Football's Magic Money Tree

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
Vegas Claret
Posts: 30275
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
Been Liked: 10917 times
Has Liked: 5594 times
Location: clue is in the title

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Vegas Claret » Mon Aug 02, 2021 1:50 am

Chester Perry wrote:
Mon Aug 02, 2021 1:37 am
There is a reasonable point about fans abroad, but this approach is just an abomination, I also do not like the need to buy cryptocurrency to buy and trade the tokens - that side of it is deeply concerning and could morph into situation along the lines of Football Index.
agree, do we know "who" is behind the platform ?

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Mon Aug 02, 2021 3:10 am

Vegas Claret wrote:
Mon Aug 02, 2021 1:50 am
agree, do we know "who" is behind the platform ?
it is in the article and as it's origin

"It is the brainchild of Frenchman Alexandre Dreyfus, an internet entrepreneur since the mid-1990s who previously ran an online poker league.

It was while trying to find ways to monetise followers of the teams in his poker league that he settled on the idea of selling voting rights on certain decisions."

RammyClaret61
Posts: 3070
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 9:46 pm
Been Liked: 1090 times
Has Liked: 300 times
Location: Melbourne, Australia.

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by RammyClaret61 » Mon Aug 02, 2021 3:43 am

To create more money to pay the players. Aren’t the greedy bastards not on way to much already.

What’s killing the game? Greedy players are killing the game.

The coffin is made, not many more nails now for the lid, then we can bury it.

Vegas Claret
Posts: 30275
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
Been Liked: 10917 times
Has Liked: 5594 times
Location: clue is in the title

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Vegas Claret » Mon Aug 02, 2021 4:15 am

Chester Perry wrote:
Mon Aug 02, 2021 3:10 am
it is in the article and as it's origin

"It is the brainchild of Frenchman Alexandre Dreyfus, an internet entrepreneur since the mid-1990s who previously ran an online poker league.

It was while trying to find ways to monetise followers of the teams in his poker league that he settled on the idea of selling voting rights on certain decisions."
yep, just wondered if it had other backers, just because it was his idea it doesn't mean he is the money behind it

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Mon Aug 02, 2021 12:14 pm

The Athletic looks at how the owners of all Premier League Clubs made their money

https://theathletic.com/2743638/2021/08 ... =twitteruk

it is telling that they cannot estimate the wealth of the Burnley owners - and people thought information was cloaked under the previous owners

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Mon Aug 02, 2021 1:06 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Mon Aug 02, 2021 12:14 pm
The Athletic looks at how the owners of all Premier League Clubs made their money

https://theathletic.com/2743638/2021/08 ... =twitteruk

it is telling that they cannot estimate the wealth of the Burnley owners - and people thought information was cloaked under the previous owners
The other interesting feature about this report is that The Athletic are now suggesting that the price paid for 84% of Burnley in now around £150m rather than the circa £170m suggested at the time of the takeover - which brings the valuation of the club down from over £200m to less than £180m.

This is the first time we have seen this new figure and it may explain Alan Pace's comments at takeover that reports had got the numbers wrong could it be some thing as simple as a currency denomination issue with the higher numbers being dollars - in a number of ways the lower figure alters perceptions:
- first and foremost it means the sale price was very low, at a multiple of 1.34 to 2019/20 revenues (even less if you take the previous two years results) and no one can really argue that Garlick has rinsed the value of the club at that multiple.
- second, if circa £100m has already been paid for the shares (that number could also be dollars) then the outstanding payments will be significantly less (circa £16m each on average rather than circa £23m on average.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Mon Aug 02, 2021 2:12 pm

While he and everyone else waits for Newcastle United to post their 2019/20 financial results @SwissRamble looks at the financial state of French Football

https://twitter.com/SwissRamble/status/ ... 7829957635

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Mon Aug 02, 2021 2:17 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Mon Jul 26, 2021 11:22 pm
beINSport lose their case to make Canal + keep the subcontract for the smaller portion of the French Ligue rights that the LFP refused to retender. As beIN don't want to pay for it (now Canal + don't have to) they are to sue the LFP just so Canal + are compelled to keep honouring their contract. Confusing isn't it - Here is SportsBusiness..com with the detail

BeIN ‘compelled’ to sue LFP as court rules in Canal Plus’ favour
Martin Ross
July 23, 2021

Pay-television broadcaster beIN Sports has been “compelled” to take legal action against France’s Professional Football League (LFP) after losing a legal case against Canal Plus this afternoon at the Nanterre Commercial Court in Paris.

BeIN had taken legal action in a bid to force Canal Plus to honour the €332m- ($390.6m-) per-season Ligue 1 sublicensing deal between the parties.

The court has ruled that the Vivendi-owned pay-television broadcaster is legally entitled to suspend its sublicensing contract with beIN, a deal due to run until the end of the 2023-24 season.

However, the court has also ordered that the payments must resume if beIN sues the LFP. Canal Plus had made an earlier, and unsuccessful bid, for beIN to take legal action against the league authorities.

SportBusiness understands that beIN is now preparing the initiation of a range of legal proceedings over the coming days, including cases with the French competition authorities, the European Commission, a civil court case and a damages case against the LFP.

Canal Plus wrote to the LFP on July 15 to inform the league body that it would exit its contract with beIN.

Canal Plus had warned it would no longer show Ligue 1 matches after the LFP awarded online retail giant Amazon the rights inventory to the top two divisions previously held by Mediapro. The Vivendi-owned broadcaster took on the Ligue 1 rights held by Mediapro for the remainder of the 2020-21 season, following the collapse of the deal with the agency and production group.

In a statement, beIN Sports France said: “We take note of the interim ruling of the Nanterre Commercial Court, which compels us to take legal action against the League in order to force Canal+ to comply with its contract.

“We are now considering all legal options. After over a year of chaos following the default of Mediapro, it is regrettable that French football is still facing such uncertainty just weeks before the season re-starts.”

Canal Plus sublicensed its rights from beIN as part of a renewable five-year exclusive distribution deal. The latter acquired them from the LFP in 2018 for €332m per season.

The matches take place at 9pm (CET) on Saturdays and 5pm on Sundays.

Amazon is paying €250m per season for eight Ligue 1 matches per match week from 2021-22 to 2023-24. Both Canal Plus and beIN, who had been in talks with the LFP to acquire the same rights, have been irked by the award of rights to Amazon, along with the value of its agreement compared to their outlay.

BeIN’s next Ligue 1 rights fee instalment of €55m is due on August 5, two days before the league begins its 2021-22 season.

BeIN also holds rights to two Ligue 2 matches per match week for the 2020-24 cycle, for which it paid €30m per season. In the wake of the Amazon award, beIN delayed paying its €7.5m July instalment for these rights.

Vincent Labrune, president of the LFP, recently called for Canal Plus to show “common sense”. Speaking in the middle of last month, he also told L’Équipe: “We have a contract with beIN Sports, which has not yet expressed its desire to terminate it.”

The LFP awarded rights to Amazon after France’s competition watchdog, the Autorité de la concurrence, rejected a complaint submitted by Canal Plus against the league over its decision to exclude the broadcaster’s rights to two matches per week in an earlier unsuccessful auction of Mediapro’s rights.
on the subject of French Football the ongoing case of that smaller but substantially more expensive package of TV rights that Canal + no longer want to "sub-let from beIN Sport - from SportsBusiness,com

Conciliator appointed in bid to resolve beIN-Canal Plus-LFP legal wrangle
Martin Ross
July 30, 2021

Pay-television broadcaster beIN Sports has called on a conciliator in a bid to solve the bitter payment dispute that continues to engulf French football a week before the 2021-22 Ligue 1 season kicks off.

News of the initiation of the conciliation process came today (Friday) as the Judicial Court of Paris met to hear the French Professional Football League’s (LFP’s) case against beIN over its rights contract for two top Ligue 1 fixtures per matchweek.

While that court ruling has been placed under consideration until Wednesday (August 4), SportBusiness understands that French judicial administrator Hélène Bourbouloux has been appointed to the conciliatory role.

In a rapidly-evolving legal wrangle that continues to disrupt plans ahead of the new season, beIN said a week ago that it had been “compelled” to take legal action against the LFP after losing a legal case against pay-television broadcaster Canal Plus. BeIN had gone to court in a bid to force the Vivendi-owned pay-television broadcaster to honour the €332m- ($393.7m-) per-season Ligue 1 sublicensing deal between the parties.

However, the Nanterre Commercial Court in Paris yesterday froze Canal Plus’ termination of the sublicensing agreement. Separately, the Nanterre court will rule next week on the merits of Canal Plus’ attempted termination.

Canal Plus had warned it would no longer show Ligue 1 matches after the LFP awarded online retail giant Amazon the rights inventory to the top two divisions previously held by Mediapro, the rights agency and production group.

In an email to staff today, Yousef Al-Obaidly, president of beIN Sports France and chief executive of beIN Media Group, wrote: “As you will have read over recent weeks, since the award by LFP of Mediapro’s previous rights to French football to Amazon, there has been a huge amount of uncertainty and contention. Throughout this period, we have constantly sought to persuade the main disputing parties to find practical solutions. At the same time, as a company, we have come under very aggressive and unjustified attacks.

“As a result, we have been forced to take measures that we wouldn’t ordinarily need to – simply to protect our interests. One such measure is the starting of conciliation proceedings this week, the aim of which is for an amicable resolution to the current crisis to be found by a well-known and skilful conciliator – which has unfortunately been beyond the parties until now.

“I want to be absolutely clear that the conciliation proceedings do not relate to our solvency – this is simply a measure to protect our interests and for a solution between all the parties, we hope, to be found.”

It transpired earlier this week that beIN had begun its own civil court case against the LFP in an attempt to void its contract, citing unforeseen market collapse. The broadcaster has also been weighing up the launch of legal proceedings with the European Commission on competition grounds, claiming abuse of dominant market position and economic extortion of the market.

However, it appears that beIN’s chief motivation has been to afford itself legal protection from the LFP and Canal Plus in a bid to force them to settle the matters themselves.

The Nanterre court ruled seven days ago that Canal Plus was legally entitled to suspend its sublicensing contract with beIN, a deal due to run until the end of the 2023-24 season. However, the court also ordered that the payments must resume if beIN sued the LFP, a scenario that prompted the league’s own pre-emptive strike in the courts.

Canal Plus, which sublicensed its rights from beIN as part of a renewable five-year exclusive distribution deal, wrote to the LFP on July 15 to inform the league body that it would exit its contract with beIN. The Vivendi-owned broadcaster took on the Ligue 1 rights held by Mediapro for the remainder of the 2020-21 season, following the collapse of the deal with the latter.

The matches contained in the disputed Package 3 take place at 9pm (CET) on Saturdays and 5pm on Sundays. There remains widespread uncertainty over who will broadcast these matches in France with under a week until the new season starts.

Amazon is paying €250m per season for eight Ligue 1 matches per match week from 2021-22 to 2023-24. Both Canal Plus and beIN, who had been in talks with the LFP to acquire the same rights, have been irked by the award of rights to the new market entrant, along with the value of its agreement compared to their outlay.

BeIN’s next Ligue 1 rights fee instalment of €55m is due on August 5, two days before the league begins its 2021-22 season.

BeIN also holds rights to two Ligue 2 matches per match week for the 2020-24 cycle, for which it paid €30m per season. In the wake of the Amazon award, beIN delayed paying its €7.5m July instalment for these rights.

The LFP awarded rights to Amazon after France’s competition watchdog, the Autorité de la concurrence, rejected a complaint submitted by Canal Plus against the league over its decision to exclude the broadcaster’s rights to two matches per week in an earlier unsuccessful auction of Mediapro’s rights.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Mon Aug 02, 2021 2:27 pm

It has been a while since I have posted one of John Nicholson's articles for Football365 and today's returns to a subject I have posted about before - it is controversial and there are a wide range of implications but could actually stop the farming of players and even the multi-club approach (I am not convinced it could)

Abolishing transfer fees could help fix a broken game
Date published: Monday 2nd August 2021 8:35 - John Nicholson

The surprising thing about the transfer window so far is not that Victor Moses is still playing football and has just been transferred from Chelsea‘s books to Spartak Moscow, nor that a few top clubs are paying big fees for players. The most surprising thing is that of English clubs outside of the Premier League only Fulham have paid a transfer fee (£12milion for Liverpool’s Harry Wilson), or rather if anyone else has they haven’t declared it.

