Thomas Partey

[Yannik]

The whole attendance issue is completely overexaggerated for the first divisions. As long as the games are running, the broadcasters will pay that sweet TV money which is 10 times what the majority of top 5 div clubs make from ticket sales.

Especially PL is just fine. France is also good, they had theirs renewed just recently.

 

[Newcomer]

The whole attendance issue is completely overexaggerated for the first divisions. As long as the games are running, the broadcasters will pay that sweet TV money which is 10 times what the majority of top 5 div clubs make from ticket sales.

Especially PL is just fine. France is also good, they had theirs renewed just recently.

PSG day match revenue is between 15 and 20% of their total income. It is a lot. Hundred of millions.

 

[Yannik]

PSG day match revenue is between 15 and 20% of their total income. It is a lot. Hundred of millions.

From when are those figures? If it's a figure from last year, then it shouldn't be up to date anymore.

Ligue Uns new TV deal is recent, it only just started from 2020-2024 and is a +60% bump to their previous income of €762m from 2016-2020.

Note also:
Some TV dealls in the other 4 leagues are currently renegotiated. Covid will be a factor, empty stadiums mean 300-500k more TV spectators per matchday, prices will go up due to the dependency on TV now. Similar to sponsors. Matchday revenue could basically just get redistributed to more TV income.

And:
Stadiums in Germany are filled by 25% capacity in cities with little infection rates. England is discussing this model and other countries likely to follow.
25% capacity rate does not mean 25% matchday income, because most people go with multiple matchday tickets instead of season tickets. And some clubs might make the tickets as expensive as necessary, because there will be more competition for tickets with only a quarter of places available..

 

[Sterlingfan2000]

Atletico Fans going mad and abusing him.

Arsenal have signed him with a weekly wage of 260k

 

[CatalinR10]

Atletico Fans going mad and abusing him.

Arsenal have signed him with a weekly wage of 260k

price ?

 

[Sterlingfan2000]

50M

 

[Messi983]

50m (his buy out clause)

 

[Newcomer]

From when are those figures? If it's a figure from last year, then it shouldn't be up to date anymore.

Ligue Uns new TV deal is recent, it only just started from 2020-2024 and is a +60% bump to their previous income of ?762m from 2016-2020.

Note also:
Some TV dealls in the other 4 leagues are currently renegotiated. Covid will be a factor, empty stadiums mean 300-500k more TV spectators per matchday, prices will go up due to the dependency on TV now. Similar to sponsors. Matchday revenue could basically just get redistributed to more TV income.

And:
Stadiums in Germany are filled by 25% capacity in cities with little infection rates. England is discussing this model and other countries likely to follow.
25% capacity rate does not mean 25% matchday income, because most people go with multiple matchday tickets instead of season tickets. And some clubs might make the tickets as expensive as necessary, because there will be more competition for tickets with only a quarter of places available..

Look at this page :
https://www.sportbuzzbusiness.fr/de...t-genere-le-plus-de-revenus-en-2018-2019.html

Top 5 richest clubs (Bar?a, Real Madrid, MU, Bayern Munich, PSG) are the ones where broadcasting money is not the overwhelming major income. Only 33% on average, with Bar?a getting 35% of their income from broadcasting and PSG 25%. Ofc, as you previously said, this value will change with the new TV deal for L1 for example. However, in this particular case, the money will be spread rather equally and it won't increase and PSG income won't increase that much. Also, due to Covid situation, L1 was stopped prematurely last season and they will spread the loss on the future next 5 years, meaning clubs will lose a portion of their TV money to repay the loan the league had to take to keep the clubs afloat after the loss of TV money this year.

In 2018-2019, Bar?a was making 19 % of their overall money thanks to daymatch activity amounting to 159 M?. For PSG, it was 18 %, amounting to 115 M?. It is a lot for big spending clubs like ours.

