When will City pass Utd's revenue?

Marvin

Well-Known Member
Joined
9 Jan 2006
Messages
46,683
City are England's best football club, the titles prove it, not just this season but over a sustained period.

But who is the bigger club? City or Utd? Where do we rank with Liverpool, Arsenal etc?

In one sense all that matters is the League Table, we're Champions...again. But alongside the league table we all have a subjective measure of the size of a club. Are Sunderland a big club? Are Everton bigger than Leeds? Rhetorical questions. It does matter because a club's current status and prestige allows them to take footballing hits and recover so that in time you can expect the league table to reflect 'status', but the two feed on each other. Look at the South Coast and the fortunes of Bournemouth, Southampton and Portsmouth. Bournemouth fans have laughed in the face of the big clubs of the South coast and over-turned it. They have fought the odds, and to an extent changed them in the process.

Two decades ago, City fell to the 3rd division of football but we were too big to stay there. Sometimes though footballing failure can not be overcome and a big club dies.

Post Fergsuson, Man Utd have failed under 3 coaches: Moyes, Van Gaal and now Mourinho. Their fans are complacent. They think they are No.1 and will always be so. "However many times Moyes, Van Gaal or Mourinho fail, there will always be tomorrow". They think their size assures their future success, and it does, but their power changes. Liverpool were once sat on their perch after all. And times changed. Are City about to knock Man Utd off their perch? Have we already done it?

The only objective way of measuring the size of a football club is through footballing revenue because that is what delivers football on the pitch.

In 2016-17 City had revenues of £473m ,United £581m. United have just issued guidance for 2017-18. It's flat at £575/585m.

The reason is obvious: broadcasting is negotiated collectively and changes step-wise over time and we're now in the middle of a cycle & their corporate revenue is flat because of their footballing failure. City will too have flat and unchanged broadcasting revenue, but I expect corporate revenue to increase.

We can not know what is going to happen in the future, but we can guess. Guardiola is here now for three more years. If the past is any guide, City are going to dominate on the pitch in that time.

The Sheikh Mansour takeover marked a tipping point in English football. That takeover was accompanied by huge investment in the playing squad and infrastructure of the club. City are no longer financed by Sheikh Mansour. We haven't been for a long time. We are fast approaching another tipping point when Manchester City will be the biggest club in England, and knowing the mentality of Utd supporters that will be when their supporters start to desert their club.
 
City are England's best football club, the titles prove it, not just this season but over a sustained period.

But who is the bigger club? City or Utd? Where do we rank with Liverpool, Arsenal etc?

In one sense all that matters is the League Table, we're Champions...again. But alongside the league table we all have a subjective measure of the size of a club. Are Sunderland a big club? Are Everton bigger than Leeds? Rhetorical questions. It does matter because a club's current status and prestige allows them to take footballing hits and recover so that in time you can expect the league table to reflect 'status', but the two feed on each other. Look at the South Coast and the fortunes of Bournemouth, Southampton and Portsmouth. Bournemouth fans have laughed in the face of the big clubs of the South coast and over-turned it. They have fought the odds, and to an extent changed them in the process.

Two decades ago, City fell to the 3rd division of football but we were too big to stay there. Sometimes though footballing failure can not be overcome and a big club dies.

Post Fergsuson, Man Utd have failed under 3 coaches: Moyes, Van Gaal and now Mourinho. Their fans are complacent. They think they are No.1 and will always be so. "However many times Moyes, Van Gaal or Mourinho fail, there will always be tomorrow". They think their size assures their future success, and it does, but their power changes. Liverpool were once sat on their perch after all. And times changed. Are City about to knock Man Utd off their perch? Have we already done it?

The only objective way of measuring the size of a football club is through footballing revenue because that is what delivers football on the pitch.

In 2016-17 City had revenues of £473m ,United £581m. United have just issued guidance for 2017-18. It's flat at £575/585m.

The reason is obvious: broadcasting is negotiated collectively and changes step-wise over time and we're now in the middle of a cycle & their corporate revenue is flat because of their footballing failure. City will too have flat and unchanged broadcasting revenue, but I expect corporate revenue to increase.

We can not know what is going to happen in the future, but we can guess. Guardiola is here now for three more years. If the past is any guide, City are going to dominate on the pitch in that time.