The ‘undisclosed’ fee is puzzling given that it is used in such moves as Harry Smith’s move from Northampton to Leyton Orient, Trevor Carson’s switch from Motherwell to Dundee United and the deal that took Neill Byrne from Halifax to Hartlepool. If there is a fee – and it seems unlikely given the finances of lower-league clubs – it cannot be significant. And this is the case right across Europe. Below the top flight of each country, transfers which cost money are rare or entirely absent.

While the small number of the richest clubs seek to leverage their wealth at a time of economic restrictions for the majority, and are still spending many millions on players, the vast majority have no such option. It has never been more clear how separate and different those small numbers of rich clubs are.

But really, free transfers and loans is how it should be. The transfer system has its roots in outdated practices which sought to restrict players’ freedoms, but is ironically itself now outdated. Valuations are arbitrary at best, often a figure seemingly plucked from mid-air. They allow rich clubs, now more than ever, to leverage wealth to ensure success in finishing in the top places and are set to have an even more destructive effect on the competitiveness of the league this year and going forward.

Yet they are so normal in football – though less than 15% of all transfers attract a fee – that we rarely ever question them. Instead we just want our own club to buy more players, often as a shortcut to improvement. Indeed, transfer gossip is the most popular page of pretty much any website, as big club fans pant eagerly about who they’re going to buy.

As weird as it may seem now, for most of football’s history, while transfers obviously did take place, they were not a big talking point the way many now absolutely obsess over them. Money had not been fetishised in this context. The idea that anyone might say “we need a £50 million striker” would’ve been thought weird because the commodification of footballers hadn’t happened; that’s not how people’s minds worked. Fans were more likely to be interested in a rumour about a good kid in the reserves, who they wanted to see get a first-team game. When Trevor Francis became the first million pound player (£1.15 million, in fact), it seemed beyond mad. That was about £5million in today’s money. So you can see how big the change has been.

But this seems to be where we’ve landed once again from the Championship downwards as building teams from loan players, free transfers and promoting youth-team players becomes the only way to develop a side, given the ruinous state of pretty much every club’s finances.

It is so dispiriting when your club develops a great player, the way Aston Villa have with Jack Grealish, and you just know that the big money – as desired by the club as much, if not more, than the player – will lure him away, despite his obvious loyalties to the West Midlands. It actually feels unfair. It feels more like bullying, in fact.

In a world where football operated like a normal business and transfer fees simply did not exist, the way they don’t exist if you want to leave Asda to work in Tesco, players would have to see out their contract and then go onto the open market if they wanted to move, or if the club didn’t want to employ them again. That’s perfectly normal. Why has football been any different for so long?

This would encourage short-term contracts because it would probably suit both parties not to be tied down for too long. While you might argue this leads to less security for the player, it would be a crucial part in ensuring club finances were kept stable and on an even keel, and a good player would always be in demand anyway.

Obviously, without independently judged wage caps set at a level which all clubs in the division could afford, the richest clubs would just pay all the money they’d have spent on a transfer fee in wages instead to get their man. But this is a time for major change.

We need to reduce the power of rich clubs markedly. Occasional outliers and meltdowns aside, they’ve already boxed off all competitions and will do so in perpetuity unless we can neuter them from hoovering up all the talent. Removing them from the league to a European Super League was our best chance to do this. Sadly, football was ‘saved’ from this fate by fans who didn’t seem to realise they were condemning everyone else to be also-rans forever, doing little more than providing the rich clubs with a team to beat most weeks.

We can see that outside of the top of the pyramid, football can function perfectly well without transfer fees; it is having to. Yes, wage inflation is still chronic and out of control but that can be addressed as contracts expire. They’ll have to be because clubs are still often paying out more than their turnover in wages and surviving on non-repayable loans from owners, and that is not a sustainable situation.

Obviously, some transfers sometimes benefit a lower-league club, who get a much needed sell-on couple of percentage points for having the player on their books initially. But that is more occasional than regular because there are relatively few big money deals. They are just a by-product of the bizarre transfer system, not a reason for it to exist.

Besides, better-run clubs with stable finances wouldn’t be relying on these occasional bonuses to bail them out of penury. With a more even distribution of funds across the whole of football and a return to the away side getting 20% of the home team’s gate receipts, abolished in 1983 (a major historical factor in hardening financial disparities), hand-in-hand with properly enforced wage caps, there’s a chance to at least disturb the current ridiculous status quo.

It might seem mad, might seem unthinkable, but then we’re in a mad, unthinkable situation with much of football forever teetering on the edge of financial extinction while a small elite wallows in riches, and as we see again this summer, buying up all the very best players. This is not the time for half-measures or mere tweaks.

The ecological, competitive and financial ecosystem of football needs a complete reset to prevent its top league and cups being expensive real estate, a gated community that the vast majority can never access. A reset could cure these competitions’ fundamental dysfunction and prevent lower-league clubs from going bust. Obviously, this won’t happen unless it becomes a legal requirement because those with the money have the power and they want to keep their financial primacy, because to see it diminish is to see their dominance diminish.

But if FIFA, UEFA and the FA were serious about restricting the growth of the big European clubs’ stranglehold on their competitions – and they should be – they could institute a whole new way to do business and that absolutely should include the abolition of transfer fees.
This user liked this post: Paul Waine

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Mon Aug 02, 2021 3:59 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Sun Aug 01, 2021 7:28 pm
This should be no surprise re the Premier Leagues investigation into Manchester City - the threat that it could run for years - typical Man City approach of dragging things out and making it expensive for the authorities - from the MAil

Man City's legal battle over alleged breaches of financial rules could rumble on for YEARS but Premier League are expected to fight on as they are 'likely being pressurised by the 19 other clubs'
Premier League's ongoing legal battle with Manchester City could last years
Warning of ongoing turmoil comes from former financial advisor to the club
Stefan Borson also expects the Premier League to push on with their fight
Case relates to Financial Fair Play and whether City inflated their income
By NICK HARRIS FOR THE MAIL ON SUNDAY

PUBLISHED: 22:31, 31 July 2021 | UPDATED: 01:08, 1 August 2021

The Premier League's ongoing legal battle with Manchester City over alleged breaches of League rules could 'move glacially on for many more years'.

Two weeks before City's title defence begins, the warning of ongoing turmoil comes from Stefan Borson, a former financial advisor to the club who also has experience dealing with complex litigation around accounting practices.

But Borson also expects the League (PL) to push on with their fight as he believes that are 'likely being heavily pressurised by the 19 other clubs'.

As detailed in The Mail on Sunday last week, City have been embroiled in the secret battle since 2019, when the PL announced a formal investigation into allegations that arose in the 'Football Leaks' files published by German magazine Der Spiegel in 2018.

After a request for 'open justice', this newspaper was the only media company allowed into court recently to hear some proceedings on the case and, while no specific details are known about what the League are probing, it relates to Financial Fair Play (FFP), and is likely to be focused on whether City inflated their income in contravention of the rules.

Borson worked with City between 2002 and 2007 and it was on his advice that the club accepted a £90 million takeover offer the club by Thaksin Shinawatra, the former Thai Prime Minister.

A City fan, Borson is also a lawyer, and now chief executive and general counsel of a public company, Watchstone, formerly known as Quindell. Since 2015, he has been leading their defence against allegations of historic faulty accounting.

'This has entrenched my group in the sort of regulatory and other litigation battles that City have faced,' says Borson.

He has closely followed City's FFP tribulations, from a first punishment by UEFA in 2014 for breaking the rules, to a second UEFA investigation in 2019, to a two-year Champions League in 2020, to a reversal of that verdict at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) last summer.

'The underlying allegations made against City are not 'rap on the knuckle' matters,' said Borson. 'It is apparent the PL are not yet minded to give up and are likely being heavily pressurised by the 19 other clubs to prosecute City to the full force of their powers, no matter how difficult.

'This is an unenviable position for the PL which needs to protect the integrity of its rules whilst being cognisant of the legal and commercial power of City.'

'If the PL decide to lay serious charges against City, this could yet move glacially on for many more years with the only real winners being lawyers.'

The most recent Court of Appeal judgements were defeats for City in as much as they meant the very existence of the battle with the PL should be made public, against their wishes.

'The judgments also made plain the judges think City have been fighting with weak and tenuous tactical arguments for many months,' said Borson. 'Litigation is heavy going and parties fight hard. The idea that City should throw open their books and worldwide documents to scrutiny by UEFA, the PL or whoever else is unrealistic.

'Battles around the disclosure of documents are routinely arduous. The League are not entitled to go on a fishing expedition, even less to demand documents from the palaces of Abu Dhabi.

'Rightly, City will feel the burden is for others to prove a case against them. They have more than 10 years of clean audited accounts under the current owners. Which is why City's approach is consistent with a leaked email from 2013 published by Der Spiegel in 2018.

'It featured City lawyer Simon Cliff explaining that, rather than settle with UEFA in the then ongoing tussle over FFP, the club's chairman Khaldoon Al Mubarak 'would rather spend £30m on the best 50 lawyers in the world to sue them for the next 10 years'.'
As if to underline the CFG approach to investigation, here are the current legal positions they are recruiting for - which seems a lot given the legal counsel they also have on retainer

https://twitter.com/tariqpanja/status/1 ... 69/photo/1

Vegas Claret
Posts: 30275
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
Been Liked: 10917 times
Has Liked: 5594 times
Location: clue is in the title

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Vegas Claret » Mon Aug 02, 2021 4:00 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Mon Aug 02, 2021 1:06 pm
The other interesting feature about this report is that The Athletic are now suggesting that the price paid for 84% of Burnley in now around £150m rather than the circa £170m suggested at the time of the takeover - which brings the valuation of the club down from over £200m to less than £180m.

This is the first time we have seen this new figure and it may explain Alan Pace's comments at takeover that reports had got the numbers wrong could it be some thing as simple as a currency denomination issue with the higher numbers being dollars - in a number of ways the lower figure alters perceptions:
- first and foremost it means the sale price was very low, at a multiple of 1.34 to 2019/20 revenues (even less if you take the previous two years results) and no one can really argue that Garlick has rinsed the value of the club at that multiple.
- second, if circa £100m has already been paid for the shares (that number could also be dollars) then the outstanding payments will be significantly less (circa £16m each on average rather than circa £23m on average.
which is all very good news surely

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Mon Aug 02, 2021 4:21 pm

Vegas Claret wrote:
Mon Aug 02, 2021 4:00 pm
which is all very good news surely
there are various ways to look at it - it shows that ALK got a very good deal, remember Kieran Maguire had been valuing us at over £350m in the previous two years (which always felt to big a number to be fair) and this is less than half that. They may still have a lot to pay if it was circa $100m+ upfront instead circa of £100m +.

From my perspective it further supports the notion that Garlick felt compelled to get the transaction across the line to change the mood at the club, which was very low last December

Vegas Claret
Posts: 30275
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
Been Liked: 10917 times
Has Liked: 5594 times
Location: clue is in the title

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Vegas Claret » Mon Aug 02, 2021 4:25 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Mon Aug 02, 2021 4:21 pm
there are various ways to look at it - it shows that ALK got a very good deal, remember Kieran Maguire had been valuing us at over £350m in the previous two years (which always felt to big a number to be fair) and this is less than half that. They may still have a lot to pay if it was circa $100m+ upfront instead circa of £100m +.

