Prestwich_Blue said:Just to be clear on this, I'd be pretty sure that the CL target for this season would have been no more than getting to the last 16 so if even if we don't get there it will only cost us about £5m in total. That's not going to upset any apple carts so I'd be confident that if we carry on doing well domestically then Mancini will be offered an extended contract.
-- Thu Nov 24, 2011 11:33 am --
That's very optimistic and probably includes money already in the pipeline (such as the reported Umbro deal). Our commercial income is already high, probably second only to the rags and we're catching up fast. We don't get any specific bonus for finishing as Champions; it would only be about £1.8m for finishing two places higher than last season.belly2000 said:Think you probably could get £10-20 million minimum in sponsorship deals/upgrades and all the reat - Reckon we would get an extra £30 million or so as a club if we we're Premiership Champions compared to the runner up.
Agreed it is impossible for a team at our stage in its development to win everything. Title has to come first then we take the chumps league.de niro said:Our target is the title, nothing else matters..... For now.
I agree. We're not even an established top 3 side yet as we've finished there a whole, once! I can see so many parrallels with how we've performed in this season's (our first) CL campaign and how we played from December 2009 to December 2010 (Mancini's first year with us) in the Prem.de niro said:Our target is the title, nothing else matters..... For now.
Prestwich_Blue said:The fans target is the title but the owners target is getting as far as possible in the CL as often as possible because that's where the big money is. We might need every penny to meet FFP comfortably and if we don't get further next season then, given his CL record at Inter, RM's future could be under the microscope.
Chelsea got £45m for just getting to the QF last season whereas we'll get £25m if we go out at the group stage. Of course we all want silverware and it helps justify the money spent on us in the media's eyes but the simple truth is that the Premiership title doesn't in itself bring in any money compared to finishing second.
Prestwich_Blue said:It's called long-term thinking. Our underlying loss was £160m this year and we've got to make at least £145m of that up once the 2011/12 FFP transitional reliefs run out. The Etihad deal will add about £30m (they already sponsor our shirts), this year's CL revenue will add another £30m. Add another £20m from the reported kit deal. That's £80m, leaving another £65m to find to bridge the gap. Knock off another £10m for youth expenditure leaving £55m. Some (maybe up to £40m but maybe less) will come from reduced player amortisation but we've still some money to find to scrape through.
So it may be boring but the simple fact is that the one real variable involves getting to the last 8 of the CL regularly will add at least another £10m to the coffers and that might well be the difference. Otherwise it will mean the Arsenal model that relies on player sales to be profitable.
We don't need to break even. The rules state that we can just have things in place to look like we're working towards breaking even or have an incremental startegy to eventually break even, even if that will be ten years away.bluenova said:Prestwich_Blue said:It's called long-term thinking. Our underlying loss was £160m this year and we've got to make at least £145m of that up once the 2011/12 FFP transitional reliefs run out. The Etihad deal will add about £30m (they already sponsor our shirts), this year's CL revenue will add another £30m. Add another £20m from the reported kit deal. That's £80m, leaving another £65m to find to bridge the gap. Knock off another £10m for youth expenditure leaving £55m. Some (maybe up to £40m but maybe less) will come from reduced player amortisation but we've still some money to find to scrape through.
So it may be boring but the simple fact is that the one real variable involves getting to the last 8 of the CL regularly will add at least another £10m to the coffers and that might well be the difference. Otherwise it will mean the Arsenal model that relies on player sales to be profitable.
That all sounds pretty positive to me. If we only need to find another £10-15m a season to break even, I suspect it'll come easily. Five years ago our turnover was less than £60m. We're already looking at that increasing to £200m+. Half a dozen "small" sponsorship deals that no-one even comments on will take care of it.
The rules don't quite say that. Here are the relevant clauses:danburge82 said:We don't need to break even. The rules state that we can just have things in place to look like we're working towards breaking even or have an incremental startegy to eventually break even, even if that will be ten years away.
a) The quantum and trend of the break-even result
The larger the quantum of a break-even deficit relative to a licensee’s
relevant income, in a reporting period or in aggregate for a monitoring period,
the less favourably it will be viewed. An improving trend in the annual breakeven
results will be viewed more favourably than a worsening trend.
c) Projected break-even result
If the projected break-even result for the reporting period T+1 foresees a
surplus, it is likely to be viewed more favourably than if the break-even result
for the reporting period T+1 foresees a deficit. As part of its considerations,
the Club Financial Control Panel may also request a licensee’s longer term
business plan (for reporting periods covering T+2 and T+3) in order to better
understand the strategy of the club.
d) Budgeting accuracy
A licensee’s break-even result for a reporting period may be compared to the
‘plan for compliance’ (i.e. budgeted break-even result) as previously
submitted. If the budgeted break-even result is realistic and consistent with
the past practice of the club, it will be viewed more favourably.
jay_mcfc said:Prestwich_Blue said:The fans target is the title but the owners target is getting as far as possible in the CL as often as possible because that's where the big money is. We might need every penny to meet FFP comfortably and if we don't get further next season then, given his CL record at Inter, RM's future could be under the microscope.
Chelsea got £45m for just getting to the QF last season whereas we'll get £25m if we go out at the group stage. Of course we all want silverware and it helps justify the money spent on us in the media's eyes but the simple truth is that the Premiership title doesn't in itself bring in any money compared to finishing second.
Didn't take long, did it!
Already talk of Mancini's future being on the line and we're not even out of the competition yet! Considering the group, considering it's our first time and considering how we're doing in the league I would think the owners are delighted. They, and we know that the success in Europe will come given time and a better European coefficient.
Winning the league is far more important at this moment in time.