Football's Magic Money Tree

[Chester Perry]

Be somewhat ironic if the bid for Newcastle (or Marseille for that matter) was approved in the next few days, only for a representative of the highest order of government in Riyadh to pull the plug on sports activity spending.

Will be the last straw for some Geordies.

I get the impression that the Saudi's wouldn't be too upset if they were turned down by the Premier League - they could still do the property thing there and Marseille would present far less challenges in a sporting and political sense. PSG (Qatar), Nice (Ineos) and them could quickly sew up the Champions League sports at the expense of Lyon (great tradition no real money behind them) and Monaco (wealthy owner seems more interested in it as a self sustainable operation)

[Chester Perry]

Another legal advisory article for football in the pandemic - Covid-19 and Football: The Legal Implications by Sports lawyer Dr. Gregory Ioannidis

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/covid-19 ... nnidis-at-

[Chester Perry]

The Sunderland Echo asked the football clubs owners a series of questions re Friday's reports about it's financial treatment of parachute payments/loans - the responses are not impressing very many

https://www.sunderlandecho.com/sport/fo ... le-2849230

[Chester Perry]

Norwich have announced they will be refunding matchday and season tickets - closed doors or nothing now

https://www.canaries.co.uk/News/2020/ma ... p-rebates/

[Chester Perry]

Interesting article in the Guardian highlighting that even if the season completes the Premier League could lose £300m in tv rights as games not delivered when and how TV companies wanted them

https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... n-finishes

[Stevie2112]

If that's the case,then we should pull the season now.Total disregard for what is happening right now from the broadcasters.

[Chester Perry]

I get the impression that the Saudi's wouldn't be too upset if they were turned down by the Premier League - they could still do the property thing there and Marseille would present far less challenges in a sporting and political sense. PSG (Qatar), Nice (Ineos) and them could quickly sew up the Champions League sports at the expense of Lyon (great tradition no real money behind them) and Monaco (wealthy owner seems more interested in it as a self sustainable operation)

And as if by magic and after years of trying by sports rights owners across the world, the Premier League have been given legal documentation that links the Saudi government to the pirate service BeoutQ

https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... ier-league

[Chester Perry]

If that's the case,then we should pull the season now.Total disregard for what is happening right now from the broadcasters.

more likely to be rights distributors looking for any excuse to stop their own cash flows haemorrhaging as they lose subscribers and advertisers. There are very few that are cash rich, those that are will be leveraging for additional opportunities in the remainder of the contract and perhaps dispensations for the next cycle.

This kind of thing was always on the cards and I have posted about most of it previously.

[Chester Perry]

The chaps at "Game of the People" have seen what has happened to the game around the world during the Pandemic and listened to all the talk of financial doom and asked - If things are that bad, which clubs are too important systemically to lose? It is likely to be a controversial notion, and certainly there are controversial choices, though the writer does suggest his own (a member of the big six) is not of systemic importance.

I find this pretty controversial, what about you?

Systemic clubs – who would we save to preserve football?
GOTP Editorial Team - Posted on May 4, 2020

Since the world locked down, there has been an upswing of interest in dystopian novels, films and radical theories from desert-dwelling hermits predicting the downfall of the human race from their caravans as they polish their weapons and count their tinned tomatoes.

But what of the football industry? How is this going to look when it finally resumes business? And can we honestly say the world of inflated investment, spiralling transfer fees and multi-millionaire footballers will continue? The fallout in the global economy has yet to be truly taken on board by the public, but there’s little doubt we face a crisis every bit as seismic as the 2008-09 earthquake.

It’s a sign of the times that whenever large companies become bankrupt there are calls for bail-outs and government help. It is not inconceivable that, in extreme cases, a football club of the size of, for example, Manchester United, could be bailed-out by the state. Whether that is right or wrong is another issue, but the morale-boosting properties of football should not be underestimated. When the UK bailed-out the economy by underpinning the banks, the government set a precedent to some extent, but people have found it hard to differentiate between saving the economy and saving banks.

Football clubs are not vital for the economy, but as far as “soft” issues are concerned, the game is vital to the working man. Indirectly, the kudos a government would get from saving the national game could be substantial, although the opposition – whoever they may be – would naturally object. Nobody actually wants to be linked to closing down a football club, whatever the political narrative.

In the worst case scenario, in other words football imploding, which clubs could be deemed to be essential to the structure of European football? This is not just about performance, it is also about the gap that club would leave if it was to suddenly disappear. Obviously, any club being wiped off the map leaves behind a lot of heartache in the local community, but if it became a “Noah’s Ark” discussion, which clubs would need to remain if a country wanted to preserve its national game?

Each would will have its national icons, but let’s assume that a pan-European body, such as UEFA, wanted to save the continent’s football, the clubs that are essential to the structure would be so because of a number of reasons. These would be, primarily, clubs that would be missed and their absence would be akin to taking a vital brick out of a broad structure. They could be clubs that are renowned player factories, producing young talent on a conveyor-belt basis. Furthermore, they will surely be institutions that have the critical mass needed to be influential – large attendances, high levels of sponsorship, appeal to broadcasters.

