Football's Magic Money Tree

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Thu Jun 18, 2020 12:10 am

Chester Perry wrote:
Wed Jun 17, 2020 12:38 am
Well it seems there is, the small matter of the ongoing proxy war and the Saudi revelation to the WTO that there prime concern is national security so couldn't prosecute BeoutQ - Simon Chadwick and @TariqPanja will guide you

https://twitter.com/Prof_Chadwick/statu ... 5507241986

https://twitter.com/tariqpanja/status/1 ... 1139706881

Panja also reminds us that for all their indignation most of those who have welcomed the WTO's verdict have been sideling up to Saudi for quite some time, their relations with Qatar don't stand up to well either.

https://twitter.com/tariqpanja/status/1 ... 8425058304

Of course Tebas and UEFA in particular are not to keen on the Premier League having another mega club either, so that always has to come into the thinking
well that was quick quite a revelation towards the end of this Bloomberg article - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... f=zEzFg8RN

Saudi sports cafes have returned to broadcasting BeIN. BeoutQ boxes are no longer widely available, and some Saudis who bought them earlier said they no longer worked.

“I don’t know why those who are behind beoutQ started beoutQ, and I don’t know why they decided to stop beoutQ,”said Abdulaziz AlSwailem, chief executive of the Saudi Authority for Intellectual Property.

Investigating and fighting the spread of beoutQ in the kingdom had been a priority since the authority’s inception in 2018, he said. Broadcasts of the channel at government events or in public spaces were traced back to contractors cutting corners, “not a governmental decision,” he added.

“Yes we need to find the root causes and continue to improve our work, but I believe what we are doing is similar to other countries,” AlSwailem said.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Thu Jun 18, 2020 12:22 am

Meanwhile Amanda Staveley is still in court trying to get £1.5+ billion out of Barclays - to say she appears to be a poor witness is to give her praise -

I posted this at the weekend
Chester Perry wrote:
Sat Jun 13, 2020 4:09 pm
Much of the debate about the proposed Saudi back takeover has been focussed on the Saudi issue, perhaps it is time some attention be focussed on the person who would be actively running the club - Amanda Staveley and PCP - If the current court case in regard to her demanding £1.5 billion from Barclays is anything to go by, then I would be reluctant to want her running my club.

This sequence of tweets from @TariqPanja over the last few days re the proceedings and statements made to the court are revealing

https://twitter.com/tariqpanja/status/1 ... 5335451648

anyone pick-up on the fact that for the last 12 years Staveley and PCP have encouraged the thought that she brokered the City deal for Sheik Mansour, when in fact she was working for Thaksin Shinawatra who was desperately trying to rid himself of the club.

"You have to wonder why for all these years, neither Staveley or her people have tried to correct misconception that she acted for Sheikh Mansour in Manchester City deal. First time that appears to have been clear is in her witness statement."

It does make you wonder if she is working for the Saudi's, Ashley or just for herself, Simon Chadwick, who has long been mocked for his doubts, tweeted this as if to say - I tend to know more detail than is generally known

https://twitter.com/Prof_Chadwick/statu ... 6031876100
You have to say things see to have got worse for her - as Barclays lawyers have sensed and Simon Chadwick informs us - we are all blessed by @TariqPanja's persistence in watching the trial and reporting to us

https://twitter.com/Prof_Chadwick/statu ... 0095131649

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Thu Jun 18, 2020 12:26 am

Earlier in the day Chadwick was pondering if the Saudi's have an overarching strategy in mind

https://twitter.com/Prof_Chadwick/statu ... 2452648977

a different model, but not so much from Abu Dhabi's Disneyfication of football, I have posted about a number of times

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Thu Jun 18, 2020 12:32 am

FIFA has updated it's rules on

Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players June 2020 Edition (including COVID-19 temporary amendments)

you can find it here - https://resources.fifa.com/image/upload ... 3tn2bztqcp

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Thu Jun 18, 2020 12:44 am

UEFA have pleased some with the detail and clarity of the announcements they made today

https://twitter.com/mjshrimper/status/1 ... 5734618114

but given that the top players in many countries are going to have only 3 to 4 weeks off (at most) is it really wise to force in extra international games. Once again there appears to be little thought given to the players while the authorities and clubs seek to get the tills ringing again

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Thu Jun 18, 2020 1:17 am

The technology clubs are looking at employing in the hope of getting fans back to football - This is the company that has taken £4m from the Premier Leagues clubs to facilitate Project restart by doing all their Covid19 testing - from SportsProMedia.com

Premier League partner developing digital health passport to bring fans back to stadia
Manchester City and Arsenal among clubs set to trial Prenetics’ biometric access system.
Posted: June 17 2020By: Michael Long

Digital platform for venues to prove user has valid, negative Covid-19 test
Prenetics system to be trialled by players and staff before fan use

Digital health passports could be used by sports governing bodies to help get fans back into stadiums safely and securely, according to a senior executive at the company overseeing the Premier League’s coronavirus testing programme.

Avi Lasarow, chief executive for the EMEA region at Prenetics, told Reuters that the Hong Kong-based biotechnology firm is developing a secure test-evidencing and access system that is believed to be the first such offering for sports.

"I think it’s going to be a big game-changer in terms of linking Covid-19 testing results... to a digital access mechanism based on biometrics and other such factors," Lasarow said.

"With any innovation, you’re always thinking about what the end goal is... in the world of sport it's about getting fans back into the stadium.”
According to Lasarow, the web-based system would require fans to scan their health passport information, by way of a QR code, upon access to a venue in order to prove their Covid-19 test is valid and has also produced a negative result.

Reuters reports that fans would opt into the system via an email and provide personal information, including a photograph, that would then be verified by clubs, who would provide a unique personal code accessed using a mobile phone.

To date, Prenetics - which is also known as CircleDNA - has conducted nearly 9,000 tests on Premier League players and staff ahead of the league’s highly anticipated return to action behind closed doors on 17th June.

According to Inews, players and staff at Manchester City, Arsenal, Aston Villa and Sheffield United will trial the Prenetics health passport system, which is also being applied across other industries, throughout the next six weeks as the 2019/20 season is concluded.

“This is the first time it’s being used in sports,” Lasarow told inews. “It has the possibilities for scaling it up in a sport context to stadiums and fans in a much bigger capacity. I think that’s where the future is in terms of Covid-19.

“Today it’s being used for access control, it can link to accreditation and biometrics. Ultimately the future is how you can scale that up to fans to get them into stadiums.

“The capability is there for us to facilitate the safe return of fans to stadiums.”

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is no surprise that Man City are keen on this - remember they were trialling Facial recognition systems to replace season tickets last year.

As ever I remain highly suspicious of technology like this - inevitably it always comes with a downside, which is almost always the deterioration of personal privacy.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Thu Jun 18, 2020 12:43 pm

UEFA announce some short term tweaks to it's regulations, including a relaxing of FFP - though a first glance that looks like it might not give much wiggle room if next season is interrupted/behind closed doors. Also calls for a harmonised transfer window.

https://www.uefa.com/insideuefa/news/ne ... 42261.html

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Thu Jun 18, 2020 1:11 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Sat Jun 06, 2020 12:12 pm
Turns out that this was preparation for a takeover by another Honk Kong listed company - Wigan Athletic have announced the takeover by Next Leader Fund L.P

https://wiganathletic.com/news/2020/jun ... -Athletic/

it is only 2 years since the previous takeover from the Whelan family

Here is a bit more detail on the new owners

https://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/hong-ko ... over-wigan

There is a nice little bit of information here - the documentation for the proposed sale valued Wigan at £17.5m last November- I think that is a lot in the current climate, though there is nothing on the actual transaction price

https://www.sportbusiness.com/news/hong ... -athletic/
If you have listened to the Price of Football Podcast this morning you will have heard that Wigan appear to be on the road to financial difficulty

https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cH ... ICRAE&ep=6

the former owner owns 51% of the new owner - £24m of loans that were interest free are now subject to 8% interest p.a. and any default pushes that up to 20% - another North West club with alarming finances

The esk
Posts: 41
Joined: Wed May 20, 2020 9:22 am
Been Liked: 24 times
Has Liked: 17 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by The esk » Thu Jun 18, 2020 1:32 pm

Sorry, really busy with the day job for the last few days, so part IV of Football Shorts will be published over the weekend - hope all are well!
This user liked this post: Chester Perry

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Thu Jun 18, 2020 5:25 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 6:26 pm
Has Scottish football found a philanthropist to dig itself out of it's current financial hole?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52881608

It is an unusual offer in what are (to this point of history at least) are unusual times - but effectively says (given the potential donor's history) that football is apart of the countries cultural fabric that is worthy of support/saving
Remember this, well James Anderson may not be the only Philanthropist ready to make donations to Scottish football - why? because they are so culturally important to their communities - from the Times (there has been quite a bit of Academic discussion around this in Scotland recently - some of which I have posted)

More philanthropists ‘may see game as a worthy cause’
Michael Grant
Thursday June 18 2020, 12.01am, The Times

If it was possible to get anyone into Hampden, it could be packed out by those still scratching their heads as to why James Anderson is pumping £2.5 million of his own money into football for nothing in return. Too-good-to-be-true philanthropists are thin on the ground in the Scottish game, to put it mildly. According to a leading sports academic, Professor Grant Jarvie, that might not always be the case.

As the author of The Value of Football report available on the SFA’s website, Jarvie knows more than most about what football contributes to communities across Scotland. And it is that vast social benefit which he believes could attract others such as Anderson. It is a tantalising prospect to say the least: that wealthy individuals may see Scottish football — the game in general, not a single club — as a vehicle for good which is worthy of their money.

Jarvie is the chair of sport and director (Academy of Sport) at the University of Edinburgh as well as being on the SFA’s equality and diversity advisory board. Anderson’s money will go out to clubs no later than next Monday and he has promised to provide more funding in the future.

Intriguingly, he has also indicated that he knows other like-minded philanthropists and Jarvie can understand why Scottish football would appeal to benefactors with disposable income. “I find the intervention by James Anderson really interesting,” he said. “The basic idea of a football club as a community asset which can do good on a range of fronts — in a game where you have popularity, scale and reach — I would say that would be incredibly attractive to philanthropists.

“What I find interesting about James Anderson’s involvement is that the money is to go across football, not to one club. It’s to serve the football cause. Philanthropy as a potential income stream for sport is not insignificant. It is a significant income stream for universities, for example. If only we could find a way of scaling it up for football. It does happen, but it tends to happen for individual clubs not as major donations across the football effort. Australia does some interesting things on this. It has a sports foundation which is set up just to attract philanthropic funding and that gets donations across sport.”

Jarvie’s report highlights the work done by Stenhousemuir, Aberdeen, Hibernian, Motherwell, Ayr United and Spartans, among others, in volunteering, delivering meals and food parcels, making telephone calls to the socially isolated and priceless broader work on issues such as social cohesion, education, physical and mental health and suicide prevention. “Football clubs are fantastic community assets,” Jarvie said. “It’s important to get that message out because what clubs do in communities is a good news story.”

Championship, League One and League Two clubs are likely to go without a single competitive game from mid-March to mid-October this year, yet they continue to serve their communities. “One of the worries for me would be that, if any club went to the wall, what we would we be losing,” Jarvie. said “Clubs are closed down and this terrific community work goes on.
“Maybe that should be the raison d’etre for clubs in Scotland: supporting communities through football. The question is how do you find income streams to make that sustainable in the long term, because it’s undoubtedly valuable work.”

“The health work, the education, the social work, the economy and cultural work that clubs do in communities is a really good cause. I would imagine that a lot of philanthropists would see that as valuable to contribute to. Philanthropists give money for a range of reasons. They donate because they believe in a cause and they want to be innovative and they normally want to supplement, not replace, core funding.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Thu Jun 18, 2020 5:39 pm

I think Sky (and the Premier League are going to be very happy with last night's viewing figures

Aston Villa-Sheffield United - 2.7m peak; 2.3m average.