The Sheikh Mansour takeover marked a tipping point in English football. That takeover was accompanied by huge investment in the playing squad and infrastructure of the club. City are no longer financed by Sheikh Mansour. We haven't been for a long time. We are fast approaching another tipping point when Manchester City will be the biggest club in England, and knowing the mentality of Utd supporters that will be when their supporters start to desert their club.
Don't forget the spawn of Uncle Malcy trouser 20M/year in "management fees" and they pay 40 or 50M in interest payments.
 
Interesting point of view but I do have one issue....
The only objective way of measuring the size of a football club is through footballing revenue because that is what delivers football on the pitch.

Not according to edwood he couldn't give a toss about success on the pitch as long as the revenue still flows
 
Don't forget the spawn of Uncle Malcy trouser 20M/year in "management fees" and they pay 40 or 50M in interest payments.
I do forget that because it's down to £300m. They carried it because when it was at its peak, they could use their footballing success to win the biggest commercial contracts in English football: Chevrolet etc.

They are no longer pre-eminent on the pitch. They have not won the title since 2013. They are still the richest club, but for how long
 
Can anyone shed any light on how much income the "big six" acquire from their shirt & in our and Arsenal's case shirt & stadium sponsorship and also from the kit manufacturer!
Not forgetting the rags have two sponsors, one for matchday and one from DHL for the training kit
 
I do forget that because it's down to £300m. They carried it because when it was at its peak, they could use their footballing success to win the biggest commercial contracts in English football: Chevrolet etc.

They are no longer pre-eminent on the pitch. They have not won the title since 2013. They are still the richest club, but for how long
Do you mean their debt is down to 300M?
 
The debt is down in £, I think it's basically unchanged in $ at 500 mil
Latest KPMG report has our value raising nearly 3 times quicker than theirs.
 
It’s only in the last two seasons that I have thought that our income could rival theirs. Keep winning the League (like Marvin said) and we wll continue to grow. For example, the next shirt sponsorship deal could be 4 times the value of our current deal.

The rags will have a bigger international profile for many years to come IMHO. We are making progress (e.g. with the City Football Group) but have started from a low base.
 
Can anyone shed any light on how much income the "big six" acquire from their shirt & in our and Arsenal's case shirt & stadium sponsorship and also from the kit manufacturer!
Not forgetting the rags have two sponsors, one for matchday and one from DHL for the training kit
Chelsea - £50mil a season from Yokohama, £60mil a season from Nike
United - £50mil a season from Chevrolet, £75mil a season from Nike
Liverpool - £25mil a season from New Balance, £25mil a season from Western Union
Spurs - £25-30mil a season from Nike, renewed with AIA which was £16mil a season
 
That sounds like debt minus cash. It's more like 500M. PB would know more about it but I think you've been mislead by our upstanding media.
It's net debt I think. Debt plus cash assets.

From their 3rd quarter report

"Net debt as of 31 March 2018 was £301.3 million, a decrease of £65.0 million over the year. The gross USD debt principal remains unchanged."
 
Chelsea - £50mil a season from Yokohama, £60mil a season from Nike
United - £50mil a season from Chevrolet, £75mil a season from Nike
Liverpool - £25mil a season from New Balance, £25mil a season from Western Union
Spurs - £25-30mil a season from Nike, renewed with AIA which was £16mil a season

I just googled the DHL deal utd had and didn't know they'd bought out of it as part of the Chevrolet sponsorship
We're miles behind the rags and chelsea for kit manufacturer, but the Chelsea one was a ten year deal, so in four years it may look dreadfully undervalued
 
It's net debt I think. Debt plus cash assets.

From their 3rd quarter report

"Net debt as of 31 March 2018 was £301.3 million, a decrease of £65.0 million over the year. The gross USD debt principal remains unchanged."

Is that down to exchange rate fluctuations between the pound and dollar?
 
I just googled the DHL deal utd had and didn't know they'd bought out of it as part of the Chevrolet sponsorship
We're miles behind the rags and chelsea for kit manufacturer, but the Chelsea one was a ten year deal, so in four years it may look dreadfully undervalued
It's something we definitely need to get right. We've smashed every PL record, we play the nicest football in the Prem (and therefore, the most exciting and watchable), have the best manager and are consistently in the CL.

We're apparently getting £50mil from Puma, but we should either re-negotiate the Etihad deal, or keep the stadium naming rights and have another shirt sponsor.
 
These figures are like Monopoly money.

I am like the urchins in the musical Oliver, looking in the window as the fat ****s tuck in while I spoon my bowl of gruel.

Ah well, what you gonna do?

Drink probably. It’s the only logical response.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top