£89 Million in prize money for Everton?

£89 million would be wonderful, but that doesn’t mean £89 million over and above what we get now? Anyone know how much better off we would possibly be than under the existing deal?

When you consider that Martinez makes half of what Moyes made, finished up £20 million (or thereabouts) in player trading this year, and significantly reduced the wage bill by getting rid of some veteran earners (Fellaini, Neville, Anichebe, Heitinga, Mucha), it’s hard for me to be skeptical of our spending power.

I know some of the old heads on here will be fearing the same old excuses for not spending, but if this year is any indication of what is to come, this version of Everton will make the progressive move. I think we will surprise the shit out of people with our spending power. If our own fans underestimate us, the outside world won’t see a £40-50M sneak attack to bolster the team. Sounds like something Roberto would do to me!!!

By the way, this does not make me pro-RS in any way shape or form, just anti-conspiracy theory when there are plausible reasons for something beyond the ’establishment looking out for their favourites’ idea.

People may be cueing up to jump on their bandwagon, but that doesn’t mean that everything is being manipulated for a specific reason.

I hope you’ve got the figures right... no doubt someone will do a cross-check for us. Cheers.

I tell you what would be impressive is if Roberto see’s more than the anticipated £20 million we are all believing will be given to him to bring in new additions.

I honestly think to make any significant progress and to increase the calibre of players we bring in the minimum RM should be given is £30 million as a quality striker is going to take up at least half (£15 million) of that amount.

As already said and I’m sure it will again, its going to be a very interesting Summer. I just hope beyond hope that Bill pulls his finger out and actually gives our manager funding to break that top 4. I won’t be holding my breath though!

"And it continues to make the traditional funding source, tickets sold to the faithful matchgoing fan, less and less significant..."

Absolutely. In days of old, there were less games shown on TV because they were always so worried about the gate, and takings being down due to people watching the game on TV. Now they don’t care because they earn more money from a game being televised than they would on the gate anyway.

Surely there will be money, and pots of it. But the cost of EPL based players will escalate hugely. Cheaper imports more likely!

If indeed we do ’only’ need £30M to start the new stadium (ahem!) then the added TV money would cover most if not all of it. Nevermind the extra cash RM generated with transfers last summer.

Just for reference, our total matchday gate receipts were £17.5M last season. As you can see, gate receipts are almost becoming irrelevant in comparison to TV money. In fact, with £750k TV money being paid out for every live game, this payment alone is almost as much as we take at the gate for the game itself!

Next year should be even more given we’ll be in the Europa League and would likely feature in more live games as we’re not as shite to watch anymore and can now be considered (justifiably) one of the top(ish) teams, as well as there being a new buzz about us with RM at the helm.

At some point this whole Sky money train is going to crash, I just hope the powers at Goodison Park can use this extra cash wisely to finally sort out the stadium issue before it’s too late, instead of just paying players massively increased wages (which is basically what happens every time the Sky money is increased).

I think the Premier league needs to stop the loan system, a system that allows Chelsea to stockpile players and loan them out to other Premier League clubs while they are getting Premier League experience. As far as Everton are concerned, well – despite all the money pouring in – we still can’t afford to buy our own training ground, never mind build a new stadium.

Life is good.

Can someone explain, why so much money is going into Finch Farm since Everton don’t own it?

I’m not surprised by the amount as The Guardian commented yesterday that the team that finish bottom this season will receive more dosh than Man Utd last season. This explains why all season teams have been going on about not wanting to go down this year.

I’ll be surprised if Roberto does not get between £40 and £50 million of which he seems to want to spend a huge chunk on Lukaku. I know there are mixed views on the lad on this site but he is only 20 and I think he will develop and fit into our team like a glove.

What exciting times we are going to have!

However, as all Premier league clubs will receive an increased windfall from TV money, expect transfer fees and players wages to be inflated. I think RM will have to work hard to find value in the transfer market, especially when the budget is stretched to finding the 6 or 7 players to add depth the squad.

