The Humble Realist Posted May 29, 2017 Report Share Posted May 29, 2017 Check out the picture. Hope lansdown doesn't read the forum ! People thought the game was worth 60mil...it was actually worth almost twice that. It's frightening. The stadium would have paid for itself and then some.. What's scary is that the play off final is going up and up in value. ...will the bubble burst ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Hitler Posted May 29, 2017 Report Share Posted May 29, 2017 It keeps bursting all the time in little controlled explosions because these income levels allow clubs to piss even more money away. In that list QPR actually lost a fortune by spending their windfall on such "stars" as Shaun Wright-Phillips, Joey Barton, and Stephen "Did you spill my pint?" Caulker. And Blackpool has just scraped out of the fourth division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lenred Posted May 29, 2017 Report Share Posted May 29, 2017 Hull defeat cost us amazing days out at Old Trafford, Anfield, White Hart Lane, Stamford Bridge, Emirates etc when I was still in my twenties and responsibility and care free! That's all I care about when I reflect on that crappy game! Sorry for going off on a tangent - just always feel a little gutted on the 'anniversary'! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted May 29, 2017 Report Share Posted May 29, 2017 What it doesn't show is the increase in expenditure due to increased transfer fees , astronomical salaries demanded by Prem players and agent's fees . This is revenue not profit . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petehinton Posted May 29, 2017 Report Share Posted May 29, 2017 It cost us a **** load more than that. Threw money at a lot of mediocre big name players in the hope we'd get back to that success. Sackings/payouts of Johnson, McInnes, Coppell... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
And Its Smith Posted May 29, 2017 Report Share Posted May 29, 2017 It only cost us that much if we'd stayed up surely. That's how I read that chart anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS3_RED Posted May 29, 2017 Report Share Posted May 29, 2017 8 minutes ago, Major Isewater said: What it doesn't show is the increase in expenditure due to increased transfer fees , astronomical salaries demanded by Prem players and agent's fees . This is revenue not profit . Exactly. The money that the game is worth is a complete myth. The money is soaked up immediately through transfers and higher wages. Its not like its money in your pocket Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanterne Rouge Posted May 29, 2017 Report Share Posted May 29, 2017 41 minutes ago, BS3_RED said: Exactly. The money that the game is worth is a complete myth. The money is soaked up immediately through transfers and higher wages. Its not like its money in your pocket It can be if you`re sensible which I believe we would have been. We would have approached it as Burnley have IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleepy1968 Posted May 29, 2017 Report Share Posted May 29, 2017 5 hours ago, The Humble Realist said: Check out the picture. Hope lansdown doesn't read the forum ! People thought the game was worth 60mil...it was actually worth almost twice that. It's frightening. The stadium would have paid for itself and then some.. What's scary is that the play off final is going up and up in value. ...will the bubble burst ? I think we all know deep down that we'll coincide our PL promotion with something burstlike! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted May 29, 2017 Report Share Posted May 29, 2017 Saw it described as the £170m game- this years final- the other day. On that chart...if it was us and say we had averaged 19k, our attendances would have probably gone up 40%. Still money doesn't guarantee it all- but it sure helps! Just took a look at QPR and £123.8m to date from ONE season up. ONE! I assume that excludes the extra gate and commercial, yet we finished above them this year. Those numbers are ludicrous but as we have seen in the CL the last few years, it doesn't guarantee dominance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poland_exile Posted May 31, 2017 Report Share Posted May 31, 2017 Hull ever since have been in a general chaos, albeit chaos mixed with fleeting success. I'm not SL's biggest fan, but at least he hasn't tried rebranding us as the Bristol Robins or something half-mad. That money is a curse! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1bristolcity Posted May 31, 2017 Report Share Posted May 31, 2017 So West Ham have reaped £798m and a fully expensed public stadium thrown in too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beaverface Posted May 31, 2017 Report Share Posted May 31, 2017 On 5/29/2017 at 19:17, Mr Popodopolous said: Saw it described as the £170m game- this years final- the other day. On that chart...if it was us and say we had averaged 19k, our attendances would have probably gone up 40%. Still money doesn't guarantee it all- but it sure helps! Just took a look at QPR and £123.8m to date from ONE season up. ONE! I assume that excludes the extra gate and commercial, yet we finished above them this year. Those numbers are ludicrous but as we have seen in the CL the last few years, it doesn't guarantee dominance. If we ever made the top flight, I'd be happy with us sticking with pretty much the same team, bag the cash, and then make all the infrastructire/stadium modifications that are necessary for the long term, such as knocking down Wickes, buying up houses around the stadium, rebuilding the Atyeo as a huge massive single tiered home end.....that sort of thing. Splashing the cash in the Premier doesn't guarantee staying in the prem, but making all the changes to Ashton Gate and beyond will last several generations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SecretSam Posted May 31, 2017 Report Share Posted May 31, 2017 It really didn't "cost" us that much. It didn't really "cost" anything. We missed out on the TV revenue, plus revenue from increased sales, etc. But that would have been offset by an increase in transfer fees, wages, etc., which may have extended beyond our (probably brief) spell in the Prem. Despite our league position, our squad then wasn't all that good, and if we'd not spent big having gone up, we'd have beaten Derby's record (low) points total. The reality, as ever, is somewhere between the extremes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanterne Rouge Posted May 31, 2017 Report Share Posted May 31, 2017 2 hours ago, beaverface said: If we ever made the top flight, I'd be happy with us sticking with pretty much the same team, bag the cash, and then make all the infrastructire/stadium modifications that are necessary for the long term, such as knocking down Wickes, buying up houses around the stadium, rebuilding the Atyeo as a huge massive single tiered home end.....that sort of thing. Splashing the cash in the Premier doesn't guarantee staying in the prem, but making all the changes to Ashton Gate and beyond will last several generations. Absolutely the right approach. Use the dosh to ensure that the club is still here in a hundred years rather than pay some bunch of past it pros 30k a week in a futile attempt to finish four from bottom. TBH I believe the former is what we would do a la Burnley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slartibartfast Posted May 31, 2017 Report Share Posted May 31, 2017 5 hours ago, SecretSam said: It really didn't "cost" us that much. It didn't really "cost" anything. We missed out on the TV revenue, plus revenue from increased sales, etc. But that would have been offset by an increase in transfer fees, wages, etc., which may have extended beyond our (probably brief) spell in the Prem. Despite our league position, our squad then wasn't all that good, and if we'd not spent big having gone up, we'd have beaten Derby's record (low) points total. The reality, as ever, is somewhere between the extremes. Bit like a losing 10/1 bet. "that cost I over a ton !" Where in reality it "cost" a tenner ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted June 1, 2017 Report Share Posted June 1, 2017 21 hours ago, SecretSam said: It really didn't "cost" us that much. It didn't really "cost" anything. We missed out on the TV revenue, plus revenue from increased sales, etc. But that would have been offset by an increase in transfer fees, wages, etc., which may have extended beyond our (probably brief) spell in the Prem. Despite our league position, our squad then wasn't all that good, and if we'd not spent big having gone up, we'd have beaten Derby's record (low) points total. The reality, as ever, is somewhere between the extremes. Yes. Exactly how I see it. We weren't ready for the Prem by several miles, and we'd have pissed the money against the wall as per usual Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS5_RED Posted June 1, 2017 Report Share Posted June 1, 2017 On 29/05/2017 at 22:48, lenred said: Hull defeat cost us amazing days out at Old Trafford, Anfield, White Hart Lane, Stamford Bridge, Emirates etc when I was still in my twenties and responsibility and care free! That's all I care about when I reflect on that crappy game! Sorry for going off on a tangent - just always feel a little gutted on the 'anniversary'! I'm still not over it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanterne Rouge Posted June 1, 2017 Report Share Posted June 1, 2017 18 minutes ago, BS5_RED said: I'm still not over it. Neither are the sags. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.