Not to mention the value of every single player goes up with every trophy win.
|
|
When you are holders of The Premier League, Champions League, Super Cup and World Cup all at once, which has never been done before, you are one pretty marketable money making mother fucking machine. TV money rockets with so many televised games, shirt sales etc go through the roof... the list goes on
Not to mention the value of every single player goes up with every trophy win.
Only Man Utd have been televised more than us since Sky came in, so even in the lean years of the premier league, they still wanted to show our games.
If you're not sure what to do with the ball, just put it in the net, and we'll talk about the other options later... Bob Paisley.
We received £150m from winning the Champions League, we weren’t even in it in our leaner years.
The club was worth considerably more than the £300 million RBS wanted - they just wanted their money back. The club was hugely undervalued - Hence Henry’s “going for a steal” comment. Also ALL top flight clubs have MASSIVELY increased in value over the same period - revenues have grown to extremes. But beyond that the club has also tapped into the global fan base far better and utilised marketing & merchandising following a similar template to United.
Small side-thought in the big picture - we presumably include incentive bonuses in our budgeting, yes?
It's well known that we have incentivised contracts. Now as far as I know, there's no public info on the breakdown, but let's pretend an agreed thing in contracts was "you get a single payment of 10% of your contract as a bonus if we win the League" - that won't be accurate, but for example's sake we'll roll with it for a minute.
If our wage bill is £300m and we won the 20/21 Premier League, we have to have £30m (10%) available and can't have spent it on another player.
It would be fascinating to know how the breakdowns of incentivised contracts actually work and what other provisional/hidden costs there are that we have to budget for in terms of "what if" scenarios - such as winning a League and Champion's League double, or someone having a 35-goal season when told they get X amount of cash per goal and so on.
As a further aside, I am always amazed by how casually we (the followers) will say "ach, just give them an extra couple of million" in regards to potential transfers - I include myself in this when there is a target I really like and it's something I try to be aware of - throwing £30m down instead of £25m down is a difference of someone like Van Dijk's wages for an entire year. If you (as a club) allow other clubs to squeeze more out of each transfer fee, it certainly would start to stack up over a 3-5 year period. The transfer fees of United, City and Chelsea often look rather wasteful when seen through this lens.
Id echo what steveo said.
1 Bought the club at a good price = makes money
2 The club was going to increase in its valuation anyway on paper too. Tv money had scheduled increases, pl money increased, el & cl too.
3 Success on the pitch, more games more money, secured CL football a major boost. Brand association increased massively with Klopp.
Klopp has added hugely to the first team squads valuation, particularly against his net spend. Weve sold players for close to their value (or more perhaps) and bought many players whose value increased.
4 Off the pitch strategies, marketing etc getting nike and other big deals done.
5 The new stand & training ground add value to the club too, new stand made a lot of sense/money.
Last edited by CCTV; 8th September 2020 at 12:53 AM.
Bookmarks