From my perspective it further supports the notion that Garlick felt compelled to get the transaction across the line to change the mood at the club, which was very low last December
I can't possibly believe that Pace and Co got the numbers wrong, these guys are seasoned businessmen, they aren't getting tripped up by an exchange rate imho.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Mon Aug 02, 2021 4:50 pm

Vegas Claret wrote:
Mon Aug 02, 2021 4:25 pm
I can't possibly believe that Pace and Co got the numbers wrong, these guys are seasoned businessmen, they aren't getting tripped up by an exchange rate imho.
not them, the media reports on the deal
This user liked this post: Vegas Claret

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Mon Aug 02, 2021 5:18 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Fri Jul 30, 2021 5:19 pm
I am going to have to do a bit of searching for context on this one - but for now you can read this

STATEMENT FROM BARCELONA, JUVENTUS AND REAL MADRID
30 JULY 2021


STATEMENT FROM BARCELONA, JUVENTUS AND REAL MADRID
FC Barcelona, Juventus, and Real Madrid CF welcome today's Court's decision enforcing, with immediate effect, UEFA's obligation to unwind the actions taken against all European Super League founding clubs, including terminating the disciplinary proceedings against the undersigning three clubs and removing the penalties and restrictions imposed on the remaining nine founding clubs for them to avoid UEFA's disciplinary action.

The Court backs the request made by the promoters of the European Super League, dismisses UEFA's appeal, and confirms its warning to UEFA that failure to comply with its ruling shall result in fines and potential criminal liability. The case will be assessed by the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg, which shall review UEFA's monopolistic position over European football.

We have the duty to address the very serious issues facing football: UEFA has established itself as the sole regulator, exclusive operator, and unique owner of rights of European football competitions. This monopolistic position, in conflict of interest, is damaging football and its competitive balance. As shown by ample evidence, financial controls are inadequate, and they have been improperly enforced. Clubs participating in European competitions have the right to govern their own competitions.

We are pleased that going forward we will no longer be subject to ongoing UEFA's threats. Our aim is to keep developing the Super League project in a constructive and cooperative manner, always counting on all football stakeholders: fans, players, coaches, clubs, leagues, and national and international associations. We are aware that there are elements of our proposal that should be reviewed and, of course, can be improved through dialogue and consensus. We remain confident in the success of a project that will be always compliant with European Union laws.
UEFA response to the Madrid Commercial Court order that led to the bullish statement from the remaining Super League three - from the Times

Uefa rejects Spanish court order to drop Super League punishments
Martyn Ziegler, Chief Sports Reporter
Monday August 02 2021, 12.01am, The Times

Uefa has rejected the demands of a Madrid court to revoke its action against the 12 founding members of the European Super League and is confident of seeing off the legal challenge at the European Court of Justice.

The judge in Madrid made an order on Friday stating that Uefa must publish on its website that it will drop all financial and sporting penalties. He also ordered Uefa to tell the Premier League and Italy’s FA to drop all action taken against the English and Italian clubs involved.

A source close to the European governing body has told The Times there is no intention of carrying out the order and that its actions will be fully justified by the European court.

Uefa is also unconcerned about reports that the ESL is now planning to revamp the breakaway competition so that it is not a closed tournament.

“The Super League idea is dead,” said another source. “The fans killed it and there is not going to be a resurrection.”

In May, nine of the 12 ESL founder clubs, including England’s ‘Big Six’, agreed a deal with Uefa under which they agreed to contribute 15 million euro (£13 million) to youth and grassroots football, and to forfeit 5 per cent of Uefa competition revenue for one season.

The Premier League’s ‘Big Six’ agreed last month to make a combined goodwill payment of just over £22 million to support grassroots and community projects, and that if any one of those clubs attempted such a move again they would be docked 30 points and fined £25 million.

Both Uefa and the Premier League agreed those settlements with the rebel clubs rather than imposed sanctions.

The Italian FA had said they would ban Italian sides who participate in any future Super League from competing in the country’s top division, Serie A.

Javier Tebas, the president of La Liga and a Uefa executive committee member, dismissed the Madrid judge’s decision as “a joke” despite Barcelona, Real Madrid and Juventus insisting they will push ahead with plans for an ESL.

“It’s the same judge as always, so he was always going to rule in a similar fashion,” said Tebas. “There’s a lot of jokes going on in that court.”

The Madrid court statement warns any breach of its injunction could lead to fines or criminal charges, however its jurisdiction over Uefa is also in doubt given that it is based in Switzerland which is not part of the European Union.

Last month the ECJ rejected a request from the ESL for an expedited decision in the case, a development which appeared to significantly derail the Super League project.
This user liked this post: Paul Waine

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Mon Aug 02, 2021 9:25 pm

We learned from today's Price of Football Podcast that the Premier League makes over £20m a year from selling it's data to betting companies, now following a successful collective selling of media rights a number of European Leagues are pooling together to sell their data to betting compaines - from Sportico.com

Eighteen European Soccer Leagues Pool Gambling Data Rights in New Tender
EBEN NOVY-WILLIAMS JULY 27, 2021

As sports betting grows more prevalent around the world, leagues large and small are finding added value in the live collected from their contests.

The European Leagues, a group that represents the commercial interests of dozens of soccer leagues across the continent, is seeking to capitalize on that trend with a new tender, issued this week, that covers 18 countries and more than 8,100 annual matches. The group is seeking a partner, or partners, that will collect the data in-venue and turn it into real-time betting products for sportsbooks around the world.

The tender, viewed by Sportico, includes the top domestic leagues in Portugal, Denmark, Belgium and the Netherlands. The rights are available starting in 2022, and the group is seeking either a three- or five-year deal.

The pooling of rights from across the continent has been a relatively new priority for the European Leagues, which earlier this year issued a tender for a media rights deal that covered nine leagues across the continent. The strategy actually began with data—back in 2017 the group pooled rights to eight leagues and later expanded that to 16 in deals with Sportradar, Genius Sports and Stats Perform.

The growth “proves that this rights collectivization process led by the European Leagues provides additional value for both our member leagues and the market,” Chris Gerstle, head of business development at the European Leagues, said in statement.

Not only is the set of rights in this tender even larger, it also includes women’s matches for the first time. The tender says the group is open to either an exclusive deal with one partner, or a non-exclusive deal with multiple firms, but this process is starting earlier than the previous ones, which could provide more time for an exclusive partnership to be reached.

The group is hoping that the sheer volume of matches and the number of relevant markets is an alluring prospect for the handful of companies that act as middlemen between rights holders and sportsbooks. The tender also includes a number of leagues that play through the summer—the offseason for Europe’s biggest leagues.

The gambling data world is dominated by four companies—Sportradar, Genius Sports, Stats Perform and IMG Arena. Bids are to be submitted by Aug. 23, the tender says, with a final decision coming on Sept. 30.

The other participants in the tender include top leagues in Austria, Czech Republic, Greece, Israel, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Switzerland, Finland, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Norway and Sweden. It also includes women’s matches from Denmark and Germany, as well as the third-tier German men’s league.
This user liked this post: Paul Waine

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Tue Aug 03, 2021 6:14 pm

An article translated from Dutch site Follow The Money (www.ftm.nl) that shows that Dutch football and it's financial practises is readily open to abuse and that increasingly financial institutions with reputations of integrity to uphold are moving out of the the game. It is a story that seems to echo the English game from a decade ago

TODAY 6:00·Clock 10 MIN
Football clubs regularly borrow without checks and balances
PEPIJN KEPPEL

Football clubs cannot take out new loans from traditional banks: they have too bad a reputation for doing so. Consequently, they rely on other lenders for unexpected costs and pre-financing transfers. Do these parties pose new risks for the clubs? And how solid are these lenders themselves?

It all started with the 2008 crisis. The financial world crawled through a deep trough for years, there were stricter rules, more controls. No bank wanted to take out a new loan with a professional football club – the risk of fraud and money laundering would be too great. This was also evident from research carried out by De Nederlandsche Bank in 2016, which warned of 'a closed culture, perverse incentives, conflicts of interest and the use of corporate law structures to obscure money flows'. To this day, clubs don't have to knock on a bank's door for a loan.

The pressure on banks was increased after the credit crisis, says Hans Nelen. He is professor of criminology at Maastricht University and has a fascination with sport, especially for football. "Banks have an obligation to have their household books in order," he says. 'If your industry is associated with fraud and money laundering, and you don't do much to change that, then no one is waiting for you.' Professional football has that reputation, he argues.

According to Nelen, football has all the ingredients to launder criminal money. 'There's no prospect of the favours being pumped into it, there's a lot of money going out that doesn't benefit the clubs but sticks to the bow of the managers, and it's an inaccessible world where it's hard to get reliable information. All parties that banks cannot trust are kept out.'

'If a club gets a player from South America, that money might go around the world five times'

This is also evident from the policy of banks. In 2019, rabobank decided not to accept new professional football clubs as customers – 80 percent of the clubs were customers. In a statement at the time, the bank wrote that "unacceptable integrity risks" could lead to "a parting process" of existing customers. A spokesman for the bank said the policy still applies: 'Given the risks involved in football, Rabobank is not currently taking on new football clubs as customers.' The bank does not comment on whether any collaborations have also ended since 2019. Other Dutch banks have a similar policy.

'I think that the compliance department of every big bank immediately gets a headache when Ajax or Feyenoord are brought in as customers,' says Ruud Koning, professor of sports economics at the University of Groningen. According to him, the 'flows of money facilitated in transfers' are particularly problematic for banks. 'For example, if Ajax get a player from South America, that money might go around the world five times, past all sorts of entities. The question is: do you want to facilitate this as a financial institution? It's completely unclear where the money comes from.' The household book of football clubs cannot be checked for a bank.

In addition, the most important assets of professional clubs on the pitch: the footballers. "How you should appreciate it is always a little shadowy," Koning says. An earlier publication by Follow the Money already showed that top European clubs regularly use valuations of data website Transfermarkt, which are drawn up by volunteers. The valuations are boosted by clubs in annual reports and come up on the table with multimillion-dollar transfers, while being inaccurate.

The stricter controls and the risk of fraud and money laundering have led to Dutch banks no new loans provide more to professional football clubs. But if a club needs money quickly, for a top transfer or to maintain liquidity, they have to get it from somewhere. A vacuum emerged, which has been filled since 2014 by lenders such as XXIII Capital in England and Germany's Score Capital. Companies that – sometimes at usury rates – lend money to professional clubs. How do these loans work? And what are the risks?

Loan as an investment product
XXIII Capital was founded in London in 2014 by two bankers: Englishman Jason Traub and Australian Stephen Duval. The company can count an investment fund owned by George Soros plus Swiss bank Credit Suisse among its shareholders, according to the Financial Times. The lender plays an important role in the financing of football clubs. For example, millions were lent to FC Porto, Watford FC, Fluminense Football Club and FC Twente , among others. According to its website, XXIII Capital has lent almost 3 billion euros to clubs since its inception.

XXIII Capital packages those loans into an investment product. The English trade register shows that the money that XXIII Capital lends to football clubs comes, among other things, from the Candlewood Investment Group – a company basedin the United States – but registered in the Cayman Islands, a tax haven. The Candlewood Investment Group would lend that money to XXIII Capital at 4 percent interest a year. XXIII Capital lends that money back to football clubs such as FC Twente, for about 8 percent.

FC Twente was on the financial precipice in 2015 and borrowed 8 million euros from XXIII Capital at an interest rate of 8.15 percent, NRC Handelsblad revealed in 2016. Documents obtained by XXIII Capital obtained by the newspaper allegedly show 'how investors make money from distressed football clubs' and would already know in advance 'that the account lands with the government'. The municipality of Enschede eventually had to save the club and in 2017 FC Twente borrowed money to pay off XXII Capital.

FC TWENTE: LOAN LED TO MANDATORY REMEDIATION
In 2010, FC Twente won the dutch championship for the first time in history. The club then wanted to be a structural part of the Dutch top and therefore took irresponsible financial risks, which increased the debts. In order to close the gaps, FC Twente entered into an agreement at the end of 2013 with Doyen Sports Group, an investment company of the influential Portuguese manager Jorge Mendes. Doyen Sports Group co-owned seven players. If one of them transferred, a percentage would be paid to the investment company.

