Chelsea are as successful as City. They probably have similar sized match-day revenue. Why have they built up such historic debts to their owner and yet City have not? I believe Chelsea's transfer actvity is quite savvy too. Their broadcasting income must be similar to City so that leaves Corporate income. Is that where they underperform?
City & FFP | 2020/21 Accounts released | Revenues of £569.8m, £2.4m profit (p 2395)
- Thread starter Marvin
- Start date
I think that type of income goes to CFG
A good point Marvin. Plenty of Chelsea data on line if you want to analyse it.
Chelsea FC revenue breakdown 2023 | Statista
How much revenue do Chelsea earn from broadcasting payments? In 2022/23, Chelsea's broadcasting revenue amounted to 260 million euros.
www.statista.com
M
M
mat
Guest
Waiting for Liverpool and the Rags to dictate it to us.
Metalartin
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 12,372
Sorry if this has already been posted(probably has) but I want to make sure nobody has missed this one because I did. Pleasantly surprised with the balance, even going back to the start of the PL, discussing United's rise and the broadcast revenue splits. The replies are gold, Tifo are on the payroll now according to some militant anti-city crusaders.
Ok, I understand that, if owners loans are zero interest and no debt accrued why didn’t our owners just inject a soft loan and avoid the shit storm we endured over FFP?
Surely just as sponsorship deals are commercially correlated, loans have to be evaluated to ensure a market percentage interest is applied to debt.
Based on the Rags commercial debt Chelsea should be evaluated at around 150m per year in interest payments.
Yes, it's a decent basic run down. I have not seen the responses but the suggestion that anything that comes under the flag of the Athletic is on City's payroll is laughable. Their City correspondent is simple Simon.
Our owners think long term. So a swop of debt for equity gave them the ability to manoever the move into CFG with potential to sell shares in the group. So, no soft loan. Whether that would have saved us from attacks by the American red shirts, I doubt. At least one of them has a real problem with Muslim arabs; the owner of Liverpool calls Khaldoon "the terrorist." "Muslims are the enemy" as one US sports tycoon said to his son.