Now top 5-10 richest clubs are making only 13 % of their overall revenues from daymatch and 48 % from broadcasting. 4 of them are PL clubs.
Arsenal is top 11 and is also in the group getting 48 % of overall revenue from broadcasting.
Top 15-20 richest clubs has two PL clubs in it and is the group where broadcasting revenue amounts to 65 % total revenue. They were only making between 30 and 40 M from matchday revenue.

Now, you can see why all of a sudden Bar?a can't even sign Depay and PSG is signing only on loans. Both our clubs are losing hundred of millions while some clubs can cope way better as the loss is less is important.

 

[Yannik]

Look at this page :
https://www.sportbuzzbusiness.fr/de...t-genere-le-plus-de-revenus-en-2018-2019.html

Top 5 richest clubs (Bar?a, Real Madrid, MU, Bayern Munich, PSG) are the ones where broadcasting money is not the overwhelming major income. Only 33% on average, with Bar?a getting 35% of their income from broadcasting and PSG 25%. Ofc, as you previously said, this value will change with the new TV deal for L1 for example. However, in this particular case, the money will be spread rather equally and it won't increase and PSG income won't increase that much. Also, due to Covid situation, L1 was stopped prematurely last season and they will spread the loss on the future next 5 years, meaning clubs will lose a portion of their TV money to repay the loan the league had to take to keep the clubs afloat after the loss of TV money this year.

In 2018-2019, Bar?a was making 19 % of their overall money thanks to daymatch activity amounting to 159 M?. For PSG, it was 18 %, amounting to 115 M?. It is a lot for big spending clubs like ours.

Now top 5-10 richest clubs are making only 13 % of their overall revenues from daymatch and 48 % from broadcasting. 4 of them are PL clubs.
Arsenal is top 11 and is also in the group getting 48 % of overall revenue from broadcasting.
Top 15-20 richest clubs has two PL clubs in it and is the group where broadcasting revenue amounts to 65 % total revenue. They were only making between 30 and 40 M from matchday revenue.

Now, you can see why all of a sudden Bar?a can't even sign Depay and PSG is signing only on loans. Both our clubs are losing hundred of millions while some clubs can cope way better as the loss is less is important.

The redux in TV income came because play was stopped. Many clubs had to pledge the last phasing of their TV deals to pay off the rising debts and a lot of rest games went into the hands of public broadcasters.
But if the ball continuely rolls in this season, then TV deals will see them through and clubs will be better off in 2021 than they were this year. Sure it's an awkward situation for Barca and many others, but as long as play is resumed the income will come back although in redistributed ways. Besides TV money, Sponsors will also continue paying as long as games are on.

And while I realize this is fully based on domestic political decisions, I do not believe they will halt the season again regardless of how bad the pandemic gets.
We're likely stuck for another 1-2 years with this pandemic, probably 50-70% of the population gets it until there's a vaccine. EU went into shutdown, worked out quite well actually, but not everyone played along so numbers kept rising anyway. We delayed it a bit and gave our nurses a bit of relieve, but we didn't stop it and now we're back at crazy reproduction rates. At this point the question is if the EU will eventually change their stance and say "fuck it, we can't beat the pandemic and we also can't keep business (event/tourism) in turnoil forever". I don't think another shutdown will happen. They'll try to do the necessary minimum to keep it at bay a bit, but overall I think they'll say fuck it and inshallah. We're already starting to let spectators back in, despite the pandemic getting worse. They'll continue to go forward here.

 

[Newcomer]

The redux in TV income came because play was stopped. Many clubs had to pledge the last phasing of their TV deals to pay off the rising debts and a lot of rest games went into the hands of public broadcasters.
But if the ball continuely rolls in this season, then TV deals will see them through and clubs will be better off in 2021 than they were this year. Sure it's an awkward situation for Barca and many others, but as long as play is resumed the income will come back although in redistributed ways. Besides TV money, Sponsors will also continue paying as long as games are on.