In 2014, the KNVB initiated an investigation into the agreement between FC Twente and Doyen Sports Group. This showed that Doyen would have an influence on the transfer policy of the football club. FC Twente got a decent slap on the wrist from the KNVB: several points were deducted and fines were imposed. The club had to clean up.

Since 2015, co-ownership has been banned by world football federation Fifa.


It can also go well, as FC Utrecht shows. The annual report for 2018/19 shows that the club borrowed more than 1.6 million euros at an interest rate of 5.5 percent at Score Capital – a German counterpart of XXIII Capital. The annual report states that the repayments to Score Capital are made through the Eredivisie CV: 'The repayments will be deducted from the television money to be received by FC Utrecht.' The loan would have been paid off by now.

The loans offered by lenders such as Score Capital and XXIII Capital are based on future income from the football clubs: media funds and transfers. A hole that banks dropped. For professional football, it is a problem that almost all payments take place in a staggered manner, says professor of sports economics Koning. 'In May and June, clubs fill the box office by selling season tickets, which they'll be able to do for the rest of the year. In the spring, the soil is in sight.'

'If you're really standing with your back against the wall, such lenders are the alternatives you're looking at'

That has three main reasons: almost no club writes black figures, it is financially uncertain how a club should get through the two transfer periods, and almost all football clubs only think in the short term. As a result, clubs barely maintain their liquidity at the end of the season, making it tempting to collect future media or transfer fees from a lender.

Football clubs are regularly actively approached by lenders, according to conversations with directors of Dutch professional clubs and employees of lenders. Mattijs Manders, for example, was approached by an investment bank in 2011 as managing director of ADO Den Haag. "If you're really standing with your back against the wall, those are alternatives that you're looking at," he said. 'Such parties feel flawlessly that you need them. With common sense, you'd never sign a contract like that.' He didn't make a deal.

Third party ownership
Lenders are now commonplace. English clubs cannot borrow money from the traditional bank either, which is why they also turn to the lenders. More than 40 per cent of Premier League clubs had a loan outstanding with a lender by 2020, according to research by accountancy firm BDO.

The way this works in the Netherlands is unknown. In their annual reports, football clubs often do not specify who has taken out a loan. The KNVB says it knows which clubs are borrowing money from lenders, a spokesman said. But the Football Association does not keep a total amount of those loans: 'It is not known how much money is involved.'

However, the union does take the loans into account when granting licenses to professional clubs. 'The KNVB assesses to what extent a loan and related conditions and conditions are correctly and fully accounted for. This includes looking at the nature/name of the lender and the agreement. That often gives a picture of the financial position of a club.'

It is noticeable eredivisie CV that media money should be transferred regularly to lenders, rather than to the clubs

Eredivisie CV does not assess the financial position of clubs, but does distribute media funds among Dutch football clubs. 'It happens a few times a season that a club requests an advance from the media funds,' a spokesman for the organisation said. 'We're taking a risk with that: you may be paying money to a club that ultimately can't meet the obligations associated with that money.' An internal procedure would have been drawn up for this purpose. However, the Eredivisie CV notices that media money should be transferred regularly to lenders, rather than to the club itself.

As well as prepaying media funds, the lenders also lend money to clubs for transfers, says Kieran Maguire. He is an assistant professor of sports economics at the University of Liverpool and has written a book on the financing of football clubs. He says that's how transfers work: 'If a club sells a footballer for 60 million euros, that amount is paid in two or three instalments. However, the first payment must be taxed immediately on the entire amount. The club only has a few million of that left, but has to buy a new player to replace him. Then come the lenders, who say: give these contracts to us, and we will pay the money out immediately. The club's going to have working capital in a minute.'

Prepayment of transfer money can cause problems. World Football Federation Fifa banned third party ownershipin 2015 - financing arrangements in which a third party (directly or indirectly) becomes the owner of a player. A recent publication by The Guardian showed that lenders operate at the limit of what is legally permitted.

Maguire doesn't mind lenders getting involved in the football world - 'as long as there's control over it'

For example, Score Capital – the company with which FC Utrecht did business – became the owner of part of the rights of the Brazilian player Éder Militão. In the case of a transfer, two rights are traded, federated and economic. As a third party, it is not permitted to become the owner of the economic rights; Score Capital became the owner of the Brazilian's federal rights. Not prohibited, but exceptional – the holder of the federated rights can register a player with a football association.

According to Maguire, it's ok for the lenders to get involved in the football world - "as long as there's control over it." And that's where things sometimes go wrong. 'They don't have to meet the same checks and balances as banks.' Cheap, because money can be paid out quickly. Detrimental, because less control can lead to illegalities more easily.

"I mainly wonder why football clubs have to go to small, boutique-like companies for a loan," Maguire says. 'Why can't the umbrella football associations [Uefa and Fifa, ed.]organise an alternative?' The lenders, he says, carry a risk. 'If a few clubs can't meet their payment obligation, for example due to a sudden pandemic, such a company could go over the top. The football associations are much bigger, then you spread the risk.'

CLUBS' INCREASING NEED FOR CREDIT
Henk Hoekstra worked at XXIII Capital until last year. In southern Europe, he says, more lenders are used than in northern Europe. Most often, future payments on transfers would be bought up by a lender, and then paid out early to a club. 'XXIII Capital has carried out a restructuring after corona came. Financiers hate uncertainty and the pandemic created a hugely uncertain market. There is actually no provider that says: I want to finance without insurance, or at more than 10 percent interest. Then there's no market.'

'When the competitions were shut down, the media money was no longer paid out. After all, no matches could be broadcast. As a result, uncertainty increased. For example, the English and German leagues were played out in July last season, because media money was paid out.'


It happened to XXIII Capital, which according to the English trade register was lifted in the middle of the pandemic and made a restart under a different name. According to Jason Traub, one of the founders, that had nothing to do with financial problems. Maguire doubts that. 'Lenders thought before the pandemic that the football industry was too big to fail. They lent huge sums. Until the clubs suddenly faced huge losses and the lenders also got into trouble.'

And that doesn't mean the biggest worries have passed. Due to the pandemic, stadium revenues dried up almost entirely. In addition, media funding will fall in all top European leagues, Reutersnews agency reported . Too few parties would be interested in purchasing the rights. Lack of competition is disastrous for any market, especially for the money-wasting football industry. Add to that the lack of record transfers during this transfer window, and not only the future of the football clubs is uncertain, but also that of their lenders. The rise of lenders began after the 2008 crisis, possibly ending with a crisis among lenders in 2021. It doesn't get any more ironic.

FIFA RESPONSE
'FIFA is closely monitoring trends in the development of paid football, while also paying attention to the financing of transfers and loans. FIFA is constantly reviewing and adapting current regulations.

As can be seen in the current regulations, FIFA has already established clear rules on the ownership of player rights. Measures have also been proposed to make football more financially sustainable; that reform process is in full swing.

As part of that process, and taking into account the findings of the recent consultations, FIFA, together with stakeholders and other sectors, will continue to tighten regulations. Further details of that reform and new measures will be announced by FIFA in the coming months.'
This user liked this post: Paul Waine

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Tue Aug 03, 2021 6:32 pm

Brighton have been charged by the FA for several breaches of the regulations for working with Intermediaries (agents between 2015 and 2018

https://www.thefa.com/news/2021/aug/03/ ... d-20210803

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Tue Aug 03, 2021 6:40 pm

More shenanigans in France over that beINsport/Canal + potion of the TV rights - first up the LFP are joining beIN in uing Canal + from SportsBusiness.com

LFP joins beIN in case against Canal Plus
Martin Ross
August 2, 2021

France’s Professional Football League (LFP) was this afternoon preparing to join pay-television broadcaster beIN Sports’ legal action against Canal Plus as the league body changes tack in its bid to protect the value of a €332m- ($394.4m-) per-season Ligue 1 broadcast deal.

SportBusiness understands that the LFP has prepared direct legal action against Canal Plus and, by making a filing to the president of the Nanterre Commercial Court, has joined beIN in its action.

In a rapidly-evolving legal wrangle that continues to disrupt plans ahead of this weekend’s Ligue 1 kick-off, a conciliator was called on Friday to try and solve the bitter payment dispute between the LFP, Canal Plus and beIN.

Also on Friday, the LFP’s case against beIN over its rights contract for two top Ligue 1 fixtures per matchweek was placed under consideration until Wednesday. The Nanterre Commercial Court last week froze Canal Plus’ termination of its sublicensing agreement. The court is scheduled to rule later this week on the merits of Canal Plus’ attempted termination.

However, the LFP informed Canal Plus yesterday (Sunday) of its intention to align with beIN in the legal proceedings, according to RMC Sport. The hearing was heard this afternoon and a decision will be handed down on Thursday afternoon, according to L’Équipe.

BeIN said last month that it had been “compelled” to take legal action against the LFP after losing a legal case against Canal Plus. BeIN had gone to court in a bid to force the Vivendi-owned pay-television broadcaster to honour the €332m-per-season Ligue 1 sublicensing deal between the parties that allows Canal Plus to show two top fixtures per matchweek.

In directly tackling Canal Plus, the LFP would be seeking to enforce the broadcaster to ensure the programming of the matches, their host broadcast, airing on the Canal+ premium channel and related marketing, along with the flow of rights fee payments.

A source close to the matter told SportBusiness that the LFP-beIN filing would call for Canal Plus to be subject to a fine of €1.5m per day of delay and violation observed.

According to the official Ligue 1 website, the LFP still lists Canal Plus as the broadcaster of two fixtures per matchweek. The games in question this weekend are Troyes’ clash against Paris Saint-Germain on Saturday evening and Metz against Lille on Sunday at 5pm (CET).

Canal Plus had warned it would no longer show Ligue 1 matches after the LFP awarded online retail giant Amazon the rights inventory to the top two divisions previously held by Mediapro, the rights agency and production group.

It transpired recently that beIN had begun its own civil court case against the LFP in an attempt to void its contract, citing unforeseen market collapse. The broadcaster has also been weighing up the launch of legal proceedings with the European Commission on competition grounds, claiming abuse of dominant market position and economic extortion of the market.

The Nanterre Commercial Court recently ruled that Canal Plus was legally entitled to suspend its sublicensing contract with beIN, a deal due to run until the end of the 2023-24 season. However, the court also ordered that the payments must resume if beIN sued the LFP, a scenario that prompted the league’s own pre-emptive strike in the courts.

Canal Plus, which sublicensed its rights from beIN as part of a renewable five-year exclusive distribution deal, wrote to the LFP on July 15 to inform the league body that it would exit its contract with beIN. The Vivendi-owned broadcaster took on the Ligue 1 rights held by Mediapro for the remainder of the 2020-21 season, following the collapse of the deal with the latter.

Amazon is paying €250m per season for eight Ligue 1 matches per match week from 2021-22 to 2023-24. Both Canal Plus and beIN, who had been in talks with the LFP to acquire the same rights, have been irked by the award of rights to the new market entrant, along with the value of its agreement compared to their outlay.

BeIN’s next Ligue 1 rights fee instalment of €55m is due on Thursday (August 5), two days before the league begins its 2021-22 season.

BeIN also holds rights to two Ligue 2 matches per match week for the 2020-24 cycle, for which it paid €30m per season. In the wake of the Amazon award, beIN delayed paying its €7.5m July instalment for these rights.

The LFP awarded rights to Amazon after France’s competition watchdog, the Autorité de la concurrence, rejected a complaint submitted by Canal Plus against the league over its decision to exclude the broadcaster’s rights to two matches per week in an earlier unsuccessful auction of Mediapro’s rights.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Tue Aug 03, 2021 6:43 pm

But that is not all as it appears the beIN and Canal + are about to go to the European courts to get them to force the LFP to retender the rights according to Get French Football News

https://twitter.com/GFFN/status/1422573594673127425

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Tue Aug 03, 2021 6:48 pm

Today's Unofficial Partner Podcast is Episode 5 of the series Re-thinking sport with guest EFL Chairman Rick Parry - it sounds like it is going to be quite interesting

the blurb

This is episode five of our series of Re-Thinking Sport, with Portas, the global strategy consultancy dedicated to sport and physical activity.

