Coefficientwatch

[Yoda8]

I agree with the notion of all clubs doing well to enter at later rounds but would love to know from a CEO if it is more profitable.

i appreciate that it’s luck of the draw in terms of glamour & geographical costs for hiring of planes hotels etc but using Hibs as an example, they hadn’t won a tie for 29 years losing against Greek & scandaniavian teams etc. 

Crowd looked half decent for Faroes home game so i’d Imagine they’d make more money from a duff tie like that via match day revenue plus bonus money than entering next round and getting knocked out. 

Is this daft thinking? ....though imagine argument gets blew out when lose to teams like Progress 

 

[Ginaro]

1 hour ago, RedLichtie86 said:

It wasnt that long ago that QotS was in the Uefa Cup. Lost the 2008 Scottish Cup final to enter as cup runners up. Scotland was 10th in the Coefficient table at the time.

Motherwell entered the First Round (equivilant to todays Play Off round)
Qots entered in the previous round (2ndQ round)

Celtic were straight into CL groups
And Rangers entered CL Q2 but lost to Kaunus.

That season was our worst ever coefficient points total - right after we had scored our highest.

[hellbhoy]

32 minutes ago, Yoda8 said:

I agree with the notion of all clubs doing well to enter at later rounds but would love to know from a CEO if it is more profitable.

i appreciate that it’s luck of the draw in terms of glamour & geographical costs for hiring of planes hotels etc but using Hibs as an example, they hadn’t won a tie for 29 years losing against Greek & scandaniavian teams etc. 

Crowd looked half decent for Faroes home game so i’d Imagine they’d make more money from a duff tie like that via match day revenue plus bonus money than entering next round and getting knocked out. 

Is this daft thinking? ....though imagine argument gets blew out when lose to teams like Progress 

 

Iirc it is much more profitable to enter at the later stages where the bigger clubs come in to compete.

Most clubs are likely to make little or no profit from the earliest stages. The level of competition from the smallest leagues won't sell tickets at a higher price and ground capacity is likely to suffer if the competition is full of  part time hairdressers, plumbers, lawyers etc etc. And then there is travel & accommodation to pay for when the prize money for the first qualifying round isn't much better than the next few qualifying rounds. Sums go up by increments of ten thousands if I'm correct. £200K plus in 1st qualy and around £260K for 3rd qualy round. So only getting £60K more for two qualifying rounds after the 1st.

Teams that enter nearer the group stage are usually the bigger clubs from the bigger leagues and to play in that part of qualifying could end up being a nice wee earner as profits grow from participating and beating better supported clubs from the bigger leagues even if it's with fewer games to qualify. Also the prize money starts to increase substantially at the latter stages of qualifying.

[RedLichtie86]

That season was our worst ever coefficient points total - right after we had scored our highest.

It was indeed. Rangers either managed to scrape a 0-0 draw at home to add 0.125 to the points.
QotS and Motherwell lost both legs.
The rest came from Celtic which i dont think was much.

[Monkey Tennis]

6 hours ago, hellbhoy said:

The level of competition from the smallest leagues won't sell tickets at a higher price and ground capacity is likely to suffer if the competition is full of  part time hairdressers, plumbers, lawyers etc etc. 

Gosh, I hadn't realised  our clubs were required to get builders in to perform alterations to their grounds if they drew part time sides in Europe.

[Monkey Tennis]

51 minutes ago, RedLichtie86 said:

It was indeed. Rangers either managed to scrape a 0-0 draw at home to add 0.125 to the points.
QotS and Motherwell lost both legs.
The rest came from Celtic which i dont think was much.

So I should yearn for circumstances that make it easier for sides like mine to somehow get in at a nice late stage; whilst simultaneously hoping that sides like mine don't get  in because they're such bad news for the coefficient, which is about clubs getting in?

Am I getting warmer?

[FairWeatherFan]

8 hours ago, Yoda8 said:

I agree with the notion of all clubs doing well to enter at later rounds but would love to know from a CEO if it is more profitable.

i appreciate that it’s luck of the draw in terms of glamour & geographical costs for hiring of planes hotels etc but using Hibs as an example, they hadn’t won a tie for 29 years losing against Greek & scandaniavian teams etc. 

Crowd looked half decent for Faroes home game so i’d Imagine they’d make more money from a duff tie like that via match day revenue plus bonus money than entering next round and getting knocked out. 

Is this daft thinking? ....though imagine argument gets blew out when lose to teams like Progress 

 

I think most clubs would probably prefer to have a tune up in the earlier rounds. But then you run the risk of last year when Rangers & St. Johnstone were knocked out in the 1st Qualifying Round against Progres & Trakai.

[RedLichtie86]

So I should yearn for circumstances that make it easier for sides like mine to somehow get in at a nice late stage; whilst simultaneously hoping that sides like mine don't get  in because they're such bad news for the coefficient, which is about clubs getting in?
Am I getting warmer?

I never said that.

That was a bad year for all clubs involved.

If Rangers hadnt been papped out by Kaunas in the 2nd Qualifying round then they would have been in Europe until christmas whether it be in the CL or Uefa Cup.

Motherwell faced Nancy and lost both legs which was dissapointing.

QotS did well considering. They lost both legs 2-1 but for a First Division side that was a good effort.

If a lower league club wins the Scottish Cup, they have earned the right to play in Europe. They might get scunnered 15-0 but thats life. They may pull off a shock and get a draw or a win. You never know.

The point is if any club starts in a later round, they have more of a chance to progress to the group stages.
They could get drawn against another minnow or a big team that isnt doing well and there for the taken. Or get a big team (AC Milan, Lazio, Ajax, Valencia etc) that the fans can go enjoy their day out knowing they probably will lose but have the hope to do something special.

