Prize Money from 2012/13

[Wimb]

So we made just over £40.3m just for turning up this season... staggering.

http://www.sportingintelligence.com/201 ... 13-210501/

We were the joint-least shown live team as well.

[SPARTA]

<ignore>

[Alexander Litvinenko]

I think this is the most interesting graphic of all - the complete breakdown of where the money went :



So "prize money" is only £1.5m - the rest is sharing of TV revenue which is more or less equal as well as the facility fees for individual matches. And the PL give teams the TV facility fees equivalent to 10 live matches, even if they had fewer.

[Wimb]

I think that's a better model than most though Dirk, it would be a bit unfair to give United an extra £20m for winning the league, especially with the riches they get from the Champions League and their TV share.

Still, over £40m just for turning up is staggering.

[Barry the bird boggler]

Still, over £40m just for turning up is staggering.

Welcome to the wacky world that is the Premier League, best league in the world donch'a know

[Alexander Litvinenko]

I think that's a better model than most though Dirk, it would be a bit unfair to give United an extra £20m for winning the league, especially with the riches they get from the Champions League and their TV share.

Still, over £40m just for turning up is staggering.

Agreed. Despite all that's wrong about the PL (and it's lots) at least they're committed to a pretty fair way of sharing TV revenue. The collective selling of TV rights is critical - it'd be an utter disaster if each club was to sell their own broadcast rights and leave the smaller clubs to pick up a few measly crumbs whilst they prospered - as in Spain.

[No Fixed Abode]

I think they need to re-evalu8 the way things are done, when Arsenal (4th) and Spurs (5th) get more money than Chelsea (3rd)and Liverpool who finished 7th are pretty much on a par with us.

[Alexander Litvinenko]

I think they need to re-evalu8 the way things are done, when Arsenal (4th) and Spurs (5th) get more money than Chelsea (3rd)and Liverpool who finished 7th are pretty much on a par with us.

It's down to popularity, m8. People want to watch Arsenal and Spurs play more than they want to watch Chelsea and Liverpool so they get more televised games. Perhaps if they work on developing their popularity and fanbase they'll get more attention and more TV income.

[Barry the bird boggler]

I think that's a better model than most though Dirk, it would be a bit unfair to give United an extra £20m for winning the league, especially with the riches they get from the Champions League and their TV share.

Still, over £40m just for turning up is staggering.

Agreed. Despite all that's wrong about the PL (and it's lots) at least they're committed to a pretty fair way of sharing TV revenue. The collective selling of TV rights is critical - it'd be an utter disaster if each club was to sell their own broadcast rights and leave the smaller clubs to pick up a few measly crumbs whilst they prospered - as in Spain.

Would that really be an issue though? The likes of ManU, Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea, Spurs etc. are already so far ahead of the rest of the league that more money for them will make sod all difference to the also rans - and it possibly may mean the reast of the league actually levels out somewhat so there isn't quite the massive gap between Div 1 and Div 2 etc.

[Alexander Litvinenko]

I think that's a better model than most though Dirk, it would be a bit unfair to give United an extra £20m for winning the league, especially with the riches they get from the Champions League and their TV share.

Still, over £40m just for turning up is staggering.

Agreed. Despite all that's wrong about the PL (and it's lots) at least they're committed to a pretty fair way of sharing TV revenue. The collective selling of TV rights is critical - it'd be an utter disaster if each club was to sell their own broadcast rights and leave the smaller clubs to pick up a few measly crumbs whilst they prospered - as in Spain.

Would that really be an issue though? The likes of ManU, Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea, Spurs etc. are already so far ahead of the rest of the league that more money for them will make sod all difference to the also rans - and it possibly may mean the reast of the league actually levels out somewhat so there isn't quite the massive gap between Div 1 and Div 2 etc.

Hmmm, it's arguable - the money that is shared equally across all 20 clubs is nearly £33M - the "Equal share" and the "Overseas TV". Remove that sharing and it'd distort things even more - the gap between the top/most popular clubs and the rest would be a quantum leap bigger then, so the PL would be much less of a contest than it is now (and it's not much of one now).

Think Scotland (as was) with 5 or 6 clubs instead of just the 2 Glasgow ones - and then about 40 clubs much smaller who are all on a shoestring. Any talent they develop would immediately get snapped up by the biggest clubs and the league would wither and die, because no-one wants to see matches which are completely one-sided. We're partly there now, but this would accelerate it.

There's a lot wrong with the big clubs, but in their wisdom at least they do appreciate that their success depends upon having clubs of a reasonable standard to beat.

So instead of having perhaps or 6 clubs at the vet top and then 20 or so in the second tier of earnings, then the Championship-level clubs, you'd make that gap betwen clubs

[No Fixed Abode]

I think they need to re-evalu8 the way things are done, when Arsenal (4th) and Spurs (5th) get more money than Chelsea (3rd)and Liverpool who finished 7th are pretty much on a par with us.

It's down to popularity, m8.

So why didn't Reading receive the least money then?

[Alexander Litvinenko]

I think they need to re-evalu8 the way things are done, when Arsenal (4th) and Spurs (5th) get more money than Chelsea (3rd)and Liverpool who finished 7th are pretty much on a par with us.

It's down to popularity, m8.

So why didn't Reading receive the least money then?

They did - Reading, Fulham, Norwich, Southampton, Stoke, Swansea, West Brom and Wigan all received the same, minimum, Facility fees payment of £5.7M.

[No Fixed Abode]

No, QPR received the least money.

[Alexander Litvinenko]

What part of the words "facility Fees" don't you understand? That's the factor based on number of TV appearances, which is down to popularity.....

[No Fixed Abode]

What part of the words "facility Fees" don't you understand? That's the factor based on number of TV appearances, which is down to popularity.....

Doesn't always correlate to 'popularity' though does it? Depends which teams are also involved in crucial games, for instance, Spurs and Arsenals money would have been bumped up by the last day of the season as they were fighting out for 4th spot.

[M-U-R-T-Y]

RattLOLed

[No Fixed Abode]

Seems like you got relegated in the wrong season....

The club that finishes bottom of the Premier League next season is set to collect around £63m in earnings from a new broadcasting deal currently in negotiations, just over £20m more than the current amount

[Alexander Litvinenko]

Seems like you got relegated in the wrong season....

The club that finishes bottom of the Premier League next season is set to collect around £63m in earnings from a new broadcasting deal currently in negotiations, just over £20m more than the current amount

Yeah, but the increases in income distribution next season are even bigger higher up the table, so although you do get more money than Championship clubs, you're relativity worse off in comparison to the other PL clubs, even those relegated with you.

[soggy biscuit]

In Spain, Real Madrid were given €140M in TV money, Grenada got just €12M

[M Brook]

In Spain, Real Madrid were given €140M in TV money, Grenada got just €12M

Very generous gesture by Spanish TV to make a donation like that to an impoverished Caribbean country. How much did Granada CF get?