Forbes List Of The Most Valuable “Football” Clubs

How do I become an investor in Goal 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8?

Two comments from this annual article by Forbes: “The Nike  swoosh will continue to adorn the shirt as well thanks to a 13-year pact with the apparel maker that pays the team $470 million plus a 50% share of profits on specific merchandise through 2015.”

• Make way for the influx of big clubs both locally here in the States and anywhere with a big enough television audience. Just this week we heard a barrage of potential and likely match-ups in the states with names ranging from AC Milan all the way down to Benfica.

Forbes’ comment on this: The “poorest” global clubs “have little reach outside their local markets. Manchester City and Newcastle United posted operating losses of $56 million and $49 million.

15 responses to this post.

  1. too late to invest in goal three, it already came out and totally deviated from one and two. this is secondhand because my friend warned me off of three very very strongly.


    • Posted by matthewsf on 2010/04/21 at 4:50 PM

      Man, I’m behind the times. I just learned that the Sports Guy is apparently now called the Sports Fella as well… (Friday column).

      Oh, I should add this…my girlfriend in years past was friends with the producers of the first Goal movie. The world premiere was in Mexico City and it was apparently a huge party…..which I would have attended if I decided not to break off the relationship.



  2. Posted by Colin on 2010/04/22 at 5:58 AM

    The first Goal was my favorite…and the sole reason why I am a NUFC supporter. BAAAhahah, that last part isnt true.


    • Posted by Colin on 2010/04/22 at 6:38 AM

      Why is it that Man Utd fans hate the Glazers so much? They have been arguably the most successful club in the world since they took over and sure they have a lot of debt, but the bottom line (which includes their debt) says that they are the most valuable club in the world…meaning, that if they wanted to pay the debt off right now, they could. Sure, they would have to sell lots of assets and what not…but they could cover their debts and still be in the black…so whats the problem?

      I’m not sure how it is calculated, but it says they are worth 1.84 billion…which is total equity + net debt. If they have a debt of $840m, does it mean there total equity is 1.0 billion or 2.68 billion? I would think that it would be total equity of 2.68 billion + total debt of -0.84 billion = 1.84 billion valuation


      • Posted by GeorgeCross on 2010/04/22 at 7:25 AM

        If their debt is so serviceable, then was there a bond issue to raise the £500 million investment they sought to get Manchester United’s spiralling debts under control? Please don’t insult me by saying that they were restructuring their debt – this bond issue is at 9%.

        If UEFA introduces a new law that say debt can only be X% of total revenue or face barring from UEFA competition, then a lot of EPL are f_cked. United are geared up to their eyeballs in relation to their European counterparts. There is more and more talk of financial fair play.

        I think the issue is that traditionally clubs were owned by a chairman who was basically a very rich fan – local boy done good sort of thing. But the fact is that the sums needed now-a-days to compete with the top top clubs is out of the realm of possibilty – it takes another level of wealth. It’s a little bit of fantasy, as clubs think that they’re local and a family club, but the reality is that they’re global brands. Fans seem to forget this. They’re hypocrites – they wear their Newton Heath scarfs, but they still turn up to the games. It’s a little like the Red Sox – they’ve looked at the Yankees as the evil empire buying their sucess, but they turn a blind eye to their own expenditure since they’ve had recent success.

        I think the bottom line is that if you want to make serious money, running a football club is probably not the best idea, ROI wise.


        • The issue isn’t the debt itself. Man U were in the same boat that a lot of private equity takovers were in after the financial crisis bit – they needed to roll over their initial debt funding under very different market conditions from those the deal was done in. The Glazers’ inability to anticipate the far-reaching effects of the US housing crisis was United’s real problem.

          The debt can exist in perpetuity as long as long as revenue is available to service the interest payments and they are able to pay off expiring debt with new debt. The PE business model takes cash out, loads the acquired entity with debt and looks to sell up having pocketed that cash.

          While the fans want a level of investment that means they win the PL and CL every year, the Glazers see no additional gain from making any investment beyond what is required to keep things going well-enough that it doesn’t threaten their profits. There’s no incentive for additional investment. That the owners see their club this way is what irks the fans, I think.

          However, football clubs require a higher level of continuous reinvestment than most other types of businesses. If United were to pull a Liverpool and threaten to drop out of the CL places, you’d probably see the Glazers make a serious splash in the transfer market on the double-quick. They may be miscalculating the investment needed to maintain that level and the time from investment to payoff.


        • Posted by Colin on 2010/04/22 at 9:31 AM

          “That the owners see their club this way is what irks the fans, I think” I think that answers it for me. I was really just hoping its not simply because they are american…but using the debt as the reason.

          Its kind of the…if you feed a mouse a cookie situation…if you feed man u fans a premier league title, they will want a champions league title, if you give them a CL title…they will want another one. Personally, if my favorite teams had man u’s level of success, i would like to think that i would be happy with that. Probly not true tho.


        • Posted by GeorgeCross on 2010/04/22 at 9:54 AM

          I would not have thought that being American had anything to do with it. Lerner keeps a low profile and I think Villa fans are happy – they’re making steady progress. The Liverpool owners are just idiots for what they say, and their public bickering.

          Tuesday made a good point in that the Glaziers look at every financial decision and invest the minimum to keep United ticking over.

          Remember, the only reason Chelsea fans aren’t crying is that Roman personally swallowed a huge “loan”…


  3. Posted by GeorgeCross on 2010/04/22 at 9:25 AM

    Not sure where to put this newsflash:

    JUST IN………………. from the same guy who reported the john terry thing 2 days before it got out.

    Gerrard moving abroad in the summer because his wife’s having an affair with a Derby County player and he’s got a 16 year old pregnant, and she’s keeping it. Apparently everyone in Liverpool has already accepted that he’s going. He’s in court at the moment trying to stop it all coming out so Capello doesn’t kick him out of the world cup squad. Kris Commons is the Derby player.


    • Posted by Colin on 2010/04/22 at 9:31 AM

      scandalous indeed


    • I love England’s pre-tournament meltdowns. Even @LucasLeiva21 couldn’t make that up.

      Is Gerrard so sure that would be the reason if Capello kicks him out of the squad. Couldn’t it just be because he’s rubbish now?


      • Posted by GeorgeCross on 2010/04/22 at 10:00 AM

        With the squad of players we have, and his form this season, we won’t miss him – we’re quite deep in midfield. It would be a different story if he had his 07/08 form.

        This is one element of football that annoys me. You don’t get as much nonsense from rugby and cricket – and the national team actually wins things!

        Money can’t buy class.


  4. its a good article by forbes, but they talk about their list through the whole article, yet dont provide the list wtf?

    also Gerrard is a scumbag just like Terry :)


  5. Posted by Colin on 2010/04/22 at 10:07 AM

    I dont know, some of the blame has to be put on their wives…why would you marry a professional english footballer? you know they are going to cheat on you at their earliest convenience…

    I hope their arent many wives that read these comments…


    • Posted by GeorgeCross on 2010/04/22 at 10:17 AM

      Colin, that’s really poor to use “what did you expect?”… In your logic, Elin “asked for it”.

      Do what Jeter does, if you want to shag around, don’t get married…


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 258 other followers

%d bloggers like this: