The relative strength of the Premier League

adexkola said:
This has feck all to do with revenue streams.

If more eyes are on the PL, teams that play in the PL will attract more advertising and marketing opportunities. Brentford will have a lot of people who follow the PL watching their games when they play the likes of City/Arsenal/United/Liverpool/etc...

No one paying money cares that Maradona played for Napoli in the 80s. All that matters is that Serie A is less of an attraction than the PL. If Napoli moved to the PL their numbers would rise in every category.
Click to expand...

Of course, I'm not arguing any of that. Hence why I said in the last paragraph that Southamptons revenue is higher due to the massive EPL TV money. Have you read the context? My "bigger club" remark was a direct reply to the statement Napoli and others were "small clubs with 'zero' fanbase or appeal outside of their respective countries". And I believe that to be wrong, in fact I actually personally know several people who are Napoli fans not living in Italy or even being Italian. I understand that doesn't add a lot in terms of revenue, but I don't accept the reasoning that Southampton is ahead of Napoli because Napoli are a small club with zero appeal outside their country. Brighton is ahead of Ajax and Benfica ffs. My argument was the same as yours, the reason is not the appeal of the club but of the league...
 
adexkola said:
And I'm saying that even if a fan in Asia only tunes in to watch 38 Manchester United games, they watch the 19 other sides twice in a season. That is exposure those other sides can leverage into advertising and marketing revenue. And if any of those sides perform well, they get even more revenue, as more eyes are on them. Fans overrate the importance of a club being big or iconic relative to the club's placing in the money league. What matters, in decreasing levels of importance, are

1. Where your club is at (domestic/European)
2. How your club is doing where it is at
3.
3.5. How your club performed 20 years ago/how big your club's trophy cabinet is/whatever else fans use to dick wave and measure
Click to expand...
I don't want to draw into discussion about which club is bigger. EPL clubs nowadays have a lot more revenue than most clubs in other league due to TV right.
 
ThierryHenry14 said:
No one would believe people outside of England who watch Southampton vs United is to watch how Southampton plays, right?
Click to expand...

Some try to sell that idea. Some even try to sell the idea that two mid table PL teams attract viewership.
 
Pintu said:
10 years Uefa ranking has 4 non english clubs (Real, Bayern, Barca and Juve) in top 4... And even Atletico is ranked higher than Liverpool and City... But over the last 5 years it's 3 English clubs in the top 4... Only Bayern has kept up with City's regularity, and both Chelsea and Liverpool did better than Real & PSG...

https://www.uefa.com/nationalassociations/uefarankings/tenyears/

https://www.uefa.com/nationalassociations/uefarankings/club/#/yr/2023
Click to expand...

I don't know how these ratings are calculated but there is no plausible argument for Chelsea being better than Real Madrid this season or last season, it's a completely absurd conclusion.
 
adexkola said:
And I'm saying that even if a fan in Asia only tunes in to watch 38 Manchester United games, they watch the 19 other sides twice in a season. That is exposure those other sides can leverage into advertising and marketing revenue. And if any of those sides perform well, they get even more revenue, as more eyes are on them. Fans overrate the importance of a club being big or iconic relative to the club's placing in the money league. What matters, in decreasing levels of importance, are

1. Where your club is at (domestic/European)
2. How your club is doing where it is at
3.
3.5. How your club performed 20 years ago/how big your club's trophy cabinet is/whatever else fans use to dick wave and measure
Click to expand...

They can't and don't.
 
JPRouve said:
Some try to sell that idea. Some even try to sell the idea that two mid table PL teams attract viewership.
Click to expand...
That's why the big clubs tried to break away and form the super league, so they generate a lot more money from TV right. Imagine a league with all the big clubs playing each other every weekend and how much the TV right will sell.
 
ThierryHenry14 said:
Unfortunately money is the most important factor for ANY industry. It will attract the best talent from coaches, management, physio, to players.
Click to expand...

Nope, try to get Mbappe then if money is the only thing that matters.. Location matters a lot plus the history especially if you are a South American/European. There is no team in the PL that can match the attraction level of Real, Barca, AC Milan (when they were at their peak)..

