Talk:Richest football clubs
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Validity and verification
Where has the information in this article come from? Only the over US$100m section has a reference, and the data in the link isn't even the same as that written here! We really need to have some references in this article, especially as it is simply a statement of revenues. We can't be using this list to source claims in other articles when the facts here could be just made up! -Toon05 23:19, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- It might have been. Newcastle United richer than Juventus and Arsenal, and there is another article on wikipedia which shows of the 20 richest clubs in the world and the information is completely different. See, Deloitte Football Money League. The sunder king 11:46, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
-
- Forbes only provides reference for the top 20 or so, and even then they are not in the right order. The rest of the list may have just been made up. So I have added the template {{Hoax}} to the article. The sunder king 11:50, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
- I have removed the prod tag, not least because no reason is given. Since this list (albeit in a shortened form) can be updated and verified thanks to references such as [1], the arguments here do not apply, although the cleanup tags remain. I'll work a little on correcting the data though. Qwghlm 23:10, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Right, it now uses the Forbes data as a basis. Further citable additions are welcome. Qwghlm 23:33, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
[edit] QPR
Is it not true that since QPR's take over by the two F1 guys that they are richer than Chelsea? Y2J RKO (talk) 18:29, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
- A company is not necessarily wealthy just because its major shareholders are. Kevin McE (talk) 00:06, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Wrong information
This page is false and its refrences should be verfied since everything stated is inaccurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.215.167.93 (talk) 07:01, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Negative Income
I realise that the phrase was simply copy-and-pasted directly from the Forbes page, but can anyone explain how Income can be negative? Income growth could be negative (declining income), income - expenditure can be negative ( loss-making activity), but how can income, the amount of new financial asset in an accounting period, possibly be less than zero? I refer you to the definition used by the International Accounting Standards Board: