Football's Magic Money Tree

[Chester Perry]

After last nights Europa League Final @SwissRamble is able to give is final estimate of Revenues from the competition for Chelsea and Arsenal this season

https://twitter.com/SwissRamble/status/ ... 8277295105" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

After last nights Europa League Final @SwissRamble is in a position to estimate all UEFA payments for Chelsea, Arsenal and Burnley

https://twitter.com/SwissRamble/status/ ... 8277295105" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

I have been hit by the free article limit again - this time at The Blizzard (3 a month) - It is a really good periodical and writes deep and informative pieces - this one looks particularly interesting - if anyone is willing to transcribe

https://twitter.com/blzzrd/status/1133689201759850497" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Falcon]

Blizzard Article transcribed here for you:

Sepp Blatter

The president of Fifa admits he may stand for re-election in 2015 and reveals concerns over the Qatar World Cup

By Philippe Auclair
1st March 2013


We're in the small hours of the morning in one of Moscow's better hotels, late in the autumn of 2010. A few journalists are sharing gossip around a bottle of Chablis, of which the bar's wine list offers a bewildering selection. All of us have been invited to see at first hand how Russia is coiling the spring in its bid to host the 2018 World Cup. Fifa's decision will be made public in a few weeks' time. 'Made public', not 'made', as it's quite clear to all those who follow these sorts of things closely that a significant majority of the 22 remaining ExCo members (Amos Adamu and Reynald Temarii, both of them suspected of corruption, had been suspended in November) are keen on the Russians. And the Qataris. Quite naturally the conversation drifts to the stories which shroud the process in a smog of allegations, about which most of the bidding nations seem quite happy to give 'private briefings'. No-one's found the smoking gun yet, but everybody's convinced it's been fired a few times. Quite naturally, the name of Sepp Blatter is mentioned time and again. The septuagenarian Blatter, the supreme football politician of our age, must be pulling the strings. But if there are strings to pull, they're of the kind that enabled Christopher Reeve to fly like Superman in those old pre-CGI movies. You just know the special effects squad must have used something but the editor's done a brilliant job. Superman's revving the planet faster than Sputnik, with no strings attached.

"One thing people forget, or fail to get," one of our group says, "is that, at heart, Blatter is a romantic." The natural response might be to laugh. Isn't it agreed that Joseph S Blatter is a bad thing? But we're all listening, as the man who's speaking knows him better than most — certainly better than any of us. He's worked with Blatter for over a decade; he's been party to discussions that we'd all have loved to witness and write about; we also know him to be trustworthy and sincere; he didn't ask for water when the second bottle was brought to our table. Blatter-bashers would struggle to understand how he could have served such a master for so long without becoming tainted himself. But he did, within Fifa, and wasn't. So Sepp is "a romantic", really? Our friend wasn't referring to Blatter's tenure as the President of The World Sociey of the Friends of Suspenders, a position he was elected to in 1973. The story of how the amateur Swiss footballer from Visp and one-time general secretary of the Swiss Ice Hockey Federation placed himself in the wake of João Havelange, climbed up the Fifa ladder and became the ruler of that empire in June 1998, gazumping Lennart Johansson in the process, is well-known and, at first glance, anything but 'romantic'.

But let's take a step back. Joseph Blatter joined the Fifa 'family' in 1975, as the organisation's Technical Director, becoming its General Secretary six years later. Fifa was near-bankrupt in the 1970s. Attendances were falling in almost every single domestic and international competition. Is football a better game to watch now that it was then? The change to Law 12 — a change of which Blatter had been a vocal advocate — banning keepers from handling a back-pass, was met with scepticism when it was introduced in 1992 by the International Board. Few would now question that it had a hugely positive impact on the game, perhaps more than any other such change since the 1925 modification of the offside law. Dangerous tackles from behind were made red card offences in 1998. Again, Blatter had pleaded in favour of a measure that many believed unenforceable or even detrimental to the game. They were wrong. Africa has staged a World Cup. Women's football has developed to an extent that was unthinkable when its first World Cup was held in 1991 in China. Fifa's coffers are bursting with cash — over £740m — which, no matter how questionable the manner in which these millions have been harvested and might have been misused by certain individuals, help finance thousands of grass-root schemes throughout the organisation's 209 associations. Football is objectively healthier now that it was when "the man who has fifty ideas a day, fifty-one of them bad", according to a German wit, decided to throw in his lot with the now-discredited Havelange.

So, yes, perhaps the arch-manoeuverer, the political virtuoso who is always one step ahead of his adversaries, is also a 'romantic', if only for his capacity to turn the conviction that he is acting for the good of the game into a formidable weapon in the fight to gain and hold onto power. Those who dismiss Blatter as an out-of-touch, quasi-senile buffoon because of his suggestions that women footballers should wear "tighter shorts" (January 2004) and gay fans "should refrain from sexual activity" when they attend the 2022 World Cup in Qatar (January 20101) make a mistake that has proven fatal to many of his former rivals: they underestimate him. Meeting the Fifa president face-to-face for the first time, as I did for this interview, conducted on the occasion of the International Football Arena in Zurich2, I was struck — as many others before me have been — by the agility of his mind, his personal charm and his ability to suggest one thing while saying quite another. As is the rule on such occasions, a list of topics (Brazil 2014, Qatar 2022, financial fair-play) had been agreed upon before I could be led into the inner sanctum of Fifa's headquarters, which can only be accessed once your guide's fingerprints have been scanned by a laser beam. Joseph Blatter, the romantic schemer, the man who put chips into footballs, is clearly in favour of cutting-edge technology.


Mr President, Brazil 2014 is now a year and a half away and there are still many doubts as to whether the country will be ready to welcome the World Cup...

...and we'll have had the Confederations Cup by then.

...Do you share any of these doubts?

Listen, as in every process of organising a World Cup which I have lived through for a number of years, there are always delays in the building work. But, ultimately, all the games take place. So, in my case, it is not necessary to be pessimistic and say, "They won't be able to do it." If Brazil, the sixth largest economic power in the world, with its 200 million inhabitants, a footballing nation par excellence, were unable to deliver a World Cup... they'll do it. Yes, there are delays, there's a bit of this, a bit of that. But you've got to say that the political organisation of Brazil plays a role in this. You've got a central government, but this central government has delegated the mission to organise this World Cup to the governors of the various provinces, and within those provinces, you've got the cities, and, naturally, politically speaking, the system isn't the same everywhere, which creates interferences and delays from time to time. I assure you, in the end, everything will be fine even if, as I have seen it with my own eyes before — in Portugal, at the 2004 Euro — you've still got to apply a lick of paint on the opening day of the competition.

The difference, this time, is that there are a number of important, powerful people within Brazil who are openly critical of the whole process, especially as far as the financing is concerned, people who think this money would be better used in other fields. Can this not have an adverse effect on what is happening there?