That Sky/BT love Liverpool FC so much that they put them on more often than other clubs so that the club generates more money which isn’t considered with regard to the FFP rules?

I’m genuinely curious as most of the "the media loves Liverpool" posters don’t back up their cases with anything concrete.

Europa could therefore indirectly be worth a few million more than the headline return, because it forces Everton games to Sundays, where Sky/BT are more likely to pick them up.

The problem, however, is the same as before. Broadcasting revenue will account for 75% of our turnover this season, while commercial performance continues to languish in the gutter. We continue to rely on others for much of our revenue, which is compounded by having to listen to Robert Elstone tell us how great Kitbag and Chang are.

The teams around us in the league earn more per season than we do in three years with Chang.

I’ve run my own business all my life, it’s not all about how much you have coming in, it’s just as important to control how much you have going out in the costs to operate. Bleeding obvious really!

Most of the extra money will end up in the players and agents bank accounts as per usual. The agents will be rubbing their hands together in anticipation.

A great deal of it will siphoned abroad by the legions of foreign players.

I wonder if, as some have previously stated, our transfer kitty will be around the £40m mark?

As long as it’s not spent on lawn mowers I’m happy. Let the groundsmen push their bloody lawn mowers like we used to when we were kids. None of those fancy sit-on jobs.

Calling someone an anti-conspiracy theorist suggests that you are a pro-conspiracy theorist.

Do I take it from your answer that my summary of your view is correct then?

As a side issue I believe that they get around £20 million a season from their sponsor and a similar figure from their kit manufacturer. Check our earnings and it makes us look way behind. We need a new commercial director!!!

I have tried to get a list of games that have been shown live on TV for the past five years but to no avail, the closest I found was a Daily Mail article from last season which made the point that LFC had been shown an incredible number of times for season 2012-13 in comparison to their rivals, I would imagine they have featured even more this season. If I can get definitive proof of the number of occasions they and others have been featured live I will gladly post it. It won’t of course prove or disprove my theory.

Arsenal 19
Chelsea 18
Liverpool 18
Man Utd 18
Spurs 17
So make of that what you will.

I'm not completely dismissing your point. Of course it's possible but for what reason would TV companies be in awe of Liverpool as you put it. I really want to know if there's some solid basis for it.

As it stands the position of such theories is to accept them as fact and then look for back-up rather than the reverse.

ToffeeWeb is getting more and more tiresome and I'm getting more tiresome pointing it out. This thread is about funds Everton is getting from TV and we're talking about Liverpool.

Television revenue for Premier League clubs 2012-13
Club / PL finish Live games (2012-13) Revenue (£m) +/- 2011-12 (£m)
Manchester United 25 60.8 0.5
Manchester City 21 58.1 -2.5
Chelsea 16 55 0.6
Arsenal 22 57.1 0.9
Tottenham Hotspur 21 55.8 -1.5
Everton 14 51.7 2.9
Liverpool 22 54.8 0.4

In case the formatting didn't survive;

Yes, they got lots of coverage (especially compared to Chelsea and ourselves who finished above them 2011-12) but it doesn't translate as a huge uplift in money (certainly not enough to compensate for not qualifying for Champions League).

They might not have won the title for almost as long as us, but in the intervening years they have hit the top four consistently enough (with their huge global following) to remain a useful tool for the broadcasters when marketing their product.

Of course, it is a BBC site I got the information from so perhaps they have lied to hide the tens of millions they have been funneling to the RS?!

Personally, I don't believe there is any concerted effort to keep the same clubs at the top of the league (if I did believe that I would stop watching the sport as what would be the point) beyond a lack of a real attempt to reign in their excesses and create a more level playing field – the free market / unfettered capitalism is god! – and I am now finding it increasingly tiresome that some people seem to be constantly trying to incite outrage at the slightest provocation.