Man City -Arsenal - 3.4m peak; 3.1m average. 75% watched on the channel with the crowd noise added

to put that into some context Sky's best in last 10 years) is May 2012 Manchester derby which peaked at 4million. They will no doubt be hoping that Spurs v Man Utd tomorrow will beat that. It all helps with the advertising income, for the broadcasters and clubs

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Thu Jun 18, 2020 5:49 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 12:26 am
Earlier in the day Chadwick was pondering if the Saudi's have an overarching strategy in mind

https://twitter.com/Prof_Chadwick/statu ... 2452648977

a different model, but not so much from Abu Dhabi's Disneyfication of football, I have posted about a number of times
remember this from last night, re the Staveley v Barclays court case - will get your heads round all this - Simon Chadwick is at it again - I do like how he can sit in a helicopter take it all in and then dive down into the detail wherever he wants to

https://twitter.com/Prof_Chadwick/statu ... 1199607811

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Thu Jun 18, 2020 6:05 pm

A lengthy and technical article that summarise the Key findings of the WTO report and suggest how that may impact the proposed Saudi takeover of Newcastle United - from FootballLaw.co.uk

https://www.footballlaw.co.uk/articles/ ... and-beoutq

The key conclusion of the writer is that this report should not prevent a PIF representative from passing the Premier League's Owners and Directors Test. IT must be remembered that his is a legal opinion not fact.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Thu Jun 18, 2020 6:36 pm

a report from Blackstone Chambers commissioned by BeIN would beg to differ with that though - from the Telegraph

Saudi Arabia powerless if Newcastle United takeover rejected due to broadcasting piracy offences, says legal expert
Paul Hayward June 18, 2020

Saudi Arabia would be powerless to challenge a rejection by the Premier League of their proposed £300 million takeover of Newcastle United, opponents of the deal believe, because a stack of alleged evidence of broadcasting rights piracy would leave no legal grounds for Riyadh’s Public Investment Fund to sue.

Campaigners led by the Qatar-based beIN Sport also welcomed an apparent shift in the Government’s attitude to the takeover, with Dominic Raab, the foreign secretary, telling Sky News: “There’s a proper process that we have got in place, to look at everything from the competition aspects of it, to other questions of propriety. I think it’s right that that legal due process, with all the safeguards that it’s got in place, is followed and we have this debate about takeovers in this country. I think we should follow the rule of law.”

In April the Culture Secretary, Oliver Dowden, said the intended sale by Mike Ashley was “a matter for the Premier League.”

Raab’s reference to “the rule of law” is seen as significant after the World Trade Organisation supported beIN’s allegation that “[the Saudi entity] beoutQ’s piracy was promoted by prominent Saudi nationals", and that "beoutQ has received assistance from a Saudi content distributor in delivering its pirated broadcasts to Saudi consumers.” The WTO said “Qatar has established a prima facie case that beoutQ is operated by individuals or entities subject to the criminal jurisdiction of Saudi Arabia.”

beIN commissioned Stephen Nathan QC of Blackstone Chambers in London to investigate whether the Premier League would be in breach of its ownership test by ignoring Saudi piracy, along with allegedly false denials.

In his report, seen by The Telegraph, Nathan advises that “if the Saudi Arabian government’s conduct in relation to beoutQ had taken place in the United Kingdom, this conduct would have fulfilled the requirements of multiple English law offences.”

Nathan concludes there are “numerous” ways the buyers “fall foul” of the Premier League’s ownership tests and that rejecting the purchase is “amply justified, and indeed required” under the rules by which prospective owners are “disqualified.”

He also cites the WTO report’s section on piracy of the 2018 World Cup, which was “broadcast” on big screens at 294 public locations in Saudi Arabia. Fifa and Uefa have both issued condemnations of Saudi piracy.

beIN’s legal analysis is that Ashley would find it hard to sue if there was no financial cost to him. A reported rival bid by the American television executive, Henry Mauriss, would mitigate Ashley’s loss of Saudi money. But in court, Saudi’s PIF would run up against evidence compiled throughout world sport that it had been “reasonable” for the Premier League to reject the deal under its own rules.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Fri Jun 19, 2020 1:36 am

The Financial Times did a Q&A today under the headline - Can Football survive the Pandemic? - there is some interesting detail in there including just how much the pause cost Sky and how it will affect future spending

Live Q&A: can the football business survive the pandemic?
Clubs’ profits were declining even before the Covid-19 crisis, making their financial future more worrisome

As football fans cheered the return of the English Premier League on Wednesday, they were perhaps only outdone by the clubs’ investors and owners who hope the season’s restart will prevent more than £500m in losses at the top teams.

The business of football has been hit hard since leagues paused play in March as coronavirus spread. The biggest leagues — Germany’s Bundesliga, Spain’s La Liga and England’s Premier League — are now back in action, but they are not out of the woods yet. Lost ticket sales and sponsorship opportunities will continue to put a dent in revenues, further exacerbating the financial squeeze some clubs found themselves in before the pandemic.

In the English Premier League, lost gate receipts from games played in empty stadiums will add up to £152m-£161m, according to KPMG. Some sponsors have also asked for discounts to their contracts, according to club executives. Across Europe’s Big Five leagues, the consultancy firm Deloitte projected revenues would drop by €1.5bn, before making a V-shaped recovery next season.

Germany’s Bundesliga, the first big European football competition to resume play, has been watched closely by rival leagues as they plot strategies to emerge from the sport’s coronavirus-induced financial crisis. Bundesliga was poised to have losses of up to €750m if the season was not completed.

Murad Ahmed, the FT’s sports correspondent and co-founder of the Scoreboard newsletter, and Samuel Agini, FT’s sports business reporter, have been closely following football’s financial crisis — one that’s really only just begun, as Murad reported in last week’s Scoreboard.

On Thursday they answered your questions about the sport’s financial future — from advertising and broadcasting revenues to ticket sales and the increasingly complex ways clubs finance expenses. Here are some highlights from the conversation.

FT commenter Saint1976: Do you think that this crisis will permanently affect the price clubs can command for players? And if so, what impact will that have on clubs?

Murad Ahmed: In the short term, yes. KPMG reckons the value of elite players has gone down a collective €10bn as a result of the pandemic. Big clubs will be able to pick up players at a cut price, as smaller teams are forced into a fire sale of the best players. That would exacerbate existing inequalities between teams at the top and bottom of the sport.

Longer term, I would say the world record €222m transfer of Neymar from FC Barcelona to Paris Saint-Germain is unlikely to be beaten for many years to come.

FT commenter ZK93: Do you think the financial impact arising from the pandemic will initiate discussions about introducing a salary cap in the Premier League?

Samuel Agini: Caps are being discussed at the highest levels, so it wouldn’t be wise to ignore the possibility. Just this month, Fifa president Gianni Infantino named salary caps as one of the “interesting proposals” he had heard from member associations.

It’s hard to see the Premier League volunteering to implement a salary cap, particularly on a unilateral basis, as English clubs don’t want to give the best players another reason to go to Spain or Germany. If leagues are willing to get around the table to discuss a Europe-wide salary cap, there’s always antitrust law to think about . ..

For the time being, the Premier League might just leave it up to the market. Many clubs across Europe are hurting. Generally, clubs are watching their costs very carefully, and offering record wages probably isn’t the best way of guaranteeing survival.

But we’re far likelier to see a salary cap in divisions below the Premier League, such as the Championship, where wage inflation has been out of control for a while now. Rick Parry, chairman of the English Football League, which runs the professional divisions below the Premier League, has already called for a cap. I’d recommend reading this piece to test your feelings on salary caps.

FT commenter HKane: How do you think the current crisis (and other factors) will impact the next rights cycle and sponsorship revenue?

MA: I have been asking a lot of broadcasting and football executives this question. On sponsorship a lot of the big sponsors, from Coca-Cola to Heineken, are cutting their marketing spend. Football clubs are trying to adapt, offering discounts to current endorsement deals or one-year extensions, hoping the sponsorship market will pick up again post-Covid. On broadcasting rights, I wouldn’t want to be a league — such as Germany’s Bundesliga — having to go out to market with a media rights auction right now. It’s clear that pay television providers have taken a huge hit due to the lack of live sport. Enders Analysis reckons Sky lost $800m, mainly through allowing UK customers to pause their sports subscriptions for three months. That scrambles their future spending plans, you would think. But the multiyear nature of football rights deals provides hope. The calculation for TV broadcasters is whether their businesses will largely return to normal for many years after the pandemic. I’m an optimist on that front.

FT commenter roxyj: Do you see a fundamental change coming in Uefa’s Financial Fair Play rules, both in the short and long-term? They currently allow voluntary arrangements to exceed the break-even requirement for an agreed period, in the case of change of ownership.

SA: The breaking news is that Uefa has outlined a set of emergency measures, relaxing the Financial Fair Play rules in light of the financial strains put on clubs by the pandemic. More fundamental change might be too much adjustment for the system to take in one go. Rule books are often rewritten after a bad crisis, so let’s not rule anything out.

The priority in the first instance will be to help clubs survive. As Uefa points out, the problem right now is that the pandemic made a whole load of revenues disappear overnight rather than financial mismanagement as such. There’s also the question of Uefa’s court battle with Manchester City over FFP. City’s appeal against a two-year ban from Europe’s Champions League is a test of the regime. Refresh on that here.

FT commenter Isabelle the Cynic: How do you think the pandemic will affect the (possible) Newcastle United takeover by the PIF-led consortium?

MA: In short, it’s complicated. The longer version is: I don’t think the pandemic is stalling the takeover, but the politics of the deal are.
The World Trade Organization report into Saudi involvement in television piracy, including Premier League matches, is damning and hard to ignore. Read about it here. But blocking the takeover would spark a diplomatic incident that would harm economic relations between the UK and Saudi Arabia. I foresee a few scenarios:

1. Realpolitik plays out and the takeover is approved. Some loophole is found to suggest that the Saudi sovereign wealth fund as an entity satisfies the Premier League’s owners and directors test, even if some powerful Saudi nationals would not.

2. The Premier League quietly warns the test may be failed to the prospective owners. The next we hear is that the deal has collapsed, even before the test has been applied.

3. The takeover is approved but with face-saving conditions attached, such as restructuring the deal so it does not explicitly involve the Saudi state, or its government makes some big aggressive moves to tackle television piracy in the country.

I’m sure there are other possibilities too. I have no intelligence on which is the likeliest of these options, I’m afraid. Like I said, it’s complicated.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Fri Jun 19, 2020 1:44 am

Chester Perry wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 12:43 pm
UEFA announce some short term tweaks to it's regulations, including a relaxing of FFP - though a first glance that looks like it might not give much wiggle room if next season is interrupted/behind closed doors. Also calls for a harmonised transfer window.

https://www.uefa.com/insideuefa/news/ne ... 42261.html
The Esk with his take https://twitter.com/theesk/status/1273579812393754628 - remember he is an Evertonian so it is being looked at through a blue lens - the purpose of the tweaks is clear though

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Fri Jun 19, 2020 2:11 pm

It was telling the other day when Sky finally talked to the press about the return of football
Chester Perry wrote:
Wed Jun 17, 2020 12:28 am

Under pressure from the UK government, the Premier League has sought to allow supporters to watch all remaining 92 remaining matches this season.

As a result, games not due to be televised will be split between the league’s broadcast partners. Sky will show 25 games on its free-to-view “Pick” channel. Four fixtures will also be shown on the BBC, the first time Premier League games will be screened live on a terrestrial broadcaster since the competition launched in 1992.

The move was a reflection of “exceptional circumstances”, said Mr Webster, with Sky unlikely to make such concessions in future. “The starting point in all our discussions on rights centres around the nature of exclusivity, because that is what drives our business,” he added.
Now the battle is on to preserve the value of next season's rights, being forced to air all behind closed door games will not do that, but the government seems to want it - for now at least - though I suspect they may get counter pressure from non sports broadcasters who will say the tv market is being distorted and causing them a drop in viewers - the battle is afoot though - From the Mail

EXCLUSIVE: The Government demand that EVERY Premier League match next season is televised until fans are back into stadiums, sparking a TV row as Sky and BT fear their £5bn contracts will be devalued
- The Premier League are on collision course with broadcasters Sky and BT Sport
- Government demanded every match next season be on TV until fans can return
- Both Sky and BT agreed reluctantly to the televising of every match this season
By Matt Hughes For The Daily Mail
Published: 22:31, 18 June 2020 | Updated: 13:05, 19 June 2020

Demands from the Government to have every Premier League match next season televised until fans are allowed into stadiums has put the league on a collision course with Sky and BT Sport.

Sky and BT — the Premier League's main domestic rights-holders — agreed reluctantly to the televising of every match this season to ensure that the campaign could be completed.

Sky Sports even pledged to show 25 of their 64 matches free-to-air to help gain Government support for the restart. But the broadcaster viewed this gesture as a one-off and do not want every game televised indefinitely, as it would reduce the value of the contract they have held since 1992.