The most essential clubs are not necessarily the richest or recently successful. For instance, are Paris Saint-Germain vital to Europe or merely vital to their owners and supporters? PSG are Jean-come-latelies, as are Chelsea and Manchester City, clubs that represent the modern model of inflated investment. English and French football did without these three clubs being phenomenally successful for decades, so in theory, if it was to stop, would the rest of the football world care? If you recall how the traditional giants of English football reacted to the threat of “new money”, it was also reflected across the many constituencies of the game, with some fans claiming these clubs had “no history”. Putting myopia aside (I am a Chelsea fan, by the way), clubs became historically dominant for a reason and the addition of clubs like City and Chelsea was, to a certain extent, artificial insemination. The corporate world has long made it difficult for organic growth and now we see that football has gone the same way.

In Spain, Real Madrid and Barcelona are obviously the most important clubs. The attendances of these two clubs account for 25% of all La Liga gates. An even more unbalanced situation can be found in Portugal, where Benfica and Porto’s attendances represent 46% of the overall Primeira Liga total. And if you add Sporting to the equation, this rises to 62%. Benfica and Porto also have a strong reputation for player development and trading, hence their position in the Portuguese game, not to mention Europe and links with South America, makes them systemic clubs beyond their domestic environment. A similar argument could be made for Ajax in the Netherlands.

Italy’s “essential” clubs would surely be Juventus and either/or Inter and AC Milan, while Germany would obviously champion Bayern Munich. Scotland, although not in the same category, would point to the Glasgow duo, Celtic and Rangers, veritable giants that are responsible for 55% of Scottish Premiership attendances.

Somebody, somewhere, has a list of the clubs that are pivotal to maintaining the European football structure, just as the world bank and European Central Bank will have a list of the banks considered to be “of systemic importance”.

This is an exercise that will hopefully not be tested, but when clubs can generate hundreds of millions in revenues but have a problem after a couple of months of financial inactivity, it does make you fear for the future of the game. Time for that screening of “28 Weeks Later”.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

EDIT this is just one of the reasons why I think the article is controversial

quietly loving this - a football club is the heart of it's community, whatever it's size

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p075m7fh

[Chester Perry]

Martin Samuel has appeared to be perpetually angry of late and his latest column in the Mail shows no sign of that abating

MARTIN SAMUEL: Give us all a laugh and try to form a European Super League now... the Premier League is a bore for broadcasters without relegation - wealthy clubs could overplay their hand into oblivion

- Talk of a European Super League has re-emerged during coronavirus lockdown
- Watch it fail obviously, and burn while we laugh at the preposterous vanity
- It turns out little clubs are bigger players in the Premier League than they knew
- Next time the big six try to dictate to them, the rest should tell them where to go

By Martin Samuel - Sport for the Daily Mail - Published: 22:31, 11 May 2020

Oh, go on. Please form a European Super League. Seriously, do it. The time has come. We're fed up. We've all been in lockdown a couple of months now. We could do with a good laugh.

The sight of Europe's most self-important and entitled clubs trying to sell tickets or interest in a closed-shop fake competition with no fans, no history, no relegation and a two-week quarantine after every away game. Well, who wouldn't break out the popcorn and pay to watch that?

Watch it fail, obviously. Watch it burn while we laugh uproariously at the preposterous vanity. The most risible aspect of the arguments enveloping the Premier League right now concern the implied threat that if the elite don't get their way, they might stamp their feet and take the ball home once more. Turns out the little clubs are bigger players than they knew.

Indeed, the next time the big six try to dictate to them over their share, the rest should tell them where to go.

In the absence of a title race — and last season's battle was an exception, because over the last 10 campaigns, the average winning margin has been 6.8 points, or 8.2 over the last seven seasons, rising to 9.75 across eight seasons if we factor in a conservative 20-point winning margin for Liverpool this year — it turns out few people really care who finishes fourth.

The reason the little clubs must play out an artificial season in jeopardy, they are being told, is that Sky will withhold the money without relegation. Big money, too. Hundreds of millions. So 20 clubs are important after all.

Mid-table mediocrities, like Arsenal, are the irrelevance, even Manchester City, when 25 points adrift in second place.

Once the league is won, attention turns to the bottom three, or six, and the fight for survival. Except those clubs are repeatedly told they are worthless, that they bring nothing to the party, that they are being carried by those at the top.

Yet now the money is on the line, the truth is emerging. The Premier League — any league — is nothing without relegation. It's moribund. It's a bore. Everyone says it.

The reason the clubs at the bottom are being pressured to complete their fixtures with the very real threat of economic catastrophe hanging over them is because, without this, it is catastrophe for all.

If the elite's reasoning is to be believed, it transpires there is limited interest in the fight for European places, probably because that is pretty much a victory for the accountants.

Whether Chelsea finish fourth or fifth is of interest to their fans but the wider world, not so much — in the same way, we are not greatly consumed by the scrap between Sevilla, Real Sociedad, Getafe, Atletico Madrid and Valencia in Spain.

Some will end up in the Champions League, others will end up in the Europa League. Some will be richer this summer. And that's all it is.
Turns out, Premier League relegation is a bigger selling point than the awarding of cheques. Turns out, take it away, and the broadcasters aren't paying.

So every club does matter. Aston Villa fighting for their lives is more gripping than an ordinary season at Tottenham. The Premier League have been very successful in selling the whole package, the whole story, good and bad.

Yet, somehow, the majority of clubs have been hoodwinked into believing they were not part of that deal, that they should be grateful to ride the coat-tails of the elite. So either that was the con, or the pressure to return is. The elite cannot have it all ways. If relegation matters, then so does every club.

