Arsenal Now Richest Club in England

[deadringer]

Affluent Arsenal reveal boom
Gunners turnover makes them richest club in the country

By Steven Morrison Last updated: 24th September 2007
http://www.skysports.com/story/0,195...752139,00.html

Top of the table Arsenal have revealed turnover of more than £200million, making them Britain's richest football club.

The Gunners publicised the results in their financial report for the year ending 31st May 2007, which showed their group operating profits were up 274% to £51.2million.

The results prove that the club's move to Emirates stadium was financially deft - they averaged match-day revenues of £3.1million per game during their first season at the new ground.

Their turnover well exceeds that of Chelsea and Manchester United, whose results for the same time was £152.8million and £167.8million respectively.

Foreign investment

Cash balances were up to £73.9million, from £35.6million in 2006, and this comes despite Arsenal's financial future coming into doubt in recent weeks, with increasing talk of foreign investment.

However, the current board have remained insistent on the stance that no investment is necessary - a standpoint backed up by the results.

Delivering success

Arsenal chairman Peter Hill-Wood says the results indicate how the club will progress for the future. He said: "The best way that Arsenal can continue to deliver success is by maintaining a business that pays its own way.

"We have always pursued, and intend to continue with, a policy of re-investing profits and surplus cash into team development.

"Emirates Stadium now provides the club with the firm financial foundations from which we will continue to build trophy winning Arsenal teams for many years to come."

The figures quoted are before 'player trading and depreciation' which means money from player departures such as Thierry Henry for £16million does not contribute towards the results.

The announcement now means Arsenal sit in the same financial bracket as Spanish giants Real Madrid, whose turnover was £202million for the 2005-06 season.

[Soberphobia]

Bull****. They are still massively in debt and in actual fact their debt levels have increased from last year.

Also, their accounting needs to be looked at if they are making that claim - they are charging exhorbitant and frankly unsustainable amounts for tickets.

I'm a 'Pool fan and several people on one of the websites I post on dispute these claims. I have no hate for Arsenal but they are still in a big hole financially.

[deadringer]

Originally Posted by Black Death

Bull****. They are still massively in debt and in actual fact their debt levels have increased from last year.

so what?...payments against the debt are factored into operating expenses...being in debt is not necessarily a bad thing, especially when being in debt allows you to build a brand new state of the art stadium which in turn provides you with further streams of revenue (see below), and you wouldnt factor a companies entire debt into a yearly earnings report, unless they were scheduled to pay off the debt in full that year...

Also, their accounting needs to be looked at if they are making that claim - they are charging exhorbitant and frankly unsustainable amounts for tickets.

the reason for the steep increase in matchday profits is that this is the first fiscal report to reflect the move from Highbury to the Emirates, which is larger and has more concessions, thus providing significantly more opportunities for the club to generate match day revenue; high ticket prices have much less to do with it than the simple fact that they can pack in more than twice as many people...in fact, arsenal have always had high ticket prices, going back to highbury; the notion that they are "unsustainable," when they arent even the highest in england, and the club is drawing 60,000+ to a wednesday night fixture, is kind of ridiculous...

I'm a 'Pool fan and several people on one of the websites I post on dispute these claims. I have no hate for Arsenal but they are still in a big hole financially.

well, you might want to tell them that they are mistaken...cause they are...

[JetsFan2012]

ringer, what's the deal with the rumor that the Galaxy might lend Beckham to Arsenal?

[Soberphobia]

23 million of that turnover is not even related to football...the club also lost 21 million on financing. (a huge amount)

They have also ignored depreciation and player transfers in their operating profit figure, which is creative accounting at its finest.

Arsenal are in a lot of debt whatever way you look at it; by their own admission they are not as big a club as Liverpool or Manure but are claiming they are the 'richest' in Britain on the basis of these figures. Yes, they have increased turnover, but a fair proportion of that increase is not related to the Emirates. Any objective assessment of the figures shows the club is not the 'richest' but rather one that has expectedly increased turnover to match a King-sized debt.

Arsenal are the biggest London club, despite claims by Chelsea to the contrary. They have 41k on their waiting list for season tickets and a rich history but to claim they are the 'richest' in British football is tommyrot.

By the way, the Arsenal shareprice only went up 3% on the news, which says it all for me really. The market is the best judge of these sorts of things and it has judged; nice result, but not outstanding.

