Premier League 25/26

bobmunro said:

Croydon said:

MarcusH26 said:

Be interesting to see what happens with Wolves now they're relegated. Feels like the owners have got a bit bored and it's not really a squad that I would expect to bounce back. Signing Adam Armstrong in Jan was pretty much an admittance they knew they were down. 

I think they'll win the championship at a canter next season

I think Spurs might have a say in that.

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

Anyone who thinks Spurs wouldn't go straight back up is crazy. Of course they will lose players and have to reshape their squad but they will be able to massively outspend the rest of the division. 

This is a division that has Millwall in an automatic promotion spot with 2 games to go, and people think Spurs wouldn't go up, seriously? 

killerandflash said:

Spurs would have to drastically rebuild their squad for the Championship,  whereas a team like Burnley already have a Championship promotion squad. 
An interesting decision for Burnley over Parker.  Parker had a poor season in the PL, but has an excellent track record in the Championship and is the sort of manager you'd hire to get you promoted!

I'll answer all 3 of these in one go.

IF we go down, I don't think we'll come straight back up as a matter of course for a number of reasons.

Unlike Burnley and Wolves, they won't have to make wholesale changes to their squad where as we'll have 15-16 players going out the door you would think.

We'll be facing a huge reduction in income, we've got to clear the player trading deficit, so the money made from a firesale will likely not be reinvested in the playing squad.

Lets be honest, ENIC are well known for not putting their own money in.  They've only recently put 2 x £100m (share issue, increasing their share holding) because the cash flow position has been poor.  They hadn't pumped any of their own money in during their previous 24 years of ownership, something I've banged on about with every other Spurs fan for years.  Of course, the stadium will continue to generate income but that'll be lining ENIC's pockets rather than THFC.  ENIC couldn't give a flying f*ck about the club.

I'm imagining 15-16 out the door (bare minimum), bring back the loan players - Moore (Rangers), Takai (Borussia Monchengladbach), Ashley Phillips (Stoke), Alfie Devine (PNE), Will Lankshear (WBA), Dane Scarlett (Hibs), jamie Donley (Oxford) integrate some of the talented youngsters, Byfield, Oluesi and especially Luca Williams-Barnett who already looks like he should be in and around the first team and then maybe bring in a few experienced players.

They may gel, they may not.  But I'd rather Spurs take a punt on the youth that we have been developing and throw in some experience to help them.




  

Maybe you're right Chris, maybe you are.  I'd like to think they'd treat getting back up as the ultimate priority, it'll be the proof in the pudding that they actually have THFC's best interests at heart.  I guess we'll find out soon.

One thing that I'm not sure of is the Championship's PSR equivalent rules.  Isn't there something like wages have to be a maximum % of turnover or something like that?  Obviously our wages/turnover ratio is ridiculously low in the PL, because of the income, but cut that income, that ratio increases.

killerandflash said:

To be fair to Wrexham, there's nothing dodgy about their commercial income. They're not being sponsored ludicrous sums by a company related to the owner, as a means of getting around the rules.

Instead they're getting loads of money and publicity from a popular TV show, and giant companies wanting to be associated with their success. Their shirt sponsors in recent years have been the sort of household name American companies you'd expect to be on a Premier League side, not a L1/L2 one.

I suppose the key term here is connected, or related, Ryan Reynolds is certainly connected to Disney, he's got multiple ties and deals with Disney through his own production company. I'm not suggesting there's anything untoward, but its (Wrexham) certainly not a relationship that was struck out of nowhere and from Disney just really wanting to be involved with a lower league English football team.

lordromford said:

EugenesAxe said:

killerandflash said:

To be fair to Wrexham, there's nothing dodgy about their commercial income. They're not being sponsored ludicrous sums by a company related to the owner, as a means of getting around the rules.

Instead they're getting loads of money and publicity from a popular TV show, and giant companies wanting to be associated with their success. Their shirt sponsors in recent years have been the sort of household name American companies you'd expect to be on a Premier League side, not a L1/L2 one.

I suppose the key term here is connected, or related, Ryan Reynolds is certainly connected to Disney, he's got multiple ties and deals with Disney through his own production company. I'm not suggesting there's anything untoward, but its (Wrexham) certainly not a relationship that was struck out of nowhere and from Disney just really wanting to be involved with a lower league English football team.

🤔🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿

😉

good point  . I'm still of the opinion Welsh clubs shouldn't be included it is the 'E'FL

DamoNorthStand said:

killerandflash said:

To be fair to Wrexham, there's nothing dodgy about their commercial income. They're not being sponsored ludicrous sums by a company related to the owner, as a means of getting around the rules.