I am in regular touch with the Brazilian president Dilma Rousseff. She delegated all her powers [in this matter] to her sports minister, Mr Aldo Rebelo. We at Fifa have asked our general secretary Jérôme Valcke and his staff to take care of all the administrative details. Now, as you know, Brazil is going through a very dynamic phase of economic development... and social development too. When you've got a big event like [the World Cup], people say, "Yes, football's fantastic," but others add, "We've also got another big event to take care of!" The Olympic Games, of course. They take place in a single city, of course, but they affect the country as a whole. Brazil "saw big." And Brazil has to digest it.

Didn't Brazil see too big?

I don't think so. It's a great country. I'm certain Brazil will be able to deliver a great World Cup. You'll see. As soon as we play the Confederations Cup there [from 15 to 30 June 2013], things are going to move, things are going to get hot! Not like in other countries where football isn't anchored as deeply as it is there in the people. Everyone's a footballer in Brazil. We're going back to the essence of football. Of course, the English will tell you (adopting a mock British accent), "We are the country of Association Football," but Brazil hasn't won five World Cups by chance. They last had a chance to organise it in 1950. Three generations ago. It is only fair that they get a chance to do it again. Brazil will deliver.

Going beyond 2014 and looking ahead to 2022, we've recently heard a number of officials — your Fifa vice-president Michel Platini among others — recommending that the Qatar World Cup should be held in winter, more precisely in November and December 2022, in order not to clash with the Winter Olympics. Are you open to this switch? Would you be in favour of it?

The World Cup is going round the world. We'll be in Russia in 2018, as no eastern European country has ever hosted a World Cup, and the last major global event to take place there was the 1980 Olympics. Then Qatar. Good. The basic conditions — not just for Qatar, but for all the candidates — were the same. It means that the Fifa World Cup is played in June and July. That's the basic condition. And it is on this basic condition that the Executive Committee took the decision to give the 2022 World Cup to Qatar. Now, naturally, a bit late perhaps, we realise... we already knew that it gets very hot in Qatar at this time of the year. The other candidates had battled for their bids on the basis of a World Cup that would be played in June and July. Now, who can change that? Firstly, it is not us, Fifa, who are going to take the initiative to do so, even if eminent... or important members of our Executive Committee3 have expressed themselves [in favour of a winter World Cup]. The basis remains the same: June, July. If someone wants to change that, the request must come from Qatar. Qatar should present a request to Fifa — which Qatar hasn't done yet. No discussion has been held. Voilà. And if you changed something, what would the reaction of the other candidates be? They'd say, "If the basic condition is changed, what's going on, what's happening now?" That's one thing. The other thing is the international schedule — even though, with all parties in agreement, an international schedule can be changed.

Some leagues are completely opposed to this, however. Wouldn't that create a political storm? Wouldn't that be detrimental to football?

I can tell you that Qatar hasn't finished being a subject of preoccupation in the football world.

Should Qatar 2022's Supreme Committee turn to you and say, "Mr Blatter, we've gone deeper into air-cooling technologies, and we really think it'd be better if the tournament was played in November and December," would these words find a sympathetic ear — or would you tell them, "Perhaps it'd be better to reconsider the bid from A to Z?" What would Australia say, or the USA?

Or Japan, or Korea! Listen. If I had to govern the football world with 'ifs'...[laughs] In any case, I cannot give a personal answer. I have to abide by the decisions that have been made by Fifa. It is my duty, my responsibility and my right to defend Fifa's principles. And one of these principles was: June, July.

In what respect would a summer World Cup in Qatar represent a step forward for football?

The important thing for me was that the World Cup should travel round the world. I remember how, when South Africa was chosen to host the 2010 World Cup, I had told the crown prince of Saudi Arabia — who was a passionate supporter of Morocco — that, for me, Africa lies south, not north of the Sahara. He replied, "Mr President, I invite you to think, one day, about the Arab world, and give it the World Cup." That is the case with Qatar. It is the realisation of what I'd said in June 1998, when I was elected president of Fifa. I'd been asked, "What is your programme?" and I'd said, "To give the World Cup to Africa and to go round the world with the competition," so that it wouldn't remain the privilege of Europe and the Americas. We're now facing a problem. But perhaps it's a false problem and the technology [to cool stadiums] will be there in 2022. As Fifa president, I repeat: June, July.

Wouldn't the Americans, the Australians, the Japanese and the Koreans turn against Fifa if it was decided to switch the tournament to winter? Wouldn't that be a plain breach of tender?

In any case, it wouldn't improve Fifa's reputation, I can tell you that.

...which Fifa could do without — which leads me to the question: now that a new Ethics Committee has been named, are you satisfied with the progress that's been made in terms of governance?

We're in the last bend before the last straight. We initiated the reform in 2011 and we have a road map that leads to the 2013 congress [which will be held in Mauritius from 30 May]. The Ethics Committee now consists of two entities, each of which has a completely independent chairman. That's done. What's left to do is to elect the members of the tribunals, which we'll do at this Congress. We'll do the same thing for the Disciplinary and Appeals Committees, in order to have complete separation of powers within Fifa. Second, the Audit and Control Committee, which is an internal FIFA organisation — but with an independently-chosen president — has been set up. Third, there are the statutory changes, which we're now in the process of identifying in consultation with the national associations. We'll have their feedback in February, their answer to questions like: "Should the ExCo be chosen by the Fifa congress, or by the confederations? Should there be an age limit? Should there be a limit to the number of terms that can be served?" All of this is supervised by the Independent Governance Committee which is presided over by Dr Mark Pieth, whose work will be concluded in 2013. This means that we now have safeguards in place — off the pitch. But that's not enough. Fifa, that's 300 million people. You can't have a single tribunal for 300 million people. It only means something if it goes down to the 209 national associations and the six confederations. The system can only work that way. At Fifa level, on 1 June, it'll be done. And then we'll get on with the electoral campaign for 2015 [laughs]. I'll be able to say, "My Fifa is now in calm waters, I can leave the boat in two years' time."

Are you really counting yourself out for the 2015 election?

[Pause]

You're in very good health, you...

...Listen...[laughs]

Never say never?

Never say never again? Well, there'll be candidates. I'm sure of that. I'll have been at Fifa for 38 years in February. We've created a Fifa that is about democracy — all the associations have one vote, the small ones like the big ones — and solidarity. The World Cup must remain the number one competition, because it is our only source of money and, with that money, we can develop football in the whole world. It's been accepted now. But there is now a trend, by which clubs think that they're more important than the rest of the world, than the national teams... but that's not true. Ask any citizen of any country how important he thinks his national team is. Solidarity between clubs and national teams is essential. Fifa stands for discipline, respect, fair-play, not just on the field of play, but in our society as well.

