Revenue League Table.

[SanFranWolf]

Heres a link to the Deloitte football revenue league table.

Deloitte Football Money League - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

In 18/19 Utd generated €711m revenue and during the 19/20 pandemic season, still generated €580m revenue.

By comparison in 18/19 we generated €195m and then in 19/20, that fell to €151m.

It’s understandable given they’ve had a massive headstart and have a stadium that holds twice as many people as Molineux but it does show how far behind we (and the half a dozen clubs similar to us) really are.

(and how much current stadium capacity holds us back).

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

They are just bigger clubs, massive catchments. We're never going to compete for revenue with Man U etc. We need to be smarter, not convinced we are being now, but building a Sky 6 stadium and hotels etc to increase revenue when the demand isn't there isn't the answer. Not that some extension wouldn't help, or be better than trying to catch up £400m 50p at a time.

 

[VictorPyrrhic]

Heres a link to the Deloitte football revenue league table.

Deloitte Football Money League - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

In 18/19 Utd generated €711m revenue and during the 19/20 pandemic season, still generated €580m revenue.

By comparison in 18/19 we generated €195m and then in 19/20, that fell to €151m.

It’s understandable given they’ve had a massive headstart and have a stadium that holds twice as many people as Molineux but it does show how far behind we (and the half a dozen clubs similar to us) really are.

(and how much current stadium capacity holds us back).

The difference between our revenue and Uniteds is impossible/difficult to attain but fortunately there isn't the same difference between players therefore we can compete in spells [2 seasons, rebuild for a while, 2 seasons, repeat...].

Pogba at 90m isn't 3.6 times better [711/195] than a 25m pound midfielder [90/3.6] hence we competed well with them recently.

Where they benefit is the squad depth. Before we invest in infrastructure we need to invest in the 20+ playing squad. The reason we wont get anywhere near 7th or above this season isn't because of revenue or the first 11, it's the squad depth and i know i keep banging the drum [but it really was a terrible decision after last summer's window] but the CM lack of options will really punish us over 90 minutes and a season.

The sooner we get the club to a balanced conveyour belt system whereby each position [plus utility players] has 4 players per position the better then we can kick on from there and think about the ground [player A at peak, player B at 75% and rotated, payer C at 50% and cup games, player D youth and loaned].

Shi miscalculated the gap between Jimenez and Silva for example. We needed Silva after 2 season development with us.

 

[giantwolf]

They are just bigger clubs, massive catchments. We're never going to compete for revenue with Man U etc. We need to be smarter, not convinced we are being now, but building a Sky 6 stadium and hotels etc to increase revenue when the demand isn't there isn't the answer. Not that some extension wouldn't help, or be better than trying to catch up £400m 50p at a time.

Got to say I agree. Man Utd’s match day revenue is just 1/5th of the total mentioned in the OP and quite often they have more games and over twice the capacity we do.

Rubbish figures but just trying to illustrate a point so bear with me:

Assume we average £35 per ticket (factoring in kids, OAPs etc) x 30k, that’s £1.05m per match day. Increase this to 40k per game (let’s be realistic) you’ve raised the revenue by £350k per game which is an additional £6.65m per season. Naturally a new stand or two will come with better corporate facilities and extra fans will buy more merchandise etc however it’s still going to take a LONG time to break even on the cost of those two new stands which I guess would cost in excess of £100m easy.

Increasing commercial revenue and success on the pitch will have a much bigger impact (Man U’s match day revenue hasn’t changed much in the past 10 years). Just for context… Man U get c47m from their shirt sponsorship and £75m from Adidas PER SEASON…. that there combined is a massive chunk of our entire revenue from everything

 

[Contrarian]

They are just bigger clubs, massive catchments. We're never going to compete for revenue with Man U etc. We need to be smarter, not convinced we are being now, but building a Sky 6 stadium and hotels etc to increase revenue when the demand isn't there isn't the answer. Not that some extension wouldn't help, or be better than trying to catch up £400m 50p at a time.

It's not about competing with Man U. Yes, we're never going to compete with them. But surely we can compete with West Ham and Palace, who had higher revenues than us?

It's about steady improvement, no (sane) person expects us to overtake somebody like Everton overnight. But we can close the gap. And that table shows that we haven't, that we have declined somewhat in relative revenue since 2019. Where does that lead us if it continues? Covid affected everybody, as do player injuries, so those excuses don't wash. The owners can talk about improvement and ambitions, but that doesn't mean it is happening.

