Skip to main content

Match day losses in the Premier League

How will barring fans from matches, probably until March, affect Premier League revenues?   The authoritative Swiss Ramble has some answers.

In 2018/19 Premier League clubs had around £700m of match day revenue with Manchester United leading the way with £111m, followed by Arsenal £96m, Liverpool £84m, Spurs £82m, Chelsea £676m and Manchester City £55m. At the other end of the spectrum, clubs like Burnley, West Bromwich Albion and Sheffield United had less than £10m.

Even though Arsenal matchday revenue was not the largest in the Premier League, it was by far the highest as a percentage of total revenue at 25%, much more than Spurs and Manchester United, both 18%. In fact, Arsenal are more reliant on this revenue stream than any other leading European club.

Based on the number of matches played in 2018/19, we can calculate the average revenue per match, ranging from Manchester United £4.3m to Burnley £0.3m.

If we assume that all matches are played behind closed doors until the end of the year, the Swiss Ramble estimates that Premier League clubs would lose a total of £288m. The largest losses would be Manchester United £47m, Spurs £36m, Liverpool £36m, Arsenal £35m, Chelsea £25m and Manchester City £24m.

Rather than an estimate based on eight home league games as above, it seems more realistic not to anticipate a return until mid-March. In that case, the total Premier League loss would increase to £451m. By club, the largest losses would be Manchester United £72m, Liverpool £55m, Arsenal £55m, Spurs £54m, Chelsea £37m and Manchester City £35m. If all games were played behind closed doors, the total loss would rise to £586m.

Timing is thus crucial. Taking Manchester United as an example, they would lose £47m if games are played behind closed doors until end year; £72m end-March; £94m whole season; £111m with progress in the cups.

In addition, clubs earn a fair amount from merchandising sales on match day, which would be reflected in commercial income, so there will be additional losses in that revenue stream, particularly at the elite clubs.

It is also possible that TV companies will push for rebates, as their “product” is devalued by the adverse impact from no spectators on the match day experience for armchair fans. This could be offset by televising more games, but this did not prevent a £330m rebate in 2019/20.

All that said, Premier League clubs still generate a huge amount of income even without match day revenue. As an example, if 100% of match day were lost in 2018/19, six clubs would still have earned more than £300m with Manchester United leading the way with £516m, down from £627m in total.

Comments

  1. I really appreciate your support on this.
    Look forward to hearing from you soon.
    I’m happy to answer your questions, if you have any.


    คาสิโน

    เล่นบาคาร่า

    คาสิโนออนไลน์

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Fulham requires big funding from owner

After lengthy delays, Fulham’s shiny, new Riverside Stand has finally opened, creating “a unique Thameside destination with first class facilities for supporters and partners on match days, as well as for the wider community year-round”. This ambitious project has increased Craven Cottage’s capacity by around 4,000 to 29,600, while it has also taken advantage of the club’s fantastic location and wealthy catchment area by including two Michelin star restaurants, a rooftop swimming pool, corporate hospitality and event space, all benefiting from views of the Thames. Chief executive Alistair Mackintosh observed, “Fulham is the sort of club that can have a business class or first class and have fans that turn left on a plane.” Indeed, there is also an exclusive members club – with a football season ticket as an optional extra. It’s fair to say that “the times they are a-changing”, as this is a long way from the traditional pie and a pint. However, in a world where clubs face the tw...

It's no deal say Spurs insiders over Taiwanese takeover

Senior figures at Tottenham Hotspur insisted on Friday that they had not been informed of any deal to sell Daniel Levy’s stake in the club. A business group, Eight Sports Capital — which is said to include a billionaire Taiwanese financier — claimed that it had an agreement in place to buy a 24.99 per cent stake in ENIC, the club’s majority owners, from Levy, who owns 29.88 per cent. The Times has been told Ng Wing Fai and Brooklyn Earick form part of the group, having both been linked previously to potential takeovers of the Premier League club. The Taiwanese businessman, Richard Tsai, is also said to be part of the consortium. He is reportedly worth £7 billion.  Last year Earick, the former DJ and tech entrepreneur, was part of an attempted £4.5 billion takeover, which was “unequivocally rejected” by Spurs.  An ENIC spokesperson said: “We can confirm that neither ENIC nor THFC are aware of any sale by Daniel Levy’s Family Trust of its minority stake in ENIC, THFC’...

Threat of financial calamity removed from Baggies

West Bromwich Albion had effectively been in decline ever since the club was sold to a Chinese consortium in August 2016, paying a figure north of £200m to buy former owner Jeremy Peace’s stake. Controlling shareholder Guochuan Lai’s ownership was fairly disastrous for the club, but his unloved tenure finally came to an end after Bilkul Football WBA, a company ultimately owned by Florida-based entrepreneur Shilen Patel and his father Dr Kiran Patel, acquired an 87.8% shareholding in West Bromwich Albion Group Limited, the parent company of West Bromwich Albion Football Club. This change in ownership was urgently required, due to the numerous financial problems facing West Brom, including growing high-interest debt and serious cash flow concerns, following years of no investment from the former owner. Indeed, West Brom’s auditors had already rung the alarm bell in the 2021/22 accounts when they cast doubt on the club’s ability to continue as a going concern without making player s...