As you mention fair-play, how do you view the 'Platini reform' and the introduction of FFP by Uefa? Could the regulations that are phased in in Europe serve as a model for other confederations, in Asia, for example, where the problem of 'financial doping' is just as acute as it is in Uefa countries?

I must say that, within Fifa, financial fair-play is already safeguarded by our Audit and Control Committee. Each [national] association must exert that control. I'd say that the phrase "financial fair-play" has a pleasant ring to it... but I don't know if there's fair-play in financial matters. In financial matters, it's about the bottom line, profit and loss. Simply call it "audit and control", and you've got it. For the whole world. And it might be a bit simpler to say, audit and control, rather than [respect] fair-play. In "fair-play", there is the word "play". And you shouldn't play with finances. Those who do are gamblers.

When you see what's happening at PSG, and sovereign funds — Qatar, in this case — which are willing to commit unbelievable amounts of money to football, how do you react as a football man and as president of Fifa? Can it work?

As long as you've got serious investors who wish to put money into football, I applaud. It proves that football is attractive. What upsets me, what I find scandalous is when clubs accept fools. We've seen that in England with Portsmouth, we've also seen that in Switzerland. Three clubs have fallen into that trap and succumbed, Neuchâtel-Xamax among them4, of which I am still the honorary president. But as long as you've got investors who are paying the players...You also pay the great stars of cinema and theatre, the singers who give four or five concerts a year and are paid huge amounts of money. Why shouldn't footballers be paid, players who put on a show twice a week for thousands in the stands and millions on television? If it's done seriously, I find nothing shocking about that, either as a football man or as Fifa president. What happens is that you've got clubs which are more popular than others, because they've got the better players, and the others say, "Why not us?" But go back fifty years. Look at the great leagues. The Italian one, for example. Fifty years ago, who was playing for the title? Inter, Milan, Juve. In England, it was between the Liverpool, Manchester, Birmingham and London clubs. What's changed? Same in Spain and Germany. As the saying goes, "You only lend money to the rich." So, if [new] investors can pull a league up, it's a good thing, I think. What matters is financial equilibrium, audit and control.

But people in France will tell you that it is impossible for a PSG to balance its accounts in the short or medium term. They'll never recoup their investment.

This investment is never rewarded. You have investors, like the Americans in the Premier League, who provide bank guarantees. You have patrons like Abramovich, who give their money to their clubs. You've got Qatar, which is one family [the al-Thani dynasty]. If they put money into football... I haven't got anything against it. How long they'll put money into football is another matter. Will they carry on or not?

So this new money, going into new clubs, disturbing the established order, can be a good thing?

Yes, of course. As long as these investors are serious. Look at Switzerland again. Lausanne, Servette... what happened is that it was not properly controlled by the league or the association. As to PSG, if they've got the money, what's the problem?

One last question: we remember your reaction at the 2010 World Cup, when Frank Lampard scored a 'ghost goal' against Germany, and you said, "I never want to see that again." Fifa has now completed extensive tests of goal-line technology — but how do you reconcile Fifa's promotion of technology with Uefa's reluctance to embrace it?

It's not Uefa which has a different view. It is Monsieur Platini. It is not Uefa. If you go to the associations which compose Uefa, or ask the professional leagues, you'll see what they say. That — that is a Michel Platini idea, Platini who, for a reason... has put it in his head that he didn't want technology on the goal-line, because if you put it on the goal-line, tomorrow you'll use it for off-side decisions, and so on. That's him. When the majority of fans, leagues — and referees — thank Fifa for introducing goal-line technology, that's not very positive for the development of football.

[Chester Perry]

Remember last week at the FT Football Business Summit the English press were falling all over themselves to quote La Liga chief Javier Tebas - at another football summit in Madrid this week he came out with this

https://twitter.com/RobHarris/status/11 ... 6081113088" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I particularly like the bit that because football is a team game doping of players is not an issue - remember It has long been suspected that Spanish teams have been doping for many years (or throughout the period of their unprecedented international success)

[Chester Perry]

Javier Tebas has also been watching a lot of TIFO Football vids on youtube - he played this this afternoon while making the comments in the post above

https://twitter.com/tariqpanja/status/1 ... 7875673089" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

All the furore around Man City and UEFA would have you believe they were the only ones under scrutiny and judgement from the UEFA Club Financial Control Body (CFCB) Adjudicatory chamber - they are not. Both AC Milan and Fenerbahce have been referred recently - Milan for a consecutive charge of the same offence (that they are challenging at the Court of Arbitration for Sport) they had a ruling on last year

AC Milan
https://www.uefa.com/insideuefa/about-u ... 99206.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Fenerbahce - FC Porto also under embargo for failing to wholly meet targets imposed last year
https://www.uefa.com/insideuefa/about-u ... 06588.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

In post #1201I referred to an article referring to the Duff & Phelps report on the value of Stadium sponsorship in the PL - today Offthepitch.com have used it as the basis to say that Daniel Levy has got it wrong in asking for £20m a season

Spurs stadium naming valuation overpriced - by Alex Miller

Tottenham unlikely to negotiate stadium naming rights at current valuation.
Independent report reveals market value of a deal.

Tottenham Hotspur might have overpriced the naming rights valuation of their new stadium, according to latest research.

It is understood Spurs chairman Daniel Levy has placed a £200 million valuation on a naming rights deal for a ten-year rights deal - the equivalent of £20 million a year.

An independent report by Duff & Phelps has calculated the value of naming rights for the new Spurs stadium at £17.5 million a year - the third highest valuation in the Premier League.

The £2.5 million a year mis-match in valuations, explains why the club has so far failed to secure a naming rights partner.

Decreasing value of naming rights
Offthepitch.com understands talks are continuing with several parties, while reports have emerged HSBC walked away from a deal over the club’s valuation.

Many football-marketing experts believe the value of stadium naming rights has decreased in recent years because companies can compare it with other marketing options, including social media.

The value of stadium naming rights - Value per year- Source: Duff & Phelps

Manchester United - £26.75 m
Manchester City - £21.9 m
Tottenham - £17.5 m
Liverpool - £16.9 m
Chelsea - £16.75 m
Arsenal - £16.65 m
West Ham - £5.55 m
Newcastle - £3.9 m
Everton - £3.3 m
Leicester - £3.2 m
Southampton - £1.75 m
Palace - £1.4 m
Brighton - £1.3 m
Wolves - £1.25 m
Watford - £1.15 m
Burnley - £1.1 m
Bournemouth - £800,000
Cardiff - £350,000
Fulham - £300,000
Huddersfield - £200,000

It is unlikely a brand would consider changing the name of the historic Anfield Stadium or Old Trafford, after observing the backlash from Newcastle fans when St James’ Park was changed to the Sports Direct Arena.

The report by the US-based consultancy placed Manchester United’s Old Trafford stadium as the most valuable naming rights proposition, with a value of £26.75 million per season.