And while I realize this is fully based on domestic political decisions, I do not believe they will halt the season again regardless of how bad the pandemic gets.
We're likely stuck for another 1-2 years with this pandemic, probably 50-70% of the population gets it until there's a vaccine. EU went into shutdown, worked out quite well actually, but not everyone played along so numbers kept rising anyway. We delayed it a bit and gave our nurses a bit of relieve, but we didn't stop it and now we're back at crazy reproduction rates. At this point the question is if the EU will eventually change their stance and say "fuck it, we can't beat the pandemic and we also can't keep business (event/tourism) in turnoil forever". I don't think another shutdown will happen. They'll try to do the necessary minimum to keep it at bay a bit, but overall I think they'll say fuck it and inshallah. We're already starting to let spectators back in, despite the pandemic getting worse. They'll continue to go forward here.

My main point stands. From Deloitte study, we can see PL clubs are in a much much comfortable situation as they are more reliant on broadcasting money than other clubs. And broadcasting money is ofc the less impacted in this whole crisis.

Bar?a and PSG are losing hundred of millions due to loss in day match revenue. And in the case of PSG, their main sponsor is ALL from Accor. Accor and Tourism are very much impacted right now and it remains to see if the commercial income of PSG or other clubs affiliated with this type of industry won't decrease in next few years. For instance, PSG deal was 3 years until 2022 + 3 other optional years. I doubt they'll renew at the same value if they renew at all. This possible domino effect will further cement PL clubs dominance down the road.

 

[Sterlingfan2000]

My main point stands. From Deloitte study, we can see PL clubs are in a much much comfortable situation as they are more reliant on broadcasting money than other clubs. And broadcasting money is ofc the less impacted in this whole crisis.

Bar?a and PSG are losing hundred of millions due to loss in day match revenue. And in the case of PSG, their main sponsor is ALL from Accor. Accor and Tourism are very much impacted right now and it remains to see if the commercial income of PSG or other clubs affiliated with this type of industry won't decrease in next few years. For instance, PSG deal was 3 years until 2022 + 3 other optional years. I doubt they'll renew at the same value if they renew at all. This possible domino effect will further cement PL clubs dominance down the road.

PSG doesn't have money Problems , they would have added 5 new players if they could..FFP Problems they have

 

[Newcomer]

PSG doesn't have money Problems , they would have added 5 new players if they could..FFP Problems they have

Uh ?

This is exactly why PSG has money problem. FFP is all about balancing your revenues and your expenses. And during Covid crisis, revenue is decreasing, hence money problem.

Never said PSG were lacking treasury or cash.

 

[Yannik]

Bar?a and PSG are losing hundred of millions due to loss in day match revenue. And in the case of PSG, their main sponsor is ALL from Accor. Accor and Tourism are very much impacted right now and it remains to see if the commercial income of PSG or other clubs affiliated with this type of industry won't decrease in next few years. For instance, PSG deal was 3 years until 2022 + 3 other optional years. I doubt they'll renew at the same value if they renew at all. This possible domino effect will further cement PL clubs dominance down the road.

Yeah, it's a significant part of income, but matchday income is just not unreplaceable. It's just the fraction of fans who can't attend the games live. They're not actually (hopefully) dying. Instead of going to the matches they'll watch the same games from TV and will thus contribute from there. That's why I'm saying: It's not an income that'll eternally be missing. It's more of a redistribution which looks awkward now, because all clubs have been taken by surprise and those things haven't yet been figured out, but this will balance out eventually with new TV share and sponsorship being negotiated and clubs now being more prepared. Next window Barca and co. will spend freely again. Football will continue exponentially inflating. Yeah, PL clubs have it even better, but that's been the case aside from the pandemic already.

Accor is a good point, but it's a very specific case because it's tourism based. They're one of the loosers in this pandemic, but there's also industries actually winning who could jump in here. Streaming, Online businesses etc just out of my head. Wether PSG will walk away with a minus, is still hypothetical. Accor might be replaced by someone equally profitable. I would certainly like to adress the Deloiette study to talk a bit about that, but my last french class was in 7th grade.