Of course, failure is not good. Burnley deserve greater reward for occupying a comfortable, if not exciting, 10th, than Norwich do for being bottom of the table and involved in a titanic, nail-biting scrap for survival throughout the season.

If a perilous existence had merit, West Ham might as well have kept Roberto in goal and let panto season continue as they plummeted down the table.

So nobody is arguing it is good to fail. More that the league contains the potential for excitement at top and bottom and, certainly, a year when the title race has been a procession for many months does not present the strongest case for the supremacy of a privileged few.

Chelsea are 34 points off Liverpool and were swept aside in Europe by Bayern Munich at Stamford Bridge. Are they really capturing imaginations across the globe?

The threat of a European break-away also needs to be handled very carefully. At the moment, the Premier League's broadcast partners are staying loyal. Aside from letting it be known that relegation matters, and that the 2019-20 season cannot drag on for ever — too many subscriptions placed on hold, or cancelled.

Sky and BT have been understanding of football's plight. Compare this to Italy where the three companies covering Serie A have so far withheld the £193million required to complete the annual fee. Why would this be?

Perhaps because Andrea Agnelli, chairman of the competition's biggest club, Juventus, has spent several years talking about European super leagues, revamped Champions League rules and generally casting Serie A as the poor relation, outdated and irrelevant.

At one time, he discussed major clubs fielding weakened teams in domestic league matches to focus their attention on Europe, and of diminishing the qualification routes from national championships.

So, having made Serie A's broadcasters feel as if they bought a pup, having undermined the value of Serie A and its broadcasters' brand, it is hardly surprising if the TV men do not feel like doing Italy's owners a favour.

Premier League clubs have, to here, resisted the idea of a European closed shop — but it is hardly a threat they can afford to use and remain on good terms with Sky.

Broadcasters have every reason to play hard to get with their wealth dwindling — even more so if clubs begin striking poses that will cause further harm to the business model.

Then there are the fans. Already shut out of this season and, in all likelihood, much of next, what have they to gain from expanded European competition in this, of all ages?

The Government's two-week quarantine plan for travellers was already in tatters within 24 hours of its announcement after President Macron protested and a deal was renegotiated excluding France from the new arrangements.

Yet if coronavirus is going to be part of our lives for many years, as seems likely, and travel becomes more complex as a result, what is the sense in a league that inflicts impossibly expensive or logistically hostile away trips on fans?

We know little of the future, but what can be predicted with certainty is that it will be easier to travel between Manchester and London or Liverpool, than it will to Istanbul, Belgrade or Turin.

Quarantine restrictions could be enforced at any time, given a spike in casualties; air travel could be curtailed and will almost certainly be more expensive.

Even the 2021 European Championship in its multiple locations is looking a terrible idea right now; why would a European league hold any greater appeal?

So when, or if, the threat comes, the poor relations should hear it out, smile politely and dare the elite to even try. Fans prefer a league with jeopardy and it seems broadcasters do, too.

The only danger in a dismal European closed shop is that some very wealthy clubs will overplay their hand into oblivion. Even in such terrible times, it would take a heart of stone not to laugh.

[Chester Perry]

Norwich have announced they will be refunding matchday and season tickets - closed doors or nothing now

https://www.canaries.co.uk/News/2020/ma ... p-rebates/

Brighton have joined them, offering the alternative of donating the monies to the clubs charity or leaving it with the club

https://www.brightonandhovealbion.com/n ... nformation

[Chester Perry]

This is nuts. we all new Football was crazy, but this is beyond that - 5 year rolling economic loss in the Championship almost equal to that of the Premier League, despite £15bn less revenue in the period

https://twitter.com/vysyble/status/1260173225889345536

[Chester Perry]

Interesting article in the Guardian highlighting that even if the season completes the Premier League could lose £300m in tv rights as games not delivered when and how TV companies wanted them

https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... n-finishes

anyone left who thinks that the Premier League has the money to support the EFL and National League?

Try this and see if it changes your mind

https://twitter.com/vysyble/status/1260158803519123458

[Chester Perry]

The always and excellent The Football Today Podcast asks - Are parachute payments holding British football back?

https://www.footballtodaypodcast.com/po ... tball-back

[Chester Perry]

The Guardian looks at the increasing possibility of a North American super league - covering USA, Mexico and Canada - it would potentially be huge, a real competitor to Europe's big 5 leagues, and could gather real strength as it would be a closed shop free of relegation.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... cer-league

[Royboyclaret]

The always and excellent The Football Today Podcast asks - Are parachute payments holding British football back?

https://www.footballtodaypodcast.com/po ... tball-back

Fail to understand this sudden furore towards parachute payments and doubt very much the Premier League will be influenced by either Rick Parry or some university academic with a supposed interest in the finances of football.

The whole point of parachute payments was to act both as a safety net for relegated teams to manage the large disparity between the finances of the PL and the Championship and as a reward for Clubs who had initially taken up the challenge to reach the promised land of the Premier League.

In any case all EFL clubs are looked after by the PL with a minimum of £9m going to each Championship club annually and even the likes of Accy in the lower reaches of the pyramid receiving the equivalent of the total of all their other Income.

Really don't see anything significant changing soon, nor should they do.

[Chester Perry]

Fail to understand this sudden furore towards parachute payments and doubt very much the Premier League will be influenced by either Rick Parry or some university academic with a supposed interest in the finances of football.

The whole point of parachute payments was to act both as a safety net for relegated teams to manage the large disparity between the finances of the PL and the Championship and as a reward for Clubs who had initially taken up the challenge to reach the promised land of the Premier League.

In any case all EFL clubs are looked after by the PL with a minimum of £9m going to each Championship club annually and even the likes of Accy in the lower reaches of the pyramid receiving the equivalent of the total of all their other Income.

Really don't see anything significant changing soon, nor should they do.

It has been a slow build Roy but there is very definite momentum against them in the EFL and the various fans organisations at that level

As for Dr Rob Wilson - he is an interesting character and a highly regarded academic in what is still a small area of research - his problem and that of the Football Collective, of which he is a founder member, is that their politics tend to dominate every conversation they have (I have remarked on that a number of times)

With regard to the ongoing issue of the Parachute payments I wrote this last week on the dichotomy in them means the Premier league is made more competitive at the same time as it makes the Championship less competitive, but given it is the Premier League who pays them it is unlikely to be stopped.

The correlation between wages and on field success has been shown repeatedly in study after study

The problem as it currently stands is that the Premier League wants some semblance of competitiveness to sell it's product, consequently it distributes it's incomes more fairly than any other European League to encourage teams to keep their squads competitive. They do not want newly promoted teams to give up before they started and run with the money (the reason why we were so unpopular in our first two promotions). So they gave them more protected revenue (Parachute Payments) to encourage them to sign better players safe in the knowledge that contracts could be paid out if relegation occurred allowing for mutually acceptable relegation clause in contracts, that still meant the were amongst the top earners in the division.

Good players tend to only join the newly promoted/weaker teams on multi-year contracts if they pay the going Premier League rates. Championship revenues for clubs (without Parachute Payments) suggest a cap of £6k per week, In the Premier league the average wage is 10+ times that (not us I would add) - how do you get a player to sign for a multi year contract (to protect the transfer fee) for a relegation candidate, knowing that if relegated the wage would be decimated, players would not accept such a loss.

Players wouldn't do it, so promoted clubs are back in the position of take the money and run - that is the dichotomy of the Parachute payment - the Premier League pays them because they want their league to be competitive, the EFL hates them because they make their league either uncompetitive or unsustainable. So far the Pay master has won by paying the "solidarity payment".

Somewhat bizarrely. if a relegated club wins immediate promotion back to the Premier League the EFL wins as they get the remaining Parachute Payments to distribute to their clubs (I think this is still the case). The Premier League won't say it, but they prefer that scenario as it means the promoted club starts in a relatively stronger financial position thus allowing them to be more competitive, the more this happens the theoretically stronger the league gets.

The EFL want the Parachute money to be added to the Solidarity Payments, as a means of reducing the financial gap, that would facilitate a salary cap of around £12k. Premier League clubs struggle to get players to sign relegation clauses of 40% - 50% in those instance players would still be on north of £20k as a minimum and often much more. How do you balance it without forcing the relegated club to replace much of it's squad, probably selling players at a loss in most cases and forcing them to deal with the attendant problems that would bring?

[Royboyclaret]

The danger is that a higher distribution of payments to Championship clubs outside the parachute payments zone means they become far too reliant on that outside source of Income instead of concentrating on an in-house policy that allows the club to be more self sustainable. When Parry quotes this crazy figure of Wages/Turnover ratio at 106% he is in my book emphasising all that is currently wrong at these clubs.

Follow the lead of Burnley in our last two promotions where our house was quite clearly in order with ratio's of 79% and 68% respectively instead of bleating about additional handouts from the Premier League.

[Chester Perry]

@UglyGame as usual has an interesting take on the news that Premier League rights holders are effectively quantifying the value of having fans at the game by asking for discounts/refunds for the restart

https://twitter.com/uglygame/status/1260911770157355008

There are of course other factors in the discount/refund discussion

- Games are not being produced at the contracted times and dates
- Subscribers pay for sports packages, almost never for just Premier League packages. With virtually no sport taking place anywhere in any form a lot of subscribers are just cancelling and will not renew just for Big League football wall to wall meaning that, broadcasters revenues are dropping and there for rights are worth less to them.
- Subscriber numbers are also dropping as a result of pandemic induced economic issues
- Advertising revenues for rights holders will also be dropping because of pandemic induced economic issues combined with reduced number of viewers/subscribers

[Chester Perry]

The vultures are at the door: Bayern Munich's new President argues for the abolishment of German Football's Cherished and envied 50+1 rule

https://amp.dw.com/en/coronavirus-the-b ... a-53373349

[Chester Perry]

This morning @AndyhHolt asked once again for the football authorities to provide some order for the game by shaping the mid to long-term structure of the game rather than focusing on short tern issues - I suspect most fans agree with him, I also suspect that most board rooms don't unfortunately

https://twitter.com/AndyhHolt/status/12 ... 5666388992

[Chester Perry]

The boys @Vysyble with a interesting bit of analysis work, on just how much Leeds could earn if the are promoted this summer and Premier Leagues 2020/21 goes ahead.

https://twitter.com/vysyble/status/1260935447649439744

While still a significant uplift, it certainly won't be as transformative as envisaged at the start of the season - still better than the FFP blackhole they would face in the Championship next season. I believe they pushed the envelope right out this season on the FFP front

[Chester Perry]

This is interesting, because it is an argument I have come across recently for Man City should CAS reject their appeal - Premiership Rugby: Titles should be stripped for future salary breaches, says review

