Is it unfortunate timing or part of the general correction that was witnessed by the Premier League in the current cycle - The Bundesliga have just completed the sale of the next cycle of domestic TV rights, which have shown a slight drop in value - The news is due to be made official during the week but @TariqPanja has the break for the New York Times
Bundesliga TV Rights Deal Suggests a Softening Market
JUNE 21, 2020
Germany’s top soccer league continues to be a bellwether for sports.
The Bundesliga’s return to action in May after a two-month hiatus caused by the coronavirus pandemic gave other big leagues the courage, and also some helpful guidance, as they pressed forward with their own returns. Now the Bundesliga has become the first major European soccer competition to sell its domestic broadcast rights since the coronavirus outbreak.
The clues from Germany this time are far less reassuring.
The sale generated less than the record 4.6 billion euros ($5.1 billion) the Bundesliga earned under its current agreements, but not by a significant amount, according to two people with knowledge of the sale, which will be announced on Monday. The pool of broadcasters narrowed in the new deal, too, with all the games divided by Sky, the longtime incumbent, and the streaming service DAZN.
The Bundesliga, DAZN and Sky Deutschland all declined to comment on the deal.
The modest decrease in the new deal could be encouraging for leagues and clubs nervous about the game’s financial future. But the reduced fee — and the smaller pool of interested bidders — could also be a worrying harbinger for dozens of other leagues and broadcasters as they head into negotiations uncertain if games will be played on schedule, in front of fans — or even if they will take place at all.
The Bundesliga sale took place against a backdrop of empty stadiums and unusual summer schedules as leagues raced to complete their suspended seasons to meet spectator demand and — perhaps more crucially — to limit the risk of nonpayment from their broadcaster partners. (The Bundesliga has yet to resolve a multimillion-dollar dispute with Discovery Inc.’s Eurosport, which pulled out of a contract to show games it had been contracted to broadcast.)
While the sale offers a sign that premium sports properties are likely to command large fees even amid a bleak outlook for the wider global economy, it could also mark the end of a yearslong inflationary bubble for elite level sports programming. The value of the current Bundesliga deal, for instance, had represented an 85 percent leap from when the rights were last tendered in 2016.
The impact of the pandemic almost certainly played a part in dulling the demand for soccer rights in Germany, but also in other key European television markets like Britain, Italy and Spain, which are typically the most sought programming. Only last year, Christian Seifert, the Bundesliga’s chief executive, predicted his league would continue its upward march, saying he anticipated broadcasters and digital upstarts like DAZN would be prepared to spend even more.
“The German pay-TV market still has a lot of room to grow,” Seifert told the Financial Times last year.
Ultimately, that did not prove to be the case. But it could also have been worse, given cost cutting plans at Sky and what appears to be the absence of strong bids from Amazon and Deutsche Telekom, two companies that had been rumored to be preparing to compete fiercely for games.
Sky managed to secure the main Saturday night game, appointment television in Germany that is akin to Sunday and Monday night N.F.L. games in the United States. But in what could be a sign of the belt-tightening measures imposed by its new owner, Comcast, Sky secured six games per week, two fewer than it currently airs.
DAZN has doubled down on its bet in Germany, where starting in 2021 it will also be the country’s main Champions League broadcaster. The company has been burning through cash as it seeks to build its subscriber base, but it has shown little sign in slowing even as it has lost more than $1 billion in the past two years.
Germany, along with Japan, is the streaming company’s biggest market. DAZN will exclusively show games on Friday nights and Sunday, while Sky’s matches will be largely limited to Saturdays.
Football's Magic Money Tree
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
Am I right in thinking we once had an issue with Deloitte over their auditing/accounting
The Irish FA are taking court action for the way Deloitte have handled the auditing of their accounts - you may remember that there has been an ongoing financial scandal there - from the Irish Times
FAI take court action against former auditors Deloitte
Firm came in for significant criticism at last FAI AGM over a number of different issues
Wed, Jun 17, 2020, 05:00 - Emmet Malone
The FAI has initiated High Court proceedings against its former auditors Deloitte with the case believed to relate to the company’s handling of the association’s accounts in the latter part of their 23-year relationship.
The firm came in for severe criticism from delegates at the FAI’s AGM in Dublin in December when calls for the association to pursue a case for professional negligence against Deloitte were met with widespread approval from the floor of the meeting.
Delegates expressed the belief that the company should have raised flags in relations to specific issues and done more to alert directors to the persistently poor state of the association’s finances. The scale of the fees it charged was also criticised with almost €500,000 paid for its work on the 2016, 2017 and 2018 accounts.
The company’s representative, Richard Howard, defended Deloitte’s performance at the time, insisting that it had always acted on the basis of assurances it had been given by the FAI’s board that it had been provided with all the relevant information required to provide accurate accounts. It had by then realised, he said, that it had been “misled”.
Deloitte had actually said in December that it was “unable to obtain sufficient audit evidence that the FAI will continue as a going concern” and it reported the association to the Company’s Registrations Office, alleging that it had breached aspects of company law.
When former FAI director Brendan Dillon questioned Howard on their failure to flag the enormous amounts of expenses being paid to John Delaney or why its opinion of the association’s financial outlook had suddenly hardened despite many years of financial difficulties, Howard declined more than once to answer.
The accounts for 2016 and 2017 had had to be restated and among the adjustments made was a settlement with the Revenue Commissioners for €2.7 million, some of which related to “a significant underpayment of employment taxes and VAT liabilities in recent years”.
International procedures
Dillon also put to Howard that Deloitte had failed to follow its own international procedures in relation to long term clients by not adequately reviewing its handling of the FAI account and changing the partner responsible for overseeing the audit far more regularly. He said he had written to Deloitte 15 years previously to express concerns about the FAI’s financial position but that no action appeared to have been taken.
The papers in relation to the case were lodged by Beale and Co. on behalf of the FAI on Monday. The association declined to comment on the case. Deloitte said that it would “not comment on legal issues. However, we stand over the quality of our audits.
“We would reiterate our position, that we take our statutory obligations as auditors very seriously and have acted accordingly, including reporting to the relevant authorities in accordance with our professional and legal obligations where necessary. We have a robust audit process that is in line with those obligations. As a statutory audit firm, we are bound by strict obligations of confidentiality in respect of audited entities.”
Deloitte resigned as the association’s auditors at the December 2019 meeting.
The Irish FA are taking court action for the way Deloitte have handled the auditing of their accounts - you may remember that there has been an ongoing financial scandal there - from the Irish Times
FAI take court action against former auditors Deloitte
Firm came in for significant criticism at last FAI AGM over a number of different issues
Wed, Jun 17, 2020, 05:00 - Emmet Malone
The FAI has initiated High Court proceedings against its former auditors Deloitte with the case believed to relate to the company’s handling of the association’s accounts in the latter part of their 23-year relationship.
The firm came in for severe criticism from delegates at the FAI’s AGM in Dublin in December when calls for the association to pursue a case for professional negligence against Deloitte were met with widespread approval from the floor of the meeting.
Delegates expressed the belief that the company should have raised flags in relations to specific issues and done more to alert directors to the persistently poor state of the association’s finances. The scale of the fees it charged was also criticised with almost €500,000 paid for its work on the 2016, 2017 and 2018 accounts.
The company’s representative, Richard Howard, defended Deloitte’s performance at the time, insisting that it had always acted on the basis of assurances it had been given by the FAI’s board that it had been provided with all the relevant information required to provide accurate accounts. It had by then realised, he said, that it had been “misled”.
Deloitte had actually said in December that it was “unable to obtain sufficient audit evidence that the FAI will continue as a going concern” and it reported the association to the Company’s Registrations Office, alleging that it had breached aspects of company law.
When former FAI director Brendan Dillon questioned Howard on their failure to flag the enormous amounts of expenses being paid to John Delaney or why its opinion of the association’s financial outlook had suddenly hardened despite many years of financial difficulties, Howard declined more than once to answer.
The accounts for 2016 and 2017 had had to be restated and among the adjustments made was a settlement with the Revenue Commissioners for €2.7 million, some of which related to “a significant underpayment of employment taxes and VAT liabilities in recent years”.
International procedures
Dillon also put to Howard that Deloitte had failed to follow its own international procedures in relation to long term clients by not adequately reviewing its handling of the FAI account and changing the partner responsible for overseeing the audit far more regularly. He said he had written to Deloitte 15 years previously to express concerns about the FAI’s financial position but that no action appeared to have been taken.
The papers in relation to the case were lodged by Beale and Co. on behalf of the FAI on Monday. The association declined to comment on the case. Deloitte said that it would “not comment on legal issues. However, we stand over the quality of our audits.
“We would reiterate our position, that we take our statutory obligations as auditors very seriously and have acted accordingly, including reporting to the relevant authorities in accordance with our professional and legal obligations where necessary. We have a robust audit process that is in line with those obligations. As a statutory audit firm, we are bound by strict obligations of confidentiality in respect of audited entities.”
Deloitte resigned as the association’s auditors at the December 2019 meeting.
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
@SwissRamble offers his take on the FFP relaxation - as ever the detail of his work is of great benefit to us mere mortalsChester Perry wrote: ↑Thu Jun 18, 2020 12:43 pmUEFA 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
https://twitter.com/SwissRamble/status/ ... 8603175936
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
The Football today podcast asks - Who really cancelled Ligue 1? - with @TariqPanja
https://www.footballtodaypodcast.com/po ... ed-ligue-1
https://www.footballtodaypodcast.com/po ... ed-ligue-1
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
It appears that Hull City owner's the Allam family have fallen out with the Athletic - because a journalist sought to establish a club;s position on an article they were researching - it had not been published and still hasn't as far as I am aware - the response to the request is unusual to say the least
https://www.hullcitytigers.com/club-sta ... -athletic/
https://www.hullcitytigers.com/club-sta ... -athletic/
-
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
Ancelotti in bother with the Spanish authoritieshttps://www.bbc.com/sport/football/53139235
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
Anybody who has worked there who is famous in football has been subject to tax fraud charges - funnily enough they all seem to have worked for Barcelona or Real Madrid - you have to question the quality of advice those clubs have been giving their employeestiger76 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 22, 2020 4:03 pmAncelotti in bother with the Spanish authoritieshttps://www.bbc.com/sport/football/53139235
Last edited by Chester Perry on Tue Jun 23, 2020 2:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
Some more detail on that Bundesliga domestic tv deal for the next cycle which has been formally announced today - from SportsBusiness.com
https://www.sportbusiness.com/news/bund ... announced/
https://www.sportbusiness.com/news/bund ... announced/
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
Seri A is getting closer to resolving it's tv money payment issues, but will not have any live free to air games in the restart
DAZN agrees Serie A payments, antitrust move scuppers free-to-air plans
Martin Ross - June 22, 2020
DAZN, the OTT streaming operator, has reached an agreement with Lega Serie A over the structure of its remaining payments this season for domestic broadcast rights to Italian football’s top flight, SportBusiness understands.
DAZN has been in talks with the league in recent weeks and has now struck a deal over the payments to be made.
Having not made its instalment payment in May as Serie A remained suspended amid the Covid-19 shutdown, it is understood that DAZN will now split the instalment in two payments, with one to be paid by June 27 and the second by July 20.
Action from Serie A resumed at the weekend after a suspension of over three months.
IMG, the agency that holds the league’s international rights, has also been reported to be closing in on an agreement with the league over remaining payments for the 2019-20 campaign. Discussions with Sky Italia have been far less fruitful, however, with the league said to have filed an injunction against the pay-television broadcaster in a bid to claw back rights fee payments.
Domestic live rights to Serie A games are held by Sky and DAZN in deals worth €973m ($1.09bn) per season, while IMG’s international rights deal is worth just over €380m per season for international broadcast rights, club archive rights, betting rights, a marketing spend and fee for access to the broadcast signal.
DAZN holds live rights to three fixtures per match week, giving it a total of 114 matches per season in a contract worth €193.3m per season.
Antitrust ruling scuppers free-to-air Serie A
Meanwhile, the AGCM, Italy’s antitrust authority, rejected plans for two Serie A matches to be shown live on a free-to-air basis as the league returned at the weekend.
Vincenzo Spadafora, Italy’s sports minister had been pushing for live free-to-air exposure of matches as they returned behind closed doors. However, the AGCM ruled that the free-to-air rights had not been put up for sale in a tender process and that coverage could therefore not be possible.
It had been proposed that DAZN make coverage of the Verona-Cagliari match available on its YouTube channel and that Sky also aired the Atalanta-Sassuolo match on TV8, its free-to-air digital terrestrial channel.
However, embargoes on free-to-air highlights were lifted, allowing public-service broadcaster Rai to show highlights shortly after the evening matches concluded. Restrictions on the timings of late-evening highlights on commercial broadcaster Mediaset were also lifted.
Mediaset recently approached Italy’s antitrust authorities over the plans to showcase live Serie A matches on free-to-air television. Mediaset is said to have to asked that either all broadcasters are able to broadcast Serie A matches on a free-to-air basis or that no advertisements could be carried if just one broadcaster is chosen.
Spadafora had earlier proposed a similar system to that introduced by German pay-television broadcaster Sky Deutschland for the Bundesliga. He suggested a Diretta Gol show – the broadcasting of near-live goals and action from various simultaneous matches in a single broadcast – on a free-to-air basis.
Sky Deutschland has made its ‘Konferenz’ coverage of Bundesliga and second-tier 2. Bundesliga matches available following the resumption of football in Germany. Sky’s Konferenz has been available on the free-to-view Sky Sport News channel and free via a live stream on the Sky Sport website.
DAZN agrees Serie A payments, antitrust move scuppers free-to-air plans
Martin Ross - June 22, 2020
DAZN, the OTT streaming operator, has reached an agreement with Lega Serie A over the structure of its remaining payments this season for domestic broadcast rights to Italian football’s top flight, SportBusiness understands.
DAZN has been in talks with the league in recent weeks and has now struck a deal over the payments to be made.
Having not made its instalment payment in May as Serie A remained suspended amid the Covid-19 shutdown, it is understood that DAZN will now split the instalment in two payments, with one to be paid by June 27 and the second by July 20.
Action from Serie A resumed at the weekend after a suspension of over three months.
IMG, the agency that holds the league’s international rights, has also been reported to be closing in on an agreement with the league over remaining payments for the 2019-20 campaign. Discussions with Sky Italia have been far less fruitful, however, with the league said to have filed an injunction against the pay-television broadcaster in a bid to claw back rights fee payments.