Manchester City’s Etihad Stadium was second at £21.9 million. Liverpool’s naming rights estimate has risen to £16.9 million, assisted by their appearance in the Champions League final last season and strong league performance this season.

Backlash from Newcastle fans
It is unlikely a brand would consider changing the name of the historic Anfield Stadium or Old Trafford, after observing the backlash from Newcastle fans when St James’ Park was changed to the Sports Direct Arena.

Tottenham Hotspur’s Champions League performances this season have provided a further premium to be paid by a brand wanting to have their name on arguably the best stadium in Europe.

There is also less risk of fan backlash and negative publicity as any potential deal would not involve changing the name of a historic stadium that is sentimental to fans.

The final cost of Tottenham’s stadium project could exceed £1.2 billion.

Construction experts estimated the final bill for the project - including stadium, delay-related costs, land acquisition and related developments will exceed £1 billion.

Most expensive season tickets
Spurs are exceeding expectations on and off the pitch. The club reached the Champions League final this season and posted a word-record profit of £113 million in 2017/18.

Matchday receipts for the same season increased from £45.3 million to £71 million after the move to Wembley and Spurs will likely see a further increase from the new stadium.

The club will have the most expensive season tickets in the Premier League in 2019/20, with adult prices ranging from £795 to £2,200.
Matchday income will be boosted through catering - estimated at £800,000-£1 million per game.

Additional revenues from a stadium naming rights deal would afford the club additional financial strength to pay down construction costs.
A source said: “The club possess the most impressive stadium in the Premier League, but the financial pressures of the construction are only just beginning. A naming rights deal would greatly help.”

-------------------------
Remember post #1113 and Man City altering the sponsor logo to "Choose Etihad" at the Emirates FA Cup final - well Simon Chadwick has spotted a potential opportunity for more of the Gulf dispute to be played out in English football and it could help with Spurs funding the Stadium

https://twitter.com/Prof_Chadwick/statu ... 2321166336" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

Came across this today - a blog post from Daniel Geey (@FootballLaw) the author of "Done Deal" a very experienced sports lawyer with a strong Football focus - it is about football clubs setting up sponsorship with betting companies - topical for Burnley fans and English football in general given the general prevalence of it in the game (today West Ham announced an extention of the relationship with Betway in what they claim to be the biggest deal outside the top 6)

https://danielgeey.com/to-gamble-or-not ... -partners/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It never ceases to amaze me just how many different specialists make money out of 22 guys kicking a ball around on a patch of grass

[Devils_Advocate]

If anyone has £1.1m laying around 'The Long Ball Arena' has a good ring to it

[Chester Perry]

Following on from post #1255 The Telegraph have this article - strangely it does not mention the doping point

La Liga president continues row with Manchester City chairman over suggestions of racism - Tom Morgan, Sports News Correspondent
30 May 2019 • 10:01pm

A war of words between Javier Tebas, the outspoken president of La Liga, and Manchester City escalated on Thursday as he accused the club's chairman Khaldoon Al-Mubarak of ignorance over insinuations he is racist.

In the latest of a tit-for-tat exchange, Tebas responded to an interview with the club website in which Al-Mubarak had accused rivals of "jealousy". Last week Tebas said the Premier League champions were damaging European football with their "state-sponsored" cash reserves. In response, Al-Mubarak said on Sunday that there was something "deeply wrong about bringing ethnicity into the conversation".

However, speaking in Madrid ahead of the Champions League final, Tebas said: "I think there is a lot of ignorance about certain things, firstly about how financial control works in European football and ignorance on regards to financial doping.

"I am not at all racist. I have no issues about ethnicity. How can I be racist if two of my grandchildren are Arab? I would be a racist against my own grandchildren! That just shows the ignorance and how easy it is to say things without knowing all the details and people's background.

"You are talking the ethnicity, it's not true. People get confused when I say they are opening up the petrol and gas and finance it like state clubs. It's not the first time I've spoken about it - we had [Roman] Abramovich at Chelsea - they had a lot of losses and he covered it by putting in more money, but he doesn't do it any more."

The outspoken president of La Liga was critical of a lack of regulation from Uefa, which he also denounced over proposals which could severely limit entrance criteria to the Champions League to create billions more pounds for Europe's biggest clubs.

Tebas has been a long-standing critic of City and has previously expressed doubts over whether the Premier League champions or Paris St-Germain would face sanctions because of a tangled web of financial relationships with Europe's governing body. Both City, who are facing a looming one-year ban over an alleged £60million deception, and PSG deny wrong-doing over financial fair play.

“The problem with PSG and City is they are state-run clubs: one off petrol-money, one off gas,” Tebas said at the FT Business in Football summit last week.

"The damage happening on Euro football is massive because they are inflating the market so clubs have to pay ridiculous sums to keep their players."
---------------------------

In this article Tebas is quoted as saying Real and Barca have never been financed by the Spanish State - hmmmmmmmmm - might be losing that argument I think (still no mention of doping other than financial)

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footb ... barak.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Not mentioned here either - though he has a dig that match-fixing must be going on elsewhere and it seems that only Spain are doing something about it - that and playing down the PL success in Europe this year by effectively saying - why did it take them so long?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/48459730" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

or even here

https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/soccer ... um=twitter" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

If anyone has £1.1m laying around 'The Long Ball Arena' has a good ring to it

If we did that I would suspect that we would have to drop the sponsorship of the individual stands - I do wonder if that adds up to more for a club like ours where the traditional long associated (revered?) name would be dfficult for a sponsor to subsume/replace

I am expecting an announcement of a new sponsor of the Cricketfield Stand (see post #937) though given the rise in the shirt sponsorship deal it could be them

[Chester Perry]

Posted on the Bury no wages thread earlier this week that Bristol City had been threatened with being struck off due to failure to post their accounts with companies house - Well they have been made public today - @kieranMaguire has a poke through them

https://twitter.com/KieranMaguire/statu ... 8941932545" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

- yet another EFL club in a sorry state this one with operational losses of £65k per week

and Kieran also points out that with these figures League 1 as a whole lost £1.2m a week in 2017/18 - Blackpool and Oldham still to post accounts

https://twitter.com/KieranMaguire/statu ... 3977091072" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

Shaun Harvey officially leaves the EFL today - @KieranMaguirre has started a Shaun Harvey Appreciation Thread #SHAT

https://twitter.com/KieranMaguire/statu ... 2152016896" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

Leicester, QPR and Bournemouth all tried to get away without paying FFP fines to the EFL (all have resolved their situations with fines far less than originally proposed). Rules were tightened and punishments toughened including the prospect of points deductions determined by the EFL being carried into the Premier League

Following the Premier League's refusal to sanction the above teams, the EFL aligned it's FFP rules to the Profit and Sustainability ones in the PL, This was done with FL approval and increased hopes that the punishments could be passed through (with PL Blessing)

http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/fina ... lained.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Now Aston Villa, who have been walking a financial tightrope since relegation are heading back to the PL with many believing they have flouted FFP (Profit and Sustainability rules to get there) are expected to avoid any points deduction that should be coming their way as the PL will not enforce it.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footb ... rules.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

Comprehensive article in the Newcastle Chronicle (actually produced by the Press Association) outlining why Middle East Investors are interested in the English game - includes perspectives from a range of specialists including Simon Chadwick

https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/sport/f ... n=sharebar" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[duncandisorderly]

Shaun Harvey officially leaves the EFL today - @KieranMaguirre has started a Shaun Harvey Appreciation Thread #SHAT

https://twitter.com/KieranMaguire/statu ... 2152016896" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Now this is a level of childishness I can get behind.

