Forum

xml	No replies possible in the archive

Author: tonybhoy
Date: 01-09-2003, 23:49

I know many have posted on here re CL money but I never really noticed or cared until now.

I heard on the radio tonight that Bayern Munich and Stuggart will get more money from the CL now that Dortmund are out as the 3 had to share the German money or something like that.

How does the breakdown work and the those two benefit because the whole of Germany watches two matches instead of three or the total money from German tv goes to 2 etc.

Does that mean that Celtic will suffer financially because Rangers are in it or does it not matter or does it even mean Celtic will be better off in some way.

Any views welcome

tonybhoy

Author: H-AAB-et
Date: 02-09-2003, 00:23

To my knowledge the teams get a non-negotiable fee for line-up and a bonus for each point. There is of course also awarding bonus for advancement in the tournement.

I unfortunayely don't have the latest figure, but the line-upp fee is around 3 million euro and about 1/10 of these per point. The overall winner gets like 11-12 million euro.

I don't know exactly how the TV deal works, but these could be the only reason to why Stuttgart and Bayern will get a little more money out of the CL.

Author: mark
Date: 02-09-2003, 00:28

For an example of how the money was handled last year you can go to http://www.uefa.com/uefa/news/Kind=4096/newsId=77336.html

In short the answer is that there is a combination of the clubs succes, money is given for a win and a draw, and the relative amount of money gained in a TV contract from the clubs country. When there are more then one team from a country, the TV related money is devided between them.

So, money wise, it might have been better for Celtics that Rangers would not have qualified (and the other way around), but still they will probably do more money then they have done last year. The point that I don't understand right now is how UEFA will decide which TV money belongs to scotland, and which to england.

The nicest part about the CL money distrebuation, is that the teams which were eliminated in the qualifying round also get something , not a lot but more then zero.

Re: CL money
Author: nelster Date: 02-09-2003, 12:37	I'm sure this was outlined in one of the UEFA bulletins of summer last year. Rangers will certainly make a lot of money, at 6 am this morning a queue of around 2000 people was already queueing for tickets!!. It is now officially sold-out for all 3 games. Ł80 (3 match package) * 50000 = Ł4 million!!!!

Re: CL money
Author: Adam Date: 02-09-2003, 13:05	So Rangers have sold out all their games already. I guess that puts an end to the theory that OF fans will abandon their club if they think they are going to lose. Not that Rangers definitely will lose, they certainly won't coast.

Author: kurt
Date: 02-09-2003, 17:47

rangers and celtic will get less money, this because they have two teams in champions league

the same thing happened with belgium

the german get a lot of TV-rights, around 45 million euro, so this dividing to two teams or three makes a big difference

for scotland belgium, the TV-rights are, around 4 million euro, so celtic and rangers get now each te halve

THIS is a fact : 90 % of all the money in champions league are TV-rights and startbonus, only 10 % is winning bonus, draw bonus, and rewards for 1/8, 1/4, 1/2 and final.

Anderlecht ended two years ago, first in their group 1, and third in the second group round, and they only were the 27th club, concerning money

anderlecht with the last 16, as third, the last 12, and get little financial award, that is champions league, money, money , money for the big five

Author: macaskil
Date: 02-09-2003, 18:12

Hence the OF wanting to get into the EPL. Better 1/3 or 1/4 of 45 million than 100% or 1/2 of 4 million.

In effect a team from Holland, Belgium, Portugal, Greece, Scotland etc would make less money from winning the ECL than a team from England, Italy, Spain or Germany being knocked out at the group stage.

Teams such as Ajax, Anderlecht, Celtic, Rangers, Porto are forced to compete with the big clubs as far as wages and other overheads are concerned but no matter how successful they are their income is going to be less.

I'd prefer to see the majority of the money depend on performance. Of course the big clubs would still dominate but a small club (or a big club from a small league) would be rewarded according to how successful they are.

Re: CL money
Author: Adam Date: 02-09-2003, 18:28	So what's the solution to breaking down the big leagues' hold on the game. Surely UEFA can't afford to balance out the scale with performance bonuses. Plus, even if there is ever a European league the TV audiences nor the distribution of money won't necessarily change significantly will they?

Re: CL money
Author: bert.kassies Date: 02-09-2003, 19:42	The money aspects of the Champions League are nicely covered by the UEFA glossy magazine "uefadirect" (available on the web by pdf files). The June 2003 issue has an article on club income, and the July 2003 issue deals with money for the national associations.

Author: mark
Date: 02-09-2003, 21:49

IMHO this is one of the thing that UEFA is doing right. Think of the altarnative, that every team has to negotiate and sell TV right for its own games, this way teams like the OF that frankly don't have a major global apeal will not be able to sell it to audiance in malazya (for example). And even in scotland, broadcasters would not have payed twice the amount of money just because there are two teams in the CL.

Selling packages in higher prices and then ditributing the money according to how much money a team would have gained in its local market sound fair enough to me.

Author: macaskil
Date: 03-09-2003, 14:54

You picked the wrong example. Celtic and Rangers (not the other Scottish clubs) have a big potential audience in England and in other English-speaking countries such as the USA, Canada, Australia, Ireland. The UEFA Cup final had an audience of 10 million in the UK, more than most of the ECL matches involving English clubs.

In England, Man U have a global appeal but clubs such as Newcastle, Soutahmpton and Blackburn have mainly a local audience. The London clubs have a big local audience - population of 7 million - but have to share it among 4 big clubs.

Author: mark
Date: 03-09-2003, 17:58

There was a realy good reason why I used malaysia as an example

, and I think that what I wrote applies also to other teams even from the big 5. Probably only the G-14 teams can claim that they have a real global interest in them at any nation.

It would be intresting to know how much money celtic had made last year from their TV rights at the UEFA cup, and compare it to the amount of money they will make this year.

Re: CL money
Author: macaskil Date: 04-09-2003, 14:49	I have seen a figure of Ł10 million (15 million Euros) Thinking of other clubs with an appeal outside their own TV market, how about Galatasaray? Surely they must have a big potential audience among exiled Turks in Germany? Also I wonder if Spanish clubs have a TV market in Latin America, and Portuguese clubs in Brazil.

Author: mark
Date: 04-09-2003, 16:07

In israel traditionaly the english league is followed very closely, and most people which are inrested in football has their favourite english team, and watch the games on TV.

The other european leagues from which games are being braodcast, are the spanish and turkish mainly (IMO) because chaim revivo played succesfuly in celta and then in fener, and there are currently other israeli players which play at those leagues.

On the other hand, there are about 1 million people from russia in israel (1/6 of population) and I have never heard that anyone proposed to broadcast the russian league, in fact even the newspapers don't follow it (which they do for the italian league).

Author: hamilton1978
Date: 04-09-2003, 20:00

BBC Scotland show the Scotland league matches. but for a developed country, they quality of televised football is extremely poor.

They sometimes don't even show highlights of matches.

The only thing they do is show 1 match per week usually either Celtic or Rangers and just show the goals of the other premier league matches at half time. sometimes.

The quality is extremely poor and SKY television should be given the rights to show Scottish football...they offered more money than BBC but the OF rejected the deal and we are left with BBC.

I'm not blaming the OF for anything, just the BBC.