Domestic live rights to Serie A games are held by Sky and DAZN in deals worth €973m ($1.09bn) per season, while IMG’s international rights deal is worth just over €380m per season for international broadcast rights, club archive rights, betting rights, a marketing spend and fee for access to the broadcast signal.
DAZN holds live rights to three fixtures per match week, giving it a total of 114 matches per season in a contract worth €193.3m per season.
Antitrust ruling scuppers free-to-air Serie A
Meanwhile, the AGCM, Italy’s antitrust authority, rejected plans for two Serie A matches to be shown live on a free-to-air basis as the league returned at the weekend.
Vincenzo Spadafora, Italy’s sports minister had been pushing for live free-to-air exposure of matches as they returned behind closed doors. However, the AGCM ruled that the free-to-air rights had not been put up for sale in a tender process and that coverage could therefore not be possible.
It had been proposed that DAZN make coverage of the Verona-Cagliari match available on its YouTube channel and that Sky also aired the Atalanta-Sassuolo match on TV8, its free-to-air digital terrestrial channel.
However, embargoes on free-to-air highlights were lifted, allowing public-service broadcaster Rai to show highlights shortly after the evening matches concluded. Restrictions on the timings of late-evening highlights on commercial broadcaster Mediaset were also lifted.
Mediaset recently approached Italy’s antitrust authorities over the plans to showcase live Serie A matches on free-to-air television. Mediaset is said to have to asked that either all broadcasters are able to broadcast Serie A matches on a free-to-air basis or that no advertisements could be carried if just one broadcaster is chosen.
Spadafora had earlier proposed a similar system to that introduced by German pay-television broadcaster Sky Deutschland for the Bundesliga. He suggested a Diretta Gol show – the broadcasting of near-live goals and action from various simultaneous matches in a single broadcast – on a free-to-air basis.
Sky Deutschland has made its ‘Konferenz’ coverage of Bundesliga and second-tier 2. Bundesliga matches available following the resumption of football in Germany. Sky’s Konferenz has been available on the free-to-view Sky Sport News channel and free via a live stream on the Sky Sport website.
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
Following this @SwissRamble was asked to give his view on Everton under the same light of UEFA FFP relaxationChester Perry wrote: ↑Mon Jun 22, 2020 1:38 pm@SwissRamble offers his take on the FFP relaxation - as ever the detail of his work is of great benefit to us mere mortals
https://twitter.com/SwissRamble/status/ ... 8603175936
https://twitter.com/SwissRamble/status/ ... 0598840323
like me he suspects the finch farm sponsorship and Stadium naming rights option would be investigated for fair value
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
Sheffield Wednesday's EFL hearing has been scheduled has started today I presume - given this in the Telegraph
Sheffield Wednesday's legal fight with English Football League to start on Tuesday
JOHN PERCY JUNE 22, 2020
Sheffield Wednesday's legal fight with the English Football League will start on Tuesday, in a potentially significant development for the Championship season.
Wednesday's battle with the EFL over charges of breaching Profitability & Sustainability rules is being heard by an independent disciplinary commission this week, after the dispute was brought forward following complaints from a number of rival clubs.
The Championship club were initially expected to appear in front of the three-man panel in July but it is understood proceedings will now begin on Tuesday, with the complexity of the case ensuring it is likely to last for the rest of the week.
Wednesday have been locked in a dispute with the EFL since last November after they were charged with financial misconduct - which they strenuously deny.
Potential punishment, if found guilty, ranges from a points deduction to a transfer embargo or fine, and will be decided by the independent commission.
The decision on when to impose any punishment - if applicable - can also be made by the commission, but sources suggest it is expected to be announced before the end of this season.
It has been alleged privately by a number of rival clubs that Wednesday could be facing a hefty points deduction if they are found guilty.
Barnsley have already written to the EFL to reveal they will consider legal action if they are relegated and the charges have not been concluded.
The EFL declined to comment on Monday evening.
Wednesday were charged over alleged breaches regarding the £60 million sale of Hillsborough to chairman Dejphon Chansiri, enabling them to post a pre-tax profit of £2.5m.
The charges relate to "how and when" it was sold, and its subsequent inclusion in the 2017-2018 accounts when it was sold a year later.
Wednesday deny the charge and also issued a counter-claim against the EFL for allegedly "acting unlawfully".
The club are currently 15th in the Championship table, eight points adrift of both the play-off positions and relegation zone. Wednesday drew 1-1 with Nottingham Forest in the season restart on Saturday, and travel to Bristol City this weekend.
Derby County are still waiting to discover the date of their hearing, after they were charged in January with exceeding "excess losses", which is understood to relate to the £80m sale of Pride Park to a company owned by Mel Morris, the club's chairman.
Morris has always maintained that the sale of fixed assets was previously allowed in the rules and Derby will "strongly contest" the charge.
Last season, Birmingham City were docked nine points after being found guilty of breaking the Profitability & Sustainability rules, previously known as Financial Fair Play.
Sheffield Wednesday's legal fight with English Football League to start on Tuesday
JOHN PERCY JUNE 22, 2020
Sheffield Wednesday's legal fight with the English Football League will start on Tuesday, in a potentially significant development for the Championship season.
Wednesday's battle with the EFL over charges of breaching Profitability & Sustainability rules is being heard by an independent disciplinary commission this week, after the dispute was brought forward following complaints from a number of rival clubs.
The Championship club were initially expected to appear in front of the three-man panel in July but it is understood proceedings will now begin on Tuesday, with the complexity of the case ensuring it is likely to last for the rest of the week.
Wednesday have been locked in a dispute with the EFL since last November after they were charged with financial misconduct - which they strenuously deny.
Potential punishment, if found guilty, ranges from a points deduction to a transfer embargo or fine, and will be decided by the independent commission.
The decision on when to impose any punishment - if applicable - can also be made by the commission, but sources suggest it is expected to be announced before the end of this season.
It has been alleged privately by a number of rival clubs that Wednesday could be facing a hefty points deduction if they are found guilty.
Barnsley have already written to the EFL to reveal they will consider legal action if they are relegated and the charges have not been concluded.
The EFL declined to comment on Monday evening.
Wednesday were charged over alleged breaches regarding the £60 million sale of Hillsborough to chairman Dejphon Chansiri, enabling them to post a pre-tax profit of £2.5m.
The charges relate to "how and when" it was sold, and its subsequent inclusion in the 2017-2018 accounts when it was sold a year later.
Wednesday deny the charge and also issued a counter-claim against the EFL for allegedly "acting unlawfully".
The club are currently 15th in the Championship table, eight points adrift of both the play-off positions and relegation zone. Wednesday drew 1-1 with Nottingham Forest in the season restart on Saturday, and travel to Bristol City this weekend.
Derby County are still waiting to discover the date of their hearing, after they were charged in January with exceeding "excess losses", which is understood to relate to the £80m sale of Pride Park to a company owned by Mel Morris, the club's chairman.
Morris has always maintained that the sale of fixed assets was previously allowed in the rules and Derby will "strongly contest" the charge.
Last season, Birmingham City were docked nine points after being found guilty of breaking the Profitability & Sustainability rules, previously known as Financial Fair Play.
-
claret2018
- Posts: 2070
- Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2018 4:49 pm
- Been Liked: 819 times
- Has Liked: 26 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
I don’t think Deloitte have been our auditors, certainly not in the last 10 or so years
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
No not in the last 10 years, but there is History that I an sure Royboyclaret has mentioned in the pastclaret2018 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 3:58 pmI don’t think Deloitte have been our auditors, certainly not in the last 10 or so years
-
Royboyclaret
- Posts: 3891
- Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 12:57 pm
- Been Liked: 1282 times
- Has Liked: 682 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
The only auditor "problem" to my recollection involved KPMG, who were subsequently shown the door and replaced by a local company.Chester Perry wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 4:07 pmNo not in the last 10 years, but there is History that I an sure Royboyclaret has mentioned in the past
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
I happily stand corrected - I knew it was big 4 but got the wrong oneRoyboyclaret wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 4:21 pmThe only auditor "problem" to my recollection involved KPMG, who were subsequently shown the door and replaced by a local company.
-
Royboyclaret
- Posts: 3891
- Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 12:57 pm
- Been Liked: 1282 times
- Has Liked: 682 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
Everton's pre-tax Loss of £112m last year really was a startling figure and I suspect even The esk was taken aback by the magnitude of the Loss. However, over the required three year measurement I believe they just about managed to avoid punishment. I recall their Player Amortisation being particularly high at something like £95m.Chester Perry wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 2:10 pmFollowing this @SwissRamble was asked to give his view on Everton under the same light of UEFA FFP relaxation
https://twitter.com/SwissRamble/status/ ... 0598840323
like me he suspects the finch farm sponsorship and Stadium naming rights option would be investigated for fair value
-
Royboyclaret
- Posts: 3891
- Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 12:57 pm
- Been Liked: 1282 times
- Has Liked: 682 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
By the way, Chester, speaking of Everton reminds me that The esk posted on here of his intention to publish Part IV of his Football Shorts articles by last weekend. Any sign of the article as yet?
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
He said he was a bit overloaded by real world work so it was delayed - we just have to be patientRoyboyclaret wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 4:43 pmBy the way, Chester, speaking of Everton reminds me that The esk posted on here of his intention to publish Part IV of his Football Shorts articles by last weekend. Any sign of the article as yet?
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
A piece from Nielsen Sports on how Premier League club partners can earn up to £2m in media value per match via the increased coverage and viewing of the restart (note - this does not necessarily equate to revenue to the clubs)
https://nielsensports.com/premier-leagu ... per-match/
https://nielsensports.com/premier-leagu ... per-match/
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
In his 3rd and final thread on the 2018/19 Premier League financial review @SwissRamble compares the big 6 against the 14Chester Perry wrote: ↑Wed Jun 17, 2020 4:11 pmtoday @SwissRamble did his piece on the other 14's 2018/19 finances - not as comprehensive as the big 6 which is disappointing
https://twitter.com/SwissRamble/status/ ... 9933929472
https://twitter.com/SwissRamble/status/ ... 3126328320
-
Royboyclaret
- Posts: 3891
- Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 12:57 pm
- Been Liked: 1282 times
- Has Liked: 682 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
Simply have to admire the detail behind the analysis provided by Swiss Ramble, and this one is no exception.Chester Perry wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 8:53 pmIn his 3rd and final thread on the 2018/19 Premier League financial review @SwissRamble compares the big 6 against the 14
https://twitter.com/SwissRamble/status/ ... 3126328320
From a Burnley perspective it's always interesting to monitor the annual differences between the big six and the remaining fourteen. We live in hope that the gap will narrow but in reality, in terms of Total Income, the difference in the last three year cycle between the 6th and 7th Premier League clubs in terms of Revenue has never been higher. Back in 2010 the difference was £29m, then £61m, £51m, £52m, £51m, £67m, £68m, £73m, £190m and £204m.
Some remarkable figures there in the last broadcast cycle and further proof, if we needed it, just how difficult it is to penetrate the financial chasm between Liverpool, City, United, Chelsea, Totteham, Arsenal and the rest. Obviously we languish a long way behind, but after last night's offering I guess we should be grateful that, for now, we are even members of the 'other 14'.
-
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
Makes you wonder how many other lower league teams will scrap their academies/youth teams, if Salford are feeling the pinch with their outside backing, you can only imagine how the other L2 clubs are faring.
League Two Salford City have decided to scrap their Under-18 team.
The club, part-owned by the ‘Class of 92’ group that famously came through Manchester United’s youth system at the same time and all went on to win multiple trophies, have made the decision after months of debate.
BBC Sport understands Salford have spent approximately £500,000-a-year running their academy, which is at Category Four level. To expand their recruitment to cover the nine to 16 age range, they would have needed to move to Category Three status, which would have taken their annual spending to £1m, which would be part-funded by the Premier League.
Instead, Salford intend to use the money to enhance their elite development squad, coached by former Manchester United Under-23 boss Warren Joyce, who will be given their own games programme, with the club withdrawing from the Football League’s Youth Alliance League.
Just as an aside i didn't know Warren Joyce had a role at Salford, always good to see ex-clarets getting work elsewhere.
League Two Salford City have decided to scrap their Under-18 team.
The club, part-owned by the ‘Class of 92’ group that famously came through Manchester United’s youth system at the same time and all went on to win multiple trophies, have made the decision after months of debate.
BBC Sport understands Salford have spent approximately £500,000-a-year running their academy, which is at Category Four level. To expand their recruitment to cover the nine to 16 age range, they would have needed to move to Category Three status, which would have taken their annual spending to £1m, which would be part-funded by the Premier League.
Instead, Salford intend to use the money to enhance their elite development squad, coached by former Manchester United Under-23 boss Warren Joyce, who will be given their own games programme, with the club withdrawing from the Football League’s Youth Alliance League.
Just as an aside i didn't know Warren Joyce had a role at Salford, always good to see ex-clarets getting work elsewhere.
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
KPMG's Football Benchmark with an update of squad values for Europe's biggest clubs as a result of covid19 impact of the games economy - all showing significant decreases
https://footballbenchmark.com/library/h ... pe_s_elite
https://footballbenchmark.com/library/h ... pe_s_elite
-
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
I haven't read the article CP, but surely if the transfer values are significantly less, then this will feed into any new contract discussions, and therefore mean players will have to be prepared to accept salary decreases, or is it not that simple?, this might finally mean the crazy market finds a sense of normality, but i know this has been said plenty of times before, and it hasn't happened yet.Chester Perry wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 12:32 pmKPMG's Football Benchmark with an update of squad values for Europe's biggest clubs as a result of covid19 impact of the games economy - all showing significant decreases
https://footballbenchmark.com/library/h ... pe_s_elite
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
There is a thought that they will bounce back when fans are allowed back (thereby returning earnings to normal.tiger76 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 1:05 pmI haven't read the article CP, but surely if the transfer values are significantly less, then this will feed into any new contract discussions, and therefore mean players will have to be prepared to accept salary decreases, or is it not that simple?, this might finally mean the crazy market finds a sense of normality, but i know this has been said plenty of times before, and it hasn't happened yet.
The other more interesting element is the number of signings over £100m that have failed - which suggests that either players cannot yet handle the price tag or have been over-valued. Either way clubs will be more reluctant to spend those sums because the price of failure is to high, combine that with the perception that spending that much on a player will seem in bad taste for the next few years and you have a deflation in value.