Today we’re talking about government regulation of football with our guests Rick Parry, the chairman of the EFL, and Adam Paker from Portas.

Rick Parry is the former chief executive of Liverpool, the original CEO of the Premier League and a board member at New York Cosmos.

He was recruited from his position as a senior management consultant with leading UK firm Ernst & Young in 1991 to assist in planning the new Premier League. Appointed Chief Executive in February 1992, the competition was officially ratified just seven days later by The Football Association, allowing Parry to proceed with negotiations for a television deal which was eventually awarded to BSkyB and the BBC for a then record bid of £304 million over five years.

The context of the conversation is the recent review of English football carried out by Tracey Crouch MP, the former sports minister and a previous guest on Unofficial Partner.

Her review was set up following the failure of The Super League, which features six of the Premier League’s leading teams. UK Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden announced he had “no choice” but to move quickly and launch the Government’s manifesto commitment of a fan-led review.

The review he said will be wide-ranging in nature and will examine the potential for changes to ownership models, governance, how finance flows through the game and how to give supporters a greater say in the running of the game.

The launch of the fan-led review comes following a number of high profile collapses in recent years including Bury Football Club that went into administration last year after being expelled from the Football League in 2019.

https://www.unofficialpartner.com/podca ... rick-parry

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Tue Aug 03, 2021 7:58 pm

For some reason this evokes memories of our former Chairman Bob Lord - though for the meagre share of the deal that Rangers would see a I can fully understand Rangers approach to this - from the Mail

SPFL chiefs will hold crunch talks this week over a simmering sponsorship row with Rangers after the club's refusal to promote the league's £1.6m-a-year commercial tie-up with car firm cinch
  • cinch's branding was not on display during Rangers 3-0 win over Livingston
  • Car firm cinch struck up a £1.6 million a year commercial tie-up with the SPFL
  • The sponsorship deal is the largest in the 131-year history of the league
  • Gers chairman Douglas Park owns one of the biggest car dealerships in Scotland
By STEPHEN MCGOWAN FOR THE SCOTTISH DAILY MAIL

PUBLISHED: 08:12, 3 August 2021 | UPDATED: 10:40, 3 August 2021

The SPFL will hold crunch boardroom talks to decide the next step in their simmering sponsorship row with Rangers this week.

The Ibrox club are in dispute with league chiefs over Rangers' refusal to promote a £1.6million a year commercial tie-up with online car firm cinch.

Rangers chairman Douglas Park owns one of the biggest car dealerships in Scotland - and cinch branding was conspicuously absent from Ibrox as the champions opened the season with a 3-0 win over Livingston on Saturday.

In an email to clubs on Monday night, SPFL chairman Murdoch MacLennan branded the Rangers stance 'very disappointing'.

League sources have refused to speculate on potential sanctions if Rangers continue to breach 'fulfilment of rights obligations'. But MacLennan promised an update after board discussions this week.

'You will all be aware that earlier this summer the SPFL signed a title sponsorship contract with cinch,' he wrote. 'This contract is, by value, the biggest single sponsorship deal in the 131-year history of the league.

'In the context of what is, by any measure, a challenging economic environment, our Chief Executive and his commercial team deserve huge credit for delivering this deal.

'It is therefore very disappointing that one of our clubs has not felt able to deliver inventory to cinch.

'Your Board will be discussing this situation later this week. I will, of course, be in touch thereafter to give you a further update.' Rangers managing director Stewart Robertson was re-elected to the league board last month.

Relations are already strained with fellow board members after he was critical of league governance and what he claimed is the underselling of television rights.

The Ibrox chief is likely to field questions over growing concerns than cinch might tear up a deal which puts revenue into the coffers of all 42 clubs.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Tue Aug 03, 2021 8:46 pm

In the light of first Project Big Picture then the Super League many will find this report from OffthePitch.com disappointing

Big Six clubs maintain hold on Premier League committees despite Super League backlash
3 August 2021 3:00 PM
  • English clubs behind European Super League initiative continue to hold positions on Premier League committees despite five senior executives told to stand down from them.
  • Arsenal confirms chief executive Vinai Venkatesham still occupies a position on a key Premier League committee.
  • Manchester United is represented on several of the league’s committees, says a spokesman.
LAWRIE HOLMES lawrie@offthepitch.com

Despite widespread reports that executives from the English clubs behind the Super League initiative were forced to step down from their roles in Premier League committees, the clubs have maintained key positions, according to sources close to the situation.

In April it was reported that the Premier League’s CEO Richard Masters gave an ultimatum for five leaders of the clubs to leave their committee roles.

The departures were seen as a response by the Premier League to a backlash from fans, players and coaches against the clubs’ participation in the initiative.

It was reported that Arsenal chief executive Vinai Venkatesham and Manchester City chief executive Ferran Soriano were asked to leave the Premier League’s Club Strategic Advisory Group. Chelsea chairman Bruce Buck was reported to have been asked to vacate the Audit and Remuneration Committee. Ed Woodward, Manchester United’s executive vice-chairman and Liverpool chairman Tom Werner were reported to have been told to stand down from the Premier League’s Club Broadcasting Advisory Group.

A spokesman for Arsenal says that the club’s chief executive Vinai Venkatesham “is on a key [Premier League] committee.” The north London club declined to say what role Venkatesham now occupied at the Premier League.

Silence in the Premier League

A Manchester United spokesman says the club is “represented on several committees” but declined to give any more detail.

The other four of the so-called 'Big Six' Premier League clubs declined to discuss the issue, as did the Premier League. But sources close to the Premier League say that “all 20 Premier League clubs are represented across various committees.”

The revelation will surprise those who believed the high-profile departures signalled the Premier League’s determination to curb the influence of the Big Six, at least temporarily.

It is not clear which club leaders kept their roles, took other positions or whether other representatives of the Big Six clubs were drafted on to the same or other committees.

In another Premier League club an executive, who asked not to be named, says it is very different now in the committee's:

"The leading advocates are no longer around, such as Woodward and Buck. There’s new faces from these clubs on the committees and a lot more representation for other clubs,” he says.

The six English clubs, along with Atletico Madrid, AC Milan and Inter Milan, that have also confirmed their departure from the European Super League, still have shareholdings in A22, the company behind the ESL.

They are understood to be trying to divest themselves from a complex arrangement that a senior executive of one of the clubs says is “legal mumbo-jumbo.”

A22, along with Barcelona, Real Madrid and Juventus, that are still backing the European Super League and are ready to carry on with plans after court ruling in Madrid goes in their favour.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Tue Aug 03, 2021 10:11 pm

I have posted a few times about former CAF President Issa Hayatou and how his $1bn tv deal with Lagardère was cancelled by FIFA and he was removed - today FIFA's ethics committee announced the conclusion of it's investigation and hearing into the incident - a small fine and a 1 yeat ban

https://www.fifa.com/legal/media-releas ... sa-hayatou

there were many themes at play here and it is plainly obvious the ethics committee were not doing their jobs in full

https://twitter.com/paalpot75/status/14 ... 3543354376

it is also obvious that the fall out of FIFA's actions has been a financial collapse in African football and a huge dependency on FIFA

https://twitter.com/PhilippeAuclair/sta ... 6914043909

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Tue Aug 03, 2021 10:42 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Mon Aug 02, 2021 12:58 am
City a.m. looks behind Socios after Arsenal became the latest club to sign up yto the fan token nonsense

Socios: The blockchain-enabled fan token platform promising to unlock revenue from the global fanbases of sport's most famous teams
Frank Dalleres

Football’s transfer market may have lacked headline-grabbing deals so far this summer but the same can’t be said for Socios.

The platform, which sells “fan tokens” offering supporters the chance to influence decisions at their team, has instantly increased visibility with a clutch of major partnerships.

Last week Socios announced the launch of an Arsenal token, adding another storied club to a roster that already includes Barcelona, Juventus, Manchester City and Paris Saint-Germain.

Days later, it signed a deal with Inter Milan that will see the Italian champions’ fan token advertised on their famous blue and black shirts next season.

And earlier in the month, the brand boosted its South American presence by sponsoring Argentina’s top football division, now renamed the Torneo Socios.

These partnerships have thrown the spotlight onto the blockchain-based platform, billed as a fan engagement tool not just for football but also other sports and entertainment.

But the deals have also revived debate about the platform, which has been criticised and, in one case, forced out of a club by angry supporter groups.

The company’s story highlights the tension between teams courting overseas followers and keeping their domestic faithful onside at a time of heightened awareness of fan power.

Socios: inception, growth and how it works for fans and teams

Socios borrows its name – and the kernel of its concept – from the Spanish word for members of supporter-run clubs such as Barcelona and Real Madrid.

By owning fan tokens, which cost £2, supporters can use the app to vote on decisions such as what to name a training ground or which song should be played at games after a goal.

The app has taken off quickly, with 1.2m downloads since it launched in 2019. The company says it has 900,000 active users.

For teams, the incentive is a 50-50 split of revenue when their tokens are sold or traded, meaning multi-million-pound payouts potentially for several years as more tokens are issued.

Socios already has 45 partners in football, cricket, motor racing, NBA basketball and mixed martial arts who have shared in $150m of revenue this year.

Its emergence is also an example of cryptocurrency’s incursion into sport, a trend already visible in the NFT boom and an increasing number of sponsorship deals.

The platform is owned by Chiliz, a company whose eponymous cryptocurrency is used for buying Socios fan tokens and is traded on major exchanges.

It is the brainchild of Frenchman Alexandre Dreyfus, an internet entrepreneur since the mid-1990s who previously ran an online poker league.

It was while trying to find ways to monetise followers of the teams in his poker league that he settled on the idea of selling voting rights on certain decisions.

He quickly realised it would be better applied to more popular and established sports, and Socios was born.

“We believe that the future of the sports industry is to go from the passive to the active fan,” Socios and Chiliz chief executive Dreyfus tells City A.M.

He points out that while it is possible to buy shares in publicly traded football teams such as Manchester United and Juventus, it is expensive and comes with no guarantee of influence over decisions.

So Dreyfus reasoned that Socios could “create a new level which is not a share in the company but a share of influence.”

‘Not acknowledging fans in Korea or Brazil is discrimination’
It may not be explicit in the marketing materials of Socios or its partners, but the platform is aimed at the sizeable global fanbases of top sports teams.

For that reason it has focused on those with worldwide reach such as Atletico Madrid and AC Milan, and the NBA’s Philadelphia 76ers, Boston Celtics and Cleveland Cavaliers.

Socios has also issued fan tokens for Formula 1 teams Aston Martin and Alfa Romeo, and Indian Premier League cricket franchises Royal Challengers Bangalore, Kolkata Knight Riders and Punjab Kings.

“My job is to monetise the 99 per cent of fans that aren’t in the stadium,” he says.

A Premier League club or NBA team might have 100m supporters worldwide, Dreyfus explains, but only know how to sell to the 50,000 who attend games. On top of that, he says, they lack the appetite for risk to launch a project like Socios by itself.

“We are not targeting the guy who has a tattoo and is a season ticket holder. Our clients are the guys who will most likely never go to the stadium and yet dream about the team but were born in Korea, Japan, Turkey or Brazil. Not acknowledging them is discrimination.”

Meanwhile, teams are on the hunt for any new revenue streams as broadcast rights values plateau or fall and ticketing and sponsorship income has a ceiling.

“Of course it is money driven,” Dreyfus says. “Sports teams need to pay their players; players are more and more expensive; therefore you need more and more revenue. We are a new revenue stream – period.”

