True, Liverpool agreed their deal earlier and will finish their deal earlier. £50m p/a isn’t aggressive value for Arsenal at this time.
Its balanced and safe
Our last 10 years of Champions league results.
2023 - Did not qualify
2022 - Did not qualify
2021 - Did not qualify
2020 - Did not qualify
2019 - Did not qualify
2018 - Did not qualify
2017 - Ro16
2016 - Ro16
2015 - Ro16
2014 - Ro16
Liverpool had 3 final appearances including a win 2022-2018 before signing their five year deal. So it’s hard by any reasonable metric to argue we should be getting more than they signed just last year.
7 Likes
We’re a bigger brand than them but they’ve had incredible success in recent years while we’ve been lingering in EL or even had no European football to play since 2018.
We should overtake them though if the team’s trajectory continues being positive.
1 Like
Ok now do United CL appearances?
We should have been able to garner more based on the projection of additional exposure, that’s what the deal is covering. The success of the Adidas deal should highlight Arsenal global brand power despite lack of competetive success
I suspect the reason we weren’t aggressive was to preserve the long term relationship with Emirates which is a conservative move business wise but lets not pretent money wasn’t left on the table
I hope we also charge for the tagline.
It’s one thing to add the Brand Name but do they also have to add “FLY BETTER” all caps?
We spend over 200m already and still not yet started to sell…
I can tell our financials must be really good.
1 Like
Well it seems we have extended up to 2028, anyone know what the new deal is worth?
I saw £60-£65m/yr floating around the other day 
Rice nearly earned back then
Let’s get through to at least the quarters pls. Need that moolah!
how much money Wenger had earned for Arsenal from CL??
Be interesting to see what that looks like next year when the CL revenue is back in the fold.
Maybe next year we’ll be the revenue kings of London and award ourselves a trophy for it.
1 Like
Kings of Merch 
We’ve finally crossed the 500m marker!
I heard that Spurs did more revenues than us (both match day & commericals), is that true!? If so, how & why? Perhaps due to player sales.
Because it was more.
If this is true, we are in really good shape. This guy also seems to think deals already signed will increase commercial revenue by another 30m for 24-25 so that would bring us into the 590m-600m range holding all else equal.
As a point of comparison, 22-23 reported revenues for other big clubs were:
Chelsea (with CL) - 512m
Spurs (with CL) - 549m
Liverpool (with CL) - 593m
United (no CL) - 648m
City (with CL) - 718m
Some of those numbers might have gone up for 23-24 but probably not by too much. And Chelsea and Spurs’ numbers surely went down without CL. We’re always going to lag the Manchester clubs. We just want the gap to be close enough and to be on equal terms with the other three.
If the PL does end up approving the anchoring rule limiting spending on players to 4.5x the domestic broadcasting revenues of the lowest earning PL club, then another key question is really whether we can make enough money to spend up to that line. Because if its a relatively hard cap and we can do that, then it doesn’t even matter if City or United make more than us as they’ll face the same limit.