It is likely that the £59m - £80m price bracket will remain strong though
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
This is happening a lot in the lower leagues - it is almost always as a result of the EPPP, where clubs can come in and take your youngsters for a fixed price if they are promising - Big clubs are just hoovering up players - it is pretty scandalous reallytiger76 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 12:31 pmMakes you wonder how many other lower league teams will scrap their academies/youth teams, if Salford are feeling the pinch with their outside backing, you can only imagine how the other L2 clubs are faring.
League Two Salford City have decided to scrap their Under-18 team.
The club, part-owned by the ‘Class of 92’ group that famously came through Manchester United’s youth system at the same time and all went on to win multiple trophies, have made the decision after months of debate.
BBC Sport understands Salford have spent approximately £500,000-a-year running their academy, which is at Category Four level. To expand their recruitment to cover the nine to 16 age range, they would have needed to move to Category Three status, which would have taken their annual spending to £1m, which would be part-funded by the Premier League.
Instead, Salford intend to use the money to enhance their elite development squad, coached by former Manchester United Under-23 boss Warren Joyce, who will be given their own games programme, with the club withdrawing from the Football League’s Youth Alliance League.
Just as an aside i didn't know Warren Joyce had a role at Salford, always good to see ex-clarets getting work elsewhere.
-
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
So we'll see less Neymar's in the coming years, that can only be a good thing, the market was becoming ridiculous, and from a BFC POV, the crazy money at the top end of the market, was pushing up the price of the average PL/top end Champ players, which is the level we're shopping in, of course on the flip side, it might mean we're not able to command the type of fees, we might have expected for McNeil, Pope et al, so it's swings and roundabouts, i'm not certain the bounce back will be so quick, there is a worldwide recession, perhaps even a depression looming, and even the mad world of football can't be completely immune to that.Chester Perry wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 1:22 pmThere is a thought that they will bounce back when fans are allowed back (thereby returning earnings to normal.
The other more interesting element is the number of signings over £100m that have failed - which suggests that either players cannot yet handle the price tag or have been over-valued. Either way clubs will be more reluctant to spend those sums because the price of failure is to high, combine that with the perception that spending that much on a player will seem in bad taste for the next few years and you have a deflation in value.
It is likely that the £59m - £80m price bracket will remain strong though
There had to be a levelling off at some point, prices couldn't keep rising at the rate they were, even with all the money swirling around the game, the FFP has already led to a more sane approach by many Championship clubs, and the covid might lead to a more sane approach by the elite, who knows we might even see clubs preferring to invest in their academies and put their faith in youth.
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
we can hope tiger we can hope
I think that the £50m transfer fee will establish itself as the new normal for the Premier League in the next 18 months and anything below £30m will be considered as a bargain basement buy, which is nuts and well beyond anything we can achieve.
I posted a few weeks back that we will soon have a 3 tier Premier League - The big 5, Arsenal slipping into a group with Everton. Leicester, Wolves, West Ham (if they can ever sort their act out), (Villa if they stay up) and possibly Newcastle and Crystal Palace (if their development plans come to fruition) - You can add Leeds to that mix too - that could leave just 7 teams fighting for the scraps and more often than not to avoid the bottom 3. Sheffield Utd have potential too but the owner is not really wealthy enough.
Then consider that if Birmingham City, Derby, Notts Forest, Sheffield Wednesday and Sunderland (even Middlesbrough) got their acts together. You can easily see the Premier League having 6-9 teams yo-yoing between them and the Championship as being normal in the next few years. Which is what they want because it makes the teams coming up potentially stronger. Are aim is likely to try and be one of those teams - which means massively overachieving in the way we have for the last 7 years, and that is a big ask, as we have already gone through 2 cycles of a settled team and are now trying to start a 3 rd cycle in the middle of an economic downturn with our funds challenged through no fault of our own.
I think that the £50m transfer fee will establish itself as the new normal for the Premier League in the next 18 months and anything below £30m will be considered as a bargain basement buy, which is nuts and well beyond anything we can achieve.
I posted a few weeks back that we will soon have a 3 tier Premier League - The big 5, Arsenal slipping into a group with Everton. Leicester, Wolves, West Ham (if they can ever sort their act out), (Villa if they stay up) and possibly Newcastle and Crystal Palace (if their development plans come to fruition) - You can add Leeds to that mix too - that could leave just 7 teams fighting for the scraps and more often than not to avoid the bottom 3. Sheffield Utd have potential too but the owner is not really wealthy enough.
Then consider that if Birmingham City, Derby, Notts Forest, Sheffield Wednesday and Sunderland (even Middlesbrough) got their acts together. You can easily see the Premier League having 6-9 teams yo-yoing between them and the Championship as being normal in the next few years. Which is what they want because it makes the teams coming up potentially stronger. Are aim is likely to try and be one of those teams - which means massively overachieving in the way we have for the last 7 years, and that is a big ask, as we have already gone through 2 cycles of a settled team and are now trying to start a 3 rd cycle in the middle of an economic downturn with our funds challenged through no fault of our own.
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
Interesting tweet about how Barca are looking to balance the books this summer
https://twitter.com/barcacentre/status/ ... 0497207300
https://twitter.com/barcacentre/status/ ... 0497207300
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
The SPFL look to avoid the bitter arguments next season by asking the clubs to give them the power to make the decisions on their behalf re-any covid impacts
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53167718
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53167718
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
Saudi Arabia look to challenge BeINsport the legitimate way by acquiring TV rights - first up they want the Bundesliga rights for 2021-25 - From the FT
Saudi Arabia makes play for Bundesliga TV rights
AHMED AL OMRAN JUNE 24, 2020
Saudi Arabia has approached Germany’s Bundesliga over acquiring the football league’s television rights in the Middle East, the latest move by the Gulf kingdom to seek new investments in international sport.
The body that runs German football’s top division is in exclusive talks with beIN Sports to renew the Qatar-based network’s $250m five-year deal to screen matches across the region, which runs out at the end of this season.
But a representative for the Saudi state recently contacted the Bundesliga seeking to acquire the Middle East rights instead, according to people with knowledge of the situation.
There was, however, disagreement over who initiated the contact.
A Saudi official said: “The Bundesliga approached Saudi. Not the other way around. They have launched their new sales cycle and so are wanting to speak to as many potential buyers as possible.”
The attempt to hijack the Qatari broadcaster’s talks with the Bundesliga is Saudi Arabia’s latest play within the global sports industry, having spent hundreds of millions of dollars in recent years to stage European football matches, heavyweight boxing bouts and motor racing events in the country.
It also shows how big sporting competitions must navigate the rivalries between the Middle East’s absolute monarchies, which have spent their petrodollars on sporting events and groups while also being entangled in political and economic battles.
The Public Investment Fund, the Saudi sovereign wealth fund steered by the country’s de facto ruler, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, is also leading a proposed £300m takeover of England’s Newcastle United Football Club.
That deal requires approval by the Premier League, the body that runs the top division in English football. The process has been complicated by a World Trade Organization ruling last week that the Saudi government has “infringed” international trade agreements due to the country’s involvement with beoutQ, an Arabic language TV network.
BeoutQ has been streaming content rightfully owned by Doha-based beIN, which has paid billions of dollars for exclusive rights to major sporting events, including Premier League and Bundesliga matches.
Saudi Arabia denies involvement in the pirate network, which emerged in 2017 shortly after Riyadh and three Arab allies cut diplomatic and transport links to Qatar.
This week, beIN pulled coverage of Italian Serie A league matches “for legal reasons” in 35 countries. The Qatari group has previously been aggrieved when the Italian league decided to hold exhibition matches in Saudi Arabia.
Separately, beIN also holds rights to screen Bundesliga matches in other countries, including France, Australia and New Zealand.
Scoreboard is the Financial Times’ new must-read weekly briefing on the business of sport, where you’ll find the best analysis of financial issues affecting clubs, franchises, owners, investors and media groups across the global industry. Sign up here.
Saudi authorities have complained about beIN’s ability to secure exclusive sports rights in the region and has shut down the Qatari TV network in the country. But speculation about intent to launch a Saudi-owned sports network has not materialised into a serious plan.
Saud al-Qahtani, a powerful former aide to the crown prince, told CNN Arabic in 2018: “What we are focused on is that television rights for global sports competitions are awarded fairly in a way that doesn’t allow any country to take advantage of its monopoly to deliver political messages.”
The Saudi government did not respond to a request for comment.
A report in a Saudi newspaper on Wednesday stated that the Bundesliga had sold the Middle East broadcast rights to its matches to KSA Sports, the kingdom’s state-backed sports channel, for three seasons.
Referring to this report, the Bundesliga said “these rumours are not correct”, but otherwise declined to comment.
On Monday, the Bundesliga announced that European pay-TV network Sky and online service DAZN would pay €4.4bn to screen matches in Germany for four years from the 2021-22 season.
The domestic rights deal was €200m less than its previous contract, in the first sign that the market for live sports has weakened because of the coronavirus crisis.
Saudi Arabia makes play for Bundesliga TV rights
AHMED AL OMRAN JUNE 24, 2020
Saudi Arabia has approached Germany’s Bundesliga over acquiring the football league’s television rights in the Middle East, the latest move by the Gulf kingdom to seek new investments in international sport.
The body that runs German football’s top division is in exclusive talks with beIN Sports to renew the Qatar-based network’s $250m five-year deal to screen matches across the region, which runs out at the end of this season.
But a representative for the Saudi state recently contacted the Bundesliga seeking to acquire the Middle East rights instead, according to people with knowledge of the situation.
There was, however, disagreement over who initiated the contact.
A Saudi official said: “The Bundesliga approached Saudi. Not the other way around. They have launched their new sales cycle and so are wanting to speak to as many potential buyers as possible.”
The attempt to hijack the Qatari broadcaster’s talks with the Bundesliga is Saudi Arabia’s latest play within the global sports industry, having spent hundreds of millions of dollars in recent years to stage European football matches, heavyweight boxing bouts and motor racing events in the country.
It also shows how big sporting competitions must navigate the rivalries between the Middle East’s absolute monarchies, which have spent their petrodollars on sporting events and groups while also being entangled in political and economic battles.
The Public Investment Fund, the Saudi sovereign wealth fund steered by the country’s de facto ruler, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, is also leading a proposed £300m takeover of England’s Newcastle United Football Club.
That deal requires approval by the Premier League, the body that runs the top division in English football. The process has been complicated by a World Trade Organization ruling last week that the Saudi government has “infringed” international trade agreements due to the country’s involvement with beoutQ, an Arabic language TV network.
BeoutQ has been streaming content rightfully owned by Doha-based beIN, which has paid billions of dollars for exclusive rights to major sporting events, including Premier League and Bundesliga matches.
Saudi Arabia denies involvement in the pirate network, which emerged in 2017 shortly after Riyadh and three Arab allies cut diplomatic and transport links to Qatar.
This week, beIN pulled coverage of Italian Serie A league matches “for legal reasons” in 35 countries. The Qatari group has previously been aggrieved when the Italian league decided to hold exhibition matches in Saudi Arabia.
Separately, beIN also holds rights to screen Bundesliga matches in other countries, including France, Australia and New Zealand.
Scoreboard is the Financial Times’ new must-read weekly briefing on the business of sport, where you’ll find the best analysis of financial issues affecting clubs, franchises, owners, investors and media groups across the global industry. Sign up here.
Saudi authorities have complained about beIN’s ability to secure exclusive sports rights in the region and has shut down the Qatari TV network in the country. But speculation about intent to launch a Saudi-owned sports network has not materialised into a serious plan.
Saud al-Qahtani, a powerful former aide to the crown prince, told CNN Arabic in 2018: “What we are focused on is that television rights for global sports competitions are awarded fairly in a way that doesn’t allow any country to take advantage of its monopoly to deliver political messages.”
The Saudi government did not respond to a request for comment.
A report in a Saudi newspaper on Wednesday stated that the Bundesliga had sold the Middle East broadcast rights to its matches to KSA Sports, the kingdom’s state-backed sports channel, for three seasons.
Referring to this report, the Bundesliga said “these rumours are not correct”, but otherwise declined to comment.
On Monday, the Bundesliga announced that European pay-TV network Sky and online service DAZN would pay €4.4bn to screen matches in Germany for four years from the 2021-22 season.
The domestic rights deal was €200m less than its previous contract, in the first sign that the market for live sports has weakened because of the coronavirus crisis.
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
Here's Simon Chadwick's take on that last post
https://twitter.com/Prof_Chadwick/statu ... 8807581705
https://twitter.com/Prof_Chadwick/statu ... 8807581705
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
In a follow up to post from Monday another rights owner comes to an agreement with Serie A over missed payments - I am extremely intrigued that the Italians do not seem to be hit by rebates to rights holders - though SKY is still holding out - from SportsBusiness,com
Serie A and IMG settle payment schedule, Sky ‘issued ultimatum’
Martin Ross - June 24, 2020
The IMG agency and Lega Serie A, the organising body of the top division of Italian club football, have reached an agreement over the remaining payments for international rights to Italian football’s top flight, SportBusiness understands.
A deal has been struck after discussions with the league in recent weeks and follows a similar accord reached by DAZN, the OTT streaming operator, over instalment payments for domestic broadcast rights.
It is understood that IMG has agreed to meet May’s missed instalment via two payments, with the first tranche to be paid by June 27 and the second by July 20.
DAZN and IMG did not make the payments in May as Serie A remained suspended amid the Covid-19 shutdown but the league resumed its 2019-20 season on Saturday (June 20).
IMG’s international rights deal is worth just over €380m ($428.2m) per season for international broadcast rights, club archive rights, betting rights, a marketing spend and fee for access to the broadcast signal.
Pay-television broadcaster Sky Italia and DAZN hold live domestic rights in deals worth €973m per season. Sky is paying €780m and can broadcast seven of the 10 weekly Serie A fixtures, with DAZN paying €193.3m per season for rights to the remaining three fixtures per match week.
Discussions with Sky Italia have been far less fruitful, with the league having filed an injunction against the pay-television broadcaster in a bid to claw back rights fee payments.
Lega Serie A has now issued Sky with an ultimatum to pay its missed rights fee instalments totalling €131m, reports La Repubblica newspaper.