[Ginaro]

5 hours ago, RedLichtie86 said:

It was indeed. Rangers either managed to scrape a 0-0 draw at home to add 0.125 to the points.
QotS and Motherwell lost both legs.
The rest came from Celtic which i dont think was much.

7 points came from Celtic, 3 for their automatic UCL group stage plus two draws and a win. - giving us a grand total of 1.875 for our coefficient. The total from that 5 year period beginning in 08/09 was even worse that the 5 years from 13/14 when Rangers weren't in the top division.

[Lebowski]

Iirc it is much more profitable to enter at the later stages where the bigger clubs come in to compete.

Most clubs are likely to make little or no profit from the earliest stages. The level of competition from the smallest leagues won't sell tickets at a higher price and ground capacity is likely to suffer if the competition is full of  part time hairdressers, plumbers, lawyers etc etc. And then there is travel & accommodation to pay for when the prize money for the first qualifying round isn't much better than the next few qualifying rounds. Sums go up by increments of ten thousands if I'm correct. £200K plus in 1st qualy and around £260K for 3rd qualy round. So only getting £60K more for two qualifying rounds after the 1st.

Teams that enter nearer the group stage are usually the bigger clubs from the bigger leagues and to play in that part of qualifying could end up being a nice wee earner as profits grow from participating and beating better supported clubs from the bigger leagues even if it's with fewer games to qualify. Also the prize money starts to increase substantially at the latter stages of qualifying.

Pish. There were 14k at Easter Road last week at full price with no ST's. The gate money was probably around 280k. There will be more next week against Asteras Tripolis. Hibs will clear an additional million quid from the two minimum European games when you add on prize money. There will be costs coming off that, but that is probably around a 10% increase in our turnover.

 

[falkirkthebigclub]

2 minutes ago, Lebowski said:

Pish. There were 14k at Easter Road last week at full price with no ST's. The gate money was probably around 280k. There will be more next week against Asteras Tripolis. Hibs will clear an additional million quid from the two minimum European games when you add on prize money. There will be costs coming off that, but that is probably around a 10% increase in our turnover.

 

You should be made to hand over the gate receipts to Queen of the South, Hibs getting more money for having large attendances is so unfair etc etc 

[FairWeatherFan]

15 minutes ago, Lebowski said:

Pish. There were 14k at Easter Road last week at full price with no ST's. The gate money was probably around 280k. There will be more next week against Asteras Tripolis. Hibs will clear an additional million quid from the two minimum European games when you add on prize money. There will be costs coming off that, but that is probably around a 10% increase in our turnover.

 

Competing in both the First & Second Qualifying Rounds means €500k (Q1 = €240k & Q2 = €260k). So Hibs should likely clear £1m with the match day income taken into account.

[Monkey Tennis]

21 minutes ago, badgerthewitness said:

You should be made to hand over the gate receipts to Queen of the South, Hibs getting more money for having large attendances is so unfair etc etc 

Wildly and inaccurately parodying what I'm saying; might suggest  a difficulty in actually countering it.

[RedLichtie86]

Competing in both the First & Second Qualifying Rounds means €500k (Q1 = €240k & Q2 = €260k). So Hibs should likely clear £1m with the match day income taken into account.

I thought prize money was award after you exited the competition.

So a team exits at Q1 they get €240k or if a team exits at Q2 they get €260k.

Not €240k + €260k. But a single payment.

[FairWeatherFan]

4 minutes ago, RedLichtie86 said:

I thought prize money was award after you exited the competition.

So a team exits at Q1 they get €240k or if a team exits at Q2 they get €260k.

Not €240k + €260k. But a single payment.

I've always understood it as being accumulated with nothing being awarded for qualification if you reach the group stage. Due to the group stage minimum being so much greater.

EDIT:

https://www.uefa.com/insideuefa/stakeholders/clubs/news/newsid=2562024.html

Edited July 21, 2018 by FairWeatherFan

[falkirkthebigclub]

4 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Wildly and inaccurately parodying what I'm saying; might suggest  a difficulty in actually countering it.

Suggesting we return European football to that golden age of development, the 1980s*, is the worst post on this thread by a considerable margin.

 

*Not a golden age.

[hellbhoy]

10 minutes ago, Lebowski said:

Pish. There were 14k at Easter Road last week at full price with no ST's. The gate money was probably around 280k. There will be more next week against Asteras Tripolis. Hibs will clear an additional million quid from the two minimum European games when you add on prize money. There will be costs coming off that, but that is probably around a 10% increase in our turnover.

 

Yes yes Hibs are raking in some money from the extra gate increase. If you had read my post slightly different then you'd agree that Hibs would make far more money if they had drawn a bigger team where Hibs could sell more and command more money for the tickets as well as bigger TV revenue and bigger brand name advertising and could easily earn far more money than £280K.

Not saying playing earlier in the competitions won't generate income but if Hibs reach the last play-off round to the group stage then Hibs will be raking it in big time and we are talking millions instead of hundreds of thousands here.

[Monkey Tennis]

1 minute ago, badgerthewitness said:

Suggesting we return European football to that golden age of development, the 1980s*, is the worst post on this thread by a considerable margin.

 

*Not a golden age.

That'll be why I didn't describe it as a golden age, or even refer explicitly to that period.

Otherwise, good point.

[hellbhoy]

36 minutes ago, badgerthewitness said:

You should be made to hand over the gate receipts to Queen of the South, Hibs getting more money for having large attendances is so unfair etc etc 

[falkirkthebigclub]

18 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

That'll be why I didn't describe it as a golden age, or even refer explicitly to that period.

Otherwise, good point.

So the 1980s didn't come before the early 90s?

You're all over the place now. Worst attempt at trolling ever.