Or maybe we should be happy that we are in the top 30 at all? Not far behind the likes of Ajax, Benfica and .... Sheffield Utd.

 

[Timberwolf]

Heres a link to the Deloitte football revenue league table.

Deloitte Football Money League - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

In 18/19 Utd generated €711m revenue and during the 19/20 pandemic season, still generated €580m revenue.

By comparison in 18/19 we generated €195m and then in 19/20, that fell to €151m.

It’s understandable given they’ve had a massive headstart and have a stadium that holds twice as many people as Molineux but it does show how far behind we (and the half a dozen clubs similar to us) really are.

(and how much current stadium capacity holds us back).

Stadium capacity has little to do with it. Man Utd are a huge global brand. There’s a reason you don’t see Palistinian, Iraqi, Sudanese or Central African kids not wearing Wolves shirts. They don’t know who the bloody hell we are. You can say the same about any of the none European or G7 countries. We neither have a relatable history or a worldwide appeal.

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

It's not about competing with Man U. Yes, we're never going to compete with them. But surely we can compete with West Ham and Palace, who had higher revenues than us?

It's about steady improvement, no (sane) person expects us to overtake somebody like Everton overnight. But we can close the gap. And that table shows that we haven't, that we have declined somewhat in relative revenue since 2019. Where does that lead us if it continues? Covid affected everybody, as do player injuries, so those excuses don't wash. The owners can talk about improvement and ambitions, but that doesn't mean it is happening.

Or maybe we should be happy that we are in the top 30 at all? Not far behind the likes of Ajax, Benfica and .... Sheffield Utd.

Palace certainly, West Ham did get something of a leg up from Boris and the taxpayer. Quite how we are being Sheffield United I have no idea!

 

[Oh When the Wolves]

Heres a link to the Deloitte football revenue league table.

Deloitte Football Money League - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

In 18/19 Utd generated €711m revenue and during the 19/20 pandemic season, still generated €580m revenue.

By comparison in 18/19 we generated €195m and then in 19/20, that fell to €151m.

It’s understandable given they’ve had a massive headstart and have a stadium that holds twice as many people than Molineux but it does show how far behind we (and the half a dozen clubs similar to us) really are.

Cristiano Ronaldo 7 shirt sales hit £32.5m in the first 12 hours.

The club has now recouped 1/4 of the £12.9m fee the club paid Juventus to bring Ronaldo to Old Trafford.

At this rate, they will recoup the whole transfer fee for Ronaldo over the weekend.


Insane

 

[Will Wolf]

I don’t agree that we will ‘never’ compete with Man United in the long term, football isn’t set in stone and the top clubs now are different to the top clubs 20 years ago were different to the top clubs 50 years ago and 100 years ago, etc.

However in the short term it is difficult without Man City levels of investment.

I think realistically a 40k Molineux with better more modern facilities, regular PL top 10 finishes and competing in cups and Europe is achievable.

 

[SA Wolf]

Stadium capacity has little to do with it. Man Utd are a huge global brand. There’s a reason you don’t see Palistinian, Iraqi, Sudanese or Central African kids not wearing Wolves shirts. They don’t know who the bloody hell we are. You can say the same about any of the none European or G7 countries. We neither have a relatable history or a worldwide appeal.

I agree with you to a point. But it's pretty irrelevant what shirts Palistinian, Iraqi, Sudanese or CAR kids wear as Man U doesn't see a penny of it as they are all knock-offs. They certainly ain't paying £50 a shirt. You are right, however about the brand and that means they do sell legitimate shirts around the world as well as other merchandise and there is a market for watching Man U games and buying other Man U '****'.

 

[George AlooGobi]

Cristiano Ronaldo 7 shirt sales hit £32.5m in the first 12 hours.

The club has now recouped 1/4 of the £12.9m fee the club paid Juventus to bring Ronaldo to Old Trafford.

At this rate, they will recoup the whole transfer fee for Ronaldo over the weekend.


Insane

Do they give Adidas a percentage of shirt sales?

 

[hankin]

Heres a link to the Deloitte football revenue league table.

Deloitte Football Money League - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

In 18/19 Utd generated €711m revenue and during the 19/20 pandemic season, still generated €580m revenue.

By comparison in 18/19 we generated €195m and then in 19/20, that fell to €151m.

It’s understandable given they’ve had a massive headstart and have a stadium that holds twice as many people as Molineux but it does show how far behind we (and the half a dozen clubs similar to us) really are.