It is claimed that a July 12 deadline has been issued by the league and, in the event that the payment is not made, the league is threatening to prevent Sky from receiving the broadcast signal at a time that the rescheduled 2019-20 Serie A season enters its decisive phase.
Speaking in mid May amid a deadlock in negotiations, Sky Italia chief executive Maximo Ibarra said that he hoped it would “finally be the right occasion for representatives of Serie A clubs to take the proposal for dialogue that we have offered them for weeks seriously”.
He told ANSA: “Across Europe, in Germany, France and the UK, leagues and broadcasters are jointly addressing this serious emergency by finding balanced and general interest solutions.”
Ibarra said that Sky has “proposed several solutions” but had not received a response and called on Serie A to “rediscover its constructive spirit that has marked many years of collaboration with Sky”.
However, he was met with a swift response from Serie A chief executive Luigi De Siervo, who said that, although the “door for dialogue with Sky has always remained open”, the league has “always stressed that it was necessary for Sky to meet the payment deadlines set by the contracts as a priority”.
De Siervo added: “We immediately made it clear that Sky’s request for a discount of between 15 per cent and 18 per cent, in the event of the continuation of the championship, obviously could not be accepted, especially during such a tricky financial period for our teams.”
Serie A and IMG settle payment schedule, Sky ‘issued ultimatum’
Martin Ross - June 24, 2020
The IMG agency and Lega Serie A, the organising body of the top division of Italian club football, have reached an agreement over the remaining payments for international rights to Italian football’s top flight, SportBusiness understands.
A deal has been struck after discussions with the league in recent weeks and follows a similar accord reached by DAZN, the OTT streaming operator, over instalment payments for domestic broadcast rights.
It is understood that IMG has agreed to meet May’s missed instalment via two payments, with the first tranche to be paid by June 27 and the second by July 20.
DAZN and IMG did not make the payments in May as Serie A remained suspended amid the Covid-19 shutdown but the league resumed its 2019-20 season on Saturday (June 20).
IMG’s international rights deal is worth just over €380m ($428.2m) per season for international broadcast rights, club archive rights, betting rights, a marketing spend and fee for access to the broadcast signal.
Pay-television broadcaster Sky Italia and DAZN hold live domestic rights in deals worth €973m per season. Sky is paying €780m and can broadcast seven of the 10 weekly Serie A fixtures, with DAZN paying €193.3m per season for rights to the remaining three fixtures per match week.
Discussions with Sky Italia have been far less fruitful, with the league having filed an injunction against the pay-television broadcaster in a bid to claw back rights fee payments.
Lega Serie A has now issued Sky with an ultimatum to pay its missed rights fee instalments totalling €131m, reports La Repubblica newspaper.
It is claimed that a July 12 deadline has been issued by the league and, in the event that the payment is not made, the league is threatening to prevent Sky from receiving the broadcast signal at a time that the rescheduled 2019-20 Serie A season enters its decisive phase.
Speaking in mid May amid a deadlock in negotiations, Sky Italia chief executive Maximo Ibarra said that he hoped it would “finally be the right occasion for representatives of Serie A clubs to take the proposal for dialogue that we have offered them for weeks seriously”.
He told ANSA: “Across Europe, in Germany, France and the UK, leagues and broadcasters are jointly addressing this serious emergency by finding balanced and general interest solutions.”
Ibarra said that Sky has “proposed several solutions” but had not received a response and called on Serie A to “rediscover its constructive spirit that has marked many years of collaboration with Sky”.
However, he was met with a swift response from Serie A chief executive Luigi De Siervo, who said that, although the “door for dialogue with Sky has always remained open”, the league has “always stressed that it was necessary for Sky to meet the payment deadlines set by the contracts as a priority”.
De Siervo added: “We immediately made it clear that Sky’s request for a discount of between 15 per cent and 18 per cent, in the event of the continuation of the championship, obviously could not be accepted, especially during such a tricky financial period for our teams.”
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
La Liga continues to develop it's long term sponsorship deals - it has just signed a 10year extension with EA Sports - from SportsBusiness,com
LaLiga signs lucrative ten-year extension with global partner EA Sports
Matthew Williams - June 24, 2020
Spanish football league LaLiga has signed a long-term extension to its sponsorship agreement with video game developer EA Sports.
The brand has been part of the league’s global partner sponsorship tier since 2015 and the latest extension means the association will run until 2030. It is only a year since the two parties agreed a five-year renewal extending their tie-up until 2024.
While neither the league nor brand would comment on the value of the deal, sources say it is worth between €8m ($9m) and €10m per year for all marketing and licensing rights.
EA Sports will continue to have the right to use official LaLiga logos, clubs and players in its FIFA games. Forty of the 42 clubs in LaLiga’s two divisions are incorporated in the agreement, with FC Barcelona and Real Madrid holding separate contracts with EA Sports.
Read this: Football clubs have woken up to the power of FIFA and Pro Evo
LaLiga and EA Sports were keen to expand their association and worked directly on the renewal, with the continued development of the football esports space at the heart of their joint goals.
LaLiga sees esports and gaming as a means to grow its fanbase – particularly outside Spain – with the FIFA series the most popular football game. A LaLiga team is selected in 25 per cent of all online FIFA matches and it can boast the largest fanbase amongst FIFA players of any football league.
Read this: Four years on, LaLiga’s international focus is paying off in sponsorship
The two organisations have already collaborated on LaLiga’s esports league, eLaLiga Santander, and the new deal includes a commitment to grow esports participation and support through the competition.
LaLiga president Javier Tebas said today (Wednesday): “We have built a collaborative partnership with EA Sports for more than 20 years that has seen both organisations become leading international brands.”
Cam Weber, executive vice-president and group general manager for EA Sports, added: “Our vision is to grow the love of sport through our games and services, and with strategic partnerships with iconic organisations like LaLiga, we’re uniquely positioned to deliver unrivalled authenticity and innovation in the years to come.”
EA Sports has supported LaLiga’s restart after its suspension due to the Covid-19 pandemic by providing virtual sound from its FIFA game, in a project called ‘Sounds of the Stand’.
LaLiga signs lucrative ten-year extension with global partner EA Sports
Matthew Williams - June 24, 2020
Spanish football league LaLiga has signed a long-term extension to its sponsorship agreement with video game developer EA Sports.
The brand has been part of the league’s global partner sponsorship tier since 2015 and the latest extension means the association will run until 2030. It is only a year since the two parties agreed a five-year renewal extending their tie-up until 2024.
While neither the league nor brand would comment on the value of the deal, sources say it is worth between €8m ($9m) and €10m per year for all marketing and licensing rights.
EA Sports will continue to have the right to use official LaLiga logos, clubs and players in its FIFA games. Forty of the 42 clubs in LaLiga’s two divisions are incorporated in the agreement, with FC Barcelona and Real Madrid holding separate contracts with EA Sports.
Read this: Football clubs have woken up to the power of FIFA and Pro Evo
LaLiga and EA Sports were keen to expand their association and worked directly on the renewal, with the continued development of the football esports space at the heart of their joint goals.
LaLiga sees esports and gaming as a means to grow its fanbase – particularly outside Spain – with the FIFA series the most popular football game. A LaLiga team is selected in 25 per cent of all online FIFA matches and it can boast the largest fanbase amongst FIFA players of any football league.
Read this: Four years on, LaLiga’s international focus is paying off in sponsorship
The two organisations have already collaborated on LaLiga’s esports league, eLaLiga Santander, and the new deal includes a commitment to grow esports participation and support through the competition.
LaLiga president Javier Tebas said today (Wednesday): “We have built a collaborative partnership with EA Sports for more than 20 years that has seen both organisations become leading international brands.”
Cam Weber, executive vice-president and group general manager for EA Sports, added: “Our vision is to grow the love of sport through our games and services, and with strategic partnerships with iconic organisations like LaLiga, we’re uniquely positioned to deliver unrivalled authenticity and innovation in the years to come.”
EA Sports has supported LaLiga’s restart after its suspension due to the Covid-19 pandemic by providing virtual sound from its FIFA game, in a project called ‘Sounds of the Stand’.
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
I cannot believe that "football fans" are still falling for this blockchain nonsense (I have posted about it a few times in the last year)- Barcelona, never short on trying to fleece their global fan base ("more than a club" indeed) have found a new and lucrative stream of revenue it seems after it's initial launch recently. - from SportsProMedia.com
Barcelona generate US$1.3m from fan token sales
Flash sale with Chiliz sees all 600k $BAR tokens go in less than two hours.
Posted: June 23 2020By: Ed Dixon
US$777k worth of fan tokens sold on Chiliz.Net in under two minutes
$BAR tokens bought in 106 countries
More to be made available from 24th June
Spanish soccer champions Barcelona generated US$1.3 million from fan token ($BAR) sales after they sold out in less than two hours.
Launched in partnership with blockchain fintech provider Chiliz, and available on fan voting and rewards app Socios.com and the Chiliz Exchange platform, all 600,000 $BAR tokens were quickly snapped up. Notably, US$777,000 worth of tokens were sold on Chiliz.Net in less than two minutes, while demand on Socios and Chiliz exceeded supply by five times – more than US$6 million was deposited up to and during the flash sale.
The $BAR tokens, available at a fixed price of US$2, were sold in 106 countries, with more set to be available from 24th June. The price for those will be determined by supply and demand.
In return for their purchase, the fan tokens will offer buyers increased fan engagement on Socios.com, enabling them to vote in club-specific polls and to be in with the chance of winning digital and real-life rewards, such as VIP experiences.
The first Barca poll using $BAR will let supporters decide on a piece of fan-designed artwork to go inside the home dressing room at the Camp Nou stadium. $BAR token holders will also be able to vote in other polls every season on Socios.com, earning rewards and increasing their fan status through the app.
A leaderboard feature, where fans will receive rewards points based on how they interact with their teams through the app, will be launched in the near future, allowing supporters to compete to become the number one fan in their country. A chat feature and games will be launched on Socios.com in the coming months.
“Socios.com has been live for just over six months, but now fans are grasping the benefits of owning fan tokens and how we are able to deliver unprecedented opportunities for engagement with their clubs and unforgettable experiences,” said Alexandre Dreyfus, chief executive and founder of Chiliz and Socios.com.
“Football is a global game and support extends way beyond the stadium, city and country of the club. It’s a stat we’ve used often, but for the biggest clubs in the world 99.99 per cent of their support is outside the stadium. The fact $BAR Fan Tokens were bought in 106 countries is a strong testament to this.”
As well as Barca, Socios has partnerships with other top soccer clubs including Juventus, Paris Saint-Germain, Atlético Madrid, AS Roma, Galatasaray, and Independiente. It also has deals with Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) and esports team OG. Going forward, the company is aiming to secure tie-ups with as many as 50 soccer clubs and other sporting verticals.
Barcelona generate US$1.3m from fan token sales
Flash sale with Chiliz sees all 600k $BAR tokens go in less than two hours.
Posted: June 23 2020By: Ed Dixon
US$777k worth of fan tokens sold on Chiliz.Net in under two minutes
$BAR tokens bought in 106 countries
More to be made available from 24th June
Spanish soccer champions Barcelona generated US$1.3 million from fan token ($BAR) sales after they sold out in less than two hours.
Launched in partnership with blockchain fintech provider Chiliz, and available on fan voting and rewards app Socios.com and the Chiliz Exchange platform, all 600,000 $BAR tokens were quickly snapped up. Notably, US$777,000 worth of tokens were sold on Chiliz.Net in less than two minutes, while demand on Socios and Chiliz exceeded supply by five times – more than US$6 million was deposited up to and during the flash sale.
The $BAR tokens, available at a fixed price of US$2, were sold in 106 countries, with more set to be available from 24th June. The price for those will be determined by supply and demand.
In return for their purchase, the fan tokens will offer buyers increased fan engagement on Socios.com, enabling them to vote in club-specific polls and to be in with the chance of winning digital and real-life rewards, such as VIP experiences.
The first Barca poll using $BAR will let supporters decide on a piece of fan-designed artwork to go inside the home dressing room at the Camp Nou stadium. $BAR token holders will also be able to vote in other polls every season on Socios.com, earning rewards and increasing their fan status through the app.
A leaderboard feature, where fans will receive rewards points based on how they interact with their teams through the app, will be launched in the near future, allowing supporters to compete to become the number one fan in their country. A chat feature and games will be launched on Socios.com in the coming months.
“Socios.com has been live for just over six months, but now fans are grasping the benefits of owning fan tokens and how we are able to deliver unprecedented opportunities for engagement with their clubs and unforgettable experiences,” said Alexandre Dreyfus, chief executive and founder of Chiliz and Socios.com.
“Football is a global game and support extends way beyond the stadium, city and country of the club. It’s a stat we’ve used often, but for the biggest clubs in the world 99.99 per cent of their support is outside the stadium. The fact $BAR Fan Tokens were bought in 106 countries is a strong testament to this.”
As well as Barca, Socios has partnerships with other top soccer clubs including Juventus, Paris Saint-Germain, Atlético Madrid, AS Roma, Galatasaray, and Independiente. It also has deals with Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) and esports team OG. Going forward, the company is aiming to secure tie-ups with as many as 50 soccer clubs and other sporting verticals.
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
Judging by a few threads still very active on the board a number are not impressed with the handling of our contract situation (which appears to include our manager) - Arsenal fans it seems are more unhappy at their contract dealings and then there is the not so small matter of agents
https://arseblog.com/2020/06/good-news- ... tionships/
There is a lot of noise going on about Kia Joorabchian at the moment, I suspect we are going to be hearing quite a bit about him in the coming weeks
for now we have @SportingIntel https://twitter.com/sportingintel/statu ... 3288140800
and this in the Mail https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footb ... chian.html
https://arseblog.com/2020/06/good-news- ... tionships/
There is a lot of noise going on about Kia Joorabchian at the moment, I suspect we are going to be hearing quite a bit about him in the coming weeks
for now we have @SportingIntel https://twitter.com/sportingintel/statu ... 3288140800
and this in the Mail https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footb ... chian.html
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
Following my posts on the subject last Saturday the Football Today Podcast asks "Is Bayern’s dominance an issue for German football?"
https://www.footballtodaypodcast.com/po ... n-football
https://www.footballtodaypodcast.com/po ... n-football
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
An Interesting diversion from Agents fees - Audit fees - @KieranMaguire has listed them for the Premier League re the 2018/19 accounts - we are mid table - Manchester United very expesinve because of much more onerous work as the are listed on the New York Stock Exchange - I suspect this is another area where MAn City benefit from a centralised CFG
https://twitter.com/KieranMaguire/statu ... 8985720838
https://twitter.com/KieranMaguire/statu ... 8985720838
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
The PFA are continuing to misunderstand the notion of winning friends and influencing people - they have released a document outlining that the proposed EFL Salary cap is illegal - from the Mirror
PFA outline "unlawful" EFL salary cap plans in two-page document sent to players
The PFA have warned its players about the proposals as EFL bosses look to bring in strict salary caps in League One and League Two with a limit also for Championship clubs
ByJohn Cross Chief Football Writer - 07:36, 24 JUN 2020
Players' union bosses have warned the EFL it would be “unlawful” to rush through a salary cap.