[Chester Perry]

FC Bayern CEO Rummenigge gets a grilling from Der Spiegel on the proposed changes to European Club Competition post 2024 - and backtracks from the talk within the Football Leaks documents

https://www.spiegel.de/international/eu ... 70196.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

The clearest possible representation of tv payments across the top 4 leagues in Europe

https://twitter.com/SBI_Barcelona/statu ... 5235485696" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

We have come to learn a lot about Soft Power and sport (particularly football) in this thread but that has usually been on a continental or global stage - here TIFO Football look at how Viktor Orban has used football to consolidate his power in Hungarian minds (other people do not form part of his concern) - it is an excellent (as usual) piece,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jk5XSKZAN7Y" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

former Fifa Secretary General Jerome Valke fails to get his 10year ban form football overturned

https://apnews.com/0bd0e8010f584d94834732116e0a4901" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

The economics of football's Magic Money Tree - everybody wants some

33k tickets allocated to the finalists fans, over 100k of said fans in the city wanting to be in the stadium - shady entrepreneurial types seize the opportunity

https://twitter.com/JPW_NBCSports/statu ... 1636342785" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://twitter.com/martynziegler/statu ... 9763785728" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

@kieranMaguire keeping his Shaun Harvey Appreciation Thread #SHAT going this is a shocking one (though far from soley being down to Harvey)

Total net losses of Championship clubs since Shaun Harvey was appointed CEO of @EFL are £1,177,278,000, (£4.5 million a week to you @AndyhHolt that/s before the losses for 2018/19 are added, so anyone who says the Championship isn't a billion pound game is telling porkies #SHAT

https://twitter.com/KieranMaguire/statu ... 6751005698" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

I mentioned in post #408 that the pressure on Gordon Taylor to quit was reaching levels of no return - subsequent announcements of internal reviews which ultimately led to him agreeing to step down in March (while preventing any of the current PFA executive from replacing him), It seems the review has yet to start and it is now looking lie Taylor will still be in post into next year. - it would be shocking if we were not so inured to these kind of administrators exercising such practises - I am struggling to remember a time when they didn't

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footb ... layed.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

It has been mooted for a while, and I suspect it has been suggested by the biggest teams as a way of securing the type of European Club Competitions they want, but could a "luxury tax" really be on it's way in European Football

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footb ... nders.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

Simon Chadwick looks at the full depth of revenue potential from Champions League qualification and progression - this goes beyond the now widely known quantity of UEFA payments - not an exact science but reflective of the opportunity that is there.

https://theconversation.com/hard-eviden ... orth-42376" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
should say it is a old article but still highly relevant

[Chester Perry]

BT will be disappointed with the problems they had last night

https://uk.sports.yahoo.com/news/champi ... 37816.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

These streaming issues must raise questions for the coming seasons toe-dip into simul-broadcasts of all games in a round by both Amazon and BT -

The saving grace is that Amazon a well structured for large audiences and BT will only be distributing to paying customers not the whole country.

[Chester Perry]

As the money continues to roll in at the top of the game in this country, at the bottom it is dying rapidly

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... ll-pitches" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Do I like this - no yet anyone who has watched Michael Calvin's film State of play on BT this week will note that many of our young stars come from south London (like Sancho) those guys never got much opportunity to play on grass, not unlike Zidane, and it is much more than just a lack of pitches that is killing the grass roots games.

The shocking lack of respect for referees and officials being just one element
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/46208857" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

"Uefa's motto should be greed, geopolitics and Gazprom" - just have to share an article with a line like that even if it is a few days old - from Tortoisemedia.com

The carnival of avarice

English teams have dominated European football this season, with Chelsea beating Arsenal in one final last night and Liverpool and Spurs meeting in the Champions League final on Saturday

Many believe the standard in the Champions League is higher even than in the World Cup. But increasingly the biggest tournaments seem to be run for profit, not supporters

These profits are not spread evenly. Cities hosting finals stand to make more money from medical conventions
By Tony Evans

Everyone wins at the Champions League final. Except football fans. European football’s showpiece occasion has grown into a fiesta of greed. Supporters know it, but they are drawn to the game’s avaricious siren call anyway.

As many as 100,000 supporters of the English Premier League clubs Liverpool and Tottenham Hotspur will flood Madrid this Saturday. Fewer than a third will have acquired tickets from the clubs they support.

Each finalist was allocated 16,613 match tickets for a stadium that holds 63,500. The rest are shared around the “Uefa family,” a dysfunctional grouping that includes officials and friends of European football’s ruling body, national associations, the local organising committee, broadcasters, commercial partners and corporate hospitality companies.

Even before touts get involved, prices are eye-watering. The cheapest tickets are £60 but only about 20 per cent of the seats are in this range. More than half cost £154, another 20 per cent go for £385, and 5 per cent cost £513. Each. Hardly the People’s Game.

At least Madrid has the capacity to handle an influx of tourists. The Spanish capital has an international airport, more than 70,000 hotel rooms and a substantial AirBnB market. Naturally, prices have been hiked substantially – flights and accommodation are going for a minimum of four times the usual rate – but at least supporters can get there.

The other Uefa signature club game, the Europa League final, took place in Baku last night. The airport in Azerbaijan’s capital could handle only 15,000 passengers over the period needed to service the event. Like the Champions League final, this game featured two clubs from the English Premier League, both from London. Arsenal and Chelsea were granted just 12,000 tickets between them. They returned more than half their paltry allocations. Was this the moment Uefa finally pushed its paying customers too far?

“It might look that way because Arsenal and Chelsea have two of the richest fan bases in football, but it’s a peculiar set of circumstances,” David Bick, a football finance expert from Square One Consulting, said.

“The Europa League is nowhere near as glamorous as the Champions League and Uefa misjudged the [choice of] venue badly. If the Baku final was in a more accessible place, the tickets would sell out immediately. If it was the Champions League, people would find a way of getting to Azerbaijan and the tickets would be snapped up.”

The selection process for this year’s finals was launched in December 2016. Two months later it was announced that Madrid’s then unfinished Wanda Metropolitano and Baku’s Olympic Stadium were the only contenders.