Why some supporters’ groups have criticised Socios
Chasing engagement from overseas fans by partnering with Socios has not gone down well with some domestic supporters.

The Football Supporters’ Association (FSA), which helped the Department for Culture, Media and Sport draw up guidelines for clubs to engage with fans, has said: “Socios attempts to monetise fan engagement which the leagues and clubs have committed to doing for free. There should be no financial barrier to engaging with your football club.”

When West Ham United announced in 2019 it had become the first Premier League club to partner with Socios, a coalition of Hammers fan groups launched a “Don’t Pay To Have Your Say” campaign. The club and Socios decided not to go ahead with the West Ham fan token.

The Arsenal Supporters’ Trust, meanwhile, gave the announcement of its club’s plans to join the platform a cool response.

“It is a concern that the club is trying to monetarise fan opinion and engagement,” said the AST, who added it had not been consulted on the decision.

Just months ago, clubs including Arsenal vowed to engage more with fans after their vigorous opposition helped derail the European Super League project.

That episode has also shaped the recommendations of a UK fan-led review of football governance, currently being led by former sports minister Tracey Crouch.

When the Arsenal-Socios deal was announced, the FSA tweeted: “One day saying you’re committed to supporter engagement. The next day, trying to monetise it.”

‘Gimmicky? Sometimes. But not a gateway to Bitcoin trading’
Socios emphasises that is not just about influencing decisions at a team; it also offers unique prizes and experiences, and promises to connect a like-minded community.

Dreyfus says that Socios users will not supersede or silence other supporter voices since all season ticket-holders or members of partner teams are offered a free fan token.

But he also dismisses the company’s critics as a disproportionately vocal minority, or “50 guys who make a noise”.

“The messaging of ‘we have to pay to have a say’ is not true,” he adds. “One: the people already engaging in a traditional way get a token for free. Two: some people – just in the UK – are complaining because for the first time they have a say and it’s thanks to us.”

Dreyfus says charging Socios users for influence “makes sense”. “Me giving my say in something that matters – of course it has a price. It’s valuable.”

He also rejects the suggestion that Socios overstates the influence its users have over teams, when many of the matters put to vote appear inconsequential.

The platform is transparent about what is and isn’t on offer, he says, and has pledged to teams that it will not meddle in sporting or business decisions.

“These kind of small things, are they gimmicky? Yes, sometimes they are, but it’s still more than what you had the day before.”

On the question of whether Socios encourages trading, he says: “Maybe. Some will hold their token forever, some will trade because there is a gamified element to it, so why not?”

It won’t make them start buying Bitcoin, though, he argues. “Does it educate you about the fact there’s a trading component involved with stock? Yeah, sure, probably, and that’s fine.”

Socios ‘no worse than Facebook or TikTok’, ‘here to stay’ and targeting US sports
Socios has more signings in the pipeline and, unlike some of its clients, it won’t stop when the transfer window closes next month.

It is preparing announcements for partnerships that have already been inked with multiple Premier League clubs and Dreyfus expects to agree more in August.

It has big plans for US sports, where it has struck deals with more than 20 teams, including some in the NFL, that are also waiting to be unveiled.

The company was close to a music partnership before the pandemic shut down concerts, he adds, but also intends to move into entertainment.

“We’ve proven that we are here to stay,” Dreyfus says he tells potential clients. “This is not about you believing it [or not] because it is happening. The question is whether you embrace it now or later.”

Despite the popularity of NFTs, Chiliz is committed to focusing on its share of the blockchain-enabled sports market.

In a statement of intent, the company recently spent $6m on acquiring fantoken.com, its trademarks and Twitter account.

“We’re not here to take money from the fans,” says Dreyfus. “What we do is not bad; we are not bad actors. We aren’t worse than Facebook or TikTok. It’s just the monetisation is different.”
Everton become the latest team to join the Socios nonsense

https://www.evertonfc.com/news/2204760/ ... -socioscom

a reminder of what the FSA said about Socios when it failed at West Ham United

“The Socios model attempts to monetise fan engagement which the leagues and clubs have committed to doing for free. “There should be no financial barriers to engaging with your football club.”

https://thefsa.org.uk/news/west-ham-end ... rtnership/

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Wed Aug 04, 2021 1:12 am

I have been meaning to post this for some time - Tifosy look at the Sponsorship Market for European Football

https://www.tifosy.com/en/insights/spon ... rview-3516

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Wed Aug 04, 2021 1:50 am

It has been a issue for a few years now, moving up from non league to the Football means that clubs who have them to replace artificial pitches (that are revenue generating everyday) with grass. This year that has happened to Sutton United, who have been presented with further problems in getting the new pitch to bed in as a result of the weather which means that fixtures have had to be changed- from the Mail

Sutton United postpone first two home fixtures in League Two after facing 'unexpected challenges' upgrading pitch to comply with Football League standards due to wet weather
  • Sutton United have had to delay their first two home games of the season
  • Sutton have experienced problems installing a grass pitch at their stadium
  • Their home fixtures against Salford City and Hartlepool have been postponed
By RICHARD MARTIN FOR MAILONLINE

PUBLISHED: 00:04, 4 August 2021 | UPDATED: 00:04, 4 August 2021

Sutton United have had to postpone their first two home games in the Football League due to problems with their pitch.

Sutton, who won a first ever promotion to League Two last season, have had to upgrade from an artificial surface to a grass pitch to comply with Football League standards but have had what have been described as 'unexpected challenges' with the transition.

They begin their adventure in professional football away to Forest Green on 7 August and were due to play their first home game of the season against Salford City on 14 August but that will now be an away fixture as their Gander Green Lane ground is still not ready, with the wet summer causing havoc with the new surface.

The club's proposed second home fixture against Hartlepool has also been altered as a result of the ground's teething problems and has been moved to September 14.

Sutton's first game in League 2 is now due to take place against Oldham on 28 Augut, assuming there will be no further delays with their new pitch.

'Following adverse weather conditions in recent weeks, the process to install a grass pitch at Gander Green Lane to comply with EFL regulations has been delayed, putting the club's ability to host its opening home fixture(s) in doubt, said a statement from the Football league.

EFL chief executive Trevor Birch said the club had 'experienced some unexpected challenges' with the pitch and the League, with the support of Salford and Hartlepool, had agreed to help them out by altering their fixtures.

Birch added: 'The club will be a great addition to the EFL, looking to build on an impressive campaign last time out and we look forward to seeing them host Sky Bet EFL fixtures at Gander Green Lane in the near future.'
This user liked this post: Paul Waine

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Wed Aug 04, 2021 11:48 am

Chester Perry wrote:
Tue Aug 03, 2021 6:48 pm
Today's Unofficial Partner Podcast is Episode 5 of the series Re-thinking sport with guest EFL Chairman Rick Parry - it sounds like it is going to be quite interesting

the blurb

This is episode five of our series of Re-Thinking Sport, with Portas, the global strategy consultancy dedicated to sport and physical activity.

Today we’re talking about government regulation of football with our guests Rick Parry, the chairman of the EFL, and Adam Paker from Portas.

Rick Parry is the former chief executive of Liverpool, the original CEO of the Premier League and a board member at New York Cosmos.

He was recruited from his position as a senior management consultant with leading UK firm Ernst & Young in 1991 to assist in planning the new Premier League. Appointed Chief Executive in February 1992, the competition was officially ratified just seven days later by The Football Association, allowing Parry to proceed with negotiations for a television deal which was eventually awarded to BSkyB and the BBC for a then record bid of £304 million over five years.

The context of the conversation is the recent review of English football carried out by Tracey Crouch MP, the former sports minister and a previous guest on Unofficial Partner.

Her review was set up following the failure of The Super League, which features six of the Premier League’s leading teams. UK Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden announced he had “no choice” but to move quickly and launch the Government’s manifesto commitment of a fan-led review.

The review he said will be wide-ranging in nature and will examine the potential for changes to ownership models, governance, how finance flows through the game and how to give supporters a greater say in the running of the game.

The launch of the fan-led review comes following a number of high profile collapses in recent years including Bury Football Club that went into administration last year after being expelled from the Football League in 2019.

https://www.unofficialpartner.com/podca ... rick-parry
Fresh from maintaining his stance on Project Big Picture which he maintains is not any anyway related to Super League (hmmm) and still fails to recognise that a greater share of significantly less means no extra (though it does reduce the gap to the bottom of the Premier League financially) and questionable assertions that football governance is already in a strong place - Rick Parry goes onto Talksport to defend Project Big Picture again

https://talksport.com/football/efl/7725 ... ll-broken/

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Wed Aug 04, 2021 2:06 pm

The Vultures are through the door

La Liga becomes the first major soccer League to go into partnership with Private Equity - at least on principle, it is dependent on La Liga's existing plan being followed - Translated from www.laliga.com

WED 04.08.2021 | PRESS RELEASE
LaLiga confirms a principle of agreement with CVC to inject 2,700 million euros into the competition and clubs
The transaction is designed to drive the global growth of LaLiga and its clubs, continuing the transformation towards a global digital entertainment company.


Press Release

WED 04.08.2021

LaLiga confirms a strategic agreement with the international investment fund CVC to inject 2,700 million euros into the competition and the clubs. It is an ambitious investment plan that will provide LaLiga and the Clubs with resources with the aim of continuing the transformation towards a global digital entertainment company, strengthening the competition and transforming the experience of the fans.

The operation will be executed through the creation of a new company to which LaLiga will contribute all its businesses, subsidiaries and joint ventures and in which CVC will have a minority stake of approximately 10% of the capital. Additionally, CVC contributes funds to LaLiga through a joint venture, a long-term agreement that aligns the interests of LaLiga, the Clubs and CVC. LaLiga will keep intact from this new company its sports competitions and the organization and management of the commercialization of audiovisual rights.

The transaction values LaLiga at 24,250 billion euros, a valuation that recognizes LaLiga's leadership as one of the most outstanding sports competitions worldwide, as well as its growth potential through a greater digital presence focused on direct interaction with fans, investment in brand and sports project and internationalization , in a coordinated effort between LaLiga and the clubs. This is a higher valuation than that which has been considered in other projects of similar characteristics, which recognizes the great work done by LaLiga to date.

This agreement aims to lead the transformation that the world of entertainment is experiencing and to maximize all the growth opportunities that the Clubs have to develop a new business model that allows them to diversify and intensify the generation of income and marketing models, accelerating their digital transformation. Moving from the current mono-product model, based almost exclusively on the match and the sale of audiovisual rights, to a multi-product/multi-experience model, with a direct relationship with the amateur, based on technology and digital and analytical capabilities. To this end, LaLiga is already on the way to becoming a global company, with the best entertainment content, strong digital presence and data capture and analysis capability that allow for direct omnichannel interaction with all fans and with a clear focus on optimizing the experience for fans.

The investment in improving the competition will have a direct impact on the improvement of the experience and the growth of the number of fans. The technological capabilities of the LaLiga and Club ecosystem will also be strengthened and will offer new content, new channels and new markets.

The 2,700 million euros that CVC will contribute will be directly concentrated in 90% in the Clubs, including also women's football, semi-professional and non-professional football by the royal Spanish Football Federation and the Superior Council of Sports (more than 100 million euros). It is, therefore, an inclusive, equitable and democratic strategic agreement, which not only shields the economic viability of all Spanish football clubs, but also opens up a new present and future for them by allowing them to advance in their development and transformation for a decade.

The resources provided by the agreement between CVC and LaLiga will also have a multiplier effect not only in the world of football, but in the ability to create brand Spain, as well as in the creation of employment for the sector and in the attraction of talent.

For the implementation of this strategic plan, the Football Clubs assume a commitment to allocate the investment they receive to the promotion of their own Development Plan agreed with LaLiga, which will include the following main areas: sports strategy, infrastructure, international development, brand and product development, communication strategy, innovation plan, technology and data and content development plan on digital platforms and social networks. All this incorporating sustainability, good governance and diversity as fundamental values of the model.