The Professional Footballers’ Association has sent out a two page document - seen by Mirror Sport - to players about the proposals for League One and League Two and it also spells out fears that wages will drop significantly in the long term.
EFL bosses want to bring in a salary cap of £2.5m per season for League One - which would mean an average salary of £2,400-a-week - and £1.25m for League Two.
They are also planning to do the same with the Championship, although there will be a much bigger ceiling of between £15m and £20m but the EFL will not be allowed to change any existing contracts.
EFL chiefs want to bring in the changes for the 2020/21 season.
But the PFA are now warning they must carry out proper consultation and has told players their clubs are not allowed to cut salaries without permission.
The PFA has told players in the document: “The PFA has made it clear to the EFL that matters relating to the employment of players, which includes matters of pay, must be considered before the Professional Football Negotiating and Consultative Committee (the “PFNCC”).
“The PFA is a member of the PFNCC, so would have an opportunity to scrutinise any plans and represent the best interests of players.
“It would be unlawful for the EFL and its clubs to vote on this issue and change the EFL Regulations without first consulting the PFNCC, which is the appropriate forum for matters relating to player contracts.
“If your contract extends beyond this season, your terms and conditions of employment will remain the same. Your club cannot change your salary without your consent, as has been the case with furlough and deferral arrangements.
“However, until such time that a salary cap is agreed by the members of the PFNCC, you are not obliged to agree to a reduced salary in line with the proposed salary cap.
"We do however envisage clubs looking to pay less for player salaries post-COVID-19.”
PFA outline "unlawful" EFL salary cap plans in two-page document sent to players
The PFA have warned its players about the proposals as EFL bosses look to bring in strict salary caps in League One and League Two with a limit also for Championship clubs
ByJohn Cross Chief Football Writer - 07:36, 24 JUN 2020
Players' union bosses have warned the EFL it would be “unlawful” to rush through a salary cap.
The Professional Footballers’ Association has sent out a two page document - seen by Mirror Sport - to players about the proposals for League One and League Two and it also spells out fears that wages will drop significantly in the long term.
EFL bosses want to bring in a salary cap of £2.5m per season for League One - which would mean an average salary of £2,400-a-week - and £1.25m for League Two.
They are also planning to do the same with the Championship, although there will be a much bigger ceiling of between £15m and £20m but the EFL will not be allowed to change any existing contracts.
EFL chiefs want to bring in the changes for the 2020/21 season.
But the PFA are now warning they must carry out proper consultation and has told players their clubs are not allowed to cut salaries without permission.
The PFA has told players in the document: “The PFA has made it clear to the EFL that matters relating to the employment of players, which includes matters of pay, must be considered before the Professional Football Negotiating and Consultative Committee (the “PFNCC”).
“The PFA is a member of the PFNCC, so would have an opportunity to scrutinise any plans and represent the best interests of players.
“It would be unlawful for the EFL and its clubs to vote on this issue and change the EFL Regulations without first consulting the PFNCC, which is the appropriate forum for matters relating to player contracts.
“If your contract extends beyond this season, your terms and conditions of employment will remain the same. Your club cannot change your salary without your consent, as has been the case with furlough and deferral arrangements.
“However, until such time that a salary cap is agreed by the members of the PFNCC, you are not obliged to agree to a reduced salary in line with the proposed salary cap.
"We do however envisage clubs looking to pay less for player salaries post-COVID-19.”
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
@SwisRamble takes us through how this trick is actually working on both sides of the deal as Juventus and Barcelona will essentially book Euro 60m profit from a deal where Juventus actually pay out Euro 10m - I must say that given the 2 clubs involved I am not surprised by this - It also goes a long way to understanding why Barcelona especially were talking up swap deals in the last few monthsChester Perry wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 6:57 pmInteresting tweet about how Barca are looking to balance the books this summer
https://twitter.com/barcacentre/status/ ... 0497207300
https://twitter.com/SwissRamble/status/ ... 5757330432
In fact there is an awful lot of interesting detail in the subsequent tail discussion down that thread - quite revealing of practices that appear to be quite common in certain parts of Europe
you make notice the tweet down the thread where Sid Lowe mentions that Barca need to find Euro 67m before month end or the directors become personally liable
This separate thread (linked by @SwissRamble) gives lots of detail on that Sid Lowe mentioned issue re Director Liability
https://twitter.com/DianaKristinne/stat ... 5352458240
This is actually very serious stuff, and is likely to be splashing across the press in the coming days - I have been posting about Barcelona's mad finances for over 2 years now - this is a revelation to me.
-
Royboyclaret
- Posts: 3891
- Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 12:57 pm
- Been Liked: 1282 times
- Has Liked: 682 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
This is the area we touched on the other day. Baldwins Audit Services are our current auditors and they merged with Cassons from Rossendale two or three years ago. Rather surprised to see the figure quite so high, mind you after the debacle with KPMG (who's charges would have been considerably higher) probably well worth the involvement with a more local company.Chester Perry wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2020 2:00 pmAn Interesting diversion from Agents fees - Audit fees - @KieranMaguire has listed them for the Premier League re the 2018/19 accounts - we are mid table - Manchester United very expesinve because of much more onerous work as the are listed on the New York Stock Exchange - I suspect this is another area where MAn City benefit from a centralised CFG
https://twitter.com/KieranMaguire/statu ... 8985720838
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
I missed this last year - from SportsBusiness.com - Marketing executive steals revenue by cutting short perimeter advertising so he can sell (and pocket the proceeds) the additional time
LED advertising | Why it took just one second to damage Infront’s reputation
Frank Dunne - September 9, 2019
- Former Infront executive under investigation for ripping off sponsors of the German FA; current member of staff suspended
- Scam shows how an agency executive can make millions by conning trusting clients
- Operatives say rip-off is not widespread in the industry but is still a wake-up call for brands
One second. Who’s going to notice one second? Nobody. Not for a long time anyway. Until someone did.
And that’s where the trouble began for the Infront agency. And for the Deutscher Fußball-Bund, Germany’s embattled football association.
On May 24, just as the Infront agency’s parent company, Wanda Sports, was gearing up for its New York initial public offering, Infront published a statement saying that it had been notified by the public prosecutor in Thurgau, Switzerland, of a pending criminal investigation into one of its former employees for “disloyal and unfaithful business management” in relation to contracts between sponsors and the DFB – contracts agreed by Infront.
The alleged scam worked like this: the agency sold multiple advertisers – DFB official sponsors and others – three minutes each per match of LED perimeter board time for Germany national men’s team home games, broken into six 30-second blocks. But instead of 30 seconds, many brands got 29 seconds.
Over 90 minutes, it freed up a further 180 seconds, or another valuable three minutes. This time was sold to other brands, with the executive allegedly diverting the funds into a private account.
In addition to the LED scam, Infront said it had learned that “gifts, at Infront’s cost, were provided by the former employee to employees of at least one of Infront’s clients that exceeded reasonable and customary values”.
The agency has “applied to constitute itself as a victim in this criminal procedure and is cooperating fully with the prosecuting authorities”.
On June 7, the prospectus for the impending Nasdaq IPO of Wanda Sports revealed Infront had offered to repay clients a total of €6m ($6.6m). The amount could have been higher but under the statute of limitations in Swiss law compensation is confined to a period of 10 years.
Infront told SportBusiness Review: “Many clients have already accepted our compensation offer and have been refunded. With some clients we are still in an ongoing dialogue. We do not discuss individual cases. The total estimated compensation indicated in the filing document is still accurate.”
The scandal has plunged the DFB and Infront into crisis. It also raises questions for the wider sports sponsorship industry.
............................
Fritz Keller, the 62-year-old president of Bundesliga club Freiburg, is expected to be confirmed as new DFB president later this month. He will inherit the LED scandal and is expected to take swift action.
A senior German football executive said one of Keller’s tasks would be to implement new compliance structures. “They are trying to be transparent, but they could be even more so. He’s a very good choice. Nobody can question Keller for having personal or political interests. No chance.”
Infront’s view is that it has “binding and valid agreements in place with the DFB and will continue to deliver the agreed services.”
But few in the industry expect the Infront marketing rights contract to survive. The question is whether it will be rescinded immediately or allowed to expire naturally. But there are lingering doubts in the industry that the kind of deep human relationships which underlie 40-year commercial relationships might be working against such an outcome behind the scenes.
As one well-placed source put it in a statement given to SportBusiness: “Under normal circumstances, you would expect the DFB to terminate the agreement straight away. The partnership should not be able to survive. But we’ll see. Anecdotally, over the years, we have all heard about agencies making higher bids than Infront for DFB rights and not getting the rights. It’s about people working with each other for a very long time.”
To date, no DFB executives or staff have been implicated in the scam, although German media outlets claim at least one member of staff has been sacked in connection with the case.
The federation has yet to say anything publicly about the scandal, but informed sources say it will do so at the end of the month.
Infront a bit behind
In 2011, the federation made Infront its global media-rights adviser, in a deal which covered media and marketing rights to both German national team games and the domestic cup competition. The large-scale centralisation of the media rights to European national teams by Uefa to create the European Qualifiers and Nations League later took a deep swathe of the value out of the deal for Infront but in 2015 the deal for the cup rights was extended.
These were the most recent deals in a relationship which stretches back to 1980, when the late Swiss entrepreneur Cesar W. Lühti began selling advertising for the federation. His agency, CWL Telesport, handled the sales and expanded the business to include other federations. CWL was bought in 1997 by the Kirch Group. When Kirch went bust in 2002, CWL was one of the divisions that was folded into the newly formed Infront Sports & Media agency.
In 1984, Lühti brought in Günter Netzer, the former German international and Borussia Mönchengladbach star. Netzer became the key man in the relationship between CWL/Infront and the DFB and, for many in Germany, remains so to this day. There is no suggestion that Netzer was involved in the scam.
There are few executives in the sports industry as obsessed with compliance as Infront president and chief executive Philippe Blatter. When SportBusiness visited him at Infront’s headquarters in Zug, Switzerland in 2016, he was at pains to point out the extent of the compliance procedures Infront had put in place. Yet the fact remains this happened on his watch.
Infront has already taken action to address what it has identified as “material weaknesses” in its internal compliance mechanisms.
In its IPO filing it says: “The first material weakness identified relates to our lack of dedicated resources and experienced personnel involved in the designing and reviewing of internal controls over financial reporting. A second material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting…relates to lack of segregation at Infront of duties between sales and execution of contracts, invoicing and implementation of services to prevent and detect fraud.”
The company is continuing to conduct its own investigation, which will focus heavily on Infront’s historic relationship with the DFB, one of the oldest in the industry.
Executives involved in similar business activities at other agencies say that it is inconceivable that the scam could have been carried out for so long by just one person, without the collaboration – or at least the knowledge – of other actors. There were simply too many transactions involved at too many levels.
An experienced sports lawyer told SportBusiness that “anyone who even knew it was going on and did nothing is liable for prosecution”.
In its IPO prospectus Wanda admitted that other Infront executives had been implicated by the former employee under investigation: “The former employee has made certain formal allegations involving certain senior Infront employees as to their involvement in the fraudulent activities, which we believe, based on Infront’s ongoing internal investigations, are without merit. The former employee may, in the future, continue to make these, or other, allegations.”
Infront provided the following statement on its own findings: “We assume that the former employee is responsible for the alleged fraud. To the best of our knowledge, all other persons – directly or indirectly reporting to the former employee – who were involved in the operational execution of the perimeter board advertising time reductions acted on the instructions of the former employee. Another employee has voluntarily reported his involvement in the case and is cooperating fully with the authorities. The employee had already been suspended.”
Lack of brand awareness
One obvious question which the case throws up is: how could the kind of sophisticated global corporations that sponsor the DFB get scammed in this way for so many years?
Here are two lawyers, one in the UK and one in Germany, who between them have worked on hundreds of European football sponsorship contracts:
Lawyer 1: “Brands have protections built into their contracts. But in my experience no one ever bothers checking. It’s all done on trust.”
Lawyer 2: “You can put anything you like into one of these contracts. But there is a 90-per-cent probability that nobody at the brands will check.”
The remarkable similarity in their answers would appear to point to a problem. As brands have become obsessed with evaluating ROI, measuring the impact of their inventory, they have taken their eye off the ball on something much more basic: checking they get the inventory they paid for. They trust the marketing agencies totally.
One of the lawyers breaks down the way brands are protected.
“Guaranteeing that your blocks of time have actually been displayed at the match is controlled in two ways. First, the agency will be required by contract to provide you with screen shots and a print-out of time during which the advertising is being displayed. It may also provide a DVD. The most crucial bit of LED is within the TV arc. Nowadays, all matches are filmed, even if not every game is broadcast live. The agency will get a recording from the TV company. There is other manually obtained evidence. Some agencies will send someone to matches with a stopwatch. The brand would usually have a right of audit. You build all these reporting mechanisms into the contract.”
Which is all fairly pointless if nobody is actually analysing any of it.
Lawyers and sponsorship consultants told SportBusiness that the scandal demonstrated brands need to start taking their advice. Their overall message is: Use your rights. Don’t put the contract in a cupboard and let it collect dust.
That includes things like:
- carrying out spot checks at matches to make sure you get the rights in your contract
- making sure you get the match tapes and checking them
- requesting an audit from the agency where you have any doubts
- employing a third party, like Nielsen, to carry out the analysis if you don’t have the time or resources to do it yourself.
Very few people working in football sponsorship believe that the kind of scam under investigation was or is widespread. Many think it was probably unique.