Azerbaijan was implicitly ruled out of the Champions League bidding when the evaluation report was published the following September. “The number of hotel rooms within a 60km radius of the stadium falls short… and would allow the city to accommodate only a very limited number of fans and visitors, including Uefa’s key target groups in standard hotels,” the inspectors said of Baku. “Mitigation measures such as camp sites, university dormitories or guest houses would need to be investigated.”

Madrid got the big game and Azerbaijan’s consolation prize was the Europa League final. At this point, nearly two years ago, the ruling body and the main Champions League sponsors – Expedia, Gazprom, Heineken, Mastercard, Nissan, PepsiCo, Santander and Sony Playstation – began to book prime accommodation in Madrid. Their Europa League counterparts, Enterprise Rent-A-Car, FedEx, Hankook Tire, Kia Motors and Heineken (using its Amstel brand) did likewise in Baku.

Well-meaning pundits who suggest the venue be changed to save supporters from the same city or country travelling thousands of miles should save their breath. The locations are locked in as soon as Uefa makes its decision.

It would take a natural disaster or violent political upheaval to cause a change of plan. Last year’s final in Kiev went ahead even though conflict between Ukraine and Russian separatists rumbled on less than 400 miles from the fan parks and celebrations.

There are clear benefits for host cities. Madrid Destino, a civic company that manages tourism and local events, estimates that this weekend’s final will generate about £49.5 million for the city. Outlay is involved – December’s Copa Libertadores final (the South American equivalent of the Champions League) between River Plate and Boca Juniors, which was moved from Buenos Aires because of fan violence, cost nearly £574,000 on National Police deployment alone – but Madrid will make a hefty profit.

There is also a knock-on effect. Uefa estimates a global television audience of about 400 million people in more than 200 countries. Coverage before, during and after the game generates free publicity for the city and Madrid Destino believes many first-time visitors among the match-goers will come back to experience the historic plazas when they are not crammed with football fans.

It makes the point, however, that the Champions League final can be trumped by less obtrusive events. The annual gathering of the European Society for Medical Oncology will take place in the city in September next year and is expected to draw 25,000 people. Madrid Destino’s financial models predict that this convention will inject more than £57 million into the economy over four days. Delegates will be less visible than Liverpool and Tottenham supporters but are likely to spend more – and cause less damage.

Azerbaijan’s rationale for wanting to bring big games to Baku was less about football’s economic boost than an attempt to wield “soft power” through sport. The country is rich in oil and gas and has had a Formula 1 grand prix for the past three seasons. But the attempt to gain prestige and good publicity from the Europa League final backfired as it became clear the city’s infrastructure could not support Uefa’s secondary showpiece.
A further blow came when it emerged that Henrikh Mkhitaryan, Arsenal’s Armenian midfielder, did not feel it was safe to travel to Baku. Armenia and Azerbaijan have been involved in a border conflict since the break-up of the Soviet Union.

The situation reflects badly on Uefa and the host government, which has refused visas to supporters with Armenian names. Tom Watson, deputy leader of the Labour Party, raised the issue in Parliament last week.

Uefa are keen that this row does not escalate. Some observers wondered why Arsenal, in particular, and Chelsea, did not object to the location of the game and Mkhitaryan’s absence more robustly, but other issues are occurring behind the scenes at European football’s headquarters in the Swiss city of Nyon.

The ruling body charged Manchester City with flouting Financial Fair Play rules this month. Both London clubs are suspicious of City’s spending and dominance on the domestic scene. The Premier League champions are owned by the Abu Dhabi royal family and a Uefa source said: “This is not a dispute with a club but a battle with an Emirate. It’s football against a country.”

It is no time to rock the boat, no matter how unhappy Arsenal and Chelsea were about Baku.

As for the fans who could not get to Baku, Uefa was unrepentant. A number of Europa League finals have failed to capture the public imagination. In 2014, Sevilla and Benfica came nowhere near to filling Juventus Stadium in Turin and the next year the Spanish club returned to the final to play Dnipro Dnipropetrovsk in front of a sparse crowd in Warsaw.

Still, it will be a full house in Madrid. Liverpool and Tottenham supporters will descend on the city using a wide assortment of inventive routes. The game’s significance makes it worthwhile.

Saturday will be the second successive Champions League final for Jurgen Klopp’s men, but Spurs have reached the big game for the first time. Events like this do not come along too often. Plenty of supporters are willing to empty their bank accounts to be present, even if it means watching on television in a bar.

Their experience of the Spanish capital will be slightly strange. They will find streets and plazas taken over by corporate areas. They will take selfies in front of a giant inflatable trophy in the Plaza de Oriente. A stage will dominate the Puerta del Sol. PlayStation fans will face down each other by playing Fifa 19 in the Plaza Mayor. Every conceivable item of Champions League tat will be on sale at an impromptu superstore in Plaza del Callao. A great city will become one of the interchangeable annual backdrops to Uefa’s carnival of avarice.


The American rock band Imagine Dragons will perform before the game, courtesy of Pepsi. Last year in Kiev, Liverpool fans bounced and squealed while Dua Lipa belted out ‘One Kiss’. It was nothing like the singing that made the Kop famous. ‘You’ll Never Walk Alone’ and Tottenham’s slow, deep ‘When The Spurs Go Marching In’ chant do not really have a place on Uefa’s stage.

The future of football will be on show in the Wanda stadium on Saturday. Uefa’s motto should be greed, geopolitics and Gazprom.

[Chester Perry]

fascinating little video on why Western Europe dominates world football

https://www.ft.com/video/d65c4081-b3c9- ... fa162cd0d6" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

Following Saturday's final @SwissRamble gives his final piece on earnings from UEFA for English teams in the Champions League - Man Utd earn more than City, despite City being previous season domestic champions - the power of history (coefficients)

https://twitter.com/SwissRamble/status/ ... 3358542849" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

Now the Champions and Europa Leagues are over for another season (start again in 4 weeks) the focus turns to the future. Head of the European Leagues Organisation (ELO has a different meaning to me) Lars-Christer Olsson kicks off the debate.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... are_btn_tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

Marketing week talks about the opportunities for sponsors as t the Women's World Cup in France as the women's game is having a "moment"

https://www.marketingweek.com/2019/05/3 ... onsorship/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

as Simon Chadwick points out -Use of the word 'moment' implies opportunism. Commitment & strategy imply something much longer-term, substantive & fundamental...