CVC brings to this project all its financial potential, its management capacity and its expert knowledge in the development of sports businesses by its extensive experience of more than 25 years in international competitions of rugby, volleyball, tennis, Moto GP, Formula 1 and its relations with technological partners essential for the implementation of the concrete projects of this plan.

© LaLiga - 2021

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Wed Aug 04, 2021 2:13 pm

That LaLiga story was first broken by Tariq Panja in the New York Times yesterday evening - forcing the early press release from LaLiga

La Liga Agrees to $3 Billion Private Equity Investment
AUGUST 03, 2021

TOKYO — Spain’s top soccer league has agreed to a deal in principle to sell 10 percent of its commercial business to a private equity firm, CVC Capital Partners, for around $3 billion.

If approved by the league’s clubs, the deal could help the league’s cash-strapped teams, including giant ones like F.C. Barcelona, repair their finances and ease a cash crunch caused by the coronavirus pandemic.

CVC, a major sports investor, has been trying to strike similar deals with major leagues across Europe in recent years. It nearly reached a similar agreement with Italy’s Serie A for a share of that league’s media rights business before the deal faltered over objections from a group of teams. Something similar could happen in Spain, where the league, known as La Liga but encompassing the country’s first and second divisions, needs to secure the support of a majority of its 42 clubs at a general meeting to complete the sale.

In a statement on Wednesday after The New York Times reported the agreement, La Liga said it would place all the assets related to the deal into a new company in which CVC will be a 10 percent partner. La Liga would retain total control over the selling arrangements for its broadcast contracts and sporting regulations.

“The agreement is expected to be ratified today by both the La Liga executive committee and the CVC investment committee,” the statement said.

While La Liga and CVC agreed to a price for a partnership that will run for several decades, representatives of the league and CVC have been meeting with club officials to secure their backing before a final vote.

The deal for such a joint venture would be the first of its type by a major European league, and it would come as the soccer industry works to get its finances on track after being buffeted by the lingering effects of the coronavirus.

The pandemic, which closed stadiums for months, resulted in billions of dollars in lost revenue and exposed the precarious business models of some of the sport’s top clubs, where profligate spending and bad decisions regularly put teams at risk of bankruptcy.

The CVC-La Liga agreement comes at a particularly delicate time for Spanish soccer. Its two biggest clubs, Barcelona and Real Madrid, are still trying to forge ahead and create a breakaway European Super League, a midweek club competition for the continent’s top teams, after an initial effort to launch the project failed spectacularly in April. One of the biggest objections to that project came from La Liga, whose president, Javier Tebas, remains a vocal critic of the scheme that he said would destroy the fabric of European soccer.

Yet much of the rationale for the teams’ breaking away is similar to the motivation for La Liga to join up with CVC. The pandemic has been punishing financially for European soccer clubs, particularly those with the largest stadiums, who are losing billions of dollars of revenue and struggling to meet outsized payroll commitments.

Barcelona’s finances have attracted the most attention. The team has been desperately trying to restructure its debt under a new president, Joan Laporta, and has been told by the league that it needs to shed about $200 million in salaries to re-sign its biggest star, Lionel Messi, whose contract expired at the end of June.

Any deal for an infusion of private equity money would most likely require a recommitment of Barcelona and Real Madrid to La Liga’s current structures. The teams account for much of the league’s global visibility and popularity, and despite their flirtation with the Super League, Barcelona’s need for immediate cash to meet La Liga’s spending caps may weigh on its decision on the CVC offer.

Still, it is not certain that Spain’s clubs will accept the deal. In Italy, a $2 billion deal with a CVC-led group for a similar 10 percent stake floundered because a handful of the biggest teams, including the would-be Super League members Juventus and Inter Milan, said the price was too low.

La Liga played down the short term impact of the cash injection, and instead insisted the purpose of the investment was to build for the future. To ensure that, they have demanded that member clubs commit to a plan focusing on developing their physical infrastructure and their brands.

CVC has been on a sporting buying spree as it bids to become the biggest player in a relatively new market for prime European leagues and competitions. It has sealed numerous deals in rugby over the past year, including one in March that saw CVC agree to pay 365 million pounds (about $500 million) for a share of the Six Nations Championship, Europe’s top national team rugby competition. It also made a big bet by investing $300 million in the world volleyball federation a month earlier.

CVC’s proposed soccer investments would be the biggest commitment of its resources since its hugely profitable exit from the Formula 1 car racing series in 2017. CVC previously held conversations with soccer’s global governing body, FIFA, about investing in new competitions, and it was on a shortlist of companies Germany’s Bundesliga was considering partnering with before scrapping the idea of a stake sale.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Wed Aug 04, 2021 2:23 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Mon Aug 02, 2021 12:14 pm
The Athletic looks at how the owners of all Premier League Clubs made their money

https://theathletic.com/2743638/2021/08 ... =twitteruk

it is telling that they cannot estimate the wealth of the Burnley owners - and people thought information was cloaked under the previous owners
Today The Athletic looks at how Owners of the Championship clubs made their money

https://theathletic.com/2736291/2021/08 ... ed-article

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by aggi » Wed Aug 04, 2021 2:26 pm

AN interesting graphic from that article

Image

Just shows how unsustainable the Championship is.
This user liked this post: Paul Waine

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Wed Aug 04, 2021 2:35 pm

aggi wrote:
Wed Aug 04, 2021 2:26 pm
AN interesting graphic from that article

Image

Just shows how unsustainable the Championship is.
The constant argument is that parachutes distort the cost picture that force the excessive spending - it is still a choice though (which people forget - and I am very aware of the pre determination that spend gives) as Luton have shown. It is also true that the same revenue multiple applies in the Premier League helped considerably by regular UEFA competition - you do not get anything near that level of overspending though from any of them

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Wed Aug 04, 2021 3:09 pm

More on that proposed La Liga deal with Private Equity group CVC from the Financial Times - a lot will depend on how many votes are required to get the agreement - though if the even one of the big 2 is against it there could be problems

Real Madrid opposes private equity’s €2.7bn Spanish football deal
SAMUEL AGINI AUGUST 04, 2021

Spain’s top football league has agreed a €2.7bn deal with CVC Capital Partners that could bring private equity into a major European league for the first time, sparking strong opposition from Real Madrid, one of its biggest teams.

The deal with La Liga, which has not been agreed by clubs, values it at just over €24.2bn. Under the project, named “La Liga Impulso”, CVC would take a minority stake in a newly created entity that would manage broadcast, sponsorship and digital rights for the league, which runs Spain’s top two football divisions, but would not take over its regulatory powers.

Just under €2.5bn of the investment would go directly to clubs over a three-year period, according to two people with knowledge of the deal.

Real Madrid and FC Barcelona, which are Spain’s most successful clubs but have been embroiled in a dispute with La Liga over plans for a breakaway European Super League, would stand to receive about €260m each, according to one of the people.

However, Real Madrid is opposed to the deal, according to two people familiar with its view. Its executives were left out of the negotiations, they added and the club felt it had been blindsided, one of the people said. Barcelona’s position is not yet clear.

La Liga’s Comisión Delegada, a committee consisting of president Javier Tebas and 14 clubs that do not include Barcelona or Real Madrid, unanimously approved the deal in a vote on Wednesday, clearing the way for a vote by the 42 clubs in both divisions as soon as next week.

Real Madrid’s opposition means La Liga and CVC will have to rely on support from other clubs. A deal could still go through without unanimous support.

CVC’s investment would aim to help clubs recover from the financial hit during the pandemic, although a person close to the league insisted the financing was not a rescue package. It would also aim to attract a larger international audience, improve technology and inject funds into grassroots football in Spain.

Although most backers of the European Super League withdrew their support after a backlash from fans, Real Madrid and Barcelona are still battling for its future despite strong opposition from La Liga.

The plan would have guaranteed each founding member a “welcome bonus” of €200m-€300m.

Barcelona and CVC declined to comment. Real Madrid did not immediately respond to inquiries.

The CVC deal comes at a time when other top European leagues have ended talks with private equity firms after a backlash about handing over control to outside groups.

Last year, CVC won the backing of some clubs in Italy’s top Serie A league for a similar deal but those talks stalled after opposition from elite teams. In May, Germany’s top football clubs voted to retreat from talks with private equity firms over the sale of a stake in the Bundesliga.

Investors have targeted sports deals during the pandemic, as leagues and clubs struggle to recover from the loss of revenue from matches that were cancelled or played in empty stadiums.

SouthLondonexile
Posts: 562
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2020 1:35 pm
Been Liked: 84 times
Has Liked: 247 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by SouthLondonexile » Wed Aug 04, 2021 4:19 pm

Just a quick post for BFC to hang in there, be prudent and stay in the Premiership.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Wed Aug 04, 2021 6:09 pm

AFC Fylde have put in a planning application for a fourth stand at their ground to complete the development - there is also an application to build 100 homes at the site (which should help offset the cost of the news stand) - anyone who knows that area will be aware that thousands of homes have been built around there in recent years

https://www.placenorthwest.co.uk/news/a ... q8.twitter

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Wed Aug 04, 2021 8:12 pm

In a desperate bid for additional revenue the Italian FA is asking it's government to temporarily reverse it's 3 year ban on betting sponsorship to alleviate financial difficulties - It is not an argument that is too convincing - betting companies may pay more than other sponsors, but is the gap so great as to make a substantial difference - from SportsProMedia

Italian FA wants government betting sponsorship ban lifted to boost club finances
National soccer body sets out proposals for new revenue opportunities.


Posted: August 3 2021By: Ed Dixon
  • Italy currently has a blanket ban on gambling-related sponsorships and advertising partnerships domestically
  • FIGC wants regulations lifted for at least two years
  • Other proposals include ‘Football Savings Fund’ and tax relief
The Italian Football Federation (FIGC) is pushing for the country’s betting and advertising ban to be temporarily lifted in order to open up more revenue streams for soccer teams counting the financial cost of Covid-19.

Since being implemented in 2019, Italian government regulations have maintained a blanket ban on all gambling-related sponsorships and advertising partnerships for Italian sports organisations domestically. However, they are free to do deals covering overseas markets. An example of this is soccer giants Juventus’ contract with 10Bet, the club’s official gaming and betting partner.

Even so, professional sports teams across Italy have been left struggling to recoup lost earnings brought on by the pandemic. This has been particularly apparent in Serie A, the top tier of Italian soccer.

In May, league champions Inter Milan took out a loan reportedly worth €275 million (US$327 million) with US-based Oaktree Capital Management to support the club’s finances, while Juventus recently confirmed a capital raise of up to €400 million (US$476 million). The latter is also bracing itself for a record €185 million (US$220 million) loss for 2020/21, according to OffThePitch.

An amendment to the gambling sponsorship ban would likely ensure fresh income for teams, though the Italian government has already set out plans for further restrictions. This would see the number of gambling licences in the country reduced from 85 to 50 by 2023.

Commenting on the ban, FIGC president Gabriele Gravina said: “We are at a crossroads; we must act quickly to prevent the professional football crisis from obliging the clubs to block their activity, thus bringing the entire sports sector to its knees, the companies of the 12 product sectors connected to it and the entire country system, with an undesirable decrease in direct and indirect tax contributions.

“We did not ask the government for refreshments, rather to recognise the socio-economic importance that football has through the adoption of some urgent measures to relieve the clubs from the crisis generated by Covid-19. Football can play a decisive role in Italy’s overall recovery.”

The FIGC is proposing the ban be lifted for a minimum of two years until 30th June 2023. The organisation also wants to see the creation of a ‘Football Savings Fund’, which would also be in place until the same date. This would allow for one per cent of all online and in-person sports bets in Italy to be sent to a national fund, which would be managed by the FIGC and used to support soccer projects across the country.

Further measures laid out by the FIGC include tax and contribution relief caveats, facilitated access to measures supporting the liquidity of sports clubs and ‘dedicated procedures’ for the installation payments and conciliation of soccer club’s tax debts with the Italian Revenue Agency.