Sky will receive backing from BT Sport, who have not made any of their 20 games free-to-air.

The BBC and Amazon have been given four live matches each over the next few weeks. All will be available for free.

The Premier League find themselves caught between the Government's demands — to broaden access to live sport as long as social distancing measures remain in place — while also seeking to satisfy broadcast partners who provide a significant proportion of clubs' income.

Sky and BT paid almost £5billion for live Premier League rights between 2019 and 2022, and if many top-flight games are available elsewhere for free, both companies fear they will lose subscribers.

Sky [should say broadcasters] will receive a £330million rebate from the Premier League for the disruption to their schedules caused by the shutdown this season. Clubs at the top of the table will pay a greater share.

Any changes to the broadcasting arrangements for next season will see Sky and BT demanding further rebates, which could lead to clubs blocking increased television coverage. Liverpool in particular, who as champions elect receive more TV money and therefore will have to repay almost £25m, were unhappy with the rebate settlement and Tottenham were also dissenters.

Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden suggested earlier this week that the Government are hopeful some fans will be allowed to attend games when the new season begins in September. But a partial return would not solve the Premier League's television problem as many season-ticket holders would continue to be excluded.

The Government are understood to be working towards a phased return of spectators, with stadiums initially limited to 25 per cent capacity.

Meanwhile, Sportsmail can reveal that the majority of viewers chose to watch last night's Premier League matches with recorded crowd noise.

Seventy-five per cent chose to watch the Sky Sports Main Event channel, rather than Sky Sports Premier League with a commentary-only soundtrack.

Sky recorded impressive peak viewing figures of 2.7m for Aston Villa v Sheffield United and 3.4m for Manchester City v Arsenal — respectively a 43 per cent and a 94 per cent increase on the season average.

After 100 days without Premier League football, Sky will hope for more bumper viewing figures for Friday's live matches between Norwich and Southampton (6pm), and Tottenham and Manchester United (8.15pm).

But the most significant increase will take place on Saturday when the BBC broadcast their first ever live Premier League game.

Crystal Palace's evening visit to Bournemouth is expected to smash the record for the biggest Premier League TV audience, which is currently 4million for a Manchester derby in 2012.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Fri Jun 19, 2020 4:10 pm

I have had to think seriously about posting this, given the way this board has been dividing recently, I have no desire to see this thread disintegrate into another argument. I determined that given some of the points made re past actions were posted on the thread as they occurred, this can be regarded as a continuation of that story line.

The curious case of sport and in particular football will only allow politics to be expressed if it doesn't affect it financial bottom line from Politico.eu

English football’s political dilemma
Support for Marcus Rashford highlights top league’s contradictory stance on politics.
By Ali Walker 6/17/20, 4:15 PM CET Updated 6/18/20, 4:58 AM CET

The world's most lucrative football league doesn't like political protests — except when it does.

The English Premier League resumes behind closed doors Wednesday evening basking in the reflected glory of Manchester United forward Marcus Rashford’s campaign on free school meals, which forced the U.K. government to reverse policy and extend a scheme providing food vouchers for poor families through the summer. The league also said players can have the words Black Lives Matter instead of their name on the backs of their shirt.

Critics accuse the league of hypocrisy as English football has been frequently hostile to political messaging in recent years.

When Manchester City manager Pep Guardiola wore a yellow ribbon in solidarity with the independence movement in his native Catalonia in 2018, he was fined by the Football Association. In blunt remarks, the FA chief executive at the time said Guardiola’s political protest was “highly divisive.”

And spooked by a furor that erupted between the NBA and China over protests in Hong Kong, the Premier League was tight-lipped when Arsenal star Mesut Özil criticized the Chinese government in December 2019 over its persecution of the country’s Uighur population.

Yet Rashford’s campaign was met with acclaim from the league’s top official.

So who decides which campaigns are worthy of the league’s tacit support? And should the cash-obsessed Premier League be a moral arbiter of political protest?

On politics, the Premier League has been making “ad-hoc decisions” and leaves itself open to “reasonable accusations of hypocrisy,” said Nicholas McGeehan, an analyst on the politics of football.

Only when a political cause has something approaching universal backing are sports leagues willing to throw their weight behind it, according to Stefan Szymanski, an economist and author of the book "Soccernomics."

Generally, Szymanski told POLITICO, sporting institutions are “cheerleaders for the status quo — not daring to challenge any injustice for fear that their empire might crumble.”

Had Rashford petitioned the U.K. government six months ago, he might have found himself banned instead of put on a pedestal, Szymanski said.
The Premier League’s chief executive, Richard Masters, admitted the difficulty in an interview Tuesday. The political activism displayed by Rashford and others could set “uncomfortable precedents,” he said.

But Masters said that, in the Rashford and Black Lives Matter cases, he didn’t see the messaging as inherently political. “It is more ethics-based, values statements,” he said.

England’s Football Association had no comment on Rashford’s activism.

Show me the money!
Ultimately, the league’s accountants are likely to call the shots when it comes to politics.

Rashford’s campaign didn’t affect the Premier League’s bottom line, said Szymanski, whereas Özil’s had the potential to cause economic damage.
The NBA example is especially stark for the Premier League, as it seeks to expand its popularity in still-emerging markets like China.

In October 2019, Houston Rockets General Manager Daryl Morey tweeted an image in support of pro-democracy demonstrators in Hong Kong. After an intense backlash, led by Chinese politicians, broadcasters and retailers, the basketball league apologized to China.

That outcry likely contributed, two months later, to English football’s unsupportive silence when Özil hit out at Beijing on social media. Even Özil’s own team, Arsenal, distanced itself from the player’s remarks, claiming in a statement that the London club is "always apolitical.”

For some commentators, English football’s apparent cherry-picking stance on politics cuts no ice in an era where sports are becoming more politicized than ever.

“I am sure that the Premier League does not want to alienate important foreign markets, but it cannot afford to repress the players, since they are the artists people are paying to see,” said Ruud Koning, professor of sport economics at the University of Groningen.

When Guardiola was fined for wearing the yellow ribbon in March 2018, then-FA chief Martin Glenn said there was no place for political symbols in football. In comments that caused a storm, he compared the ribbon to the swastika and the hammer and sickle.

For some commentators, English football’s apparent cherry-picking stance on politics cuts no ice in an era where sports are becoming more politicized than ever.

“The fact it has taken such a creditable and positive stance by allowing players to freely express their views on BLM raises the question of why others have been prevented from using their platforms to raise other legitimate issues,” said McGeehan.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Fri Jun 19, 2020 4:56 pm

and to follow that here is an interesting marketing opinion piece - from SportsProMedia.com

Opinion | Marketers can all learn from Marcus Rashford’s textbook meal voucher campaign
Simon Oliveira, managing director of KIN Partners, explains why Marcus Rashford's drive to provide free meals for British children is a game-changer for athletes wanting to use their platform to create social reform.
Posted: June 19 2020

Marcus Rashford has rightly received universal praise for his life-changing campaign that has set a new benchmark for athlete activism in the UK.
Rashford’s crusade prompted a government U-turn that will see parents claim vouchers for 1.3 million children in England during the summer holidays, after earlier helping the FareShare charity raise UK£20 million and supply three million meals a week to vulnerable people across the UK.

It has been another exceptional example of the power and influence soccer players, and high-profile sportspeople in general, wield to help enable change by utilising their platforms to reach the masses.

Having worked in the sports industry for more than 20 years with some of the world’s best-known personalities, there is no surprise to me in what Rashford has been able to achieve.

I have witnessed first-hand the influence that high-profile sportspeople can have, never more so than when David Beckham became an ambassador for the Chinese Super League (CSL). During a tour of the country, British diplomats thanked us at every dinner for opening doors to Chinese politicians and powerbrokers that were previously inaccessible. I have seen the joy David has brought to millions of children and adults around the world, but this was another level of impact.

Today, top-level athletes are publishing moguls in their own right, with bigger followings, reach and influence than most traditional media and an unfiltered platform to share their thoughts and feelings. Quite simply, they have never held more influence in their hands, and, in times of tragedy and injustice, the power of social media is never more evident.

You only have to see the reaction from sport, its stars and associations, to the Black Lives Matter movement to realise that it is no longer enough to be silent on such endemic social issues. Harnessing and utilising this power is becoming increasing common as sportspeople become empowered by events happening around the world and inspired by the likes of Colin Kaepernick, LeBron James, Megan Rapinoe, Raheem Sterling and many more who are taking a stand, and a knee.

Against this backdrop, Matt Hancock picked the wrong target when, during the early stages of the coronavirus pandemic, he called out players in English soccer’s top flight, calling on them to “play their part”. Soccer, and its players, are often used as scapegoats for the rich and famous and Hancock was guilty of pandering and deflecting from British government's handling of Covid-19.

In launching #PlayersTogether – a collective project to help generate funds for the NHS – Premier League players provided the perfect riposte to Hancock’s criticism. Following this, we saw England captain Harry Kane join forces with Leyton Orient, sponsoring the third-tier club’s shirts and donating the space to three charitable causes.

It was around this time that Rashford was stepping up his support of FareShare, having initially set a goal of raising UK£100,000 and feeding 400,000 children after partnering with the food poverty and waste charity in April. Having helped raise more than UK£20 million for FareShare, Rashford set his sights on a new target, penning an open letter to his government.

that open letter https://twitter.com/MarcusRashford/stat ... 9819823105

The genius of Rashford’s campaign was its simplicity. It was textbook in its strategy, tactics and execution. It starts with a clear positioning based on his personal experience: no one can question his motive or accuse him of jumping on a bandwagon.

It is built on personal insights from all the unreported and unheralded work he had been doing to help the FareShare charity over several months.
The cause is inclusive and was not initially about politics. It is about human rights and children having food to eat. He isolated his argument to a place where it cannot be questioned and is universally supported, both by soccer fans and wider society - children should not go hungry.

He consistently used his personal platforms to keep up the momentum and drive awareness, mixing this with traditional media interviews to reach the widest possible audience.

Finally, when he had forced the hand of government in to making the policy U-turn, he displayed humility. There has been no basking in the moment, rather he is already talking about the further steps that need to be taken. 

https://twitter.com/MarcusRashford/stat ... 33/photo/1

It was the perfect campaign and one that all lobbyists and brand marketers can learn from. Activism with authentic and passionate delivery across the right platforms, in the right tone, at the right time, remains an extremely powerful combination.

It has been a shining example of the power athletes have in their hands and the change that can be facilitated when used in the right way. And this attitude is here to stay. As Rashford himself said: "It's becoming more normal that people speak out on topics that they believe in and I think it's just positive for the future."

Broader society - and, by proxy, the media - now celebrates influential voices who are not afraid to put their heads above the parapet. Moving forwards, sport federations, leagues, clubs, sponsors and broadcasters must support these sentiments with actions too.

Premier League chief executuve Richard Masters praised Rashford’s campaign, but also questioned if “it creates uncomfortable precedents going forward.” Grey areas will remain, but moral-based issues can no longer be avoided by sport's wider stakeholders.

A by-product of the increasing amount of athlete activism is that, like Gen Z more generally, the star names of today are far more socially conscious and increasingly looking for partners to match these values. Let us be clear - badging exercises are a thing of the past. Organisations championing emotional and purpose-driven agendas, aligned to a clear brand promise and displaying these values at all touchpoints will thrive and attract the most valuable ambassadors.

The barriers have been well and truly broken, and sportsmen and women will continue to take strength from the positive reactions to their willingness to speak out. Top-level athletes, and the organisations they represent, can collectively reach more people than almost any politician and connect.

This is an age where you can educate, influence and inspire and make a real difference for generations to come. The challenge now for athletes will be to ensure they remain accountable and live up to their claims.