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/52661940

Remember the Premier League still have an open investigation on City that is waiting to see what CAS determine (and also what evidence is made public no doubt)

[Royboyclaret]

The boys @Vysyble with a interesting bit of analysis work, on just how much Leeds could earn if the are promoted this summer and Premier Leagues 2020/21 goes ahead.

https://twitter.com/vysyble/status/1260935447649439744

While still a significant uplift, it certainly won't be as transformative as envisaged at the start of the season - still better than the FFP blackhole they would face in the Championship next season. I believe they pushed the envelope right out this season on the FFP front

Some interesting numbers there for Leeds and the estimated Income for this current season. Particularly the commercial revenue figure of £28.5m which is considerably higher than the combined figure of matchday receipts and broadcast income. That figure of £28.5m, if accurate, will represent a figure almost double that of Burnley for our equivalent income.

[Chester Perry]

Some interesting numbers there for Leeds and the estimated Income for this current season. Particularly the commercial revenue figure of £28.5m which is considerably higher than the combined figure of matchday receipts and broadcast income. That figure of £28.5m, if accurate, will represent a figure almost double that of Burnley for our equivalent income.

Their owner has worked hard on that side, last season their revenue was the highest ever in the Championship for a team not in receipt of Parachute Payments. I believe the current ownership would make them a very strong prospect in the Premier League, even without the often touted Qatari buy in. You can easily see them being part of a really financially strong middle tier of Premier League clubs (all in the top 20 richest in Europe), along with a rejuvenated Newcastle (if the takeover ever completes), Everton, Wolves and Leicester. There is also the possibility of Arsenal falling down into this group and should they somehow survive West Ham and Aston Villa being part of it.

We would then be part of 7 fighting for the financial scraps, making avoiding the obliteration of our cash balances in the short term and keeping our head over the next 24 months crucial in to our longer term ability to keep in their fighting. to do that I believe that we have to hope that the financial rules are tightened rather than relaxed.

[Royboyclaret]

Their owner has worked hard on that side, last season their revenue was the highest ever in the Championship for a team not in receipt of Parachute Payments. I believe the current ownership would make them a very strong prospect in the Premier League, even without the often touted Qatari buy in. You can easily see them being part of a really financially strong middle tier of Premier League clubs (all in the top 20 richest in Europe), along with a rejuvenated Newcastle (if the takeover ever completes), Everton, Wolves and Leicester. There is also the possibility of Arsenal falling down into this group and should they somehow survive West Ham and Aston Villa being part of it.

We would then be part of 7 fighting for the financial scraps, making avoiding the obliteration of our cash balances in the short term and keeping our head over the next 24 months crucial in to our longer term ability to keep in their fighting. to do that I believe that we have to hope that the financial rules are tightened rather than relaxed.

I guess there's every chance of Arsenal slipping down into that middle group, particularly if next season's games are played behind closed doors. From memory their latest matchday receipts total some £96m which will be one almighty loss within their total revenue.

[Chester Perry]

The danger is that a higher distribution of payments to Championship clubs outside the parachute payments zone means they become far too reliant on that outside source of Income instead of concentrating on an in-house policy that allows the club to be more self sustainable. When Parry quotes this crazy figure of Wages/Turnover ratio at 106% he is in my book emphasising all that is currently wrong at these clubs.

Follow the lead of Burnley in our last two promotions where our house was quite clearly in order with ratio's of 79% and 68% respectively instead of bleating about additional handouts from the Premier League.

I hear you, not convinced that they ever will, primarily because I do not believe the owners would vote in the rule changes that would enforce it

you cannot say that this was not an act of free will however stupid it looks from the outside

This is nuts. we all new Football was crazy, but this is beyond that - 5 year rolling economic loss in the Championship almost equal to that of the Premier League, despite £15bn less revenue in the period

https://twitter.com/vysyble/status/1260173225889345536

[Chester Perry]

More pandemic related legal advice for football, on a right up to the minute topic - can professional sports clubs compel their players to return to the pitch and waive health and safety liability? - From Littleton Chambers

“Project Restart” or a false start: can professional sports clubs compel their players to return to the pitch and waive health and safety liability?
14.05.20

Introduction
As elite-level leagues, sporting associations and other stakeholders debate whether competitions can be restarted in an era of physical distancing, it has been reported that some professional football and rugby clubs are proposing to require players to sign disclaimers in relation to the health risks posed by Covid-19 before they resume training.[1]

In this article, John Mehrzad QC and Joseph Bryan, both of the Littleton Sports Law Group, discuss the legal consequences of clubs seeking to compel players to train or play and whether such ‘disclaimers’ are of any legal effect.

The article will set out relevant first principles of employment rights in the UK, then suggest that players may be entitled to refuse to play or train due to Covid-19 concerns, before explaining how waivers of liability for Covid-19-related personal injury or death are not enforceable.
First principles of employment rights

Turning to first principles, top-level professional footballers and rugby players are engaged by their clubs under a contract of employment. The relationship between club and player is therefore subject to employment law, just as in any other sector of the wider economy.

A fundamental principle of that relationship is often said to be the so-called ‘work/wages bargain’: in exchange for the employer’s obligation to pay wages or other remuneration, the employee agrees to perform his work for the employer or, at least, to be ready and willing to do so.[2] These are mutual obligations.