Instead they're getting loads of money and publicity from a popular TV show, and giant companies wanting to be associated with their success. Their shirt sponsors in recent years have been the sort of household name American companies you'd expect to be on a Premier League side, not a L1/L2 one.

The sponsorship deals are still piss all compared to the money being spent. Doesn’t even touch the sides.

Brands like M and S, United Airlines and HP will be paying an average of c£700k between them…. Front of shirt a bit more.

When you consider what they paid for Broadhead it’s fuck all

They earned £17m in 24/25 from commercial income. I've seen estimates that they are getting £5m to £6m from United Airlines, their shirt sponsor.

Will be interesting to see how many PL clubs struggle for front of shirt sponsorship for next season with the new rules coming in about no gambling sponsors and what type of companies fill in the gaps. Interestingly most of the sides in the promotion battle from the Champ would be okay with what they've currently got (Cov with Monzo, Ipswich with Halo, Saints with P&O) 

sam3110 said:

DamoNorthStand said:

killerandflash said:

To be fair to Wrexham, there's nothing dodgy about their commercial income. They're not being sponsored ludicrous sums by a company related to the owner, as a means of getting around the rules.

Instead they're getting loads of money and publicity from a popular TV show, and giant companies wanting to be associated with their success. Their shirt sponsors in recent years have been the sort of household name American companies you'd expect to be on a Premier League side, not a L1/L2 one.

The sponsorship deals are still piss all compared to the money being spent. Doesn’t even touch the sides.

Brands like M and S, United Airlines and HP will be paying an average of c£700k between them…. Front of shirt a bit more.

When you consider what they paid for Broadhead it’s fuck all

No chance, it's way higher than that, multiple news outlets have reported the front of shirt sponsorship some to be between £5m and £6m a year, HP another estimated £1m-1.5m

Those numbers are incorrect.

HP are one of my clients

fenaddick said:

MarcusH26 said:

Will be interesting to see how many PL clubs struggle for front of shirt sponsorship for next season with the new rules coming in about no gambling sponsors and what type of companies fill in the gaps. Interestingly most of the sides in the promotion battle from the Champ would be okay with what they've currently got (Cov with Monzo, Ipswich with Halo, Saints with P&O) 

Knock on effect to the Championship is interesting too. Anyone with ambition of the PL either won’t want a gambling sponsor or will be living off 1 year deals. Be interesting to see what we do when the RSK deal is up 

Will be interesting to see how it all shakes out. I guess the gambling money is always going to be tough to turn down at this level because they offer so much more than anyone else. The really interesting one would be what Stoke would do with Bet365 given the direct link to owners. 

Can't see us going down the owner related businesses route for sponsors but I think we've still got a good few years with RSK if I recall. 

DamoNorthStand said:

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

DamoNorthStand said:

killerandflash said:

DamoNorthStand said:

killerandflash said:

To be fair to Wrexham, there's nothing dodgy about their commercial income. They're not being sponsored ludicrous sums by a company related to the owner, as a means of getting around the rules.

Instead they're getting loads of money and publicity from a popular TV show, and giant companies wanting to be associated with their success. Their shirt sponsors in recent years have been the sort of household name American companies you'd expect to be on a Premier League side, not a L1/L2 one.

The sponsorship deals are still piss all compared to the money being spent. Doesn’t even touch the sides.

Brands like M and S, United Airlines and HP will be paying an average of c£700k between them…. Front of shirt a bit more.

When you consider what they paid for Broadhead it’s fuck all

They earned £17m in 24/25 from commercial income. I've seen estimates that they are getting £5m to £6m from United Airlines, their shirt sponsor.

They are not getting that for front of shirt.

Sky Sports were the ones who reported their deal with United Airlines is worth between £5-6 million per year.

The average championship front of shirt is £524k per season.

Or very close to that.

They are top of the charts.

But it isn’t that much.

Our platform ingests 250,000 sponsorship proposals direct from brands every year. We use first party data.

Sky Sports have an inflated number.

The Disney show is their biggest earner and the second audiences get bored (which they will - happens to every entertainment formay evetually) they need to hope they’ve already made it to the prem or make up the shortfall another way.

In short - I think they have a 2 year window from here to make the prem 

The other side is I am talking annual numbers.

So a Man Utd or Liverpool is c£50-60m annually.

The biggest in the champ may be £1-1.5m. Are this media numbers total deal values across a 3-4 year deal for example?

In that case when they spend c£30m per year on new signings the sponsorship won’t touch the sides 

Stu_of_Kunming said:

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6231816/2025/03/27/wrexham-unprecedented-turnover-accounts-analysed/

Based on actual filed accounts.

Nah it's wrong Damo said so, everyone else is wrong 

Then my question is why lie about it, and where did all the sponsorship money that they filed in their accounts come from?