Matt Hancock may have briefly forgotten his name, but the 1.3 million children benefitting directly from Rashford’s campaign never will. The precedent has been set. Players have the platforms and the power. This is just the beginning.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reminds me a lot of
Chester Perry wrote:
Thu May 14, 2020 5:50 pm
We know how increasingly important in the modern game (however disappointed older readers may feel about the terminology) Branding for clubs and players is a key feature to commercial growth and revenue diversity. Here one of the key players in this area within sport, Ehsen Shah, talks to @FootballLaw about how he started and what he does. It is one of the real fast growth area's in sport.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ppk0CVYtRUc
and
Chester Perry wrote:
Mon May 18, 2020 5:47 pm
Shah's business partner in B-Engaged is Hector Bellerin, probably one of the most accomplished of the new generation of brand-builders. Here Forbes.com talk to Bellerin about what drives him.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertkidd ... -in-a-box/

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Fri Jun 19, 2020 5:13 pm

With the Premier League now back (in part at least) the question is where does it go from here, especially as it has shown that it can have real social value - from SportsProMedia.com

The Premier League is back but where does it go from here?
World soccer's most-watched league has returned but in its months as a broadcast-only product, clubs will be thinking carefully about how to close the gap to supporters.
Posted: June 17 2020 By: Eoin Connolly

So the Premier League is back, only this time it really does feel like it’s been away.

Last night the world’s most-watched domestic soccer competition, perhaps the most global national league of them, returned to action at Villa Park and the Etihad Stadium. The table moved for the first time since 9th March as Aston Villa played out a contentious goalless draw with Sheffield United before outgoing champions Manchester City made easy work of Arsenal. 100 days after its suspension served notice of how bad the Covid-19 crisis would become, its resumption in a six-week sprint to the finish serves as an emblem of our adjusted reality.

It is worth reflecting for a moment on how we got here. Chief executive Richard Masters has only been in the job on a permanent basis since mid-December, a Premier League veteran who stepped up from an interim position when a series of eye-catching external hires imploded. The expectation was that he might act as a safe pair of hands, someone who could carry its interests from the long and lucrative Richard Scudamore era to a place where more radical thinking might be needed.

Right. But it is likely for the best that Masters, with his knowledge of the league’s inner workings, was on hand for such an unlikely challenge. Even outside the context of the British government’s disjointed response to the coronavirus pandemic, it is a success in itself that the English game is back at all.

Project Restart looked at times to be faltering through a storm of competing interests, with member clubs showing very different levels of enthusiasm for completing the season. Players had to be reassured of their safety at a time when measures to ensure it looked distinctly hypothetical. There was a very real chance that the coalition would not hold, but it has.

Of course, minds were concentrated by the threat of a cataclysmic financial collapse – one that might have held ramifications for British sport far beyond the Premier League. The worst extremes of that, for now at least, appear to have been avoided.

Ahead of kick-off Sky Sports confirmed the agreement of a UK£170 million rebate to cover three months with no live events, with further restructuring giving both parties a chance to navigate the choppy waters ahead. There may be as much given back again to other TV companies internationally but for now, clubs have a good deal more certainty for the year to come.

Again, familiarity has been an asset. As its primary broadcaster since breakaway opening day in 1992/93, Sky is effectively a founding partner of the Premier League. There is mutual benefit to an amicable solution for BT Sport and Amazon, too. There are hard economic realities to countenance. For some supporters, though, those aspects of the discussion only deepen the discomfiting sense that the league is a vehicle for media content, and little more.

That view is understandable, if reductive. Nothing this big can exist in one form alone. Away from Project Restart, the biggest off-field story in the Premier League has been the tortuous progress of Newcastle United’s UK£300 million sale to Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund (PIF). It is a deal whose fate, whatever the abundant ethical concerns that surround it, may hinge on how much Saudi officials really knew about the theft of broadcast feeds from Qatar-based Premier League broadcaster BeIN Sports.

Premier League clubs, however, have shown since March that their concerns extend beyond the bottom line. There are many stories to be told about teams stepping up in difficult times, lending a hand to charitable operations and offering their facilities to the National Health Service (NHS).

Leading players, who began the shutdown period receiving cheap shots from their government about pay cuts, have revealed an activist streak. A captains’ group convened for restart talks has arranged a fund for healthcare workers and pushed to support Black Lives Matter protests. Manchester United and England striker Marcus Rashford, 22, has raised huge sums for children’s charities and convinced the government to extend a school meal vouchers programme through the summer holidays, putting UK£120 million on the plates of hungry young people.

That social value must endure through months where English soccer exists only on television. It is to the credit of everyone involved that all 90 games left will be accessible to British audiences for the rest of the season, 33 of them for free, including four on the publicly funded BBC. For all that, the very fact that action must continue without fans present will change the role of supporters completely.

Producers will make every effort to compensate for the lack of atmosphere. Adaptive crowd noise has been ported from video games, while clubs can also set musical cues for goals and substitutions. The evidence so far from Spain and Germany is that these tricks can be pretty effective. Yet as much as it is a broadcaster’s prerogative to protect the quality of their product, rights holders need to tread carefully around such innovations – especially as their use will not necessarily end once grounds have fully reopened.

Premier League stands will mostly be cloaked in flags but consider for a moment the virtual crowds on offer during La Liga and Coppa Italia broadcasts. On the one hand, they are a neat visual route out of an awkward spot. On the other, they could be read as a step towards diminishing the importance of match-going fans not just to the spectacle, but the occasion. Fans concerned they might as well be extras in a TV production would think even less of being a special effect. Some observers have compared the virtual crowds to those in early 2000s video games – which were basic because the crowds were the last thing worth using limited operating memory to create.

All of this means that clubs will be working just as hard to make use of technologies that can bring fans together, rather than just simulating them. Some in the Premier League will be taking advantage of video walls that beam images of fans into their empty stadiums. And the most intriguing moment to watch will probably not come during a game itself.

At some point very soon – most likely, in fact, before this column is filed again – Liverpool will be crowned champions of England for the 19th time, and the first time in the Premier League era. It is an event 30 years in the making but instead of a sold-out Anfield, thronged streets and packed pubs, it will be celebrated at social distance. The club are sure to be making plans for virtual events that unite groups from around the world. If those are effective, they might point the way to a wealth of new opportunities when normality descends again.

Masters has already said that as he sees it, the Premier League will not really return until its fans do. Still, soccer is well on its way back. On Wednesday, Uefa confirmed plans for condensed finales to its Champions League and Europa League competitions. Uefa Euro 2020 qualifying play-offs have also been rescheduled for the autumn, with the tournament itself due to take place in its original host cities, albeit a year later than planned. Barring any further catastrophe – and we know well enough by now how unwise it is to rule those out – the calendar is already taking shape.

The future of the game is in sight. The part everyone plays in it is not so clear just yet.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Fri Jun 19, 2020 5:43 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 12:22 am
Meanwhile Amanda Staveley is still in court trying to get £1.5+ billion out of Barclays - to say she appears to be a poor witness is to give her praise -

You have to say things see to have got worse for her - as Barclays lawyers have sensed and Simon Chadwick informs us - we are all blessed by @TariqPanja's persistence in watching the trial and reporting to us

https://twitter.com/Prof_Chadwick/statu ... 0095131649
Definitely got worse for her today (there was a day off from proceedings yesterday) - as her testimony is shredded by the Barclays lawyer, she broke down in tears as he delivered his withering attack

https://twitter.com/tariqpanja/status/1 ... 4810085378

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Fri Jun 19, 2020 5:59 pm

Meanwhile the position within government is noticeably shifting on the Newcastle takeover

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53104800

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Fri Jun 19, 2020 6:06 pm

In a sign of the current financial predicament in football on the back of Chelsea's £100m loss last season (and £250m loan from Roman Abramovich to help out with the overspend) and Liverpool's world record profits 2 years ago, very healthy profits last season and a 1st League title in 30 years this season - the Football Today Podcast asks - Why can Chelsea buy Timo Werner and Liverpool can’t?

https://www.footballtodaypodcast.com/po ... rpool-cant

Must admit that it had bypassed me that Brighton owner Tony Bloom also owns a club in Belgium.

it was 2 years ago apparently - a Brexit beating measure

https://www.theargus.co.uk/sport/162396 ... -gilloise/

@KieranMaguire is so much better when he is serious and not joking around

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Fri Jun 19, 2020 6:34 pm

I have posted about player support/player liaison officers a few times (football's magic money tree has made them a necessity) - this article in the Guardian highlight what they were up to during the pause.

It was non-stop': the club staff who looked after footballers in lockdown
There were no Premier League games for 100 days, but the club’s player care managers were busier than ever
Richard Foster - Fri 19 Jun 2020 17.05 BST

Premier League games stopped for 100 days, but some staff were busier than ever. Player care managers – the staff at Premier League clubs who provide support to players and their families off the pitch – suddenly had some very different challenges. “We don’t just sign footballers, we sign footballers’ families,” says Charlotte Renshaw, the player care manager at Everton.

“There is a stigma about the player care role, but I see myself more as a facilitator, particularly for the younger foreign players who may have never set foot in England before. My aim is to give them a sense of independence as quickly as possible.” Renshaw is often the first member of staff a foreign player meets when he arrives at the club and her role is not just about the player. “We want them to be part of the Everton family.”

Renshaw would ordinarily see players at the club’s training ground, but that face-to-face contact was quickly taken to FaceTime. “Normally my office is the hub,” she says. “Players would pop in during their free time for a chat. Then we had to try and replicate that remotely. It was important to keep the lines of communication open.

“We made sure that their days were full. It was difficult for the players who were used to arriving at Finch Farm, doing their training work, having set meals, doing their gym work and seeing their teammates. But that was taken away. So we filled up their days. Not only did they have their fitness regimes to follow, there were various Zoom meetings, including yoga sessions and English language lessons.”

Renshaw also helped players with children in education. “Schools would send stuff to me and I would pass it on and we would give tips. This was made easier by the club’s strong links with many of the schools through the educational arm of our charitable foundation.”

“It was all a bit strange,” says Simone Ricchio, the player care manager at Watford. “Because everything seemed so far away when it all started in China. Then it started getting closer and closer – first with Italy, where I’m from – then all of a sudden we were overwhelmed by the situation. Of course, the suspension of the matches made sense as it would have been dangerous to continue. We reached a certain point where the needs of the human being come before that of the footballer.”

Like many player care managers, Ricchio has a dual role at Watford. “I also look after the football operations,” he says. “So on one hand there were none of the match logistics to organise, such as travel and accommodation, but as we had no idea of when we might return we still had to be prepared – which proved extremely challenging.”

With no certainty about when training or games would return, the club set up various calls to keep everyone involved. “We did not want to lose the unity of the group. It was something that Nigel [Pearson] wanted, so we organised a video call at least once or twice a week between players and staff – so we could go through any doubts or particular problems our players might want to discuss. Ultimately, they also just wanted to have a chat with each other.”

There were no major issues with physical fitness during the break as the players had all been given individual plans and both clubs provided gym equipment for those who did not have access at their homes. “Mental health was the most important aspect of the isolation,” Ricchio says. “We were in contact with the players on a daily basis or whenever they wanted or needed. All of a sudden they were just at home, alone or with their families, isolated and that can be really tough. So we provided all the players with experts in psychology, including one who could speak different languages to help the foreign players.”

As a result, Ricchio’s role was even more demanding. “During lockdown everyone has a different routine,” Ricchio says. “The player care world is normally 24/7. In lockdown it was even more. It was non-stop because someone might be a morning guy and can text in the morning, whereas someone else gets in touch during the evening. There were no limitations anymore. They were all at home and might need anything at any moment. Another thing we did was to avoid players who might be at high risk of contracting the virus coming into contact with anyone, we would deliver them their food, organise the shopping for them and deliver straight to their homes.”

Just as Ricchio was adapting to the new normal, Watford became the first Premier League club to announce that one of their players, 33-year-old Adrian Mariappa, had tested positive for coronavirus during lockdown. Ricchio worked closely with the club’s medical team to support Mariappa and his family. “We created a ‘bubble’, as the Premier League called it, which is a safe place so we have a training ground where everyone is negative and tested twice a week. We followed all the protocols and guidelines from the government.”

Ricchio also spent time speaking with Watford captain Troy Deeney, who voiced his reservations about returning to action. Deeney took a stand as he was concerned for the safety of his five-month old baby, who had been born prematurely and suffered from breathing problems, and because of the way the virus has disproportionately affected the BAME community. “His position was completely understandable,” says Ricchio. “So we supported him and tried to back him as much as we could. So, anything he needed to understand about whether the environment was safe, we did it. We did our best to reassure him and support him, because it wasn’t easy for him to take that decision. He was really brave to do it, especially publicly.”

Renshaw and Ricchio are both enthusiastic about the return of the Premier League. “Everyone at the club is looking forward to it,” Ricchio says. “It’s a great thing for us and for the fans as well. It was one of the government’s goals, to have the Premier League back to boost the morale of the country.”