The window of opportunity for a scam involving national team LED time was relatively short. It started when LED boards started to become the norm, around 2005 to 2006, and ended when most of the signage inventory was centralised by Uefa ahead of the qualifiers for the 2014 World Cup.
But for clubs in domestic league competitions the bulk of LED inventory is still sold in this way. The potential for such a con still exists. And brands sponsoring football clubs need to wise up.
LED advertising | Why it took just one second to damage Infront’s reputation
Frank Dunne - September 9, 2019
- Former Infront executive under investigation for ripping off sponsors of the German FA; current member of staff suspended
- Scam shows how an agency executive can make millions by conning trusting clients
- Operatives say rip-off is not widespread in the industry but is still a wake-up call for brands
One second. Who’s going to notice one second? Nobody. Not for a long time anyway. Until someone did.
And that’s where the trouble began for the Infront agency. And for the Deutscher Fußball-Bund, Germany’s embattled football association.
On May 24, just as the Infront agency’s parent company, Wanda Sports, was gearing up for its New York initial public offering, Infront published a statement saying that it had been notified by the public prosecutor in Thurgau, Switzerland, of a pending criminal investigation into one of its former employees for “disloyal and unfaithful business management” in relation to contracts between sponsors and the DFB – contracts agreed by Infront.
The alleged scam worked like this: the agency sold multiple advertisers – DFB official sponsors and others – three minutes each per match of LED perimeter board time for Germany national men’s team home games, broken into six 30-second blocks. But instead of 30 seconds, many brands got 29 seconds.
Over 90 minutes, it freed up a further 180 seconds, or another valuable three minutes. This time was sold to other brands, with the executive allegedly diverting the funds into a private account.
In addition to the LED scam, Infront said it had learned that “gifts, at Infront’s cost, were provided by the former employee to employees of at least one of Infront’s clients that exceeded reasonable and customary values”.
The agency has “applied to constitute itself as a victim in this criminal procedure and is cooperating fully with the prosecuting authorities”.
On June 7, the prospectus for the impending Nasdaq IPO of Wanda Sports revealed Infront had offered to repay clients a total of €6m ($6.6m). The amount could have been higher but under the statute of limitations in Swiss law compensation is confined to a period of 10 years.
Infront told SportBusiness Review: “Many clients have already accepted our compensation offer and have been refunded. With some clients we are still in an ongoing dialogue. We do not discuss individual cases. The total estimated compensation indicated in the filing document is still accurate.”
The scandal has plunged the DFB and Infront into crisis. It also raises questions for the wider sports sponsorship industry.
............................
Fritz Keller, the 62-year-old president of Bundesliga club Freiburg, is expected to be confirmed as new DFB president later this month. He will inherit the LED scandal and is expected to take swift action.
A senior German football executive said one of Keller’s tasks would be to implement new compliance structures. “They are trying to be transparent, but they could be even more so. He’s a very good choice. Nobody can question Keller for having personal or political interests. No chance.”
Infront’s view is that it has “binding and valid agreements in place with the DFB and will continue to deliver the agreed services.”
But few in the industry expect the Infront marketing rights contract to survive. The question is whether it will be rescinded immediately or allowed to expire naturally. But there are lingering doubts in the industry that the kind of deep human relationships which underlie 40-year commercial relationships might be working against such an outcome behind the scenes.
As one well-placed source put it in a statement given to SportBusiness: “Under normal circumstances, you would expect the DFB to terminate the agreement straight away. The partnership should not be able to survive. But we’ll see. Anecdotally, over the years, we have all heard about agencies making higher bids than Infront for DFB rights and not getting the rights. It’s about people working with each other for a very long time.”
To date, no DFB executives or staff have been implicated in the scam, although German media outlets claim at least one member of staff has been sacked in connection with the case.
The federation has yet to say anything publicly about the scandal, but informed sources say it will do so at the end of the month.
Infront a bit behind
In 2011, the federation made Infront its global media-rights adviser, in a deal which covered media and marketing rights to both German national team games and the domestic cup competition. The large-scale centralisation of the media rights to European national teams by Uefa to create the European Qualifiers and Nations League later took a deep swathe of the value out of the deal for Infront but in 2015 the deal for the cup rights was extended.
These were the most recent deals in a relationship which stretches back to 1980, when the late Swiss entrepreneur Cesar W. Lühti began selling advertising for the federation. His agency, CWL Telesport, handled the sales and expanded the business to include other federations. CWL was bought in 1997 by the Kirch Group. When Kirch went bust in 2002, CWL was one of the divisions that was folded into the newly formed Infront Sports & Media agency.
In 1984, Lühti brought in Günter Netzer, the former German international and Borussia Mönchengladbach star. Netzer became the key man in the relationship between CWL/Infront and the DFB and, for many in Germany, remains so to this day. There is no suggestion that Netzer was involved in the scam.
There are few executives in the sports industry as obsessed with compliance as Infront president and chief executive Philippe Blatter. When SportBusiness visited him at Infront’s headquarters in Zug, Switzerland in 2016, he was at pains to point out the extent of the compliance procedures Infront had put in place. Yet the fact remains this happened on his watch.
Infront has already taken action to address what it has identified as “material weaknesses” in its internal compliance mechanisms.
In its IPO filing it says: “The first material weakness identified relates to our lack of dedicated resources and experienced personnel involved in the designing and reviewing of internal controls over financial reporting. A second material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting…relates to lack of segregation at Infront of duties between sales and execution of contracts, invoicing and implementation of services to prevent and detect fraud.”
The company is continuing to conduct its own investigation, which will focus heavily on Infront’s historic relationship with the DFB, one of the oldest in the industry.
Executives involved in similar business activities at other agencies say that it is inconceivable that the scam could have been carried out for so long by just one person, without the collaboration – or at least the knowledge – of other actors. There were simply too many transactions involved at too many levels.
An experienced sports lawyer told SportBusiness that “anyone who even knew it was going on and did nothing is liable for prosecution”.
In its IPO prospectus Wanda admitted that other Infront executives had been implicated by the former employee under investigation: “The former employee has made certain formal allegations involving certain senior Infront employees as to their involvement in the fraudulent activities, which we believe, based on Infront’s ongoing internal investigations, are without merit. The former employee may, in the future, continue to make these, or other, allegations.”
Infront provided the following statement on its own findings: “We assume that the former employee is responsible for the alleged fraud. To the best of our knowledge, all other persons – directly or indirectly reporting to the former employee – who were involved in the operational execution of the perimeter board advertising time reductions acted on the instructions of the former employee. Another employee has voluntarily reported his involvement in the case and is cooperating fully with the authorities. The employee had already been suspended.”
Lack of brand awareness
One obvious question which the case throws up is: how could the kind of sophisticated global corporations that sponsor the DFB get scammed in this way for so many years?
Here are two lawyers, one in the UK and one in Germany, who between them have worked on hundreds of European football sponsorship contracts:
Lawyer 1: “Brands have protections built into their contracts. But in my experience no one ever bothers checking. It’s all done on trust.”
Lawyer 2: “You can put anything you like into one of these contracts. But there is a 90-per-cent probability that nobody at the brands will check.”
The remarkable similarity in their answers would appear to point to a problem. As brands have become obsessed with evaluating ROI, measuring the impact of their inventory, they have taken their eye off the ball on something much more basic: checking they get the inventory they paid for. They trust the marketing agencies totally.
One of the lawyers breaks down the way brands are protected.
“Guaranteeing that your blocks of time have actually been displayed at the match is controlled in two ways. First, the agency will be required by contract to provide you with screen shots and a print-out of time during which the advertising is being displayed. It may also provide a DVD. The most crucial bit of LED is within the TV arc. Nowadays, all matches are filmed, even if not every game is broadcast live. The agency will get a recording from the TV company. There is other manually obtained evidence. Some agencies will send someone to matches with a stopwatch. The brand would usually have a right of audit. You build all these reporting mechanisms into the contract.”
Which is all fairly pointless if nobody is actually analysing any of it.
Lawyers and sponsorship consultants told SportBusiness that the scandal demonstrated brands need to start taking their advice. Their overall message is: Use your rights. Don’t put the contract in a cupboard and let it collect dust.
That includes things like:
- carrying out spot checks at matches to make sure you get the rights in your contract
- making sure you get the match tapes and checking them
- requesting an audit from the agency where you have any doubts
- employing a third party, like Nielsen, to carry out the analysis if you don’t have the time or resources to do it yourself.
Very few people working in football sponsorship believe that the kind of scam under investigation was or is widespread. Many think it was probably unique.
The window of opportunity for a scam involving national team LED time was relatively short. It started when LED boards started to become the norm, around 2005 to 2006, and ended when most of the signage inventory was centralised by Uefa ahead of the qualifiers for the 2014 World Cup.
But for clubs in domestic league competitions the bulk of LED inventory is still sold in this way. The potential for such a con still exists. And brands sponsoring football clubs need to wise up.
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
That last post was made because it provides the background to this development - from SportsBusiness.com
Infront to contest DFB’s termination of contracts after probe into alleged corruption
Martin Ross - June 25, 2020
Infront has vowed to contest the termination of its contracts with the German Football Federation (DFB) after the sport’s governing body in Germany moved to sever its ties with the international sports marketing agency in the wake of an investigation into allegations of corruption.
The DFB decided to end the contracts following a meeting of its executive committee yesterday (Wednesday) after assessing the findings of a commissioned report delivered by Esecon, the Berlin-based investigative agency.
The allegations pertain in part to a contract awarded to Infront in 2013 to sell perimeter advertising for Germany’s national team matches, along with a deal to sell sponsorship and advertising rights at matches of the DFB Pokal, Germany’s national knockout clubs tournament.
Infront has said it “firmly rejects” the corruption allegations and “will do everything it can to combat them”.
The DFB’s relationship with Infront has been under the microscope since details of an ‘LED scam’ conducted by a former executive at the agency first emerged in May 2019. The executive in question faces a criminal investigation in Switzerland and the case has been the subject of an investigation by Infront with the agency having commissioned external lawyers.
The move by the DFB to end the contracts comes after a report in German magazine Der Spiegel on Friday claimed the Esecon findings unearthed €40m ($45m) of financial damage caused at the federation.
It is alleged that Infront was awarded the national teams contract despite a competitor having offered €18m more and that the DFB Pokal pitchside advertising sales contract was awarded under questionable circumstances. Among other allegations are that the son of then DFB secretary general Helmut Sandrock was given a job at Infront at the same time that the agency was granted the national teams contract.
Infront responded to the report in Der Spiegel by saying that Esecon’s reported allegations are “not only highly construed but are above all unsubstantiated through any evidence” and represent “purely allegations for which Esecon provides no reliable evidence”.
Infront no longer sells perimeter advertising at Germany’s national team matches but still holds the contract to sell pitchside advertising at DFB Pokal matches. The DFB has now moved to discontinue this contract and cancel Infront’s services contract for the delivery of the LED boards. Infront is also the long-standing international media rights adviser for the DFB Pokal.
Announcing its decision yesterday, the DFB stated: “The DFB, which had obtained evidence of possible damaging actions of Infront towards the DFB in May 2019, is now presented with the results of an investigation by the Berlin-based consulting firm Esecon. This has resulted in various acts in recent years which, for the DFB, constitute clear irregularities in connection with the realisation and delivery of Infront’s contractual services, as well as unlawful influence on DFB representatives.”
In response, Infront said: “The German Football Association (DFB) informed Infront today that it will end its very successful and lengthy partnership with Infront and terminate or discontinue with immediate effect all existing contracts. Infront contests the validity of this cancellation and insists on the full completion of the current contracts with the DFB. Infront has severe doubts about the methods and motives of the investigative agency Esecon, on whose interim report the DFB is basing this proposed cancellation.
“The DFB said it based its decision on allegations of ‘potentially damaging activities’. The interim report of Esecon – which Infront has not been given access to – apparently accuses Infront of gaining undue benefits from improper gifts to DFB employees.
“Infront firmly rejects these allegations of ‘potentially damaging activities’ and will do everything it can to combat them. There is no reason for the intended termination of the contract and Infront will do everything to enforce its rights under the existing contracts with the DFB. Infront has always met its contractual obligations in full and will fulfil existing obligations, for example for the DFB Pokal.
“The extensive and exhaustive investigation commissioned by Infront with external lawyers on this matter concluded that Esecon’s allegations which go beyond the already known and addressed issues are either demonstrably incorrect or not verifiable and thus are ultimately invalid. Esecon was given these results together with mitigating arguments but these do not appear to have been reflected in the interim report sent to the DFB.”
Infront went on to say that it has “considerable doubts” about Esecon’s “methods and motivation”, including the “reversal of the burden of proof and the use of dubious sources of information, including demonstrably falsified documents”.
The agency continued: “In fact, all there is are allegations for which Esecon has so far not provided any reliable evidence. We have considerable doubts about the seriousness of the investigation commissioned by the DFB, which has led to a damaging prejudgment of Infront, especially in light of all the forwarding of one-sided, preliminary investigation results to the media and the resulting one-sided reporting referencing, among other things, proven forged documents.”
The statement concluded: “Infront will now protect its interests with all the means at its disposal given that a mutual solution that Infront always proffered has failed. In particular, Infront insists on the mutual fulfilment of the contracts with the DFB.
“Overall, we look forward to any judicial assessment of the matter with composure and are very confident that the allegation of any ‘potentially damaging activities’ will prove to be unfounded.”
With regards to the initial LED case that emerged in May 2019, Infront stated at the time that it had “discovered fraudulent activities that are presumed to have been committed by one of its former senior employees” as the agency “applied to constitute itself as a victim” in criminal proceedings undertaken in Switzerland.
The scam related to the sale of reduced minutes to DFB sponsors and advertisers with the time freed up then sold to other brands with the unnamed executive allegedly diverting the funds into a private account.
In addition to the LED scam, Infront said at the time that it had learned that “gifts, at Infront’s cost, were provided by the former employee to employees of at least one of Infront’s clients that exceeded reasonable and customary values”. On June 7 last year, the prospectus for the Nasdaq IPO of Wanda Sports revealed Infront had offered to repay clients a total of €6m.
Infront to contest DFB’s termination of contracts after probe into alleged corruption
Martin Ross - June 25, 2020
Infront has vowed to contest the termination of its contracts with the German Football Federation (DFB) after the sport’s governing body in Germany moved to sever its ties with the international sports marketing agency in the wake of an investigation into allegations of corruption.
