Forbes rich list (football clubs)

[jonty]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17769654

A few clubs missing, mr huns and mr mini-huns...

1. Manchester United - $2,235bn (£1.4bn)
2. Real Madrid - $1,877bn (£1.17bn)
3. Barcelona - $1,307bn(£1.07bn)
4. Arsenal - $1,292bn £800m)
5. Bayern Munich - $1,235bn(£770m)
6. AC Milan - $989m (£615m)
7. Chelsea - $761m (£473m)
8. Liverpool - $619m (£385m)
9. Juventus - $591m (£367m)
10. Schalke 04 - $587m(£365m)
11. Tottenham Hotspur -$564m (£351m)
13. Manchester City - $443m (£275m)

Do Forbes do a debt list?

[Mikey]

How do Bayern Muncih have that much money when they only charge thruppence ha'penny for a ticket in Germany (and you get to stand and drink beer too )

[jonty]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

How do Bayern Muncih have that much money when they only charge thruppence ha'penny for a ticket in Germany (and you get to stand and drink beer too )

i think you answered your own question

[pentlando]

I'm sure in Germany those in corporate seats pay 4 or 5 times the usual corporate price so that the club can reduce ticket prices for ordinary fans. They do this knowing that the more fans they can subsidise = full stadium = great atmosphere. A culture we just don't have in Scotland or the UK.

[Hibs7]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17769654

A few clubs missing, mr huns and mr mini-huns...




Do Forbes do a debt list?

Take away the debt these clubs have and lets see who is better off. these figures are very misleading. IMHO.

[Sylar]

Surely there are a few Russian clubs who have more wealth than the likes of Schalke, Juventus or Spurs?

[jgl07]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Surely there are a few Russian clubs who have more wealth than the likes of Schalke, Juventus or Spurs?

It is not really a wealth list as such but a ranking of turnover which in turn is based on cash raising ability from matchday revenue, commercial income and TV money.

The German clubs are strong on commercial income because they have close links with major companies and have very high attendances but charge less to spectators. English clubs have very strong TV income from sales all over the world especially the far east.

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It is not really a wealth list as such but a ranking of turnover which in turn is based on cash raising ability from matchday revenue, commercial income and TV money.

The German clubs are strong on commercial income because they have close links with major companies and have very high attendances but charge less to spectators. English clubs have very strong TV income from sales all over the world especially the far east.

According to the BBC report, "The study estimates the Premier League champions are worth £1.4bn".

Pointless statement, IMO. What is "worth"? It's whatever anybody is prepared to pay for something.

Deloittes did a similiar exercise a while ago, which WAS based on turnover. Again, stupid exercise, because it ignored expenditure.

[Greendub]

That skakalakalaka team from Russia must have more dough than some on that list

[ScottB]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

That skakalakalaka team from Russia must have more dough than some on that list

If you go by spending power than surely Man City would be Number 1 by some distance.

I take this to be a case of 'if someone wanted to buy these clubs this is how much they'd cost' list really.

[jgl07]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

According to the BBC report, "The study estimates the Premier League champions are worth £1.4bn".

Pointless statement, IMO. What is "worth"? It's whatever anybody is prepared to pay for something.

Deloittes did a similiar exercise a while ago, which WAS based on turnover. Again, stupid exercise, because it ignored expenditure.

I would guess that the valuation approach would be to take projected income (less costs?) for a given period and discount to present value. It is rather meaningless as the revenue figures are highly dependent on performance. If a big club in England fails to make the top-four and hence misses out on the Champions League their income will plummet.

Leeds budgeted on the basis that they would reach the CL quarter finals every year and the semi-finals one year in two. They failed to qualify for the CL one season and collapsed financially. They ended up being relegated (twice) and in administration. Even worse they ended up being owned by Ken Bates.

If you did an exercise for Scotland: Rangers would be second and Hearts third in the 'wealth list'. So no more!