I hadn't read all of your last post (as I gathered the information I have just posted last night and had it ready when I logged on tonight) so sorry for echoing your 'tiresome' sentiment.

I am worried that TW is tending towards the hysterical these days. Whilst that may actually attract some people, I think it could end up causing more to look elsewhere for rational EFC-themed discussion / debate.

Just found this, considering Man Utd, Arsenal and Man City were in Europe and Liverpool came second in live games shown. Take away the European games and they are clear winners, even last season kind of backs it up.

Do you want TW to be another bland fan site similar to the official sites of the clubs or governing bodies?

What is it that so distresses you about posts such as mine? The subject is Everton related because if another club who happen to reside close to our doors is somehow gaining an unfair competitive advantage over Everton then to my point of view it should be highlighted and discussed - feel free to object; feel free to ridicule; but never ever say that it is invalid or denigrates the forum as that is an insult to me personally and mostly to those people who work hard to put the show on the road. BTW if anything puts people off the site it is sanctimonious and condescending know-alls who dislike anything that doesn't suit their own world view. GFY

Passions running high may be a justifiable excuse for the occasional discord, but I am just not convinced any of us are best served by prejudice and a heavily skewed perception going unchallenged; extreme simply doesn't make things more interesting in my opinion. I have no fear that TW will become bland by reining in the speculation / conjecture a tad so that it doesn't appear to be simply a jerk reaction to any information.

I thought you had leapt to an unreasonable conclusion and were making unsubstantiated claims so I have provided data (very easily found) that refutes your suggestion that the RS are favoured to any significant degree. If you wish to view that as sanctimonious and condescending that is your right (and one I am sure you will cling to whenever you feel harshly done by). Personally, I would call it putting things into perspective.

Man City only recently bought their success, and now are on 22-26 times a season, so it's not beyond hope for us. Er...

Si, Patrick, Shane, just out of curiosity, read the O.P again and then post what you think we should do with the extra money.

Jim @34 and Matt @38. I would look to pay down bank debt. It would mean we're clearing the debt and not paying out good money on interest payments. Matt, while I don't like the idea of our lazy Board getting rich off their own ineptitude, having a smaller amount of debt will make the club itself stronger and more attractive to investment.

Maybe I'm wrong and they'll sell the club for a recovery of their investment, and a token profit, to owners who have the capital and know-how to move it forward. One good thing about the increased revenue, is as long as the non-sugar daddy clubs don't use it as a means of entering bidding wars for 2nd rate foreign players, then clubs should be operating sustainably. They might cut ticket prices! Or pay tax! (Both of which probably more likely than BK et al selling for a token profit).

In fairness to Patrick, at least he had some basis for his theory. Generally we have someone posting the likes of "the media hates us" and then run off without further comment.

Si's post #52 sums it up perfectly and it's good to see David
Ellis, Matt Traynor and Andy Osbourne giving logical responses.

Apologies for my part in hijacking the thread.

I allocated that amount as a guesstimate; Roberto sees Finch Farm has a vital asset to his future plans, housing young players there in temporary accommodation for injured and squad get together before certain games.

It could easily be the case that all that was reasonably expected for this summer was consolidation following a Phil Walling 7th-ish - no need to sell important players, like-for-like replacements, with small scale squad strengthening. I am hoping that our good performance and league position approaching Christmas meant that some way was found to adjust the plans to accommodate a much greater level of squad investment in the coming transfer window.

Maybe, after checking there were no great deals to be struck, the much vaunted January transfer pot was diverted to loan repayments to allow a more substantial kitty to be put together in the summer and, providing Roberto can find some gems, we will all be surprised and excited come August.

Or does that make too much business sense for our board?

I think we'd do well to get Lukaku in permanently, maybe two more permanent squad players and a couple of handy loans again to cover the Europa League. Let's not forget, we need to get Barry signed on, and improved contracts for our young stars. The above list will certainly cost the £30m and much more.