The DFB decided to end the contracts following a meeting of its executive committee yesterday (Wednesday) after assessing the findings of a commissioned report delivered by Esecon, the Berlin-based investigative agency.
The allegations pertain in part to a contract awarded to Infront in 2013 to sell perimeter advertising for Germany’s national team matches, along with a deal to sell sponsorship and advertising rights at matches of the DFB Pokal, Germany’s national knockout clubs tournament.
Infront has said it “firmly rejects” the corruption allegations and “will do everything it can to combat them”.
The DFB’s relationship with Infront has been under the microscope since details of an ‘LED scam’ conducted by a former executive at the agency first emerged in May 2019. The executive in question faces a criminal investigation in Switzerland and the case has been the subject of an investigation by Infront with the agency having commissioned external lawyers.
The move by the DFB to end the contracts comes after a report in German magazine Der Spiegel on Friday claimed the Esecon findings unearthed €40m ($45m) of financial damage caused at the federation.
It is alleged that Infront was awarded the national teams contract despite a competitor having offered €18m more and that the DFB Pokal pitchside advertising sales contract was awarded under questionable circumstances. Among other allegations are that the son of then DFB secretary general Helmut Sandrock was given a job at Infront at the same time that the agency was granted the national teams contract.
Infront responded to the report in Der Spiegel by saying that Esecon’s reported allegations are “not only highly construed but are above all unsubstantiated through any evidence” and represent “purely allegations for which Esecon provides no reliable evidence”.
Infront no longer sells perimeter advertising at Germany’s national team matches but still holds the contract to sell pitchside advertising at DFB Pokal matches. The DFB has now moved to discontinue this contract and cancel Infront’s services contract for the delivery of the LED boards. Infront is also the long-standing international media rights adviser for the DFB Pokal.
Announcing its decision yesterday, the DFB stated: “The DFB, which had obtained evidence of possible damaging actions of Infront towards the DFB in May 2019, is now presented with the results of an investigation by the Berlin-based consulting firm Esecon. This has resulted in various acts in recent years which, for the DFB, constitute clear irregularities in connection with the realisation and delivery of Infront’s contractual services, as well as unlawful influence on DFB representatives.”
In response, Infront said: “The German Football Association (DFB) informed Infront today that it will end its very successful and lengthy partnership with Infront and terminate or discontinue with immediate effect all existing contracts. Infront contests the validity of this cancellation and insists on the full completion of the current contracts with the DFB. Infront has severe doubts about the methods and motives of the investigative agency Esecon, on whose interim report the DFB is basing this proposed cancellation.
“The DFB said it based its decision on allegations of ‘potentially damaging activities’. The interim report of Esecon – which Infront has not been given access to – apparently accuses Infront of gaining undue benefits from improper gifts to DFB employees.
“Infront firmly rejects these allegations of ‘potentially damaging activities’ and will do everything it can to combat them. There is no reason for the intended termination of the contract and Infront will do everything to enforce its rights under the existing contracts with the DFB. Infront has always met its contractual obligations in full and will fulfil existing obligations, for example for the DFB Pokal.
“The extensive and exhaustive investigation commissioned by Infront with external lawyers on this matter concluded that Esecon’s allegations which go beyond the already known and addressed issues are either demonstrably incorrect or not verifiable and thus are ultimately invalid. Esecon was given these results together with mitigating arguments but these do not appear to have been reflected in the interim report sent to the DFB.”
Infront went on to say that it has “considerable doubts” about Esecon’s “methods and motivation”, including the “reversal of the burden of proof and the use of dubious sources of information, including demonstrably falsified documents”.
The agency continued: “In fact, all there is are allegations for which Esecon has so far not provided any reliable evidence. We have considerable doubts about the seriousness of the investigation commissioned by the DFB, which has led to a damaging prejudgment of Infront, especially in light of all the forwarding of one-sided, preliminary investigation results to the media and the resulting one-sided reporting referencing, among other things, proven forged documents.”
The statement concluded: “Infront will now protect its interests with all the means at its disposal given that a mutual solution that Infront always proffered has failed. In particular, Infront insists on the mutual fulfilment of the contracts with the DFB.
“Overall, we look forward to any judicial assessment of the matter with composure and are very confident that the allegation of any ‘potentially damaging activities’ will prove to be unfounded.”
With regards to the initial LED case that emerged in May 2019, Infront stated at the time that it had “discovered fraudulent activities that are presumed to have been committed by one of its former senior employees” as the agency “applied to constitute itself as a victim” in criminal proceedings undertaken in Switzerland.
The scam related to the sale of reduced minutes to DFB sponsors and advertisers with the time freed up then sold to other brands with the unnamed executive allegedly diverting the funds into a private account.
In addition to the LED scam, Infront said at the time that it had learned that “gifts, at Infront’s cost, were provided by the former employee to employees of at least one of Infront’s clients that exceeded reasonable and customary values”. On June 7 last year, the prospectus for the Nasdaq IPO of Wanda Sports revealed Infront had offered to repay clients a total of €6m.
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
Predictions in the Telegraph of a Chaotic transfer window this summer
Agents and clubs fear chaotic three-week period in transfer window as 2020/21 season approaches
MIKE MCGRATH JUNE 25, 2020
Premier League clubs and football agents fear summer transfer chaos in a frantic 20 days of business before the start of the 2020/21 season.
Chief executives have discussed the period of trading players when the current season ends and the new campaign begins, with August 2 one date proposed for clubs to start reshaping their squads.
But the Champions League final being held on August 23 has led to intermediaries expecting deals to start getting thrashed out later in the summer. The Premier League must start by September 12, leaving less than three weeks for many players to get moves.
Manchester City hope to be involved in the latter stages of Uefa's elite club competition, while Manchester United and Wolves are in the Europa League, which concludes on the same weekend.
Uefa have advised transfer windows to close by October 5 so players can be registered for the 2020/21 competition but the Premier League have discussed running beyond that date. The world governing body, Fifa, allow a maximum of 16 weeks trading a year but do not stipulate when the periods should be taken.
In the EFL, Championship clubs want the window to be left open for longer to help money flow through the game after revenues were hit by the coronavirus pandemic preventing fans attending matches.
The window shifted in recent seasons to close before the Premier League starts, with the reasoning to stop players lining up against clubs they are about to join. However, it was pointed out by chairman and chief executives that the same situation occurs every January when the window opens while teams are playing.
Tottenham chairman Daniel Levy and Manchester United vice-chairman Ed Woodward are among those who have publicly insisted there will be less spending as a result of Covid-19.
Agents and clubs fear chaotic three-week period in transfer window as 2020/21 season approaches
MIKE MCGRATH JUNE 25, 2020
Premier League clubs and football agents fear summer transfer chaos in a frantic 20 days of business before the start of the 2020/21 season.
Chief executives have discussed the period of trading players when the current season ends and the new campaign begins, with August 2 one date proposed for clubs to start reshaping their squads.
But the Champions League final being held on August 23 has led to intermediaries expecting deals to start getting thrashed out later in the summer. The Premier League must start by September 12, leaving less than three weeks for many players to get moves.
Manchester City hope to be involved in the latter stages of Uefa's elite club competition, while Manchester United and Wolves are in the Europa League, which concludes on the same weekend.
Uefa have advised transfer windows to close by October 5 so players can be registered for the 2020/21 competition but the Premier League have discussed running beyond that date. The world governing body, Fifa, allow a maximum of 16 weeks trading a year but do not stipulate when the periods should be taken.
In the EFL, Championship clubs want the window to be left open for longer to help money flow through the game after revenues were hit by the coronavirus pandemic preventing fans attending matches.
The window shifted in recent seasons to close before the Premier League starts, with the reasoning to stop players lining up against clubs they are about to join. However, it was pointed out by chairman and chief executives that the same situation occurs every January when the window opens while teams are playing.
Tottenham chairman Daniel Levy and Manchester United vice-chairman Ed Woodward are among those who have publicly insisted there will be less spending as a result of Covid-19.
-
Vegas Claret
- Posts: 30707
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
- Been Liked: 11052 times
- Has Liked: 5660 times
- Location: clue is in the title
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
good, transfer fees need to come down
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
Are proper salary caps - not the current "if you want" model going to come to the EFL - from the Mail (and yes I do think Matt Hughes's name is appearing on far too many bylines for him to actually be writing and researching all of them)
EFL pressing forward with salary cap plans and want to introduce limits of £2.5m in League One and £1.5m in League Two ahead of vote next month... and squads will be restricted to just 20 players from 2021-22
The EFL are pushing ahead with their proposals to introduce a salary cap
Plans are for a £1.5m cap in League Two with a limit of £2.5m in League One
But salaries paid to players under 21 would be exempt from the restrictions
Another change to be introduced from 2021-22 is a squad limit of 20 players
By MATT HUGHES FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 09:00, 26 June 2020 | UPDATED: 10:16, 26 June 2020
The Football League are pushing ahead with plans for a salary cap for the lower divisions despite opposition from the PFA, with a formal vote to take place next month.
Under proposals sent to clubs on Thursday seen by Sportsmail the League Two salary cap would be set at £1.5million from next season, with a wage limit of £2.5m in League One, although salaries paid to players under 21 would be exempt from the restrictions.
The League Two salary cap was originally set at £1.25m, but after failing to gain majority support in a consultation of bottom division clubs it has been raised to £1.5m.
In another significant change to be introduced from the start of the 2021-22 season squad sizes will be capped at 20 in both divisions, meaning that the average salaries in the lower tiers will be £75,000 and £125,000 in League Two and League One respectively.
The EFL Board are confident the cap will be introduced despite vocal complaints from PFA chief executive Gordon Taylor, who wrote to all the union’s members this week outlining his opposition on the grounds that wage limits would deter investment in the sport and punish well-run clubs who are not over-spending.
The EFL’s proposed updated rules and regulations will be sent to the clubs at the start of next month ahead of a formal vote on July 29.
Championship clubs are also considering introducing a salary cap, but have yet to agree the details after talks reached an impasse around a proposed limit of £18m.
All the salary caps will include fees paid to agents and any club guilty of breaching them will be hit by a points deduction.
EFL pressing forward with salary cap plans and want to introduce limits of £2.5m in League One and £1.5m in League Two ahead of vote next month... and squads will be restricted to just 20 players from 2021-22
The EFL are pushing ahead with their proposals to introduce a salary cap
Plans are for a £1.5m cap in League Two with a limit of £2.5m in League One
But salaries paid to players under 21 would be exempt from the restrictions
Another change to be introduced from 2021-22 is a squad limit of 20 players
By MATT HUGHES FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 09:00, 26 June 2020 | UPDATED: 10:16, 26 June 2020
The Football League are pushing ahead with plans for a salary cap for the lower divisions despite opposition from the PFA, with a formal vote to take place next month.
Under proposals sent to clubs on Thursday seen by Sportsmail the League Two salary cap would be set at £1.5million from next season, with a wage limit of £2.5m in League One, although salaries paid to players under 21 would be exempt from the restrictions.
The League Two salary cap was originally set at £1.25m, but after failing to gain majority support in a consultation of bottom division clubs it has been raised to £1.5m.
In another significant change to be introduced from the start of the 2021-22 season squad sizes will be capped at 20 in both divisions, meaning that the average salaries in the lower tiers will be £75,000 and £125,000 in League Two and League One respectively.
The EFL Board are confident the cap will be introduced despite vocal complaints from PFA chief executive Gordon Taylor, who wrote to all the union’s members this week outlining his opposition on the grounds that wage limits would deter investment in the sport and punish well-run clubs who are not over-spending.
The EFL’s proposed updated rules and regulations will be sent to the clubs at the start of next month ahead of a formal vote on July 29.
Championship clubs are also considering introducing a salary cap, but have yet to agree the details after talks reached an impasse around a proposed limit of £18m.
All the salary caps will include fees paid to agents and any club guilty of breaching them will be hit by a points deduction.
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
I posted a few financial reviews of the 2018/19 season but this is a stark image of the different routes for fiscal management rules played out - La Liga/Premier League profitability 2018/19 by club
https://twitter.com/Football_BM/status/ ... 4809964544
of course the Premier League is more competitive in the sense there have been more different winners and many more clubs challenging for Europe. Premier League clubs earn much more on average too.
https://twitter.com/Football_BM/status/ ... 4809964544
of course the Premier League is more competitive in the sense there have been more different winners and many more clubs challenging for Europe. Premier League clubs earn much more on average too.
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
Australia and New Zealand will host the 2023 Women's World Cup - beating the bid from Columbia - Interestingly all the UEFA voters (including the FA voted for Columbia (even though it's bid was ranked substantially weaker by FIFA assessors) - this follows a much closer relationship between the European and South American governing bodies in the last few years - from Sports Business
Australia and New Zealand win race to host 2023 Women’s World Cup
Ben Cronin, Europe Editor
June 25, 2020
Australia and New Zealand have secured the rights to host the 2023 Women’s World Cup, beating off competition from Colombia.
Australia and New Zealand won a Fifa Council vote yesterday by 22 votes to 13. The winning bid was the overwhelming favourite, but a surprise decision by Uefa delegates to vote for Colombia created some last-minute tension.
Adding to the suspense were reports that English Football Association chairman Greg Clarke had refused to take a phone call from New Zealand prime minister Jacinda Ardern earlier in the week.
Australia and New Zealand will co-host the ninth edition of the tournament, marking the first time two confederations have joined forces to deliver the tournament. New Zealand is in the Oceania Football Confederation, while Australia switched from Oceania to the Asian Football Confederation in 2006.
It will also be the first Women’s World Cup in the Asia-Pacific region and the first to be held in the southern hemisphere.
The two countries were favourites to host the tournament after securing the highest score in Fifa’s evaluation report assessing three potential hosts in early June. The joint bid scored 4.1 out of five, while Japan scored 3.9 and Colombia scored 2.8.
The Australia and New Zealand bid secured strong financial commitments from each country’s government, causing Fifa to rank theirs as the most “commercially-favourable” bid.
This was not enough to convince Uefa delegates. The European confederation later explained it voted for Colombia because it felt women’s football was in more need of a boost in South America than in Australian and New Zealand.
Uefa said, “Even though the Colombian bid was not the one rated highest technically by Fifa, European members of the Fifa Council felt that it represented a strategic opportunity for the development of women’s football in South America thanks to the legacy and increase of attention for the women’s game that the tournament would bring to the continent.