(and how much current stadium capacity holds us back).

It would be interesting to see the stats for 2020/21 when no fans attended and we didn't have 6 European home games either (and finished 6 places further down the table which would have further reduced revenue by c.£14 million).

 

[SA Wolf]

I think it's disappointing that our revenue is below our real rivals which are West Ham, Leicester, and Everton, but it's also lower than Crystal Palace and Sheff Utd, FFS. Let's face it, we're not going to be matching Man City, Chelsea or Liverpool any time soon.
The table does explain why (despite the unpopularity of it), Wolves is having to raise STs, Match Day tickets, parking and the like as well as being creative in raising revenues.

 

[Mile End Wanderer]

Look at the Ronaldo shirt sales we should of gone for a big name even if they are old. Dzeko, Pepe, Buffon FOR EXAMPLE but I suppose Korean and Japanese market for players could also be lucrative

 

[Shergar]

The difference between our revenue and Uniteds is impossible/difficult to attain but fortunately there isn't the same difference between players therefore we can compete in spells [2 seasons, rebuild for a while, 2 seasons, repeat...].

Pogba at 90m isn't 3.6 times better [711/195] than a 25m pound midfielder [90/3.6] hence we competed well with them recently.

Where they benefit is the squad depth. Before we invest in infrastructure we need to invest in the 20+ playing squad. The reason we wont get anywhere near 7th or above this season isn't because of revenue or the first 11, it's the squad depth and i know i keep banging the drum [but it really was a terrible decision after last summer's window] but the CM lack of options will really punish us over 90 minutes and a season.

The sooner we get the club to a balanced conveyour belt system whereby each position [plus utility players] has 4 players per position the better then we can kick on from there and think about the ground [player A at peak, player B at 75% and rotated, payer C at 50% and cup games, player D youth and loaned].

Shi miscalculated the gap between Jimenez and Silva for example. We needed Silva after 2 season development with us.

Shi should be sent back to Shanghai and held accountable for this shocking mismanagement of transfer funds. This week the club has been found to be penny wise pound foolish during the close of this transfer window. Yet £35m….. for a ‘wonder kid’ that needs ‘2-3 years to develop’…… makes absolutely no ****ing sense whatsoever.

 

[WolfInSheep'sClothing]

It's not about competing with Man U. Yes, we're never going to compete with them. But surely we can compete with West Ham and Palace, who had higher revenues than us?

It's about steady improvement, no (sane) person expects us to overtake somebody like Everton overnight. But we can close the gap. And that table shows that we haven't, that we have declined somewhat in relative revenue since 2019. Where does that lead us if it continues? Covid affected everybody, as do player injuries, so those excuses don't wash. The owners can talk about improvement and ambitions, but that doesn't mean it is happening.

Or maybe we should be happy that we are in the top 30 at all? Not far behind the likes of Ajax, Benfica and .... Sheffield Utd.

What factors influence our revenue?

1. TV and competition money.
The biggest one by a mile. Finish higher up the table, the more money we earn. Play better football, the more games get televised. Qualify for Europe and we're loaded for a bit.
2. Gate receipts. Last season there were as good as none. To increase the revenue, we either increase ticket prices(ouch) or build a new stadium. Building a new stadium is a big initial cost(I would have gone with Morgan's plans ages ago, they weren't that bad) and would decrease revenue while the work was done, and in the case of arsenal, hamper how much money we have available to sign players.
3. Selling players. Buying every young player under the sun in the hope some come good, and selling them for a profit.
4. Merchandise. Money from shirt sales etc. Some players are just damned popular. See how we have new fans in Mexico as an example of this. We could sign a player with a massive profile, but these tend to have massive wages based on their image rights.
5 Sponsorship and other brandingy ****. From the main shirt sponsorship to having an official ball shaver. Brands tend to want to associate themselves with success. Finish higher the more money we are able to attract.

It is a catch 22. It's easier to finish higher up the league with more money. And the easiest way to generate more money is to finish higher in the league.
Which is why Nuno had to go last year.

 

[Focke Wolf]

Stadium capacity has little to do with it. Man Utd are a huge global brand. There’s a reason you don’t see Palistinian, Iraqi, Sudanese or Central African kids not wearing Wolves shirts. They don’t know who the bloody hell we are. You can say the same about any of the none European or G7 countries. We neither have a relatable history or a worldwide appeal.

