The Offical Glasgow Celtic thread

Started by Gaoth Dobhair Abu, January 26, 2007, 10:41:11 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

?

?
62 (87.3%)
?
9 (12.7%)

Total Members Voted: 71

Main Street

Quote from: lynchbhoy on February 13, 2012, 08:26:02 PM
Quote from: Main Street on February 13, 2012, 06:39:45 PM
Quote from: borderfox on February 13, 2012, 05:53:33 PM
10 years CL money would easily offset the SPL TV revenue. How ironic would it be if Celtic were asked to join the premiership whilst the huns languish in  the lower Scots leagues ;D

Reaching the  group stages of the CL gives a guaranteed minimum of €7m
Celtic earn just £3m p/a from SPL tv revenue
I thought it was only £1.5m
You could be right because now I see the figure of £3m was from 2007/8 when there was £18m tv to distribute. Celtic as winners got £3m and Rangers as runners up got £2.7.

But I won't believe you, until you present proof  ;D







Canalman

Almost sure I can remember that Celtic nearly "went to the wall" some years ago but were "saved" at the 11th hour.


Main Street

Yeah but that was just part of a masonic conspiracy  ;D  by the Bank of Scotland  to crush Celtic, using the excuse that they exceeded their overdraft limit by a few pennies. At a period in time when Celtic was ineptly run and building a brand new stadium at the same time.
The actual foundation of celtic fc was solid and the situation was easily handled by the new astute chairman.
The result of which left Celtic in the ownership of Celtic minded shareholders and relatively debt free while Rangers spent millions, avoided taxes and hoarded debts, in order to keep ahead of them.



LondonCamanachd

Quote from: Main Street on February 14, 2012, 12:29:24 PM
You could be right because now I see the figure of £3m was from 2007/8 when there was £18m tv to distribute. Celtic as winners got £3m and Rangers as runners up got £2.7.

That right there is the problem with Scottish Football.

Why is the gap between 2nd and 3rd so much bigger than the gap between 1st and 2nd when it comes to prize money?  Why is 30% of the prize money in a 12 team league divided between only two teams?

Main Street

Quote from: LondonCamanachd on February 14, 2012, 02:22:27 PM
Quote from: Main Street on February 14, 2012, 12:29:24 PM
You could be right because now I see the figure of £3m was from 2007/8 when there was £18m tv to distribute. Celtic as winners got £3m and Rangers as runners up got £2.7.

That right there is the problem with Scottish Football.

Why is the gap between 2nd and 3rd so much bigger than the gap between 1st and 2nd when it comes to prize money?  Why is 30% of the prize money in a 12 team league divided between only two teams?
That's a normal enough standard distribution of the tv revenue.
Payments are based on the final position in the league.
The bottom club received £700.000 in that example from 2007/8

The revenue problem is not with the system of distribution but rather there's not enough to distribute.


SambaSaffron

Quote from: LondonCamanachd on February 14, 2012, 02:22:27 PM
Quote from: Main Street on February 14, 2012, 12:29:24 PM
You could be right because now I see the figure of £3m was from 2007/8 when there was £18m tv to distribute. Celtic as winners got £3m and Rangers as runners up got £2.7.

That right there is the problem with Scottish Football.

Why is the gap between 2nd and 3rd so much bigger than the gap between 1st and 2nd when it comes to prize money?  Why is 30% of the prize money in a 12 team league divided between only two teams?
Thats the way it is in all leagues. Do you want the bottom teams to receive the same as the top? Cath yourself on.

LondonCamanachd

Quote from: Main Street on February 14, 2012, 02:40:10 PM
Quote from: LondonCamanachd on February 14, 2012, 02:22:27 PM
Quote from: Main Street on February 14, 2012, 12:29:24 PM
You could be right because now I see the figure of £3m was from 2007/8 when there was £18m tv to distribute. Celtic as winners got £3m and Rangers as runners up got £2.7.

That right there is the problem with Scottish Football.

Why is the gap between 2nd and 3rd so much bigger than the gap between 1st and 2nd when it comes to prize money?  Why is 30% of the prize money in a 12 team league divided between only two teams?
That's a normal enough standard distribution of the tv revenue.
Payments are based on the final position in the league.
The bottom club received £700.000 in that example from 2007/8

The revenue problem is not with the system of distribution but rather there's not enough to distribute.

i don't have the numbers to hand, so excuse me for what is essentially hearsay, I'll try to dig it out later.  There is a serious disparity in the progression of shrinking prize money that results in the top two getting more than their fair share.

In reality, it makes little difference, as European football will always be the bigger income generator, but I still don't like the principle.

This isn't juist sour grapes because my team's not doing very out of the set-up by the way.  Aberdeen's troubles are almost all of our own making.

LondonCamanachd

Quote from: SambaSaffron on February 14, 2012, 02:42:58 PM
Quote from: LondonCamanachd on February 14, 2012, 02:22:27 PM
Quote from: Main Street on February 14, 2012, 12:29:24 PM
You could be right because now I see the figure of £3m was from 2007/8 when there was £18m tv to distribute. Celtic as winners got £3m and Rangers as runners up got £2.7.

