Skip to Main Content
Members:   Log In Sign Up
Text:  A  A  A

Everton finish 8th in the money league

by | 03/06/2015  Comments (26)  jump
Everton may have finished in the wrong half of the final 2014-15 Premier League table but, thanks to a healthy number of live matches, the club offset some of that lost merit money.

The Blues ended the season in 11th place, six places lower than in Roberto Martinez's first season in charge, which represented a 7.47m decrease in revenue based on finishing position in the League.

The 17 times in which the team was screened live on either Sky Sports or BT Sport, however, gave Everton a leg up on the likes of Swansea City, Stoke and Crystal Palace, all of whom finished higher in the actual table, to the tune of between 4m and 6m.

It means that Everton are ranked 8th in terms of the final revenue from the 2014-15 Premier League season with overall payments of 80,573,166.

Click image to view larger version

Source: Sporting Intelligence

Reader Comments (26)

Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer

Peter McHugh
1 Posted 03/06/2015 at 23:04:57
Wow. I know it will never happen but wouldnÂ’t it be great if the Board actually planned for the future. For example, they could ring-fence 10-20% of the TV money received each year and place in a separate account for stadium development. Within 10-20 years we could fund a state-of-the-art redevelopment or new stadium.
Paul Hewitt
2 Posted 03/06/2015 at 23:19:52
Peter, the thing with that is you would have to be certain that we would not be relegated. Can we say that with Martinez?
Jamie Sweet
3 Posted 03/06/2015 at 23:22:05
Nice idea, Peter, but Bill's ring-fence has big holes in it that money seems to escape from!

Seriously though, if we still claim that we donÂ’t have a pot to piss in after seeing those figures, then we are being lied to. Again.

Peter McHugh
4 Posted 03/06/2015 at 23:25:49
Jamie – if Bill promises it must be true. He mortgaged his house to buy us remember? Imagine having a mortgage on your house .... such an odd thing to do... like garlic bread.
Clive Rogers
5 Posted 03/06/2015 at 23:27:45
Kenwright is our Sepp Blatter.
Steavey Buckley
6 Posted 03/06/2015 at 23:27:22
If Everton did pay 㿈 million for Lukaku and ٣ million for Besic, then when you add up all the salaries to players, then to the manager and his assistants etc, together, plus VAT to the tax man and money paid for outstanding debts, there wonÂ’t be a lot left to even build a new loo in a new stadium.

To build a new stadium without harming current club finances, there has to be an extra injection of money.

Clive Rogers
7 Posted 03/06/2015 at 23:37:27

The first instalment last summer for Lukaku was ٧M and think Besic was ٢M. Most transfer fees nowadays are staggered over the length of the player's contract.

Phil Walling
8 Posted 03/06/2015 at 23:42:59
......and you forgot to mention Â’other operating costsÂ’, Stevey!
Peter McHugh
9 Posted 03/06/2015 at 23:47:22
Ah yes I forgot Steavey - every ٟ goes to the manager .... None goes to some bridging company in BVI, of course. Mmmmm...
Patrick Murphy
10 Posted 04/06/2015 at 00:02:16
ItÂ’s obvious that Uncle Bill has been squirrelling the money away for the last decade in order to surprise everyone by building a new stadium owned lock stock and barrel by Everton FC... oops it was all a dream.

Though the 㿼M figure looks mind-blowing, it isnÂ’t really in the modern game, not when figures of 㿼M to 𧴜M are being touted about for the star players. I suppose in that context the 㿈M we paid for Lukaku is not much different to buying Duncan Ferguson for ٢M when he came from Rangers. Now if we could only find a way of earning 𧿘M then we might be able to make a dent in that top four.

Ciaran Duff
11 Posted 04/06/2015 at 00:37:32
IÂ’m assuming that above does not include gate receipts and commercial revenue (including sponsorship)? It would be interesting to see where we stand (overall) when those figures are included.
Dick Fearon
12 Posted 04/06/2015 at 01:04:51
Aargh! Ring-Fence? Now where have I heard those words before...
Matt Traynor
13 Posted 04/06/2015 at 08:58:26
Ciaran #11 you are correct, those figures are only broadcast revenues from Premier League which includes domestic (Sky/BT), radio, overseas.

The problem for us is that other clubs leave us in their wake with commercial revenues.