Ricchio is confident that Watford have made every effort to keep their players and staff safe. Now the focus shifts to their match against Leicester on Saturday as they try to preserve their Premier League status. Everton also have a big game this weekend, the Merseyside derby at Goodison Park. Renshaw says the players are “itching” to play. “We have all been on tenterhooks on when it’s going to happen. It will be a relief to get back to playing again.”

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Fri Jun 19, 2020 6:39 pm

TwoHundredPercent on how "Football's Self Interest beats Football's Health Interest

https://twohundredpercent.net/footballs ... -interest/

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Fri Jun 19, 2020 7:01 pm

This court case which Barcelona won (Neymar lost) goes to highlight the fantastical sums of money that club lavish on their stars- no doubting he is a very special talent - but the way that club operates defies belief at times - From the Mail

Neymar's claims Barcelona owe him £39.5m 'loyalty bonus' are REJECTED in court as club 'expresses its satisfaction' at verdict which sees Brazilian forced to pay THEM £6m
Neymar's legal battle against former club Barcelona was rejected on Friday
The Paris Saint-Germain star was claiming an unpaid signing bonus by Barcelona
A court ruled that instead it is the club who is owed around £6m from Neymar
The player and his representatives can appeal the verdict delivered on Friday
By Pete Jenson for MailOnline
Published: 13:13, 19 June 2020 | Updated: 15:01, 19 June 2020

Neymar will have to pay Barcelona €6.7million (£6m) after losing his court case against them for unpaid signing bonuses.

There were huge differences of opinion over how Barcelona and Neymar should tie up financial loose ends in 2017 when the player moved to Paris Saint-Germain for a world record €222m (£198m) fee.

The player had signed a new contract at the Nou Camp in 2016 that included a signing bonus payable in instalments.

Barcelona refused to pay the last instalment after Neymar switched to France.

He wanted the final payment paid, the club wanted some of the money they had already paid him reimbursed. On Friday, the judge came down in the club's favour.

In a statement Barcelona said: 'The judgment dismisses the player's claim in its entirety, which demanded the payment 43.6m euros (£39.5m), and upholds a large part of the claim filed by FC Barcelona, according to which the player must return the club 6.7m euros.'

Neymar has the right to appeal and the statement added: 'The Club will continue to firmly defend its legitimate interests.'
This is another chapter in the often bizarre relationship between player and club.

Last summer Barcelona were criticised by a large sector of their support for trying to re-sign Neymar while he was taking the club through the courts.

Last July it was suggested if Neymar did win his court case he would not see the money because Barcelona would have to give it straight to the Spanish taxman because of claims Neymar owed money in unpaid taxes.

tiger76
Posts: 25697
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 9:43 pm
Been Liked: 4644 times
Has Liked: 9849 times
Location: Glasgow

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by tiger76 » Fri Jun 19, 2020 9:27 pm

Getting tasty in the Scottish courts.

Dundee Utd, Raith & Cove Rangers will 'robustly defend' right to promotion

Dundee United, Raith Rovers and Cove Rangers say they will "robustly defend" themselves after a petition was lodged that could lead to a "ruinous" reversal of their promotions.

Hearts and Partick Thistle went to the Court of Session to challenge their relegations - and that of Stranraer - after the SPFL ended the season early.

Their petition asked for a judge to scrap promotions and relegations for last season - meaning United, Raith and Cove would stay down despite being crowned champions of their divisions.

In a joint statement, the "extremely unhappy" trio say that could "potentially have catastrophic financial implications" not just for them, but for each of the SPFL's 42 clubs.

They also confirm they have instructed lawyers to act for them.

"We have undertaken extensive and costly preparations for a new season in new leagues, including obtaining major financial commitments from our supporters, business partners and stakeholders," the statement read. "Our removal from those leagues would be ruinous on and off the field.

"Our status as champions is not being contested, and nor should the promotion which has always, and should always, come with it. We must and will robustly defend our position."

After filing the petition in Edinburgh on Wednesday, Hearts and Thistle said they "have no wish to disrupt" Scottish football, but "reserve the right" to try to delay the Scottish Premiership season.

The SPFL had seven days from then to respond to the petition, and a spokesman for the league said its solicitors are "studying this carefully".

Hearts, Thistle and Stranraer had their demotions confirmed on Monday when clubs failed to support league reconstruction to extend the top flight from 12 teams to 14.

That followed a vote in April to curtail the campaign, with Hearts bottom of the Premiership and Thistle last in the Championship.

This has the potential to severely impact on the professional game north of the border, if it's not resolved quickly.

Royboyclaret
Posts: 3891
Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 12:57 pm
Been Liked: 1282 times
Has Liked: 681 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Royboyclaret » Fri Jun 19, 2020 10:29 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Fri Jun 19, 2020 2:11 pm
It was telling the other day when Sky finally talked to the press about the return of football



Now the battle is on to preserve the value of next season's rights, being forced to air all behind closed door games will not do that, but the government seems to want it - for now at least - though I suspect they may get counter pressure from non sports broadcasters who will say the tv market is being distorted and causing them a drop in viewers - the battle is afoot though - From the Mail

EXCLUSIVE: The Government demand that EVERY Premier League match next season is televised until fans are back into stadiums, sparking a TV row as Sky and BT fear their £5bn contracts will be devalued
- The Premier League are on collision course with broadcasters Sky and BT Sport
- Government demanded every match next season be on TV until fans can return
- Both Sky and BT agreed reluctantly to the televising of every match this season
By Matt Hughes For The Daily Mail
Published: 22:31, 18 June 2020 | Updated: 13:05, 19 June 2020

Demands from the Government to have every Premier League match next season televised until fans are allowed into stadiums has put the league on a collision course with Sky and BT Sport.

Sky and BT — the Premier League's main domestic rights-holders — agreed reluctantly to the televising of every match this season to ensure that the campaign could be completed.

Sky Sports even pledged to show 25 of their 64 matches free-to-air to help gain Government support for the restart. But the broadcaster viewed this gesture as a one-off and do not want every game televised indefinitely, as it would reduce the value of the contract they have held since 1992.

Sky will receive backing from BT Sport, who have not made any of their 20 games free-to-air.

The BBC and Amazon have been given four live matches each over the next few weeks. All will be available for free.

The Premier League find themselves caught between the Government's demands — to broaden access to live sport as long as social distancing measures remain in place — while also seeking to satisfy broadcast partners who provide a significant proportion of clubs' income.

Sky and BT paid almost £5billion for live Premier League rights between 2019 and 2022, and if many top-flight games are available elsewhere for free, both companies fear they will lose subscribers.

Sky [should say broadcasters] will receive a £330million rebate from the Premier League for the disruption to their schedules caused by the shutdown this season. Clubs at the top of the table will pay a greater share.

Any changes to the broadcasting arrangements for next season will see Sky and BT demanding further rebates, which could lead to clubs blocking increased television coverage. Liverpool in particular, who as champions elect receive more TV money and therefore will have to repay almost £25m, were unhappy with the rebate settlement and Tottenham were also dissenters.

Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden suggested earlier this week that the Government are hopeful some fans will be allowed to attend games when the new season begins in September. But a partial return would not solve the Premier League's television problem as many season-ticket holders would continue to be excluded.

The Government are understood to be working towards a phased return of spectators, with stadiums initially limited to 25 per cent capacity.

Meanwhile, Sportsmail can reveal that the majority of viewers chose to watch last night's Premier League matches with recorded crowd noise.

Seventy-five per cent chose to watch the Sky Sports Main Event channel, rather than Sky Sports Premier League with a commentary-only soundtrack.

Sky recorded impressive peak viewing figures of 2.7m for Aston Villa v Sheffield United and 3.4m for Manchester City v Arsenal — respectively a 43 per cent and a 94 per cent increase on the season average.

After 100 days without Premier League football, Sky will hope for more bumper viewing figures for Friday's live matches between Norwich and Southampton (6pm), and Tottenham and Manchester United (8.15pm).

But the most significant increase will take place on Saturday when the BBC broadcast their first ever live Premier League game.

Crystal Palace's evening visit to Bournemouth is expected to smash the record for the biggest Premier League TV audience, which is currently 4million for a Manchester derby in 2012.
Sky and BT actually paid £5.4 billion in the cycle just ended, 2016-2019, so the £5 billion for the current cycle represents a reduction in domestic payments of 7.4%. However, this is more than offset by an incredible 35.5% increase in overseas payments from £3.1 billion to £4.2 billion.

An overall increase in the new cycle of 8.2% from £8.5 billion to £9.2 billion. The one big concern might be the number of weaker broadcasters from overseas liable to disappear from the market with the impact of Covid-19.

Whilst on the subject of broadcasting revenues Chester will be well aware they are a particular bone of contention with me on the basis that reconciling the agreed total amounts with the amounts actually paid to clubs is a very difficult process. In the domestic figure for the last cycle of £1.8 billion per year the equal share 50% of £900m only £688m was paid to clubs (£34.4m x 20 clubs), a difference of some £212m.

Similarly with the 25% figures for facility fees and merit payments from a theoretical payment of £450m in each case only £403m was actually paid. And again with overseas payments from a potential £1.03 billion per year and an equal share per club of £51.5m, only £43.2m was actually paid. So a figure of £864m distributed as opposed to the £1.03 billion.

All of which makes for a total annual distribution difference of a mere £472m, a figure which presumably went to swell the coffers of the Premier League. Little wonder they are able to report such healthy financial accounts.

Be very interested to hear the views of The esk on the above.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Sat Jun 20, 2020 12:57 am

Chester Perry wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 12:44 am
UEFA have pleased some with the detail and clarity of the announcements they made today

https://twitter.com/mjshrimper/status/1 ... 5734618114

but given that the top players in many countries are going to have only 3 to 4 weeks off (at most) is it really wise to force in extra international games. Once again there appears to be little thought given to the players while the authorities and clubs seek to get the tills ringing again
Seems like my thoughts are shared - but clubs, still in Europe are wanting a delayed start to the Premier League to help them cope with the overload of matches

https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... gue-europa

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Sat Jun 20, 2020 1:06 am

Royboyclaret wrote:
Fri Jun 19, 2020 10:29 pm
Sky and BT actually paid £5.4 billion in the cycle just ended, 2016-2019, so the £5 billion for the current cycle represents a reduction in domestic payments of 7.4%. However, this is more than offset by an incredible 35.5% increase in overseas payments from £3.1 billion to £4.2 billion.

An overall increase in the new cycle of 8.2% from £8.5 billion to £9.2 billion. The one big concern might be the number of weaker broadcasters from overseas liable to disappear from the market with the impact of Covid-19.

Whilst on the subject of broadcasting revenues Chester will be well aware they are a particular bone of contention with me on the basis that reconciling the agreed total amounts with the amounts actually paid to clubs is a very difficult process. In the domestic figure for the last cycle of £1.8 billion per year the equal share 50% of £900m only £688m was paid to clubs (£34.4m x 20 clubs), a difference of some £212m.

Similarly with the 25% figures for facility fees and merit payments from a theoretical payment of £450m in each case only £403m was actually paid. And again with overseas payments from a potential £1.03 billion per year and an equal share per club of £51.5m, only £43.2m was actually paid. So a figure of £864m distributed as opposed to the £1.03 billion.

All of which makes for a total annual distribution difference of a mere £472m, a figure which presumably went to swell the coffers of the Premier League. Little wonder they are able to report such healthy financial accounts.

Be very interested to hear the views of The esk on the above.
Roy I may now have some answers on that for 2018/19

PFA Charity got 5% of the total domestic pot - which is £90m
Solidarity Payments totalled £106.3m
Parachute Payments totalled £265m

which is a grand sum of £461.3m the remainder looks a more reasonable cost of Premier League operations

Famously, we are told that the Premier League don't give anything away but they have given over a £billion away in each of the last 2 cycles and are on course to do the same again in this cycle.

Remember in the early days of the Premier League the EFL turned down a deal that would have seen them get 20% of the domestic deal (this was before Parachute Payments were invented, such a deal would have prevented them from being introduced) but they turned it down, it involved the Premier League negotiating their TV deal too, though you could never imagine the big clubs being willing to do such a thing now.

The PFA were clever enough to get their deal in writing back in 1992 and have refused to change it since, despite repeated efforts by the Premier League.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Sat Jun 20, 2020 1:26 am

I have to say that this comes as no surprise - from the Mail

PREMIER LEAGUE BOSSES SWEATING ON BBC VIEWERS
Premier League executives will nervously await news of the viewing figures for Saturday's clash between Bournemouth and Crystal Palace, the first top-flight game to be televised live on the BBC since 1988.