The proposals have been sent to the Presidency of the Council of Ministers, the representatives of the Departments of Economy and Finance, Health and Economic Development, as well as the Undersecretary for Sport.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Wed Aug 04, 2021 9:09 pm

Nick de Marco QC who was the PFA's legal representative in the case that ended League's 1 and 2's attempts to impose a salary cap last season has written why they cannot work in football

https://www.blackstonechambers.com/docu ... _Marco.pdf
This user liked this post: Paul Waine

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Wed Aug 04, 2021 9:52 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Wed Aug 04, 2021 9:09 pm
Nick de Marco QC who was the PFA's legal representative in the case that ended League's 1 and 2's attempts to impose a salary cap last season has written why they cannot work in football

https://www.blackstonechambers.com/docu ... _Marco.pdf
It all seems very reasonable under English Law, but it will be interesting what the final report of the Fan Led Review of Football has to say about this (the time of this article seems too much of a coincidence) and indeed what is recommended as the scope of influence for what seems likely to be a new regulator of football.

Of course a kind of salary cap already exists in some European Leagues but they form part of an overall spending cap which covers transfers, development players and wages as we have seen in Spain where spending caps have been in force for at least 7 years, and it was only the pandemic and terrible fiscal management at some of the biggest clubs that has seen this as restrictive. Though since their introduction opportunity in winning the league has much reduced - France has been operating spending caps for over 30 years.

Paul Waine
Posts: 9845
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 2344 times
Has Liked: 3164 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Paul Waine » Wed Aug 04, 2021 10:15 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Wed Aug 04, 2021 9:09 pm
Nick de Marco QC who was the PFA's legal representative in the case that ended League's 1 and 2's attempts to impose a salary cap last season has written why they cannot work in football

https://www.blackstonechambers.com/docu ... _Marco.pdf
Hi CP, I've just caught up with some reading - and added "likes" to some of the articles you've posted. My "likes" should be read as appreciating that you've posted this stuff to be read. I find it informative. However, my "likes" should not be taken, necessarily, as support or agreement with the articles you've posted. Just interesting to read.

BTW: You refer to private equity as "vultures." I don't think this is how most people think of private equity (pe). It's just an alternative to public equity, i.e. shares listed and traded on a public stock exchange. Of course, "vulture funds" exist; these funds target entities that are in financial difficulties, often buying up the debt issued by these struggling entities - because the struggling entities are struggling to pay their debt. Often the debt will be acquired at a deep discount to the monetary face value. Of course, they are taking a gamble that they can fix some of the problems and make money for themselves as a result of fixing these problems.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Wed Aug 04, 2021 10:39 pm

Paul Waine wrote:
Wed Aug 04, 2021 10:15 pm

BTW: You refer to private equity as "vultures." I don't think this is how most people think of private equity (pe). It's just an alternative to public equity, i.e. shares listed and traded on a public stock exchange. Of course, "vulture funds" exist; these funds target entities that are in financial difficulties, often buying up the debt issued by these struggling entities - because the struggling entities are struggling to pay their debt. Often the debt will be acquired at a deep discount to the monetary face value. Of course, they are taking a gamble that they can fix some of the problems and make money for themselves as a result of fixing these problems.
I am quite cognisant of the nature of Private Equity Paul, I apply the term vultures when talking about football (and sport in general) because I feel they are extracting much from the game without really putting anything significant into itand I do not just mean money. To my way of thinking they attack the soul and spirit of the game both at club and league level. I get and have posted about (in an effort to be balanced) all the "benefits" they can bring in terms of acceleration development (particularly infrastructure and technology) of investment and introducing specific expertise, but I think the price is too high (not just financially) partly because the exit strategy is over a relatively short period. I will concede it has more relevance in new competitions such as WSL, but established traditions and emotional connections have been in place in European Football for too long for it to have merit.

Every example of Private Equity trying to enter into the men's game I have come across, distorts (rather than disrupts) the model that clubs like ours have to compete in, each with an ominously negative impact to club and by extension the community in which it sits.

Paul Waine
Posts: 9845
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 2344 times
Has Liked: 3164 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Paul Waine » Wed Aug 04, 2021 10:58 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Wed Aug 04, 2021 10:39 pm
I am quite cognisant of the nature of Private Equity Paul, I apply the term vultures when talking about football (and sport in general) because I feel they are extracting much from the game without really putting anything significant into itand I do not just mean money. To my way of thinking they attack the soul and spirit of the game both at club and league level. I get and have posted about (in an effort to be balanced) all the "benefits" they can bring in terms of acceleration development (particularly infrastructure and technology) of investment and introducing specific expertise, but I think the price is too high (not just financially) partly because the exit strategy is over a relatively short period. I will concede it has more relevance in new competitions such as WSL, but established traditions and emotional connections have been in place in European Football for too long for it to have merit.

Every example of Private Equity trying to enter into the men's game I have come across, distorts (rather than disrupts) the model that clubs like ours have to compete in, each with an ominously negative impact to club and by extension the community in which it sits.
OK, got it. But, if you feel like that about private equity, don't you think that the same applies to "billionaire owners" and footballers (and their agents) taking more out of the game than the game can afford? I'm not sure when we can date the start of the "slippery slope" of money distorting the game, is it the formation of the Premier League in 1992, or was it the abolition of the maximum wage in 1962 (have I got that date right) as campaigned for by Jimmy Hill? Private equity is only seeking to be involved with football because football has an insatiable desire for more and more money. And, we, as fans are also "part of the problem" - reference the transfer rumours threads where many are posting where Burnley should (and shouldn't) spend the money that the fans expect to be spent.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Wed Aug 04, 2021 11:51 pm

Paul Waine wrote:
Wed Aug 04, 2021 10:58 pm
OK, got it. But, if you feel like that about private equity, don't you think that the same applies to "billionaire owners" and footballers (and their agents) taking more out of the game than the game can afford? I'm not sure when we can date the start of the "slippery slope" of money distorting the game, is it the formation of the Premier League in 1992, or was it the abolition of the maximum wage in 1962 (have I got that date right) as campaigned for by Jimmy Hill? Private equity is only seeking to be involved with football because football has an insatiable desire for more and more money. And, we, as fans are also "part of the problem" - reference the transfer rumours threads where many are posting where Burnley should (and shouldn't) spend the money that the fans expect to be spent.
Before the abolition of the maximum wage in 1960 a lot of owners were taking advantage with dividends and not investing in facilities - many it had to be said were paying players extra under the counter - Jimmy Hill proved this and it was key to changing the regulations.

Around 1980 we saw the end of ticket revenue share, and it was swiftly followed by the end of equal distribution of TV revenue across the 92, something that has seen greater disparity in cash terms through every broadcast deal cycle ever since.

In most cases Billionaires have had disastrous effects on the game by inflating the cost expectations of players agents and clubs (for transfer fees) - similar impacts have come from UEFA competition changes (instigated by a small group of clubs who already had the highest revenues, traditionally through matchday attendances but increasingly through commercial sponsorship).

Just look at the number of clubs that have won the league in the 40 years since Aston Villa did and compare it to the 40 years that preceded that -interestingly there have been more in the last decade than in each of the previous 3 decades - but the pool of potential winners has become very small where previously it was possible to build a team in the lower divisions and rise to win the title and many teams took their turn at success over the period as their fortunes rose and fell.

There is no doubt that stadiums, pitches and player quality have improved immensely with all this money but it has accelerated the end of real competition for all but the a few clubs. The sad by product is the clamour of a number of fans who think it is more important to spend lots of money even if it has not been generated through revenues to spend on yet more players - this virus spread voraciously by media is terrible indictment of the game at the highest levels where "fans" place a greater value on perceived prestige of their club rather than it's future stability. It also feeds the nonsense spending in the Championship to gain the perceived riches of the Premier League - which itself is a bit a of a myth when you look at the cost of participation in wages and fees not to mention the demands of the rights holders (Leeds has to spend nearly £20m on infrastructure upgrades last summer to meet Premier League standards) .

Players and Agents feed this further by expecting clubs to stump up wages and fees that only a few can realistically pay.

Fortunately, there appears to be a groundswell in the lower leagues that are rejecting this approach and with fan and community buy in are concentrating on being sustainable community assets over the long term.

As for myself, I have maintained my fascination for the game from a distance, barring my annual TV license fee I have not put a penny into football for 20 years now and I do not see that ever changing the way things are going. Burnley is my club so I cannot and will not go elsewhere, I still get down after poor performances but I will not demand ever more money be spent. I have regularly argued that the existence of the club is more important than the division it plays in.
This user liked this post: Paul Waine

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Thu Aug 05, 2021 12:06 am

Chester Perry wrote:
Tue Jun 15, 2021 11:13 am
Abingdon Town join Whyteleafe in having to resign from their League as they lose the lease for their ground - Irma who bought the ground last year have made "impossible demands" - this is a story that is only going to get bigger

https://twitter.com/theabbotts_1870/sta ... 4430251008
I missed this at the time but here is the product of some investigation into IRAMA by :UglyGame and @AgainstLeague3

https://twitter.com/AgainstLeague3/stat ... 6954181632

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Thu Aug 05, 2021 1:34 am

It is a topic that has been posted about before, but here is an update - The Athletic on the significant drift that Elite English football has taken from North to South

https://theathletic.com/2746710/2021/08 ... dailyemail

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Thu Aug 05, 2021 1:45 am

Chester Perry wrote:
Tue Jun 29, 2021 11:06 pm
As ever Simon Chadwick looks at the wider picture re Ares Managment's buy in to Atletico Madrid - and it starts to look more like Silver Lakes partnership with CFG as Atleti are building a Sports City/Entertainment complex

https://twitter.com/Fire_and_Skill/stat ... 1812568066
The Sports Business Institute looks at and talks up the recent capital investment into Atletico Madrid

https://www.sbibarcelona.com/newsdetails/index/547

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Thu Aug 05, 2021 2:14 am

The French Ligue validate the multi-club model (sadly, but they had little choice) after a number of Ligue 2 clubs complained about Nancy's network of partners

https://translate.google.com/translate? ... KjcnBszQh6

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Thu Aug 05, 2021 2:22 am

This is interesting

https://twitter.com/mjshrimper/status/1 ... 1230992385

"Moroccan FA president Fouzi Lekjaa: “Those who are against the World Cup every two years are selfish people who discriminate against billions of people just to protect their own commercial interests.”

This one isn’t going away."


Another African country joins up to FIFA's plan, no surprise given FIFA's almost total control of CAF now - that is 54 votes potentially right there

Vegas Claret
Posts: 30275
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
Been Liked: 10917 times
Has Liked: 5594 times
Location: clue is in the title

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Vegas Claret » Thu Aug 05, 2021 5:11 am

We should have the World Cup every year, then we can all be disappointed more frequently !

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Thu Aug 05, 2021 10:10 am

Vegas Claret wrote:
Thu Aug 05, 2021 5:11 am
We should have the World Cup every year, then we can all be disappointed more frequently !
What people are not recognising about these efforts to increase the frequency of the world cup, partnered with 48 teams in the finals is that the sheer volume of games will inevitably lead to a FIFA edict (ostensibly about player safety/health) about the maximum size of the top leagues - which may be as low as 16 but will not be higher than 18 teams - so few leagues have more than 16 teams (in Europe it is 5) and UEFA is already pressuring for a reduction to 18 in England Spain and Italy (France have already voted to go to 18 in 2024, Italy are due to vote for the same thing later this year). It will be interesting to see how that will impact broadcast revenues for domestic leagues, particularly if a reduction to 16 happens

Naturally the English will resist, and be called selfish as over a 100 years of tradition is not considered as important as the development of the game globally. There is some legitimacy to that argument, but this is about FIFA growing revenues so it can exert greater control via it's distributions.

What nobody is talking about is who will host all these mega competitions, though even there it seems FIFA has already established the notion that the era of a single nation host is more or less over - apart from the very few.

From a revenue perspective I also think eliminating the scarcity value will see diminished returns

Post Reply