[Soberphobia]

Also forgot to mention what I meant by the 'unsustainable ticket prices' comment; I think over the long term they are. The globe is headed for a soft or hard recession in the next few years and it will affect London town just as it affects everywhere else. What are some of the tickets going for? 90 quid or something? The Premier League isn't the NFL with only 16 set games a season. Even for the die-hard supporter some of the ticket prices will be too much over the long-term.

Something will break at some stage for Arsenal; I'm not saying they are going to do a Leeds, or even a Newcastle for that matter, but they are going to have to cut down on something at some stage.

[ragnarok14]

I think the title is a little misleading.

Arsenal aren't the richest club in england, but I can certainly believe they have the highest turnover, but then we aren't sure what is being included and what isn't in these figures and we dont know the debt level of all clubs either.

But it is possible for arsenal to be the club with the highest turnover in england.

[deadringer]

Originally Posted by Black Death

Also forgot to mention what I meant by the 'unsustainable ticket prices' comment; I think over the long term they are. The globe is headed for a soft or hard recession in the next few years and it will affect London town just as it affects everywhere else. What are some of the tickets going for? 90 quid or something? The Premier League isn't the NFL with only 16 set games a season. Even for the die-hard supporter some of the ticket prices will be too much over the long-term.

Something will break at some stage for Arsenal; I'm not saying they are going to do a Leeds, or even a Newcastle for that matter, but they are going to have to cut down on something at some stage.

yes, some tickets are going for 94 quid (best seats for the top games), the most expensive in the league...but guess what?...arsenal have ALWAYS had the most expensive tickets in the league, in a fairly similar proportion to the rest of the league as today, or at least ever since standing decks were abolished and clubs were forced to build "all seater" stadiums...so what you are saying is, despite 20 years of evidence to the contrary, Arsenal's high ticket prices are suddenly going to cause the club to "break"...doesnt make sense mate...

also, as to the whole "global recession" thing...you are aware that ticket prices across the premiership are up 600% in the last decade...perhaps it would be more appropriate to talk about "unsustainable ticket prices" league wide, rather than focusing on one of the only clubs who actually sells out all of its matches...

[deadringer]

Originally Posted by Black Death

23 million of that turnover is not even related to football...the club also lost 21 million on financing. (a huge amount)

They have also ignored depreciation and player transfers in their operating profit figure, which is creative accounting at its finest.

Arsenal are in a lot of debt whatever way you look at it; by their own admission they are not as big a club as Liverpool or Manure but are claiming they are the 'richest' in Britain on the basis of these figures. Yes, they have increased turnover, but a fair proportion of that increase is not related to the Emirates. Any objective assessment of the figures shows the club is not the 'richest' but rather one that has expectedly increased turnover to match a King-sized debt.

Arsenal are the biggest London club, despite claims by Chelsea to the contrary. They have 41k on their waiting list for season tickets and a rich history but to claim they are the 'richest' in British football is tommyrot.

By the way, the Arsenal shareprice only went up 3% on the news, which says it all for me really. The market is the best judge of these sorts of things and it has judged; nice result, but not outstanding.

well, i didnt notice this post, but i dont have time to really respond to it point by point...but the gist is, ManU are rocked with debt, Chel$ki doesnt actually make money, and if liverpool ever gets around to building its new stadium they will probably be in comparable situation to arsenal...but for now, according to sky sports, arsenal are the richest club in england...so, its just another thing that we are number 1 at this year...

[Soberphobia]

Come back to us when all of your turnover is actually funded through football. Come back to us when your debt is under control because being rich is defined by both your assets and your liabilities.

I'm not doubting the Gunners are a great club nor that the Emirates is a great asset. I am doubting the claim that the Gunners are the richest club however.

If it were down to me to define the richest club I would pick Chelsea. You know the reasons why. Chelsea aren't a tenth the club Arsenal are however.

In the end this argument is probably academic, because a club isn't defined by its riches, it is defined by its trophies, and there is a long way to go before any trophies are decided on this season.

[deadringer]

Originally Posted by Black Death

Come back to us when all of your turnover is actually funded through football. Come back to us when your debt is under control because being rich is defined by both your assets and your liabilities.

I'm not doubting the Gunners are a great club nor that the Emirates is a great asset. I am doubting the claim that the Gunners are the richest club however.

If it were down to me to define the richest club I would pick Chelsea. You know the reasons why. Chelsea aren't a tenth the club Arsenal are however.

In the end this argument is probably academic, because a club isn't defined by its riches, it is defined by its trophies, and there is a long way to go before any trophies are decided on this season.

(hey, how else do i respond to the classic "come back to me when..." last word?)

[Soberphobia]

Can't open it for some reason. If that is Michael Thomas I want to wring his neck!