While the expected record Premier League audience of over 10million would boost the competition in the short term, there are fears among executives that massive numbers will increase pressure on them to ensure that some top-flight games are made available on free-to-air television, which would reduce the value of the next broadcast contract.

As Sportsmail reported on Thursday, there is already tension between the Premier League and their main domestic rights-holders, Sky Sports and BT Sport, over whether all matches should continue to be shown live next season until fans are permitted to return to stadiums.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And some people wondered why the BBC effectively got told which games they would be showing by the other broadcasters - otherwise known as the 10th pick of the 10 games in that round (or more likely the 89th, 90th, 91st, and 92nd pick of the 92 restart games)

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Sat Jun 20, 2020 1:43 am

Marseille get away with breaching their FFP settlement with UEFA - fines and withholding of a percentage of UEFA earnings in the next 2 years but get to play in the Champions League next season - I wonder what City will make of this (though French President Macron is said to be a Marseilles fan) - from ESPN

Marseille fined €3m for breach of FFP settlement, will keep Champions League spot

Marseille have been fined €3 million for breaching a settlement agreement relating to financial fair play (FFP) rules but will retain their spot in next season's Champions League, UEFA said on Friday.

European football's governing body said in a statement that it would permanently withhold "15% of the revenue that the club would be entitled to receive from any participation in UEFA club competitions" in the next two seasons.

Marseille will be allowed to register only 23 players instead of the usual 25 in UEFA club competitions for the next three seasons, the statement added.
The French club had reached a settlement with UEFA last June after being investigated for not complying with break-even requirements set out in FFP guidelines.

"As a result of this decision, the settlement agreement from June 2019 is no longer in effect," UEFA said, adding that Marseille could appeal the decision to the Court of Arbitration for Sport.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Sat Jun 20, 2020 1:56 am

During the week Bayern sealed their 8th title on the bounce, but that may not be their biggest concern - @Marcotti for ESPN (starting to get a bit of deja-vu from the end of last season (though City haven't defend their title like many thought they would and Barcelona are being properly challenged by Real Madrid at the moment)

Bayern's eighth straight Bundesliga title is both incredible and a problem

Gabriele Marcotti - Senior Writer, ESPN FC - June 18, 2020

When it comes to underscoring Bayern Munich's dominance over German football, you can pick your poison. There's the fact that the Bundesliga was formed in 1963 and the Bavarians have won it more times (29) than every other German team combined. There's the fact that the Meisterschale they won Tuesday night is their eighth consecutive league title, and they won their previous seven by an average of 14.6 points. There's the fact that since the Bundesliga moved to three points for a win 25 years ago, Bayern have recorded seven of the eight highest points totals in history in each of the past seven seasons. (Assuming they win one of their final two games, they'll make it eight of nine.)

But perhaps the most remarkable fact is that they've dominated (again) despite so many things not going according to plan. For the second time in three years, they fired their manager in midseason, replacing him with an experienced assistant who hadn't actually been a No. 1 since 2005.

They suffered injuries in key roles: their record signing, Lucas Hernandez, made only nine league starts, and their second-most expensive signing, Corentin Tolisso, only seven. Niklas Sule, who was supposed to partner Hernandez, suffered a season-ending injury in October. Philippe Coutinho -- who is costing them close to $30 million a year in wages and loan fees and was supposed to play a critical role -- turned out to be a bust, lasting 90 minutes in a league game only twice since early October. And, until last month, their goalkeeper and captain, Manuel Neuer, was in contract limbo, refusing to extend his deal after they locked down his long-term replacement, Alexander Nubel.

And they still won the title with games to spare.

And before we hear the old cliche about the paucity of the competition, consider that RB Leipzig are Champions League quarterfinalists and Borussia Dortmund, who finished just two points back last season, invested heavily in the summer adding Julian Brandt, Thorgan Hazard and Mats Hummels, and doubling down in January with the arrival of Emre Can and Erling Haaland.

There are two ways to read this and, yes, both can be true.

The first is that Bayern's title is a prodigious feat because of the adversity the club had to overcome. Hindsight is 20/20 and we take things for granted, but think of the number of times we've heard about the importance of managerial stability, about avoiding injuries, about getting the big decisions right, about spending money wisely. Well, Bayern overcame all that, going on a prodigious tear that saw them take 52 of a possible 54 points since December. Credit manager Hansi Flick, credit the players, credit the strength and determination and winning culture of the club ... whatever you like. But please credit them, because winning when so much goes wrong -- whether it's your fault (Niko Kovac, Coutinho) or whether you're just unlucky (Sule, Tolisso, Hernandez) -- is something special.

But the other thing worth noting is that this is not normal. And, in fact, it hasn't been normal in the history of football until very, very recently.

European football isn't like U.S. pro sports. There's no pretense or expectation of a level playing field; there is an acceptance that some teams are bigger and better resourced and, therefore, will win more. And winning more creates a virtuous cycle in which they earn more money and buy better players and continue winning. Yet if a team goes through as much adversity -- both external and self-inflicted -- as Bayern went through this season, you reasonably expect a closer finish.

Not anymore -- and it's obviously not just a Bundesliga issue. Paris Saint-Germain have won seven of the past eight titles in France, while in Italy, Juventus are competing for their ninth in a row. Barcelona or Real Madrid have won La Liga in 14 of the past 15 seasons. Even in the Premier League, where the size of the TV deal means there are more wealthy clubs, only twice in the past five seasons has a "Big Six" team finished outside the top six.

If you've read this far, you've heard all this before. A combination of factors -- from globalization to the boom in commercial rights, from the growth of broadcast revenue to the Bosman rule -- have led to unprecedented polarization. And this has led to the scratching of heads and a search for fixes from salary caps and luxury taxes to super leagues. Heck, you can read my own modest proposal here.(+++ TRANSCRIBED IN THE NEXT POST+++)

A lot of this is based on two assumptions that come from opposite sides of the spectrum. One is that this is somehow morally and ethically unfair and damages the spirit of competition, which is at the heart of the concept of sport. The other is that there's a commercial imperative to make leagues exciting and hard fought, and that some semblance of parity is good for business: After all, a league where the same guys win year after year gets boring.

Both arguments have their merits, but both ignore the reality. At the risk of sounding cynical, the moral/ethical/sporting argument has little traction. The big clubs have a stranglehold on institutions at every level. From UEFA to the Premier League right down to Greece and Scotland, the big clubs dominate with the argument that they bring in most of the money so they ought to get the lion's share of the revenue. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy, of course, but nobody is going to point that out. Especially not now, as leagues are increasingly independent of federations.

As for the "bad for business" argument, the problem is simple: It hasn't been. Germany is a perfect example. Bundesliga revenue has nearly doubled since 2012, when the current period of Bavarian hegemony began. Attendance has remained constant. Empty seats are a rare sight ... obviously, before the pandemic.

Fans care about their teams and are willing to pay to see them. And while it necessarily doesn't mean they're happy with the lack of social mobility, it's not enough to keep them away.

There's another wrinkle here, one that strikes deep at the differences between U.S. sports and European football -- particularly the Bundesliga where, with a few exceptions, there is no single owner looking for a return on his investment. Sure, maybe the league could be more profitable with a different revenue-sharing model that gave more teams a chance to win. But when instead of an owner chasing profits, there are merely club boards whose sole goal is to reinvest everything in the club, there's less of an urgency to milk the cow. Breaking even is more than enough.

Obviously this isn't the case everywhere and there are owners who pay themselves dividends out of club profits (the Glazer family at Manchester United are the obvious example). Elsewhere, there are others who extract money from the club in less transparent (and sometimes less salubrious) ways. But generally, the imperative is the same: Owners make their money, if they make it, when they sell the club, through capital appreciation. And their immediate return -- a bit like the people who invest in thoroughbreds or America's Cup teams -- is through fame, networking and a seat at the table with other billionaire owners and private-equity guys.

The reality is that two of the main drivers for a more level playing field -- fans and owners -- simply aren't as strong in European football in general, but in the Bundesliga in particular. So we might as well get used to the idea of Bayern firing their manager, seeing three starters miss most of the season, spending lavishly on a superstar who turns out to be a dud and still winning the league by double digits.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Sat Jun 20, 2020 2:01 am

In that last article @Marcotti referred to this article for ESPN from January (roughly about the time @MiguelDelaney was doing his series of the mess the game was in)

Soccer continues to favor superclubs. If we can't redistribute wealth, why not the players?
Jan 17, 2020

Sometimes, it takes something bold to enact change. UEFA's annual benchmarking report, released this week, underscores what we already know. There's good news (financial stability) and not-so-good news: extreme polarization. And it's the latter that could use a fix.

Over the past decade, debt has fallen, revenue has increased tremendously and the game of soccer, as a whole, is profitable. I feel like I've written this a gazillion times, but when Financial Fair Play was introduced, European club football made aggregate losses of €1.67 billion ($1.86 billion). In the past two years, the European game as a whole has been profitable: It made €579m ($646m) in 2017 and €140m ($156m) in 2018. And no, the decline in profits isn't a concern because we're still in the black. You make more than you expected and so you reinvest that extra cash in your company, which, in football, generally means increasing wages.

Forget the snide remarks: FFP achieved what it set out to do. It made football a business you could invest in, that could stand on its own two legs and where clubs didn't continually go bust or default on debts. The value of assets held by clubs has grown nearly 60% since FFP; if you own or run a football club, generally speaking life is good or, at least, sustainable. And that's important.

On the flip side, we've seen a vast increase in polarization, the gap between rich and poor or, more accurately, the 1-percenters and everybody else. It exists both among clubs -- the top 30 clubs make nearly as much as the rest of the continent combined and the top 1% of clubs earn 20% of the club game's total revenue -- and among leagues, where the Big Five (England, Spain, Germany, Italy and France) account for 75% of the total.

The upshot of this is extreme polarization. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that the more revenue you get, the more you can spend on wages and the better the players you can attract. And that, in turn, translates into success on the pitch. I wrote about this and why it's not a good thing two years ago. If anything, the situation has gotten worse.

The same six clubs have finished in the top six spots in each of the past three years in England. In Spain, the last time someone other than Real Madrid, Barcelona or Atletico finished in the top three was back in 2012. Some leagues have more turnover among the top spots, but not at the very top: In Germany, Bayern have won seven in a row, Juventus have won eight in a row in Italy and Paris Saint-Germain six of the past seven in France.

Sure, you can mention Leicester City's Premier League exploits in 2016 or Ajax reaching the Champions League semifinal all you like, but the evidence is overwhelming. And unless something is done, in the long term we're only headed one way: the formation of a European Super League.

FFP often gets blamed for the extreme inequalities and because it limits outside investment from owners, generally forcing clubs to live within their means, it certainly hasn't helped. But it's a relatively minor, contributing factor. The real difference is the rise in the value of broadcasting revenue and commercial income, both of which have flowed mainly to the very top as the game became more globalized.

So what can you do to create a more level playing field?

Fans of U.S. sports will cite salary caps but simply put, they're unworkable (and probably) illegal in football. Luxury taxes might be more viable but again, you're relying on a deep-pocketed owners happy to make losses over time -- those are in short supply. What's more, you risk reintroducing some of the instability and pitfalls of the pre-FFP era.

A more equal revenue distribution is an option and would help; broadly speaking, football has already moved in that direction when it comes to leaguewide income, like broadcasting deals. However, broadcast income is a shrinking proportion of most clubs' revenues. The Premier League has had one of the most equitable TV deals for years and it has served English clubs well, but the gap between haves and have-nots has turned into an abyss. Unless you're willing to extend it to all revenues, including box-office and commercial, you're not going to have much of an impact. That would also be unworkable and, frankly, unfair: Why should Manchester United, for example, who've built their brand over decades, share revenue from a shirt deal with, say, newly promoted Sheffield United?

But what if, instead of working on redistributing revenues, we looked at redistributing the means of production, the players?

Right now, most top clubs will have more than 40-50 players under contract. Some will be youngsters, some will be on loan. What if we drastically cut that number? The players cut loose would end up back on the market and trickle down to the next tier of clubs that, presumably, would become more competitive. This knock-on effect would continue down the pyramid.

Many leagues already limit squad sizes and loan players. In the Premier League, you can't register more than 25 players, excluding Under-22s. What if that were cut radically to, say, 19?