In the 1980’s, I was in Borneo with the Army staying with a local village elder near a place called Bareo, (which was essentially in the rainforest,) and a little kid came up to me and said, “ Bobby Charlton, Manchester United, “ and grinned. They truly are a global brand .

 

[Stratman Wolves]

You know, winning matches, which requires signing decent/good players (not just ones for the future) really does wonders in commercial revenue. I wonder if our owners thought about this

 

[Contrarian]

Palace certainly, West Ham did get something of a leg up from Boris and the taxpayer. Quite how we are being Sheffield United I have no idea!

Well, that study is presumably based on Sheff Utds first season in the Premier League, perhaps the second. Either way, their revenue will have dropped significantly now, even with parachute payments.

 

[Contrarian]

What factors influence our revenue?

1. TV and competition money.
The biggest one by a mile. Finish higher up the table, the more money we earn. Play better football, the more games get televised. Qualify for Europe and we're loaded for a bit.
2. Gate receipts. Last season there were as good as none. To increase the revenue, we either increase ticket prices(ouch) or build a new stadium. Building a new stadium is a big initial cost(I would have gone with Morgan's plans ages ago, they weren't that bad) and would decrease revenue while the work was done, and in the case of arsenal, hamper how much money we have available to sign players.
3. Selling players. Buying every young player under the sun in the hope some come good, and selling them for a profit.
4. Merchandise. Money from shirt sales etc. Some players are just damned popular. See how we have new fans in Mexico as an example of this. We could sign a player with a massive profile, but these tend to have massive wages based on their image rights.
5 Sponsorship and other brandingy ****. From the main shirt sponsorship to having an official ball shaver. Brands tend to want to associate themselves with success. Finish higher the more money we are able to attract.

It is a catch 22. It's easier to finish higher up the league with more money. And the easiest way to generate more money is to finish higher in the league.
Which is why Nuno had to go last year.

Yes, good list there On the point of Sheff Utd actually having higher revenue than us for the season in question, isn't there a bit of a warning there? I can't imagine they'd be lucrative in the global merchandise market and sponshorship. Point #3, selling more than you buy. They got a good year out of it..but now look. They won't be in that list again as revenue will drop on relegation.

It's something I keep repeating...a players value is not just the transfer fee. If they put in the performances that get you into Europe, or even save you from relegation, it doesn't matter if you paid £30M for a 30 year old, that you sell for next to nothing in a couple of seasons, they have paid for their fee. I'm not that impressed by "player dealing" where the players never play for the first team, you just collect them in a portfolio and loan them out hoping to sell them on for more than you paid.

 

[Chris H]

Yes, good list there On the point of Sheff Utd actually having higher revenue than us for the season in question, isn't there a bit of a warning there? I can't imagine they'd be lucrative in the global merchandise market and sponshorship. Point #3, selling more than you buy. They got a good year out of it..but now look. They won't be in that list again as revenue will drop on relegation.

It's something I keep repeating...a players value is not just the transfer fee. If they put in the performances that get you into Europe, or even save you from relegation, it doesn't matter if you paid £30M for a 30 year old, that you sell for next to nothing in a couple of seasons, they have paid for their fee. I'm not that impressed by "player dealing" where the players never play for the first team, you just collect them in a portfolio and loan them out hoping to sell them on for more than you paid.

Sheffield Utd’s year end was July 2020 where as ours is May 2020.

So when football returned after the pandemic it was past our year end but before theirs so we’d have deferred a larger proportion of income than they would.

Last years turnover figures are massively skewed by this so comparisons between clubs need to be done carefully as most football clubs have either May, June or July year ends and obviously the earlier the year end the bigger the proportion of income that would have been deferred (May all of the remaining game, June most and July none).

I’d imagine without the deferred incomes for each club our turnover would have been larger than theirs.

 

[Berlin Wolf]

In the 1980’s, I was in Borneo with the Army staying with a local village elder near a place called Bareo, (which was essentially in the rainforest,) and a little kid came up to me and said, “ Bobby Charlton, Manchester United, “ and grinned. They truly are a global brand .

Back in 1998, I did a six month placement at Marketing Manchester, marketing the city in Berlin.
I recall that no amount of money spent marketing Manchester globally could match the marketing power of Manchester United doing it.