Even Barca at their worst was able to bring in Lewa from Bayern despite Bayern's attempts.. Not surprising that there were also only two Ballon D'or winners from the Premier League last 30-40 years..
 
genardk said:
Nope, try to get Mbappe then if money is the only thing that matters.. Location matters a lot plus the history especially if you are a South American/European. There is no team in the PL that can match the attraction level of Real, Barca, AC Milan (when they were at their peak)..

Even Barca at their worst was able to bring in Lewa from Bayern despite Bayern's attempts.. Not surprising that there were also only two Ballon D'or winners from Premier League last 30-40 years..
Click to expand...
Isn't Mbappe accepted the huge offer from PSG to stay, instead leave for free to join Real Madrid? Or is it because he stayed in PSG because of his love for the club, the city and the people?

Money talks in this world, for any industry. The best money attracts the best talent.
 
Money is an important factor, but it tends to be more complicated than "more money equals better."

Top players want to win the top prizes, and that is difficult when you have so many good and wealthy teams in the same league, and when even qualifying for Europe can become a problem.
 
Iker Quesadillas said:
I don't know how these ratings are calculated but there is no plausible argument for Chelsea being better than Real Madrid this season or last season, it's a completely absurd conclusion.
Click to expand...
It is measured over the last 4 1/2 seasons, previous 4 seasons and including progress made this season. Over that period, Real have won the CL once (last year). Its quite straightforward. Explained in more detail here: https://www.uefa.com/nationalassociations/uefarankings/club/about/
 
Iker Quesadillas said:
I don't know how these ratings are calculated but there is no plausible argument for Chelsea being better than Real Madrid this season or last season, it's a completely absurd conclusion.
Click to expand...
It’s over 5 season. And it’s only based on performance on European competitions… In this case, starting 2018/19—22/23… Over this particular period you haven’t won more games than Chelsea has in the CL.

The main issue I have with this ranking is that it gives the same points for defeating Plzen in the group stage as beating Liverpool in the final… City are particularly lucky to be up there.. They have less wins against big teams in the latter stages than Bayern and Real. But they have more wins against cannon fodder…
 
JPRouve said:
They can't and don't.
Click to expand...

Well in part they actually can because their shirt sponsor will be viewed by all TOP6 fans twice a season and their stadium adverts at least once, disregarding cup games.
 
ThierryHenry14 said:
Isn't Mbappe accepted the huge offer from PSG to stay, instead leave for free to join Real Madrid? Or is it because he stayed in PSG because of his love for the club, the city and the people?
Click to expand...

Of course, money is important. The point is PL teams (when PL is at its peak) were not within the consideration set of Mbappe. Lewa would not even think about choosing United over Barca when Barca was having one of its worst season post-Messi, the guy left Bayern for Barca. Also, beyond a point, money loses its effect, other factors gain more importance. Ronaldo would stay in Europe instead of Saudi Arabia had he been offered a significantly lower salary by a top CL contender for example..

Think about all the top players (top-20) that left their mark in the last 20 years, very few spent their peak in the PL. I do not think this trend will change significantly any time soon.
 
genardk said:
Of course, money is important. The point is PL teams (when PL is at its peak) were not within the consideration set of Mbappe. Lewa would not even think about choosing United over Barca when Barca was having one of its worst season post-Messi, the guy left Bayern for Barca. Also, beyond a point, money loses its effect, other factors gain more importance. Ronaldo would stay in Europe instead of Saudi Arabia had he been offered a significantly lower salary by a top CL contender for example..

Think about the players that left their mark in the last 20 years, very few spent their peak in the PL.
Click to expand...
You can go on and list all the unique or rare example but it won't change the tide. It is how this world works and that's why Juventus, Inter, Milan, Madrid, and Barcelona all want to break away from their local league to form the super league.
 
Pintu said:
It’s over 5 season. And it’s only based on performance on European competitions… In this case, starting 2018/19—22/23… Over this particular period you haven’t won more games than Chelsea has in the CL.

The main issue I have with this ranking is that it gives the same points for defeating Plzen in the group stage as beating Liverpool in the final… City are particularly lucky to be up there.. They have less wins against big teams in the latter stages than Bayern and Real. But they have more wins against cannon fodder…
Click to expand...

It's not just CL it counts Europa League as well. Chelsea winning that in 18/19 puts them ahead. Also the group stages are not completely the same as a final because you get bonus points for qualifying in each round of the latter stages, including the final.
 