This is exactly why PSG has money problem. FFP is all about balancing your revenues and your expenses. And during Covid crisis, revenue is decreasing, hence money problem.

Never said PSG were lacking treasury or cash.

I do talk about the general thing though because it's all somehow connected. FFP is about balancing revenues and expenses, with the small addition that basically owner money doesn't count to revenue.
It does however count to the clubs general balance. Owner money can't be used to buy players due to FFP rulings, but it can be used for administrative issues like paying off stadiums, debt etc. Things that'll not influence transfers directly, but will ensure that the club stays healthy enough to not worry about financial risks or insolvence when spending on players and contracts. This just as a sidenote tho.

 

[Newcomer]

Yeah, it's a significant part of income, but matchday income is just not unreplaceable. It's just the fraction of fans who can't attend the games live. They're not actually (hopefully) dying. Instead of going to the matches they'll watch the same games from TV and will thus contribute from there. That's why I'm saying: It's not an income that'll eternally be missing. It's more of a redistribution which looks awkward now, because all clubs have been taken by surprise and those things haven't yet been figured out, but this will balance out eventually with new TV share and sponsorship being negotiated and clubs now being more prepared. Next window Barca and co. will spend freely again. Football will continue exponentially inflating. Yeah, PL clubs have it even better, but that's been the case aside from the pandemic already.

Accor is a good point, but it's a very specific case because it's tourism based. They're one of the loosers in this pandemic, but there's also industries actually winning who could jump in here. Streaming, Online businesses etc just out of my head. Wether PSG will walk away with a minus, is still hypothetical. Accor might be replaced by someone equally profitable. I would certainly like to adress the Deloiette study to talk a bit about that, but my last french class was in 7th grade.



I do talk about the general thing though because it's all somehow connected. FFP is about balancing revenues and expenses, with the small addition that basically owner money doesn't count to revenue.
It does however count to the clubs general balance. Owner money can't be used to buy players due to FFP rulings, but it can be used for administrative issues like paying off stadiums, debt etc. Things that'll not influence transfers directly, but will ensure that the club stays healthy enough to not worry about financial risks or insolvence when spending on players and contracts. This just as a sidenote tho.

Matchday money can't be easily replaced. PSG matchday revenue is one of the highest despite their "small" stadium because they can charge a lot with their lounges and hospitalities. This money can't be brought by any other mean. One of the concepts of the Accor partnership was to get an Accor-like service and feeling in PSG hospitalities (could influence some people towards choosing Accor Hotels after that experience). Wonder if that could impact their sponsorship.

Search for Deloitte Football Money League, you'll find a PDF in english.

About your second paragraph, i agree. PSG is safe thanks to its owners while other clubs, even behemots like Bar?a, can see their infrastructure renewal plans in pause due to their bad financial situation. I read you had something like a 800 M debt. Still manageable with your 1 Billion income but a bit worrying indeed.

 

[Luftstalag14]

Yeah, it's a significant part of income, but matchday income is just not unreplaceable. It's just the fraction of fans who can't attend the games live. They're not actually (hopefully) dying. Instead of going to the matches they'll watch the same games from TV and will thus contribute from there. That's why I'm saying: It's not an income that'll eternally be missing. It's more of a redistribution which looks awkward now, because all clubs have been taken by surprise and those things haven't yet been figured out, but this will balance out eventually with new TV share and sponsorship being negotiated and clubs now being more prepared. Next window Barca and co. will spend freely again. Football will continue exponentially inflating. Yeah, PL clubs have it even better, but that's been the case aside from the pandemic already.

Matchday income IS irreplaceable, at least in the foreseeable future. Those fans that are not going to the stadium to watch the game live, therefore clubs will lose a big portion not only from ticketing but also from selling merchandise from the official club stores and food stands (not an insignificant part of matchday income) etc. How many of them will be forced to buy TV or OTT subscriptions to watch games on TV or on their devices and therefore potentially impact their respective league's TV deal? That would be negligible, I think.