That right there is the problem with Scottish Football.

Why is the gap between 2nd and 3rd so much bigger than the gap between 1st and 2nd when it comes to prize money?  Why is 30% of the prize money in a 12 team league divided between only two teams?
Thats the way it is in all leagues. Do you want the bottom teams to receive the same as the top? Cath yourself on.

Nope.  But this looks a little odd in terms of progression, no?

1 - 4% + 13% = 17%
2 - 4% + 11% = 15%
3 - 4% + 5.5% = 9.5%
4 - 4% + 4.5% = 8.5%
5 - 4% + 4.0% = 8.0%
6 - 4% + 3.5% = 7.5%
7 - 4% + 3.0% = 7.0%
8 - 4% + 2.5% = 6.5%
9 - 4% + 2.0% = 6.0%
10 - 4% + 1.5% = 5.5%
11 - 4% + 1.0% = 5.0%
12 - 4% + 0.5% = 4.5%

1st place to 2nd place 15% differance
2nd place to 3rd place 50% difference
3rd to 4th 20% differance
4th to 5th 12% differance



Geoff Tipps

Quote from: LondonCamanachd on February 14, 2012, 02:48:12 PM
Quote from: SambaSaffron on February 14, 2012, 02:42:58 PM
Quote from: LondonCamanachd on February 14, 2012, 02:22:27 PM
Quote from: Main Street on February 14, 2012, 12:29:24 PM
You could be right because now I see the figure of £3m was from 2007/8 when there was £18m tv to distribute. Celtic as winners got £3m and Rangers as runners up got £2.7.

That right there is the problem with Scottish Football.

Why is the gap between 2nd and 3rd so much bigger than the gap between 1st and 2nd when it comes to prize money?  Why is 30% of the prize money in a 12 team league divided between only two teams?
Thats the way it is in all leagues. Do you want the bottom teams to receive the same as the top? Cath yourself on.

Nope.  But this looks a little odd in terms of progression, no?

1 - 4% + 13% = 17%
2 - 4% + 11% = 15%
3 - 4% + 5.5% = 9.5%
4 - 4% + 4.5% = 8.5%
5 - 4% + 4.0% = 8.0%
6 - 4% + 3.5% = 7.5%
7 - 4% + 3.0% = 7.0%
8 - 4% + 2.5% = 6.5%
9 - 4% + 2.0% = 6.0%
10 - 4% + 1.5% = 5.5%
11 - 4% + 1.0% = 5.0%
12 - 4% + 0.5% = 4.5%

1st place to 2nd place 15% differance
2nd place to 3rd place 50% difference
3rd to 4th 20% differance
4th to 5th 12% differance

Yes it is odd. In the premier league last year, each team got £756,000 per finishing place.

Doogie Browser

Rangers being banned from Europe next season will not help the SPL co-efficient either I would say.

Main Street

Would there be that much difference if the EPL model was used, where 25% of the total tv revenue is distributed to the clubs, according to the number of tv appearances?








Muzz

Quote from: Doogie Browser on February 14, 2012, 03:22:06 PM
Rangers being banned from Europe next season will not help the SPL co-efficient either I would say.

Not banned yet but have to prove finances in order by 31st March.  Your right though it won't help the co-efficient which could mean that Scotland loses automatic CL place to a qualifying round or worse and go straight to Europa League.

This mess for Rangers may not be good for Celtic long term unless there is a move South of the border involved. 

Leo

Quote from: Canalman on February 14, 2012, 12:38:03 PM
Almost sure I can remember that Celtic nearly "went to the wall" some years ago but were "saved" at the 11th hour.

Correct..
The club was saved by Fergus McCannn who endured venomous hate campaign from Celtic fans at the time!!
Fierce tame altogether

Main Street

Quote from: Muzz on February 14, 2012, 09:30:57 PM
Quote from: Doogie Browser on February 14, 2012, 03:22:06 PM
Rangers being banned from Europe next season will not help the SPL co-efficient either I would say.

Not banned yet but have to prove finances in order by 31st March.  Your right though it won't help the co-efficient which could mean that Scotland loses automatic CL place to a qualifying round or worse and go straight to Europa League.
The SPL champions have already lost their automatic CL place.
Most every league champion has the right to the enter the CL qualification stages. There's no going straight to the Europa league for the champs.






bennydorano

Not really true, the venom came when it became clear he wasn't going to act the sugar daddy & fire money at transfers - he was a hard  nosed businessman first & foremost.

Quote from: Leo on February 14, 2012, 10:47:31 PM
Quote from: Canalman on February 14, 2012, 12:38:03 PM
Almost sure I can remember that Celtic nearly "went to the wall" some years ago but were "saved" at the 11th hour.

Correct..
The club was saved by Fergus McCannn who endured venomous hate campaign from Celtic fans at the time!!