Let's look at Liverpool's squad as an example. Take out the seven guys likely to contribute the least: Let's say Pedro Chirivella, Isaac Christie-Davies (he's on loan anyway, but bear with me), Nathaniel Clyne, Andy Lonergan, Dejan Lovren, and Adam Lallana. Those guys would be "cut" at the start of the season to meet the squad limit and if you wanted to bring in another guy in January, as they did with Takumi Minamino, then you'd need to cut somebody else loose. Bye bye, Xherdan Shaqiri. We're not talking about superstars, and the team as a whole wouldn't be much affected. But those seven players would trickle down to other clubs who would become more competitive as a result.

You can play the game for other clubs, too. Real Madrid would need to cut two guys, maybe Alvaro Odriozola and Mariano Diaz. Juventus might say arrivederci to Carlo Pinsoglio, Marko Pjaca, Emre Can and Daniele Rugani.

The other obvious upshot here is that younger players would become more valuable and clubs would be incentivised to develop them and keep them around because they don't count against the cap. Clubs who develop players would be rewarded in the long term.

You would obviously need some sort of mechanism to "cut" the player because if he signs a contract, he's entitled to his rights. So maybe you work out a deal where anybody can get cut in exchange for a full year's wages. You become a free agent and you get a year's salary. It's not a bad deal for a player and because you're a free agent, you suddenly become more affordable for other clubs because there's no transfer fee to pay and they don't have to match the big wages you were previously earning.

Would clubs go for it? Those who enjoy hoarding players would obviously be penalized and their managers would, of course, grumble about lack of options. But the reality is that everybody would be in the same boat and you wouldn't need to keep paying for dead weight on your wage bill. Sure, you'd need to be smarter when it comes to squad-planning, but costs would come down -- not just in terms of wages, but also in terms of transfer fees.

You would obviously need to find the right mechanisms in order to make such a plan work, too. Maybe 19 is too lax as an age; maybe we need to go down to 17 or even 16. Maybe it's not a year's salary to cut players; maybe six months is enough. Maybe exempt the U-21s or U-23s instead of U-22s. You'd also need greater transparency and oversight to prevent clubs (and, these days, superagents) from "parking" players at "friendly" smaller clubs.

You'd need a better-regulated loan system for players over the age of 22, like maybe limiting them to one per season. You'd then want to figure out some sort of medical exemption for players who suffer a long-term injury and, of course, you'd need a long transition period before you whittle things down to 19 senior pros.

But it's doable and it's desirable. Because the fact of the matter is that the 20th-most important senior player at Manchester City (John Stones?), or Tottenham (Eric Dier?) or Paris Saint-Germain (Edinson Cavani?) may well move the needle the next tier down. Or, alternatively, we just sit and do nothing, waiting for the Overton window to further shift to the point where we think what is going on today across Europe is entirely normal. But trust me: that will get really, really boring in the long run and leave us screaming out for that closed Super League, which nobody says they want.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Sat Jun 20, 2020 2:35 am

Chester Perry wrote:
Sat Jun 20, 2020 12:57 am
Seems like my thoughts are shared - but clubs, still in Europe are wanting a delayed start to the Premier League to help them cope with the overload of matches

https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... gue-europa
and there is talk of the 7 Premier League clubs that qualify for UEFA tournaments not taking part in the League cup next season because of the fixture congestion, even though taking part with a competitive is one of the 3 written agreements that were made at the formation of the Premier League (along with the PFA charity payment and the FA's insistence on promotion and relegation) - there are hints that the EFL is going to us their agreement as leverage for a £250m rescue package from the Premier League, though I fail to see how that could be possible given the Premier Leagues own losses

https://www.90min.com/posts/top-7-premi ... re-pile-up

I must say that you begin to think that with all these regulation changes setting precedents, that Andrea Agnelli himself might have devised the pandemic given that it has taken the game so far down the path he wants it to both contemplate and accept. - there are hints that the EFL is going to us their agreement as leverage for a rescue package from the Premier League

Royboyclaret
Posts: 3891
Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 12:57 pm
Been Liked: 1282 times
Has Liked: 681 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Royboyclaret » Sat Jun 20, 2020 10:16 am

Chester Perry wrote:
Sat Jun 20, 2020 1:06 am
Roy I may now have some answers on that for 2018/19

PFA Charity got 5% of the total domestic pot - which is £90m
Solidarity Payments totalled £106.3m
Parachute Payments totalled £265m

which is a grand sum of £461.3m the remainder looks a more reasonable cost of Premier League operations

Famously, we are told that the Premier League don't give anything away but they have given over a £billion away in each of the last 2 cycles and are on course to do the same again in this cycle.

Remember in the early days of the Premier League the EFL turned down a deal that would have seen them get 20% of the domestic deal (this was before Parachute Payments were invented, such a deal would have prevented them from being introduced) but they turned it down, it involved the Premier League negotiating their TV deal too, though you could never imagine the big clubs being willing to do such a thing now.

The PFA were clever enough to get their deal in writing back in 1992 and have refused to change it since, despite repeated efforts by the Premier League.
Cheers for that, Chester, very poor on my part. Clearly should have factored in both Parachute payments and Solidarity payments to the distribution. Even so the magnitude of particularly the Parachute payment has surprised me, but on closer inspection it seems no fewer than eight clubs benefited from such payments in 2018/19.

Unusually it appears that figure might actually reduce in the 2019/20 distribution as both Hull City and Middlesbrough drop out of the loop.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Sat Jun 20, 2020 2:24 pm

Royboyclaret wrote:
Sat Jun 20, 2020 10:16 am
Cheers for that, Chester, very poor on my part. Clearly should have factored in both Parachute payments and Solidarity payments to the distribution. Even so the magnitude of particularly the Parachute payment has surprised me, but on closer inspection it seems no fewer than eight clubs benefited from such payments in 2018/19.

Unusually it appears that figure might actually reduce in the 2019/20 distribution as both Hull City and Middlesbrough drop out of the loop.
In fact the Premier League claims that it gave the EFL more than £140m in Solidarity and ringfenced youth development grants

so that would suggest a loss making 2018/19

https://www.premierleague.com/news/1225126

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Sun Jun 21, 2020 4:02 pm

Are the Saudi's finally going to make a stand against Piracy - is this to do with Newcastle or the much wider sports business investment that I have posted about recently - from the Mail

Newcastle's £300m takeover 'receives a boost as Saudi Arabia vows to launch crackdown on TV piracy of major sporting events'
- The WTO slammed Saudi Arabia this week for helping to breach piracy laws
- The Government were urged to intervene in the £300m takeover of Newcastle
- But the Saudis now appear to have launched a crackdown on television piracy
- Broadcaste beoutQ allegedly illegally broadcasts Premier League matches
By KISHAN VAGHELA FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 13:31, 21 June 2020 | UPDATED: 15:34, 21 June 2020

The £300million Saudi-led takeover of Newcastle United has moved a step closer to completion after the Kingdom vowed to crack down on piracy, according to reports.

The World Trade Organisation slammed the Saudis after ruling earlier this week that they had helped to breach international piracy laws by supporting broadcaster beoutQ - which allegedly illegally broadcasts the Premier League as well as other ripped off content from UEFA, FIFA, La Liga and Wimbledon.

The UK Government had been urged to intervene and block the Saudi-led takeover unless the Kingdom adhered to international law on TV piracy, with the chair of the International Trade Select Committee Angus MacNeil having written to trade secretary Liz Truss in the wake of the WTO report.

But The Mirror report that in a seemingly significant development, the Official Saudi Authority for Intellectual Property has announced it will take action to shut down the websites involved.

A statement read: 'Within the framework of the Kingdom's efforts to reduce violations of the right... we aim to block 231 websites that violate intellectual property regimes, with a view to shutting them down.

'Those violating sites included a group of violations, which are sites that download and watch movies and series without obtaining a prior authorisation from the right holder, direct broadcast sites for encrypted sports channels without obtaining a prior license from the right owner... and the sites selling subscriptions and servers of TV channels encoded through IPTV.

'The commission emphasised that these practices violate the copyright protection system and entail financial penalties and fines that may amount to 250,000 Saudi riyals, the closure of the violating site or the cancellation of the commercial license, and in some cases it amounts to imprisonment for a period not exceeding six months or defamation at the account of the infringer and removing the infringement.'

It could represent a watershed moment, given that it represents the first action that the Saudis have taken to acknowledge the problem in their nation.

The news will interest those involved in the Premier League's owners and directors test who have been charged with approving the Public Investment Fund's bid to buy 80 per cent of the Tyneside club.

The Premier League were reportedly blocked from taking the Saudi piracy problem to court in the Kingdom nine times.

This move could be crucial in a bid to solve the huge legal block to the takeover, but perhaps only if the Premier League believe the crackdown will yield genuine results.

The Premier League also face another problem in approving the Newcastle takeover – brokered by Amanda Staveley – having seen their Middle East and North Africa broadcast deal, held by Qatar based beIN sports, devalued by piracy in Saudi.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Of course Amanda Staveley - who is supposed to be the active boardroom partner in the Newcastle takeover may soon find that she finds it difficult to negotiate the Owners and Directors Test as a result of the Barclays hearing

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Sun Jun 21, 2020 5:37 pm

Interesting comments from the Cardiff chairman yesterday with regards to the number of Championship clubs that are up for sale at giveaway prices - from the Mirror

Cardiff City chairman fears a third of Championship clubs could be sold for £1
Mehmet Dalman says Leeds United will have 'serious restructuring to do' if they don't win Premier League promotion - and fears some clubs may have to sell up or go bust
ByJohn CrossChief Football Writer
07:19, 20 JUN 2020UPDATED08:29, 20 JUN 2020

Cardiff City chairman Mehmet Dalman believes nearly a third of Championship owners would sell up for £1 because of the coronavirus crisis.

Dalman believes the situation will only get worse for English football’s second tier because of mounting debts. He says they cannot sustain their huge spending and some face the prospect of going out of business.

It is a grim prediction from Dalman who has also warned it will be promotion or bust this season for Cardiff ’s next opponents Leeds, who are pinning all their hopes on getting into the Premier League.

Former investment banker Dalman, who helped broker the Glazers’ takeover of Manchester United, said: “I have spoken to seven clubs in the Championship who would be quite happy to sell up for £1.

"They’ve just run out. You can’t live with the cost base that’s coming.

“What’s going to happen to the game when you have a second wave of this virus? It’s not as if we will play out the season, get to August and all will be well. It won’t be.

“I’m really concerned about the game. Clubs have realised it will not be sustainable in the long term, they are looking at double digit losses, mid-table or fighting against relegation for two or three years.

"Every year losing £10m isn’t very appealing.

“It will be a travesty if Leeds don’t get the opportunity to go up. They’ve deserved it. They’ve made a huge investment, they’re almost there and if we suddenly stop then that’s unfair.

"But if they don’t go up then they will have some serious financial restructuring to do."

He added: “Clubs are bleeding, particularly in the Championship. I think the decision to finish the season is right. We can’t put so much work and effort in and then be denied the chance of promotion - ourselves included because we’re two points off the play-offs.

“But I think there needs to be a reset - and my fear is there won’t be. People will try to ignore it and go back to normality. But the reality is you won’t be able to do that or the damage at these Championship clubs will be irreversible.

“Clubs will have to bring in more capital, they will have to sell or they will fold. It’s one of those three things.”

Dalman has been at Cardiff for nearly seven years, and has overseen incredible change during his tenure as they have gone up and been relegated from the Premier League and are now still in with a shout of the play-offs.

The former Crystal Palace triallist, who became an elite investment banker, knows the game inside out but also has a passion for football which means that, while Cardiff is run responsibly, he fears for other clubs and their financial futures without any support from the Premier League.

Dalman added: “Outside of the Premier League, nothing gets filtered down. They are sitting on £1.5billion cash and yet how much of that money goes into the Championship, League One and Two?

“Why is the Premier League so exciting? It’s because we have promotion and relegation to and from the Championship, so of course the EFL plays a part. We need a healthy league.

“Everyone has got to go from chasing rainbows in the Championship, trying to get into the Premier League to producing your own players through the academy, selling them to survive and following the French model to be creative rather than spending tonnes of money to get promoted.

“Someone asked me: ‘What sort of budget will Cardiff have for this summer’s window?’ I actually think the question should be: ‘How many players are we going to let go?’ Football is going through its worst crisis, certainly since the Second World War.

