Ok. In my humble opinion the money tends to follow the bigger clubs. Take a list of the PL and Championship clubs and force rank them in terms of sponsorship / commercial revenues. I personally think that is a good barometer. Aside from a few clubs who we may argue are laundering money or flouting the sponsorship rules there are no real surprises in that list other than that Leeds are 15th despite not being in the PL for the period in question
I’m not saying SFC aren’t a big club, or they haven’t won more titles etc (btw you haven't if we look at post war history) - in fact, I didn’t even bring up about Leeds being a bigger club. You did that all on your own and this whole question seems to be something that only you are obsessed with.
Dear me, you're scratching about
Now you want to be selective and talk about post war success, rather than a club's overall history..... ours from 1879 and yours from 1919 ? History is what makes a club, not cherry picking selective parts of it.
As for the money factor ... much good it's done Leeds.
You're operating under massive annual losses, which put you in potential jeopardy of PSR.
Not forgetting that you went into liquidation in 2007.
So, maybe best to leave revenues out of it, eh?
It's a bit like a bloke bragging he earns £90k a year while his outgoings are £120k a year.
I genuinely don't know why you post on here. You haven't, nor will you ever, convince or convert any Sunderland fan into your way of thinking, the same would apply if any Sunderland fan had such an empty, meaningless life that for some perverse reason they trolled a Leeds football forum.
Quite honestly, it sounds both weird and sad that you feel and have this need.
in the Union flag t-shirt chipping in with the odd “yeah”….and nothing else.
.
.