Pintu said:
It’s over 5 season. And it’s only based on performance on European competitions… In this case, starting 2018/19—22/23… Over this particular period you haven’t won more games than Chelsea has in the CL.
Click to expand...

Real Madrid have won more Champions League games than Chelsea in this period.
 
adexkola said:
Why can't they?

If they don't that is negligence.
Click to expand...

Because they don't actually have the tools or appeal for it, to increase your commercial appeal you need to play more games which is directly linked to how good you are because you play in more competitions and further. Companies will pay for that extra exposure that you "guarantee". Which doesn't apply to midtable and bottom table teams.

And in the case of broadcasting or even stadium advertisement. The rates depend on the actual fixture, it's not a flat rate, so companies don't and won't pay more because you played against United 2 weeks ago, they will pay the rate that is linked to the viewership that you get or are expected to get which is fairly low for teams that are outside of the top 6-7.
 
Iker Quesadillas said:
Real Madrid have won more Champions League games than Chelsea in this period.
Click to expand...
I was mistaken indeed. I meant more UEFA points (including games won in Europa league, even though the EL counts a bit less-lower bonuses for qualification than in the CL- ).
 
ThierryHenry14 said:
You can go on and list all the unique or rare example but it won't change the tide. It is how this world works and that's why Juventus, Inter, Milan, Madrid, and Barcelona all want to break away from their local league to form the super league.
Click to expand...
Agreed.
From the bbc article on the same topic it mentioned that the PL was the only league out of the top 5 who increased their media rights value the last time they were renegotiated.
so the financial gap is likely to grow larger, not smaller.
 
Iker Quesadillas said:
Probably because the exposure that 180 minutes buys you isn't that much.
Click to expand...

If exposure was limited to 2 games then you'd have a point.

Multiply that by the number of teams people have interest in (United/Arsenal/City/Liverpool/Chelsea/Tottenham)... 12 games of exposure is something.
 
Pintu said:
I was mistaken indeed. I meant more UEFA points (including games won in Europa league, even though the EL counts a bit less-lower bonuses for qualification than in the CL- ).
Click to expand...

I'd also misread the table and thought it actually said Chelsea had more points last year (without accounting for other years). That was the part I found bewildering, but it isn't true.
 
Revenue data clearly show that the only way ahead for EU football to try and offer an EPL comparable product is an EU superleague, similar to what is happening with the basketball EuroLeague already.
 
jadajos said:
Well in part they actually can because their shirt sponsor will be viewed by all TOP6 fans twice a season and their stadium adverts at least once, disregarding cup games.
Click to expand...

They can't because it's not enough games or exposure. It's not an efficient way of using your money and that's why none of these teams have good sponsorship deals, the efficient move is to simply pay for ads minutes during games, they are not going to spend millions on the other 14 teams and don't.
 
ThierryHenry14 said:
You can go on and list all the unique or rare example but it won't change the tide. It is how this world works and that's why Juventus, Inter, Milan, Madrid, and Barcelona all want to break away from their local league to form the super league.
Click to expand...

You have no idea how the South American/Latin player mind works.. You do not seem to know what Real, Barca or AC Milan mean for the Latin players. They grow up dreaming of playing one day for Real, Barca not United, Liverpool etc..

PL teams most of the time can only attract these when they are past their prime like Casemiro.. There's a reason why you couldn't even keep players like Ronaldo at your prime under SAF and won't be even considered by Mbappe or Lewa. The point is Italians and Spanish are having worst times of the last 20 years with PL having its best times, yet PL teams still fail to dominate European competitions and become a talent magnet. Even Real won the CL last year with an ageing squad, embarrassing for PL tbh. Imagine what would happen when the financial gap narrows.

Messi, Ronaldo, R9, Kaka, Ronaldinho, Rivaldo, Modric, Benzema, Neymar, Iniesta and Xavi would not even consider PL at their prime when the choice is between living in Manchester/Liverpool vs living in Milan/Barcelona/Madrid or maybe even Paris.
 
JPRouve said:
Because they don't actually have the tools or appeal for it, to increase your commercial appeal you need to play more games which is directly linked to how good you are because you play in more competitions and further. Companies will pay for that extra exposure that you "guarantee". Which doesn't apply to midtable and bottom table teams.

And in the case of broadcasting or even stadium advertisement. The rates depend on the actual fixture, it's not a flat rate, so companies don't and won't pay more because you played against United 2 weeks ago, they will pay the rate that is linked to the viewership that you get or are expected to get which is fairly low for teams that are outside of the top 6-7.
Click to expand...

If this doesn't apply to midtable clubs, why is West Ham making 2/3s of the commercial money of a club like Inter Milan?
 
genardk said:
You have no idea how the South American/Latin player mind works..
Click to expand...
It didn't stop all the latin american cross the border every day into america trying to make more money and improve the quality of their living.
 
Whats happening with EPL is what happens in most industries in the world. One firm becomes dominant and its relative strenght attracts more power/money. The best managers and players will be attracted to play in the richest league which compounds the initial advantage.

While Barca, Juve, and all the other superleague teams may still be big enough to compete at the top, there is a clear financial advantage to smaller EPL clubs which can be argued is because of tv rights bit you could go a bit deeper and identify other factors like English being such a widely spoken language. Whatever it is, the EPL is starting to pull ahead and I don't accept the argument that its part of a cyclical process whereby another league will dominate later. The advantages that the EPL has are very sticky and won't change soon. The more top players and managers come over the more dominant the league will become which could lead to the EPL being seen as a superleague with little or no real competition.

The key to success is healthy competition making so called smaller clubs like Tottenham or Newcastle appealing to top players and the league being viewed as the ultimate test for the players who think they're the best.
 
adexkola said:
If this doesn't apply to midtable clubs, why is West Ham making 2/3s of the commercial money of a club like Inter Milan?
Click to expand...

I am searching for commercial revenue data for West Ham and Inter Milan and West Ham's doesn't look like it's 2/3rds. What is your source?
 
adexkola said:
If this doesn't apply to midtable clubs, why is West Ham making 2/3s of the commercial money of a club like Inter Milan?
Click to expand...

In the case of Inter and Milan they have been poorly managed commercially due to being almost entirely financed by their owners. Neither are close to having exploited their commercial potential.
 
Iker Quesadillas said:
I am searching for commercial revenue data for West Ham and Inter Milan and West Ham's doesn't look like it's 2/3rds. What is your source?
Click to expand...

Deloitte. In 2022 Inter generated 87m and West Ham 59m. The latter is in line with what a club of their stature gets while Inter and Milan are clearly underperforming.
 
JPRouve said:
In the case of Inter and Milan they have been poorly managed commercially due to being almost entirely financed by their owners. Neither are close to having exploited their commercial potential.
Click to expand...
In my opinion english plays an important role for the EPL popularity. Most countries in Asia the only 2nd language people can speak or understand is english.
 
JPRouve said:
In the case of Inter and Milan they have been poorly managed commercially due to being almost entirely financed by their owners. Neither are close to having exploited their commercial potential.
Click to expand...

Convenient answer. Either way it shows that in the current landscape, there is a benefit to being in the PL from a commerical perspective, even to clubs not at the top.
 
Iker Quesadillas said:
I am searching for commercial revenue data for West Ham and Inter Milan and West Ham's doesn't look like it's 2/3rds. What is your source?
Click to expand...

The link that was posted from Deloitte. There are breakdowns of revenue for all clubs in the top 20. I would have selected Leicester City but they probably have an "unfair" advantage in SE Asia...

West Ham are just a club in London.
 
adexkola said:
Convenient answer. Either way it shows that in the current landscape, there is a benefit to being in the PL from a commerical perspective, even to clubs not at the top.
Click to expand...

Why is that convenient? There is a benefit, no one argued against that and that wasn't the point that you made. Now proportionally West Ham won't monetize their presence in the PL more than they currently are, the way they will get more money is based on their continental presence.
 
JPRouve said:
Why is that convenient? There is a benefit, no one argued against that and that wasn't the point that you made. Now proportionally West Ham won't monetize their presence in the PL more than they currently are, the way they will get more money is based on their continental presence.
Click to expand...

So West Ham making 2/3rd of the commercial revenue of Inter Milan is not them leveraging their presence in gbe PL to earn income on that end?
 
adexkola said:
So West Ham making 2/3rd of the commercial revenue of Inter Milan is not them leveraging their presence in gbe PL to earn income on that end?
Click to expand...

No. Unless you think that Inter situation is normal and has nothing to do with ownership or if you think that the difference for West Ham between this season and two years ago is that they joined the PL.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.