It follows that if an employee fails to work, the employer is not obliged to pay the wages.[3]

The application of this basic ‘work for wages’ principle is, however, generally limited to cases of deliberate or unreasonable refusals to work (and in such cases the refusal is also likely to amount to misconduct leading to the employer taking action under its disciplinary policy). Moreover, the basic principle is easily displaced, for instance by the express and implied terms of the employment contract.

Refusal to train or play
What, then, of the situation in which a player-employee consciously declines to attend training or play in a match because of a fear of contracting Covid-19?

Training and playing are the core elements of the player’s day-to-day duties as an employee. But the ‘work for wages’ maxim above is too basic to be of any assistance here; the club would be ill-advised to leap to suspending payment of wages (or to issuing disciplinary fines) on that simple premise alone: the answer lies in the more nuanced rights and duties of clubs and players established by statute, contract and common law.

It is important to consider more closely players’ statutory rights under the Employment Rights Act 1996.

Paraphrasing s. 44(1) of the 1996 Act, an employee has the right not to be subjected to any detriment by his or her employer done on the ground that “in circumstances of danger which the employee reasonably believed to be serious and imminent” the employee took or proposed to take appropriate steps to protect himself or herself (or others[4]) from the danger. There is an equivalent provision, in s. 100 of the 1996 Act, which deems a dismissal for that reason to be an unfair dismissal.

The application of these rights to the danger posed by Covid-19 is obviously untested; nor are we aware of any relevant case-law on s. 44 or s. 100 dealing with any other pandemic disease. It has, however, been held that the statute covers any danger “however originating”,[5] so it seems that Covid-19 falls within the scope of these provisions. Whether or not a player has a reasonable belief that the danger is “serious and imminent” will depend on the particular facts,[6] but relevant factors will no doubt include the severity of the outbreak and the fact that the virus is spread by close contact – an essential feature of contact sports such as football and rugby.

Further, whether or not an outright refusal to attend training or a match is an “appropriate” step under s. 44 may depend on the extent of the measures the club has implemented to minimise the chance of Covid-19 transmission. In top-flight football, a temporary ban on tackling, disinfecting pitches and daily health screening are among the innovative measures reportedly being considered.[7] However, health risks will remain or, certainly, there could be a reasonable belief that they will remain.

What is clear is that a club which takes disciplinary action against a player will be subjecting him or her to a detriment. So, at the very least, if it does so on health and safety grounds, the club is risking exposure to a claim for uncapped compensation, which could include any withheld wages and fines unlawfully imposed.

A similar result – uncapped compensation – might be achieved via the parallel ‘whistleblowing’ provisions under s. 47B (detriment) and s. 103A (unfair dismissal) of the 1996 Act. Although a detailed examination of these provisions is beyond the scope of this article, a player may well benefit from these additional protections if he or she complains (to the club or even, in some circumstances, the Health and Safety Executive or the newspapers) about the club’s Covid-19 health and safety practices and is sanctioned as a result.

There are also special features of professional sport which affect the extent of the obligation on a player to follow a club’s reasonable instruction when compared with employees in other industries. In particular, players are obliged to maintain their fitness: indeed, their careers – and ability to serve their employers – depend on it. An express term to this effect is commonly found in professional playing contracts. For example, the express terms of the standard-form Premier League contract oblige the player:

except to the extent prevented by injury or illness to maintain a high standard of physical fitness at all times and not to indulge in any activity sport or practice which might endanger such fitness or inhibit his mental or physical ability to play practise or train.[8]

A player might argue that the club’s instruction to return to full training and competitive matches, while others in society are subject to restrictive physical distancing rules, is flatly inconsistent with the contractual duty to maintain fitness. Playing contact sport during the pandemic could be construed as an “activity, sport or practice” which “might endanger” physical fitness by exposing players to the risk of contracting the disease. A player might thereby escape the prima facie obligation to follow the instruction to return to work.

Clubs’ health and safety obligations and attempted waiver
Clubs owe their players a duty to provide a safe system of working as part of their duty of care.[9] They may also be liable for a breach of statutory duty if they fail to comply with their obligations under the various health and safety regulations.

For present purposes, the key point to note is that employers are required by s. 1(1) of the Employers’ Liability (Compulsory Insurance) Act 1969 to take out insurance against liability for personal injury or disease suffered by their employees in the course of their employment, subject to the conditions and exemptions in that Act. Failure to have appropriate insurance in place is a criminal offence punishable by a fine.

The practical consequence in the Covid-19 context is that existing policies may not cover the current pandemic and premiums for appropriate top-up insurance are likely to be costly. It is easy to envisage that a player who contracts the disease at the training ground or on the field of play and whose career is severely adversely affected by the consequences of the disease will suffer extensive financial losses. Even if a player recovers, their performance (and consequent earning potential, especially for appearance and goal-scoring bonuses) may be impaired for many weeks and months. Insurance premiums may therefore be unaffordable for some clubs, particularly in the lower leagues.

Against this background, it is understandable that the idea of obtaining players’ signed consent in an attempt to disclaim a club’s potential liability is superficially appealing.

However, such ‘disclaimers’, in so far as they exclude or restrict liability for death or personal injury resulting from negligence, will be void by reason of s. 2(1) of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977,[10] and, in so far as they exclude or restrict liability for other types of loss (such as financial loss), they are subject to the statutory requirement of reasonableness.[11] Depending on the wording of the disclaimer, it may also fall foul of other statutory ‘voiding’ provisions.[12]

Clubs should not therefore have high hopes at all of the courts upholding such clauses, even if contractually agreed by the player.