“But I don’t believe we will learn the lesson from the current crisis and predicament that we are in. That’s the really sad part.”

tiger76
Posts: 25697
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 9:43 pm
Been Liked: 4644 times
Has Liked: 9849 times
Location: Glasgow

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by tiger76 » Sun Jun 21, 2020 5:44 pm

Heart of Midlothian and Partick Thistle have nothing to lose by legally challenging their relegation, a sports lawyer has told BBC Radio Scotland, but he thinks their chances are no more than 50-50.

The Scottish FA has written to both clubs to ask why they filed a petition at the Court of Session this week.

The two clubs are unhappy at being relegated from their respective Scottish Professional Football League divisions after the Covid-19 pandemic ended last season.

Former St Mirren defender David Winnie, now head of sports law at a London firm, says the £10m compensation claim of the duo is "conservative".

"I can fully understand why they are going down this route," he said.

"They have nothing to lose. The option of doing nothing means they would lose millions. Have they got a real chance? I would put it no more than 50/50."

In the petition, the clubs asked for a judge to scrap promotions and relegations throughout all four of Scotland's divisions.

That sparked a robust response from Dundee United, Raith Rovers and Cove Rangers, who would stay down despite being named champions.

Hearts and Thistle have said they "reserve the right" to apply for an interim interdict to prevent the Premiership season starting.

However, Winnie says that would be "a risky strategy" and that he would be "very surprised" if a judge determined that the league should not begin on 1 August.

The SPFL have until Tuesday to respond and Hearts and Thistle have asked for an expedited hearing.

The court will either decree they have jurisdiction to adjudicate or will decide it is a matter for the SPFL.

Winnie, who also played briefly for Hearts in the mid-1990s, says a settlement agreement to avoid a court case seems unlikely.

It has been reported Hearts and Thistle may be in breach of Article 99 of the Scottish FA's Articles of Association.

The legal opinion received by the clubs is that they have not breached that rule, as their main dispute is with the SPFL. However, that remains open to interpretation.

No deadline has been set for the duo to reply to the letters, which will also ask why they have chosen not to ask the governing body to arbitrate.

However, depending on their response to the compliance officer, Hearts and Thistle could be issues notices of complaint and face a judicial panel charge.

I'm no legal expert, but this has the potential to get very messy for the Scottish game. Why the clubs up here don't wish to restructure the leagues baffles me, that would seem to be the obvious answer to these grievances.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Sun Jun 21, 2020 5:46 pm

great contributions on this tiger

with regard to the reluctance for change is it because 8 teams would be playing in the mini league for relegation rather than 6 and/or with more teams in the leagues the central distributions would be smaller for many

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Sun Jun 21, 2020 5:58 pm

Anyone able to transcribe this article from the Athletic - ‘The casino mentality has to stop’ – why the Championship has changed for good

https://theathletic.com/1875381/2020/06 ... ed_article

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Sun Jun 21, 2020 6:16 pm

Saudi are really moving forward with this idea of combating piracy - Now the Saudi FA is involved on the fight

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53121184

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Sun Jun 21, 2020 6:59 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Fri Jun 19, 2020 2:11 pm

Now the battle is on to preserve the value of next season's rights, being forced to air all behind closed door games will not do that, but the government seems to want it - for now at least - though I suspect they may get counter pressure from non sports broadcasters who will say the tv market is being distorted and causing them a drop in viewers - the battle is afoot though - From the Mail

EXCLUSIVE: The Government demand that EVERY Premier League match next season is televised until fans are back into stadiums, sparking a TV row as Sky and BT fear their £5bn contracts will be devalued
- The Premier League are on collision course with broadcasters Sky and BT Sport
- Government demanded every match next season be on TV until fans can return
- Both Sky and BT agreed reluctantly to the televising of every match this season
By Matt Hughes For The Daily Mail
Published: 22:31, 18 June 2020 | Updated: 13:05, 19 June 2020
I am sure people will not know what to make of last night's viewing fugure's for Match of the Day Live - from the Mail

Peak TV audience of 3.9m tune in for BBC's first-ever Premier League match... but Crystal Palace's win over Bournemouth is short of 4.04m record held by Manchester derby in 2012
The BBC 's first-ever Premier League game attracted a peak audience of 3.9m
BBC One broadcast Crystal Palace's 2-0 victory over Bournemouth on Saturday
But their viewings figures fell just short of the Manchester derby's 2012 record
The BBC will broadcast three more Premier League games during Project Restart
By MAX WINTERS FOR MAILONLINE

PUBLISHED: 10:14, 21 June 2020 | UPDATED: 13:22, 21 June 2020

The BBC's first-ever Premier League game attracted a peak TV audience of 3.9million viewers on Saturday.

BBC One's broadcast of Bournemouth's defeat by Crystal Palace was the first top-flight match the Beeb have shown live since 1988.

A record TV audience had been expected to tune in to watch the action from the Vitality Stadium but the figure fell just sort of the 4.04million who watched the Manchester derby in 2012.

The audience of 3.9m was a 24.5 per cent share of Saturday night's TV audience and the match brought in an average viewership of 3.6m.

It is thought those figures do not yet include the BBC's iPlayer service so it could yet still rise.

The return of Premier League football also ensured Match of the Day was back in its traditional Saturday night BBC One slot. The highlights show pulled in a peak TV audience of 2.7m.

Goals from Luka Milivojevic and Jordan Ayew helped Roy Hodgson's Palace side move into the top half of the table while another defeat worsened Bournemouth's chances of staying in the Premier League.

As part of the UK Government’s demand for a third of the remaining top-flight games to be shown free-to-air, the BBC will broadcast three other matches.

They will include Norwich against Everton on Wednesday, Manchester City's visit to Southampton on July 5 and one other, as yet undecided, match.

It comes after Manchester City's comfortable win over Arsenal on Wednesday night was the most-watched Premier League fixture in almost three-and-a-half years.

With football fans starved of top-flight action for over three months because of the coronavirus shutdown, viewers tuned in in big numbers to see Pep Guardiola's men dent the Gunners' hopes of a top-four finish.

In total, 2.6m people watched Sky Sports' coverage as Raheem Sterling, Kevin De Bruyne and Phil Foden struck against the visitors, who had substitute David Luiz sent off during the second half.

Bournemouth vs Crystal Palace clearly surpassed that number but was still just short of the 2012 Manchester derby at the Etihad Stadium.

Vincent Kompany scored the winner that night, which helped City go on to claim their first Premier League title.

Royboyclaret
Posts: 3891
Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 12:57 pm
Been Liked: 1282 times
Has Liked: 681 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Royboyclaret » Sun Jun 21, 2020 7:13 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Sun Jun 21, 2020 5:58 pm
Anyone able to transcribe this article from the Athletic - ‘The casino mentality has to stop’ – why the Championship has changed for good

https://theathletic.com/1875381/2020/06 ... ed_article

Unable to help there, Chester, but suspect the Athletic article will be very much a replica of the message from the Cardiff Chairman Mehmet Dalman higher up the page. Dalman's comments should be compulsory reading for anyone with a financial interest in our great game and his reference to a reset for the EFL and a new "normal" after the virus are particularly relevant.

No doubt, like me, you will have picked up on this specific point he made......."Outside of the Premier League, nothing gets filtered down. They are sitting on £1.5billion cash and yet how much of that money goes into the Championship, League One and Two?"........Quite how that reconciles with our various posts yesterday on parachute and solidarity payments and just how much remains in the Premier League pot after distributions are complete, I'm not too sure.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Sun Jun 21, 2020 7:19 pm

Royboyclaret wrote:
Sun Jun 21, 2020 7:13 pm
Unable to help there, Chester, but suspect the Athletic article will be very much a replica of the message from the Cardiff Chairman Mehmet Dalman higher up the page. Dalman's comments should be compulsory reading for anyone with a financial interest in our great game and his reference to a reset for the EFL and a new "normal" after the virus are particularly relevant.

No doubt, like me, you will have picked up on this specific point he made......."Outside of the Premier League, nothing gets filtered down. They are sitting on £1.5billion cash and yet how much of that money goes into the Championship, League One and Two?"........Quite how that reconciles with our various posts yesterday on parachute and solidarity payments and just how much remains in the Premier League pot after distributions are complete, I'm not too sure.
solidarity payments work out around £3.7m a club in the Championship (which is not too different to Sean Dyche's reported wage) - Cardiff of course are on parachute payments

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Sun Jun 21, 2020 7:28 pm

An interesting if long and complex read, available for free - Academic Paper - Football Worlds: business and networks during COVID-19

ABSTRACT
The structure of football can also be conceived as a form of ecosystem, or even a social world, constructed through a network of individuals, within a division of labour, that interact under a set of specific conventions. In this commentary we describe that socially constructed world – Football World. The nature of this structural world makes network theory an appealing framework to explore processes of the football ecosystem during COVID-19. While we focus on the English Premier League, notably this league is embedded within a European and international marketplace it offers relevance for the broader global football ecosystem. We proceed to explore this dynamic Football World by considering how the different collective forms – specifically fans, players and clubs – have been affected by COVID-19. We comment on the potential implications for the connective fabric of the broader network and what these observations mean for potential future research.

Full paper https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10 ... 8A.twitter

Royboyclaret
Posts: 3891
Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 12:57 pm
Been Liked: 1282 times
Has Liked: 681 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Royboyclaret » Sun Jun 21, 2020 7:36 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Sun Jun 21, 2020 7:19 pm
solidarity payments work out around £3.7m a club in the Championship (which is not too different to Sean Dyche's reported wage) - Cardiff of course are on parachute payments
Aye, he failed to mention that Cardiff will receive an estimated £42.6million in first year parachute payments.

I believe the solidarity payments were as high as £4.65million in the Championship per team for 2018/19 and League One & Two £700k and £470k respectively. Think those figures will equate to your total of £106.3m.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Sun Jun 21, 2020 7:43 pm

Royboyclaret wrote:
Sun Jun 21, 2020 7:36 pm
Aye, he failed to mention that Cardiff will receive an estimated £42.6million in first year parachute payments.

I believe the solidarity payments were as high as £4.65million in the Championship per team for 2018/19 and League One & Two £700k and £470k respectively. Think those figures will equate to your total of £106.3m.
They will be less this year as they are calculated from the equal share distributions in the Premier League (and that was before the rebates) I posted about that last summer

Chester Perry
Posts: 19392
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3157 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Sun Jun 21, 2020 7:46 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Sun Jun 21, 2020 6:16 pm
Saudi are really moving forward with this idea of combating piracy - Now the Saudi FA is involved on the fight - the Italian FA has not been very supportive in the fight against Piracy as well as getting friendly with the Saudi's

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53121184
BeIN took an interesting move with the return of Italian football last night - from Bloomberg .com

Qatari Broadcaster Lets Screens Go Blank on Italian Soccer
By David Hellier
20 June 2020, 21:40 BST Updated on 21 June 2020, 01:37 BST

Qatari broadcaster BeIn normally shows top-tier Italian soccer matches in 35 countries but on Saturday night, anyone tuning in to watch Torino take on Parma in Serie A’s return would have been disappointed.

“No Serie A matches are being broadcast on Bein Sports’ entire global network,” a company spokesman said. “It would not be appropriate to comment further, other than to say our legal and public position has been consistent and well-documented for three years.”

In France, viewers were treated instead to a match between Turkey’s Denizlispor and Besiktas. And a late-night trawl through BeIn’s website for all of Saturday’s results suggested there weren’t any games played in Italy -- just England, Spain, France and Germany. For the record, Torino and Parma drew 1-1.

BeIn paid $500 million to broadcast Italian soccer from 2018-21, an agreement that has been beset by snags. It claims strong backing from competitions including England’s Premier League, Spain’s La Liga and the Wimbledon tennis championships, as part of a long-running campaign against its sports rights being pirated in Saudi Arabia.

The company recently wrote to Premier League clubs to warn them against agreeing to a takeover deal with a Saudi-led consortium for Newcastle United. The Premier League board is currently deciding on whether to allow the deal to go through.

BeIn’s particular grievance with Serie A reached a tipping point when the league decided to play some exhibition matches in Saudi Arabia despite the broadcaster urging it not to. The league argued that it had signed a contract that was difficult to get out of.

The Italian league, which is said to be in discussions with private equity groups over refinancing, is the home to Cristiano Ronaldo of Juventus. Serie A couldn’t immediately comment on the broadcast blackout.

— With assistance by Geraldine Amiel

Post Reply