 

[jrpb-3]

shows we are well behind the teams who are consistently at the top. Also shows Arsenal now lagging behind them but still ahead of most of the rest, shows they are probably under performing compared to the next batch. Looking at Leicester, Everton and West Ham they have been reasonably competitive and their levels of revenue are not unattainable, so for the immediate future I guess that's who we need to be competing with, both in terms of league position and finances

 

[Oliwolf44]

Globalisation has cemented the football pecking order, the only way to muscle in is to throw money at it that isnt sustainable like Man City.

 

[lobodelsur]

In the 1980’s, I was in Borneo with the Army staying with a local village elder near a place called Bareo, (which was essentially in the rainforest,) and a little kid came up to me and said, “ Bobby Charlton, Manchester United, “ and grinned. They truly are a global brand .

Something similar happened to me in rural Poland in the early '70s.

 

[lobodelsur]

Interesting that for most of the more recent years there are few changes amongst the top 15 - just a place or two here or there. In the long term, our goal must be to cement ourselves in that top 15. How to do it is another question...

 

[Hsvwolf]

You know youre a big club when you see your shirt bring sold in holiday tat shops in Spain and Greece

 

[SanFranWolf]

Another interesting stat…

We have 1.8m followers on Instagram.


Here’s a few other teams:

Real Madrid 103m
Barcelona 100m
Man Utd have 47m
Chelsea 29.5m
Man City 26m
Arsenal 19m
Spurs 11.1m
Leicester 5.7m
Everton 2.4m
Villa 1.3m
Crystal Palace 1.2m
Sheffield United 520k
Albion 390k

 

[AW]

Do they give Adidas a percentage of shirt sales?

It's more like the other way round; Adidas are the big winners here:

Ronaldo Manchester United transfer: Why shirt sales won't balance the books

 

[ricki herberts moustache]

It’s understandable given they’ve had a massive headstart and have a stadium that holds twice as many people as Molineux but it does show how far behind we (and the half a dozen clubs similar to us) really are.

(and how much current stadium capacity holds us back).

Is the stadium capacity responsible for the lack of goals?

 

[McSteen]

More stats, cost of acquiring current squads:

Weekly Post 346

CIES Football Observatory Weekly Post

football-observatory.com

 

[Manic88]

I’ve got this sorted;
- Fosun restructure so Wolves own Club Med
- Wolves Revenue now over £1.5bn
- Wolves can spend what they like, **** FFP

it wouldn’t make Wolves self sustaining though…

 

[optimuswolf]

It's not about competing with Man U. Yes, we're never going to compete with them. But surely we can compete with West Ham and Palace, who had higher revenues than us?

It's about steady improvement, no (sane) person expects us to overtake somebody like Everton overnight. But we can close the gap. And that table shows that we haven't, that we have declined somewhat in relative revenue since 2019. Where does that lead us if it continues? Covid affected everybody, as do player injuries, so those excuses don't wash. The owners can talk about improvement and ambitions, but that doesn't mean it is happening.

Or maybe we should be happy that we are in the top 30 at all? Not far behind the likes of Ajax, Benfica and .... Sheffield Utd.

Theres a lot of devil in the detail.

Crystal Palace for instance extended their accounts so had more money than us for broadcasting, on a technicality only.

Revenues come from tv mainly. Matchday is tiny and commercial we are growing, albeit slowly.

Lots of PL clubs will be much of a muchness in finances as tv is shared quite equally.

 

[Sussex Wolf]

If you think we can easily catch up with the biggest clubs, this article makes sobering reading,…

Man City's record signing of Grealish could yet be shattered - but what does it mean for the Premier League and its fans?

Manchester City's £100m signing of Jack Grealish is the most expensive transfer in Premier League history - but it could yet be shattered in a summer of astronomical spending by England's richest football clubs.

news.sky.com

 

[optimuswolf]

If you think we can easily catch up with the biggest clubs, this article makes sobering reading,…

Man City's record signing of Grealish could yet be shattered - but what does it mean for the Premier League and its fans?

Manchester City's £100m signing of Jack Grealish is the most expensive transfer in Premier League history - but it could yet be shattered in a summer of astronomical spending by England's richest football clubs.

news.sky.com

Its a huge task. That article is a jumbled mess but the takeaway that the big clubs have spent 20 yrs building and then defending their position is true, and important. Man city broke in with hm investment never seen before, but the price would be even higher now, as evertons owners are finding.

So now we have a range of approaches from clubs looking to move incrementally forward, either medium/quick (villa, everton, leicester) or slow (most others). Some clubs don't even have any grand plans (Palace, norwich).