Conclusion
It is vital that clubs fully consider their legal position before imposing a compulsory return to training and competitive matches and that, likewise, players consider the extent to which they may be legally entitled to refuse to return. Attempts by clubs to exclude liability for Covid-19-related personal injury, or even death, will be fraught with considerable risk and players may be entitled to refuse to train or play if instructed to do so.
Of course, this must all be seen in context of rapidly rising insurance premiums. As we have set out, it is, however, mandatory to have appropriate insurance in place on pain of criminal liability. If clubs simply cannot afford to take out such cover or to face the risk of high-value claims by players, this will at the very least be a factor weighing heavily on the minds all stakeholders as they try to find a way of resuming paused seasons in professional contact sports.

[1] See, in relation to professional rugby, ‘Premiership players and clubs face hard choice over waivers on rugby’s return’ (The Guardian, 9 May 2020) (https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/ ... are_btn_tw) and, in relation to professional football, ‘We won’t sign! Premier League gives players and staff Covid-19 forms to get Project Restart rolling’ (Daily Mail, 7 May 2020) (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footb ... lling.html).
[2] Ready Mixed Concrete (South East) Ltd v Minister of Pensions and National Insurance [1968] 2 QB 497 at 515.
[3] Miles v Wakefield Metropolitan District Council [1987] AC 539.
[4] This provision would mean that players would be covered by its protection even if they believe they are not in serious and imminent danger but that others, such as a vulnerable pregnant partner or elderly family member living in their household, would be at such danger as a consequence of the player contracting Covid-19 in training or whilst playing.
[5] Harvest Press Ltd v McCaffrey [1999] IRLR 778 [17].
[6] Oudahar v Esporta Group Ltd [2011] ICR 1406.
[7] ‘Premier League: restrictions in place for team training under “Project Restart”’ (BBC Sport, 12 May 2020) (https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52635005).
[8] Premier League Handbook: Season 2019/20, p. 310 (https://resources.premierleague.com/pre ... 070520.pdf).
[9] Wilsons & Clyde Cole Company Ltd v English [1938] AC 57.
[10] Johnstone v Bloomsbury Health Authority [1992] QB 333.
[11] See s. 2(2) of the 1977 Act.
[12] For example, if the ‘disclaimer’ seeks to exclude or limit the operation of any provision of the 1996 Act (such as a purported waiver of the employee’s rights to take appropriate steps in circumstances of danger under s. 44), it will be void to that extent. It is also not possible to preclude, by contract, a worker’s right to make a protected disclosure: s. 43J(1). This may be relevant if the ‘disclaimer’ seeks to keep confidential the health and safety measures the employer has taken to combat the spread of Covid-19.

Relevant Members
John Mehrzad QC, Joseph Bryan

[Chester Perry]

The fight to block the Saudi backed takeover of Newcastle goes on - yesterday Hatice Cengiz, who is the fiancee of murdered journalist Jamal Khashoggi wrote a direct letter to Newcastle fans

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52651771 - the letter in full https://twitter.com/MsiDouglas/status/1 ... 2189711362

today a conservative MP has called on the DCMS to fully investigate the bid

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52635008

[Chester Perry]

We know how increasingly important in the modern game (however disappointed older readers may feel about the terminology) Branding for clubs and players is a key feature to commercial growth and revenue diversity. Here one of the key players in this area within sport, Ehsen Shah, talks to @FootballLaw about how he started and what he does. It is one of the real fast growth area's in sport.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ppk0CVYtRUc

[Chester Perry]

Article from Soccerex about the choices facing Serie A in those competing bids from Blackstone and CVC for a share of ownership - Blackstone offer more direct funding immediately, CVC greater revenues through the mid to long term.

Could Private Equity Provide Serie A With A Shot In The Arm?
Written by Dan Tracey - 11 May 2020

Michel Platini, Marco Van Basten, Diego Maradona, Ronaldo. A mere sample of names that at one time plied their trade in Italian football and more importantly at a time when Serie A, was considered the dominant league in the world.

With an image that was more defensive than attacking, Italian clubs in the 1980’s and 90’s were known for their financial firepower and with a litany of world class players gracing stadiums such as the San Siro and Stadio Delle Alpi, European dominance was never that far away.

However, all great dynasties must come to an end at some point and with the creation of the Premier League in 1992, it would only take until the turn of a new millennium and a huge increase in television rights, to change the football landscape forever.

Since Serie A was knocked off its lofty perch 20 or so years ago, its global standing has been somewhat dwarfed and although there is still an impressive amount of talent throughout the league, household names are fewer and farther between.

With the competition wrestling for a share of football’s global audience, it finds itself jostling for exposure alongside the likes of Germany’s Bundesliga and Spain’s La Liga and with it being currently considered the fourth pillar of the “Big Five”, that status could be set to change.

In any scenario that sees a downturn, there is also the potential for a reversal in fortunes and with two private equity firms reportedly in discussions regarding investments in Serie A, this could prove to be a welcome shot in the arm for the competition.

CVC Capital Partners and Blackstone Group have taken a separate view regarding potential investment – with the former looking to purchase a 20% stake for 2 billion euros and the latter suggesting a lending plan to Serie A’s member clubs.