“It was a choice between two countries – Australia and New Zealand – where women’s football is already strongly established, and a continent where it still has to be firmly implanted and has a huge development potential.
“It’s important to add that European members of the FIFA Council agreed to vote together on major issues as a matter of solidarity.”
Fifa president Gianni Infantino said he was surprised by Uefa’s vote but said it represented “democracy”.
Japan’s withdrawal from the running earlier this week ensured the Australia and New Zealand bid received full backing from the AFC and its seven votes on the Fifa Council. Gianni Infantino is also reported to have backed the bid, as did the Oceania Football Confederation, all members of the council from the Confederation of African Football and Concacaf, which represents North and Central America and the Caribbean.
The votes were cast on Thursday afternoon by 35 members of the 37-strong Fifa Council. New Zealand’s Johanna Wood and Colombia’s Ramon Jesrun were ineligible to vote.
Australia and New Zealand’s joint hosting model is based on minimising travel times for players. In a joint press release ahead of the vote, the Australia-New Zealand bid said their plans to schedule matches across four time zones would “deliver matches at times favourable to broadcasters in established as well as emerging markets”.
Colombia disgruntled
The bidding campaign was not without controversy. The South American Football Confederation (Conmebol) and the Colombian Football Federation (FCF) last week wrote to Fifa over what they deemed “erroneous and discriminatory conclusions” in its evaluation report.
In response to Conmebol and the FCF’s concerns, Fifa secretary general Fatma Samoura moved to answer criticism of the evaluation report in a letter issued to members of the ruling Fifa Council ahead of the vote.
“I am confident that the evaluation process that Fifa has conducted has adhered to the key principles of objectivity, vision, transparency, commitment to human rights and sustainability,” Samoura said, in comments reported by Reuters.
Antipodean elation
Welcoming the award of the hosting rights, New Zealand Football president and Fifa Council member Wood, said: “Australia and New Zealand will not only host a Fifa Women’s World Cup that is the largest tournament ever run, but it will also be a catalyst for ensuring the development of women’s football continues in the Asia-Pacific region and globally.
“Our two nations have worked together to deliver an exceptional, historic bid and I would like to thank Fifa and the whole football family for giving us this opportunity. The Fifa Women’s World Cup 2023 will bring us all together in a celebration of our shared loved of football.”
NZF chief executive Andrew Pragnell said Prime Minister Ardern had played an important role lobbying for the bid during telephone calls this week. “She was willing to get on and make sure the key messages of the bid were heard and that’s brilliant,” he said. “That’s huge, and that showed in the technical report [evaluating the bids], that the Government was committed to bringing the event here.”
New Zealand sports minister Grant Robertson said the government would be supporting the tournament and surrounding projects with investments worth NZ$25m ($16m/€14m).
Football Federation Australia president Chris Nikou said that the 2023 tournament would “unlock the huge potential for growth in women’s football in the Asia-Pacific region”.
Australian Olympic Committee president and prominent IOC member John Coates congratulated the winning bid, saying, “This decision will deliver what could be a golden decade for Australian sport…I can see a ten year runway taking us from 2023 with the Women’s Football World Cup, a year earlier the Fiba Women’s Basketball World Cup in 2022, potentially the Rugby World Cup for men in 2027 and ultimately the jewel in the crown with the Olympic Games in Brisbane in 2032. The benefits will continue beyond.”
He said the decision confirmed Australia was considered “a sports loving country, capable of delivering the biggest events to the highest standard. We are viewed as a very safe pair of hands and of course, we are a wonderful destination for sports fans from around the world.”
Asian Football Confederation president Shaikh Salman bin Ebrahim Al Khalifa also welcomed the bid, saying, “On behalf of the AFC – and the Asian football family – I congratulate Australia/New Zealand on being named as hosts of the Fifa Women’s World Cup in 2023 – and thank all the AFC’s Fifa Council Members for their support of the bid.
“Today, we can celebrate a great day for women’s football and a historic moment with a cross Confederation tournament…
“This will be the first time the Southern Hemisphere has hosted the tournament and the benefits for the development of the women’s game in both Asia and the Pacific Region – as well as globally – are enormous.”
Shaikh Salman also thanked the Japan Football Association “for their technically strong bid but also their show of Asian football unity”, and the Korea Football Association for taking part in the selection process.
Additional reporting by SportBusiness staff, Asia
Australia and New Zealand win race to host 2023 Women’s World Cup
Ben Cronin, Europe Editor
June 25, 2020
Australia and New Zealand have secured the rights to host the 2023 Women’s World Cup, beating off competition from Colombia.
Australia and New Zealand won a Fifa Council vote yesterday by 22 votes to 13. The winning bid was the overwhelming favourite, but a surprise decision by Uefa delegates to vote for Colombia created some last-minute tension.
Adding to the suspense were reports that English Football Association chairman Greg Clarke had refused to take a phone call from New Zealand prime minister Jacinda Ardern earlier in the week.
Australia and New Zealand will co-host the ninth edition of the tournament, marking the first time two confederations have joined forces to deliver the tournament. New Zealand is in the Oceania Football Confederation, while Australia switched from Oceania to the Asian Football Confederation in 2006.
It will also be the first Women’s World Cup in the Asia-Pacific region and the first to be held in the southern hemisphere.
The two countries were favourites to host the tournament after securing the highest score in Fifa’s evaluation report assessing three potential hosts in early June. The joint bid scored 4.1 out of five, while Japan scored 3.9 and Colombia scored 2.8.
The Australia and New Zealand bid secured strong financial commitments from each country’s government, causing Fifa to rank theirs as the most “commercially-favourable” bid.
This was not enough to convince Uefa delegates. The European confederation later explained it voted for Colombia because it felt women’s football was in more need of a boost in South America than in Australian and New Zealand.
Uefa said, “Even though the Colombian bid was not the one rated highest technically by Fifa, European members of the Fifa Council felt that it represented a strategic opportunity for the development of women’s football in South America thanks to the legacy and increase of attention for the women’s game that the tournament would bring to the continent.
“It was a choice between two countries – Australia and New Zealand – where women’s football is already strongly established, and a continent where it still has to be firmly implanted and has a huge development potential.
“It’s important to add that European members of the FIFA Council agreed to vote together on major issues as a matter of solidarity.”
Fifa president Gianni Infantino said he was surprised by Uefa’s vote but said it represented “democracy”.
Japan’s withdrawal from the running earlier this week ensured the Australia and New Zealand bid received full backing from the AFC and its seven votes on the Fifa Council. Gianni Infantino is also reported to have backed the bid, as did the Oceania Football Confederation, all members of the council from the Confederation of African Football and Concacaf, which represents North and Central America and the Caribbean.
The votes were cast on Thursday afternoon by 35 members of the 37-strong Fifa Council. New Zealand’s Johanna Wood and Colombia’s Ramon Jesrun were ineligible to vote.
Australia and New Zealand’s joint hosting model is based on minimising travel times for players. In a joint press release ahead of the vote, the Australia-New Zealand bid said their plans to schedule matches across four time zones would “deliver matches at times favourable to broadcasters in established as well as emerging markets”.
Colombia disgruntled
The bidding campaign was not without controversy. The South American Football Confederation (Conmebol) and the Colombian Football Federation (FCF) last week wrote to Fifa over what they deemed “erroneous and discriminatory conclusions” in its evaluation report.
In response to Conmebol and the FCF’s concerns, Fifa secretary general Fatma Samoura moved to answer criticism of the evaluation report in a letter issued to members of the ruling Fifa Council ahead of the vote.
“I am confident that the evaluation process that Fifa has conducted has adhered to the key principles of objectivity, vision, transparency, commitment to human rights and sustainability,” Samoura said, in comments reported by Reuters.
Antipodean elation
Welcoming the award of the hosting rights, New Zealand Football president and Fifa Council member Wood, said: “Australia and New Zealand will not only host a Fifa Women’s World Cup that is the largest tournament ever run, but it will also be a catalyst for ensuring the development of women’s football continues in the Asia-Pacific region and globally.
“Our two nations have worked together to deliver an exceptional, historic bid and I would like to thank Fifa and the whole football family for giving us this opportunity. The Fifa Women’s World Cup 2023 will bring us all together in a celebration of our shared loved of football.”
NZF chief executive Andrew Pragnell said Prime Minister Ardern had played an important role lobbying for the bid during telephone calls this week. “She was willing to get on and make sure the key messages of the bid were heard and that’s brilliant,” he said. “That’s huge, and that showed in the technical report [evaluating the bids], that the Government was committed to bringing the event here.”
New Zealand sports minister Grant Robertson said the government would be supporting the tournament and surrounding projects with investments worth NZ$25m ($16m/€14m).
Football Federation Australia president Chris Nikou said that the 2023 tournament would “unlock the huge potential for growth in women’s football in the Asia-Pacific region”.
Australian Olympic Committee president and prominent IOC member John Coates congratulated the winning bid, saying, “This decision will deliver what could be a golden decade for Australian sport…I can see a ten year runway taking us from 2023 with the Women’s Football World Cup, a year earlier the Fiba Women’s Basketball World Cup in 2022, potentially the Rugby World Cup for men in 2027 and ultimately the jewel in the crown with the Olympic Games in Brisbane in 2032. The benefits will continue beyond.”
He said the decision confirmed Australia was considered “a sports loving country, capable of delivering the biggest events to the highest standard. We are viewed as a very safe pair of hands and of course, we are a wonderful destination for sports fans from around the world.”
Asian Football Confederation president Shaikh Salman bin Ebrahim Al Khalifa also welcomed the bid, saying, “On behalf of the AFC – and the Asian football family – I congratulate Australia/New Zealand on being named as hosts of the Fifa Women’s World Cup in 2023 – and thank all the AFC’s Fifa Council Members for their support of the bid.
“Today, we can celebrate a great day for women’s football and a historic moment with a cross Confederation tournament…
“This will be the first time the Southern Hemisphere has hosted the tournament and the benefits for the development of the women’s game in both Asia and the Pacific Region – as well as globally – are enormous.”
Shaikh Salman also thanked the Japan Football Association “for their technically strong bid but also their show of Asian football unity”, and the Korea Football Association for taking part in the selection process.
Additional reporting by SportBusiness staff, Asia
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19415
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3162 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Football's Magic Money Tree
FIFA have announced a $1,5 billion dollar football relief plan to help the global game recover from the pandemic - from Reuters
FIFA agree massive US$1.5 billion COVID-19 relief plan
FIFA announced on Thursday that it had agreed a US$1.5 billion relief plan to help deal with the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the global game.
REUTERS: FIFA announced on Thursday that it had agreed a US$1.5 billion relief plan to help deal with the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the global game.
FIFA's plan means world soccer's governing body will dip into its reserves to provide national federations with a number of grants and interest-free loans to cope with budget hits.
FIFA had already provided the immediate release of all funds from its 'Forward' projects and given the green light for such grants to be used for COVID-19 relief plans - with a minimum of 50per cent of released funds to be allocated to women's football.
The third stage of the plans, unanimously backed by the FIFA Council on Thursday, allows for a 'universal solidarity grant' of US$1 million dollars to all national associations with an additional US$500,000 specifically for women's football.
Each regional confederation will receive a grant of US$2 million.
FA's will be able to apply for loans, amounting to up to 35per cent of their audited, annual revenues up to a maximum of US$5 million with confederations able to request up to US$4 million.
"Both grants and loans can be directed by member associations to the wider football community in their respective territories, including clubs, players, leagues, or others that have been affected by COVID," said FIFA president Gianni Infantino.
Infantino added that there would be strict controls on the use of funds, audit requirements, as well as clear loan repayment conditions.
Olli Rehn, the deputy chairman of the FIFA Governance Committee, who is Governor of the Bank of Finland and a member of the Governing Council of the European Central Bank, will head a committee set up to administer the funds.
The council also backed changes to the calendar to support confederations' desires to extend international breaks to allow for fixture congestion and rearranged matches.
Infantino said no decision has yet to be taken on the rescheduling of the new Club World Cup tournament which has been postponed from July 2021 due to the postponement of Euro 2020 and the Copa America.
The council also gave the green light to a new pan-Arab tournament to be played in 2021 in Qatar as a 'test event' for the 2022 World Cup.
The invitational competition will be contested by Arab nations from Africa and Asia and feature home-based players only.
The tournament will be held in from 1-18 December 2021 and be run by Qatar's World Cup organising committee.
FIFA agree massive US$1.5 billion COVID-19 relief plan
FIFA announced on Thursday that it had agreed a US$1.5 billion relief plan to help deal with the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the global game.
REUTERS: FIFA announced on Thursday that it had agreed a US$1.5 billion relief plan to help deal with the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the global game.
FIFA's plan means world soccer's governing body will dip into its reserves to provide national federations with a number of grants and interest-free loans to cope with budget hits.
FIFA had already provided the immediate release of all funds from its 'Forward' projects and given the green light for such grants to be used for COVID-19 relief plans - with a minimum of 50per cent of released funds to be allocated to women's football.
The third stage of the plans, unanimously backed by the FIFA Council on Thursday, allows for a 'universal solidarity grant' of US$1 million dollars to all national associations with an additional US$500,000 specifically for women's football.
Each regional confederation will receive a grant of US$2 million.
FA's will be able to apply for loans, amounting to up to 35per cent of their audited, annual revenues up to a maximum of US$5 million with confederations able to request up to US$4 million.
"Both grants and loans can be directed by member associations to the wider football community in their respective territories, including clubs, players, leagues, or others that have been affected by COVID," said FIFA president Gianni Infantino.
Infantino added that there would be strict controls on the use of funds, audit requirements, as well as clear loan repayment conditions.
Olli Rehn, the deputy chairman of the FIFA Governance Committee, who is Governor of the Bank of Finland and a member of the Governing Council of the European Central Bank, will head a committee set up to administer the funds.
The council also backed changes to the calendar to support confederations' desires to extend international breaks to allow for fixture congestion and rearranged matches.
Infantino said no decision has yet to be taken on the rescheduling of the new Club World Cup tournament which has been postponed from July 2021 due to the postponement of Euro 2020 and the Copa America.
The council also gave the green light to a new pan-Arab tournament to be played in 2021 in Qatar as a 'test event' for the 2022 World Cup.
The invitational competition will be contested by Arab nations from Africa and Asia and feature home-based players only.
The tournament will be held in from 1-18 December 2021 and be run by Qatar's World Cup organising committee.