ECHO response - Poll if you would buy the ECHO or not

[joey_macmo]

Just for clarity - Everton's commercial income in the last accounts are as follows:

Sponsorship, advertising and merchandising £8.436 million
Catering £0.934 million
Other commercial activities £3.337 million

Total: £12.707 million

Tottenham Hotspurs' commercial income

Sponsorship & corporate hospitality £37.3 million
Merchandising revenues £11.00 million

Total Commercial revenues £56.228 million

The problem is that we are comparing apples and pears. Spurs includes corporate hospitality in their commercial revenues, Everton do not. Spurs merchandising revenues are revenues before the cost of supplying the goods and distribution costs. Everton's merchandising figure is the net receipt from Kitbag.

Therefore a comparison of Everton's performance v Spurs performance cannot be made on the basis that the Echo has reported. This may be a lack of understanding, or (as others would have you believe) a deliberate attempt to mislead.

ps - I forgot to mention Spurs carry £4.29 million worth of merchandising stock, something which Everton through their arrangement with Kitbag do not have to fund or account for.

do we put them down as gate receipts?

trying to compare us to spurs was naive at best, however the fact that Prentice cherry picked the wrong figures to make our total commercial revenue look favourable (still unsure why he continued to use that figure when he himself acknowledges that the kitbag figure is £3m/season) compared to spurs doesn't exactly scream credibility

 

[The Esk]

do we put them down as gate receipts?

I'm assuming so as there is no other item in the accounts.

 

[TheFinnFan]

so did anything change then?

they promised a change starting from monday?

do you guys see it? are they just lying or doing bad journalism, again?

 

[joey_macmo]

so did anything change then?

they promised a change starting from monday?

do you guys see it? are they just lying or doing bad journalism, again?

both imo

good that they have broached the subject at all but after that the research is at best poor and at worst misleading & intentionally deceiving.

probably just poor research tbh

 

[The Esk]

do we put them down as gate receipts?

trying to compare us to spurs was naive at best, however the fact that Prentice cherry picked the wrong figures to make our total commercial revenue look favourable (still unsure why he continued to use that figure when he himself acknowledges that the kitbag figure is £3m/season) compared to spurs doesn't exactly scream credibility

I suspect Kitbag sell similar numbers of shirts and other Everton merchandise as Spurs to be honest and that Kitbag's gross revenues would be similar to Spurs.

 

[gaino92]

that article also states that everton kits are not on sale in the US, I saw a few shops selling them in florida in november, proper kits as well

 

[joey_macmo]

I suspect Kitbag sell similar numbers of shirts and other Everton merchandise as Spurs to be honest and that Kitbag's gross revenues would be similar to Spurs.

based on?

surely if thats the case it shows how bad our deal is?

dont forget the under armour deal potentially worth £10m/season

 

[The Esk]

based on?

Everton receive roughly £3m from Kitbag. I'm guessing the split would be suppliers - 40%, Everton -25% and Kitbag retains 35% of their gross revenues.

That would equate to £12 million of gross revenues from shirt and merchandise sales.

 

[joey_macmo]

Everton receive roughly £3m from Kitbag. I'm guessing the split would be suppliers - 40%, Everton -25% and Kitbag retains 35% of their gross revenues.

That would equate to £12 million of gross revenues from shirt and merchandise sales.

no offence but thats the key word isnt it? unless Prentice had the correct figures to hand (and included them) the tottenham comparison is poor journalism

 

[The Esk]

no offence but thats the key word isnt it? unless Prentice had the correct figures to hand (and included them) the tottenham comparison is poor journalism

Well it's based on some knowledge of other retailing operations and their likely margins and costs, I've not plucked it out of the air lol

 

[joey_macmo]

Well it's based on some knowledge of other retailing operations and their likely margins and costs, I've not plucked it out of the air lol

Prentice has thats the point

 

[bizzaro]

no offence but thats the key word isnt it? unless Prentice had the correct figures to hand (and included them) the tottenham comparison is poor journalism

It was a deliberate - avoid at all costs - attempt to avoid the Newcastle comparison

Plus deliberate apples and pears ploy.

They tried to throwrite in the Villa figures but that's not going to work either.

Absolute sham of an article.

@davek

 

[riddick]

I think what they need to do is look at what Everton are doing and simply ask themselves..honestly.. 'if Chelsea, United, city, arsenal, spurs or THAT lot were in that position, would we be asking serious questions?'

This isn't worrying about them over the park, it's about how the media runs with things that are FAR more trivial at other clubs but conveniently doesn't bother about a board that is, at BEST, stagnating..

 

[The Esk]

It was a deliberate - avoid at all costs - attempt to avoid the Newcastle comparison

Plus deliberate apples and pears ploy.

They tried to throwrite in the Villa figures but that's not going to work either.

Absolute sham of an article.

@davek

The Newcastle comparison would be another apple and pears, we went through this yesterday.

 

[joey_macmo]

The Newcastle comparison would be another apple and pears, we went through this yesterday.

in a similar why spurs was, yet they somehow plucked a random comparison to try and make our commercial bottom line look favourable (even though the article was about kitbag)

isnt that what this thread is all about!?