Deloitte Football Money League 2012

Status
Not open for further replies.
E

efc61

Player Valuation: £100k
Deloitte Football Money League 2012 - The Money League is published nine months after the end of the 2010/11 season, and is therefore the most contemporary and reliable analysis of clubs’ relative financial performance

Full report makes interesting reading

2010/11 Revenue (€m)

1 Real Madrid 479.5
2 FC Barcelona 450.7
3 Manchester United 367
4 Bayern Munich 321.4
5 Arsenal 251.1
6 Chelsea 249.8
7 AC Milan 235.1
8 Internazionale 211.4
9 Liverpool 203.3
10 Schalke 04 202.4
11 Tottenham Hotspur 181
12 Manchester City 169.6
13 Juventus 153.9
14 Olympique de Marseille 150.4
15 AS Roma 143.5
16 Borussia Dortmund 138.5
17 Olympique Lyonnais 132.8
18 Hamburger SV 128.8
19 Valencia 116.8
20 Napoli 114.9
21 Benfica 102.5
22 Atlético de Madrid 99.9
23 Werder Bremen 99.7
24 Aston Villa 99.3
25 Newcastle United 98.0
26 Ajax 97.1
27 VfB Stuttgart 95.5
28 Everton 90.8
29 West Ham United 89.1
30 Sunderland 87.9

deloitte.com/assets/Dcom-UnitedKingdom/Local%20Assets/Documents/Industries/Sports%20Business%20Group/uk-sbg-dfml-2012-final.pdf
 

This is the reason our beautiful game is now elitist the champions league and skys premiership have caused an unbridgable gap now. We may never win the league again its sad, we just can't compete with teams who regularly get revenue from the champions league, every season we fall further behind.
 

kenada_blue said:
Villa still up there....

28th and we still dont have a pot to piss in
Click to expand...

I think the Villa turnover will be more next year as the shirt sponsorship deal has only begun this year (they had a charity on the shirts for the past few years).
 
Tottenham have done remarkably well capitalising on their marketing potential to increase turnover.

Given their position presently is in the main self generated as opposed to falsely inflated like Man City, they've pulled out all the stops off the field over the past few years. But for the right investment at the right time (2006/2007) there's no reason why this couldn't have been Everton.
 
milks said:
Tottenham have done remarkably well capitalising on their marketing potential to increase turnover.

Given their position presently is in the main self generated as opposed to falsely inflated like Man City, they've pulled out all the stops off the field over the past few years. But for the right investment at the right time (2006/2007) there's no reason why this couldn't have been Everton.
Click to expand...

Spurs took the opportunity when it came off the field.

We never did even though we couldve
 

milks said:
Tottenham have done remarkably well capitalising on their marketing potential to increase turnover.

Given their position presently is in the main self generated as opposed to falsely inflated like Man City, they've pulled out all the stops off the field over the past few years. But for the right investment at the right time (2006/2007) there's no reason why this couldn't have been Everton.
Click to expand...

This all over.

Despite not having the London factor we were in a stronger position in the league than they were.
 
Surprised Newcastle isn't higher -- everyone always goes on about their attendance. Is it because their fans never buy shirts? Regardless, given how much we moan it's somewhat surprising we're even in the top 30. With a new stadium we'd be in a pretty decent position (decent ... not great). City don't have nearly enough revenue to offset their spending -- if they aren't allowed to sponsor themselves in that ridiculous deal I think they might be in some trouble under fair play. However I'm sure they'll get away with it because rich people usually do whatever they want without consequences.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register

Shop

Back
Top