Shane Corcoran
14 Posted 04/06/2015 at 10:26:47
So Sky love the Toffees now and not Liverpool FC?
Joe Foster
15 Posted 04/06/2015 at 10:33:19
Yep our commercial side is appalling. Even if there is a massive upsurge in shirt sales due to the Cleverly signing, we donÂ’t see any extra. Ridiculous.
Ged Simpson
16 Posted 04/06/2015 at 10:39:43
I agree that we donÂ’t have great commercial activity and from time to time wonder if our Board are up to it.

But I have never seen and evidence of Bill K robbing the club as is so often hinted at in many emails.

Andrew Ellams
17 Posted 04/06/2015 at 10:49:16
I donÂ’t think so Ged. HeÂ’s more buffoon than crook. HeÂ’s certainly no Sepp Blatter as more than one person has opined in the past few days.
Nick Page
18 Posted 04/06/2015 at 14:29:17
Hang on, thereÂ’s commercial activity?
Mike Childs
19 Posted 04/06/2015 at 18:35:59
Here in the States, I havenÂ’t heard the term 'Ring-Fence' used. I have an idea what it means but would love to hear a proper definition. Thanks in advance.
Eric Holland
20 Posted 04/06/2015 at 19:52:54
Found this for you, Mike:

Definition of ring-fence:

In financial terms to ring-fence is to remove a set of assets from a set of accounts and consider it separately. This could be done for a company or for an individual. Certain assets could perhaps be moved offshore which would lower that companyÂ’s or personÂ’s tax liability. Ring-fenced assets in some jurisdictions could also be subject to higher taxation, but the financial arrangement is made to protect the remainder of the business from the higher tax rate. The term is also used in a regulatory sense to describe a way of managing a corporation where certain parts of the business could be ring-fenced to ensure that losses in one part did not affect another.

Trevor Lynes
21 Posted 04/06/2015 at 19:57:49
We have had a tremendous increase in media revenue and we are amongst the wealthiest clubs in the world. Yet we are unique in having no investment from our rich board of directors.

The Â’onlyÂ’ real investors in our club are the fans who buy the merchandise (when they can find it) and pay to watch. The board do neither!!

Managers are hired to front the board and toe the line. They are there to act as Â’punch bagsÂ’ when things are going wrong and provide a barrier which the board can hide behind.

I am quickly becoming disillusioned as a fan and am not excited at the prospect of us signing any players we are being linked with.

If we do not bring in one or two players who will genuinely improve the squad and lift the fans, then I will stop watching them live.

Tony Abrahams
22 Posted 04/06/2015 at 21:06:50
Do you think he will resign, Clive!!?
Danny Broderick
23 Posted 05/06/2015 at 08:25:01

Our chairman once stated that the money for us to move into a state-of-the-art stadium in the city centre was ring-fenced i.e. guaranteed, put to one side. A few months later, the whole deal collapsed, because we couldnÂ’t provide our share of the funding.

If you have a look at the Liverpool Echo Arena, thatÂ’s what could have been if we had been able to provide the 㿊 million that was Â’ring-fenced!Â’

Peter Morris
24 Posted 06/06/2015 at 13:05:01
As usual, Man Utd feature in most live games. In fact, I think they are the only club who would do this no matter where they finished. Can anyone explain NewcastleÂ’s surprisingly high number of featured games? It did make me chuckle to see we earned � more than Swansea! How the mighty have fallen. IÂ’ve said a few times that it takes between 3 and 5 years for any extra money from TV deals to find itÂ’s way in players and agents pockets, and this wonÂ’t be any different, so no money for ground developments IÂ’m afraid. Our biggest weakness is our very poor scale of independent commercial income compared to the other usual suspects.
Ernie Baywood
25 Posted 06/06/2015 at 13:24:26
I guess we were shown about the number you might expect for a top 6 team that played good football. Shame we couldnÂ’t live up to the last yearÂ’s billing.

Does Europa affect this much? ie weÂ’re playing Sundays anyway so the TV companies pick up the game?

Victor Yu
26 Posted 09/06/2015 at 09:44:16
But we wonÂ’t spend a dime.

Add Your Comments

In order to post a comment, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.

» Log in now

Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and Talking Points submissions across the site.

About these ads

© ToffeeWeb

We use cookies to enhance your experience on ToffeeWeb and to enable certain features. By using the website you are consenting to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.