EDIT - The host nation doesn't seem to have taken much notice of Marketing Week

https://twitter.com/RobHarris/status/11 ... 8249131008" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

Liverpool will have to play their Club World Cup games in Qatar this December - as QSI find a way to make more use of their New Stadiums ahead of the World Cup

https://apnews.com/10957cf21be24326b96b190ab1f7feaf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

First posted in ##1153 about Mohammed bin Zayed the ruler of UAE (and also how many suspect he is the real owner of Man City) this piece gives more insight into the sheer scale of his influence - originally in the NY Times - but found this free version (I have to save those limited read opportunities)

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ne ... 623640.cms" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

Keeping in mind the last 2 posts - Qatar got its way in restricting World Cup to 32 teams, another country would have had to get involved for the 48 FIFA wanted and with Iran being effectively Qatar's only friend in the region, that was always a non-starter even for FIFA. The region's problems are not going away any time soon it would seem.

https://gulfbusiness.com/uae-saudi-hit- ... ah-summit/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

the clock is ticking on finding a resolution. Entirely possible that late stage preparations for 2022 could take place against backdrop of massively tense geopolitical stand off. What price a World cup from multiple cities in multiple countries like the Euro Championship

[Chester Perry]

@MiguelDelaney argues that Liverpool's 6th big cup takes them back to the top table of Superclubs

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/foo ... 41331.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

Posted the first 3 episodes of the Mathew Briggs documentary in post #1243 - Part 4 has been released today


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GmWDVyObakM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

Posted about Shaun Harvey's comments re owners being the saviours of clubs in post #1207 - here is a biting repost

https://nickigoeconsultancy.co.uk/blogs ... rs-or-fans" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

Back to Qatar and their world cup preparations - the Qatari authorities have released their 4th Workers Welfare Report - 11 Deaths - 1 in work and 10 not at work - lot's of issues still for them to address

https://sc.qa/sites/default/files/docs/ ... ort_EN.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

More Uefa Money up for grabs for both Liverpool and Chelseas as a result of this seasons success- from OffthePitch.com


Champions League winners Liverpool in line for £8 million bonus - by Alex Miller

The Merseyside club will be eligible to play the UEFA Super Cup and FIFA Club World Cup.
Today FIFA will pick the host of the Club World Cup tournament. (see post #1285)

Liverpool will bank £8 million in additional prize money as Champions League winners - if they also go on to lift the UEFA Super Cup and FIFA Club World Cup.

The winners of the Champions League final in Madrid will win in the region of £95 million in prize money from UEFA.

However, the winners will also be entered into the UEFA Super Cup and the FIFA Club World Cup.

The UEFA Super Cup will take place in Istanbul on 14th August, where Liverpool will take on Europa League winners Chelsea. The winners of the Super Cup will take home £4 million in prize money, while the runners-up will receive £3.1 million.

Seven teams receive prize money
Liverpool last won the Cup in 2005, beating CSKA Moscow.

The FIFA Club World Cup will take place over two weeks during the winter.

All seven teams in the tournament win prize money awarded on a sliding scale. The winners of the World Cup will receive £4 million, while the runners-up will be awarded £3.2 million.

Liverpool were runners-up in 2005.

Today FIFA will select the hosts of the 2019 and 2020 events.

Massive changes
Gonzalo Belloso, the deputy secretary general and development director of CONMEBOL, recently revealed that the 2019 and 2020 tournaments will be held in Japan.

A spokesperson for FIFA confirmed to offthepitch.com that the meeting was scheduled to take place in Paris to confirm the detail's

FIFA said: “The hosts for the FIFA Club World Cups 2019 and 2020 are scheduled to be appointed at the upcoming FIFA Council on Monday 3 June. The tournament regulations will also be published in due course.”

Spokespeople for Liverpool and Tottenham wouldn’t comment on their potential participation.

Massive changes to the FIFA Club World Cup mean that it will become a four-yearly competition from 2021.

The idea for a 24-team tournament was approved in March and is set to first take place in two years’ time.

Given the green light
Liverpool are reportedly one of eight European sides already invited to take part in what has been described as a “£100 million tournament.”

The competition will run from June to July in the slot currently used for the international tournament, the Confederations Cup, which has been scrapped.

FIFA president, Gianni Infantino, expressed his delight that the tournament was given the green light and hopes that the Club World Cup will now be taken more seriously by Europe's elite.

"Now the world will see a real Club World Cup where fans will see the best teams in the world compete to be crowned the real world champions," he said.

"We hope that all the best teams will participate and we have had some very positive discussions with UEFA.

"But it was our responsibility to take a decision because we have to deal with the organisational matters - it is only two years away."

[Chester Perry]

A belligerent article on Footbal365.com (it seems to be a home for them - which I can of like as all sides need a voice) about ticket price rises at Man City and the public management of them - from a City ST holder

https://www.football365.com/news/man-ci ... pport-them" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

More from Football365.com - John Nicholson writes on what we have learned from the 2018/19 season and kicks off with this belter -

"Fulham taught us the modern day all-consuming obsession with money and transfers is a madness and is born out of a culture which only understands personal success through acquisition and materialism rather than nurturing and education."

I did say it was a home for beligerent writers didn't I?

https://www.football365.com/news/427-th ... ft-man-utd" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

Following Bristol Rovers late release of Accounts and its £65k loss in post #1264 - well the owners have pumped another £10m into the club via equity

https://twitter.com/KieranMaguire/statu ... 2171016192" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

the game is bonkers

[Chester Perry]

Blackpool appear to tidying their finances in advance of new owners coming in

https://twitter.com/KieranMaguire/statu ... 2826271749" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

apparently there has been a large number of prospective buyers with very real interest - a lot, lot more than Bolton

[Chester Perry]

This Qatar-Leeds story is just not going away - This from Tariq Panja in the New York Times

Qatar May Buy Into English Team Leeds - By Tariq Panja - June 3, 2019


Qatar, the gas-rich Gulf state that has gained an outsized influence in global soccer, held advanced discussions to buy a stake in the storied English team Leeds United on Monday, according to two people with direct knowledge of the discussions.

Qatar stunned the sports world when it secured the rights to host soccer’s World Cup in 2022. Since that vote in 2010 it has been among the most consequential nations in soccer, buying and investing huge amounts to turn Paris Saint-Germain into a powerhouse team and also becoming the biggest buyer of soccer rights on the continent through its BeIN Sports network.

The move for Leeds, which missed out on a return to the Premier League after losing a playoff semifinal to Derby last month, would be Qatar’s first foray into English soccer and most likely will lead to further scrutiny into its affairs at home and abroad. Human rights groups have drawn attention to the treatment of workers building World Cup stadiums, while there have been allegations of wrongdoing over the way in which Qatar convinced FIFA members to choose it to host the World Cup.

The talks with Leeds, which won the last of its three English championships in 1992, are at an advanced stage and stem from a close personal relationship between the club’s majority owner, Andrea Radrizzani, and Nasser al-Khelaifi, the businessman who fronts most of Qatar’s investments in sports. A close friend of Qatar’s emir, al-Khelaifi is president of P.S.G. and chairman of beIN Sports. He once backed Qatar’s joint sports television venture in Asia with Radrizzani, who ran MP Silva, a global sports rights buyer.

The Financial Times first reported talks between Qatar Sports Investments — the vehicle that controls its sports assets — and Leeds on May 25.
Spokesmen for Radrizzani, Q.S.I. and Leeds declined to comment. Last year, the Leeds owner sold a 10 percent stake to 49ers Enterprises, the investment division of the San Francisco 49ers. The initial talks with Qatar involve a stake sale, though there could be a provision for a full buyout later on, according to a person with knowledge of the discussions.

An investment in Leeds would be Qatar’s third in club soccer teams. As well as P.S.G., which is now home to soccer’s two most expensive players, Neymar and Kylian Mbappé, the Gulf team owns K.A.S. Eupen, a minor Belgium team. That investment is part of a plan to improve the skills of young Qatari nationals, who may form part of its national team in the World Cup, now just three years away.

Should a deal be completed, there are also likely to be other complications. European soccer’s governing body does not allow teams with a single owner to compete against each other in continental competitions. While that seems a long way off, with Leeds not even in the Premier League, Qatari money in Paris has shown how quickly a formidable team can be assembled to compete with Europe’s finest.
--------------------------------------

I have previously postulated that any investment could be business diplomacy and reading that doesn't make me think they want to own the club outright at this stage - in fact you could say they may be looking at another club where Qatari players could be sent to develop further in advance of the 2022 world cup

[Chester Perry]

I said in post #1283 that thigs were going to heat up around the UEFA Club Competitions post 2024 - there Lars-Christer Olsson spoke for the domestic leagues - here Edwin Van der Sar does his bit for the ECA - from yesterday's Times


Wealth gap harms the competitive balance in European club football - Edwin van der Sar

It has been a wonderful season of Champions League football. For me, as chief executive of Ajax, it has been a particularly special season and, if the semi-final had finished a few seconds earlier, perhaps it would have been even more so.

However, I want to look past this season and consider the longer-term trends in European football. A lot of people have watched Ajax’s performances in Europe this year and called us “a fairytale”. But why are we, a club with such a rich history in the Champions League, seen as a fairytale? Why were we the first Champions League semi-finalist from outside England, Spain, Italy, Germany or France since 2006?

It’s simple — we are a big club with a rich history in the Champions League, but from a relatively small country with only €9m domestic broadcasting revenues each season.

There’s a huge and growing financial gap between those rich five leagues and the rest. To give you an idea of the size of that gap, in 2007 the top five domestic leagues earned €2.6bn more than the next 50 leagues in Europe.

A decade later, that figure had grown to €5.8bn. With the wealth increasingly concentrated in the top five, their clubs will increasingly dominate European competitions year after year — hence the all-English finals in the Champions League and Europa League this year.

When you add the fact that clubs from these leagues are guaranteed places in the group stages of the Champions League each season, you end up with what we have now; a locked system where great clubs on the outside such as Benfica, Porto, PSV, Celtic, Galatasaray or Ajax struggle to get in the door.

This is why it is disappointing when people criticise Uefa’s consultation process over the future of European competitions and the European Club Association (ECA), of which I am one of four vice-chairmen, without considering the flaws in the current system. It is a system that sees my club and others from so-called “second tier leagues” competing against clubs from the top five leagues whose incomes dwarf ours — indeed, these are clubs whose player wage bills alone are greater than our total revenues.

This wealth gap is harming the competitive balance in European club football at a time when the Champions League is ever more important to Ajax as the only means, next to transfer income, of bridging the gap with teams in those big leagues.

Furthermore, the current system makes bridging that gap difficult and unpredictable for clubs such as ours even when we perform well on the pitch. This year, we reached the Champions League semi-finals and won the league and cup double in the Netherlands, but we will still have to go through two qualifying rounds to get to next year’s group stages. It leaves me wondering whether I can risk giving my best players new contracts when a slip-up in a qualifier in August can totally disrupt our financial planning for the season.

Meanwhile, clubs finishing fourth in the biggest leagues go straight to the group stages and can plan their budgets in the knowledge that they are guaranteed at least six group games and, most likely, income from knockout rounds too.

This is the “stability” I was referring to when I addressed the meeting organised by the European leagues in Madrid. It’s not about making “special cases” out of any clubs, it’s about recognising that winning things should mean something.

One of the ECA’s fundamental beliefs is that all clubs across Europe who are good enough to develop and play regularly in European competitions should have a fair chance to do so. This means more certainty for more clubs from more associations playing more matches in Europe. So competitions, formats and rules should be looked at with a view to enabling this — across the whole system. Not just the Champions League, which everyone likes to talk about, but the Europa League (a competition increasing in competitiveness and attractiveness for fans and clubs every year) and, from 2021, a third competition that will give more clubs the opportunity to make their names on the European stage.

Regular participation in a system that rewards clubs based on performance in all the competitions will do two things: it will improve financial stability for clubs from the less wealthy leagues, and improve the quality of their teams and the football they play, thus giving them the opportunity to progress further each year on and off the pitch.

This is what increased promotion and relegation in European competitions would do. It’s not about a “closed shop” or removing the risk of failure — it’s about making sure clubs are rewarded for their performance on the European playing field, not for the relative strength of their league.
Such reform can be put in place in consultation with all stakeholders to find a solution that will improve the European club competitions and benefit everyone. Domestic leagues are strong, vibrant, unique competitions that all clubs and players dream of winning. European competitions sit alongside them and allow the very best teams to excel at home and abroad. It should not be all about the money in certain big leagues. It should be about a fair and equitable system across Europe for all clubs, whoever and wherever they are.

Maybe the critics of Uefa’s plans to reform its European club competitions in 2024 think that “might makes right” and only teams from rich leagues should be allowed to dream of European glory. I believe football is about what clubs do on the pitch, not how big their league’s TV deal is, and this is what we at the ECA are fighting for as we work with Uefa and other stakeholders on creating a structure for European club competition that is better and fairer for all. Uefa’s competitions are where the best teams from each association can compete with each other to show the world what they stand for, like Ajax did this season.
_________________________

I have to say that I am still not seeing it - unless there is a cap on the number of teams from a single domestic league - you could foresee a situation where all the PL teams allowed into Europe work their way up to the top competition and lock out other PL teams from European competition. Alternatively if you put a glass ceiling on promotion (with maximum numbers from a single domestic league that isn't fair either

[Chester Perry]

Meanwhile the Bundesliga continues with it's own efforts to close the gap to the Premier League

https://www.sportbusiness.com/news/bund ... programme/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

5 years ago Luton were breaking out of Non League football (having arrived there following a 30 point penalty for financial irregularities) - Next season they kick off in the Championship. Their return has been impressive - their plans going forward are huge - can they actually do it - warning it involves a lot of property development - from this months edition of FCBusiness

https://cloud.3dissue.com/6374/7271/131 ... .html?r=12" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

there is also some extend articles on Spurs and their new home in the issue