While with two proposed options, there is a sense of who stands to benefit the most and here there is something of a quandary, because if CVC get their way, it will make the governing body a lot richer but if Blackstone’s proposal is passed, there will be direct and quicker funding to teams in need.

Of course, there could be scope for both equity firms to add to their portfolios – although whether either would be too keen on the other party muscling in, is probably not a plan that goes ahead anytime soon.

Which means, Serie A can either look to a injection of funds which enables their clubs to exist or it looks for an investment, which subsequently enables the league to land bigger television deals and adds some bulk to their rather lean financial muscle.

The case for brokering a deal with CVC, is that more money from television, soon trickles down to the top flight teams and they can then compete in the transfer market, in a bid to bring star names to Italian shores.

In addition to that, the 20% stake could also lead to the creation of an in-house Serie A television channel and the potential to then garner further revenues via subscriptions and the selling of content abroad.

However, there is almost a sense of urgency regarding finance in the home of the 2006 World Cup winners and there is a growing belief, that the mindset should be more about protecting the league now and strengthening later.

If the nightmare scenario comes around and several clubs go to the wall, any hopes of increased television rights will all but evaporate and at that point, CVC may well be questioning their decision to invest a rather substantial outlay.

Then again, with COVID-19 acting as the great unknown in all of this, who is to say which is the right way to turn. However, if Italian football can ride out this current global storm, their league could soon find itself emulating the glory days of decades past.

[Chester Perry]

La Liga boss, Javier Tebas has been very aggressive in trying to restart Spanish football, and he has been equally bullish in trying to seize new opportunities as others are hesitant during the pandemic. Today has seen the announcement of a new long term (15 years) joint venture for La Liga as they seek to exploit opportunities in Asia. A similar venture in North America incorporated the commitment for League Matches to be played there - a moved foiled by the courts.

https://www.sportbusiness.com/news/lali ... l-venture/

[MrTopTier]

Today is the 500th consecutive day that Bolton have spent in the relegation zone. Ten years ahead and all that.

[Chester Perry]

I have posted about this in the past, particularly in relation to Southampton and China's BRI initiative and more recently in relation to the Saudi bid for Newcastle - Simon Chadwick on the seemingly ever growing combination of ports and football in investment strategies

https://twitter.com/Prof_Chadwick/statu ... 8089821184

Could the Saudi's want both Newcastle and Marseille - you would say that it should cause issues if both were in the same UEFA tournament, though Red Bull appear to have shown the way around that one,

[Chester Perry]

I guess there's every chance of Arsenal slipping down into that middle group, particularly if next season's games are played behind closed doors. From memory their latest matchday receipts total some £96m which will be one almighty loss within their total revenue.

As you would expect I am more concerned by the potential of us fighting not to be in the bottom 3 from a group of 7 (rather than the current 13) should clubs such as Forest, Derby and Sunderland ever get their act together for a prolonged period and get back into the top flight.

Add to that the prospect of Brighton continuing their astounding growth the best we could hope for would be as a yo-yo club exchanging places every couple of seasons as part of a small group of 8 or so clubs. the financial imbalances are only going to grow I fear.

[Chester Perry]

Today is the 500th consecutive day that Bolton have spent in the relegation zone. Ten years ahead and all that.

Why does it fell that that statement is missing a 0 (great Stat though)

[Chester Perry]

Article from Soccerex about the choices facing Serie A in those competing bids from Blackstone and CVC for a share of ownership - Blackstone offer more direct funding immediately, CVC greater revenues through the mid to long term. from SportsBusiness.com

Could Private Equity Provide Serie A With A Shot In The Arm?
Written by Dan Tracey - 11 May 2020

Meanwhile they are desperate to get their current rights holders to change their minds and pay them as per contract, hence the desire to restart

Serie A earmarks June 13 return, maintains TV rights payment stance
Martin Ross - May 13, 2020

Clubs from Italy’s top-tier Serie A today voted to resume the competition on June 13, pending government approval, as the league continued to adopt a tough stance on payments by rights-holding broadcasters.

During today’s league assembly meeting, a total of 16 clubs voted in favour of the return date in question, with four voting for the June 20 alternative, according to ANSA.

Following the meeting, Lega Serie A announced that the June 13 date for the resumption of the championship “has been indicated, and in accordance with the decisions of the government and the medical protocols for the protection of players and staff”.

Clubs are expected to resume group training on May 18.

Serie A has been suspended since March 9, with Italy particularly hard hit by the global Covid-19 pandemic.

The league also today stressed that rights fee payments must be met by broadcast rights-holders.

A statement read: “Lega Serie A reiterates, in its relationship with audiovisual rights licencees from 2018 to 2021, the need to meet the payment deadlines stipulated in the contracts in order to maintain a constructive relationship with them.”

Domestic rights-holders Sky Italia, the pay-television broadcaster, and DAZN, the subscription OTT player, plus the league’s international rights agency IMG, have all been pushing for deferrals because of the shutdown of the league.

The trio were due to make their latest rights fee instalment payments on May 1 as part of their deals running from 2018-19 to 2020-21.

Ahead of today’s league assembly meeting, Sky Italia chief executive Maximo Ibarra said that he hoped it would “finally be the right occasion for representatives of Serie A clubs to take the proposal for dialogue that we have offered them for weeks seriously”.

He told ANSA: “Across Europe, in Germany, France and the UK, leagues and broadcasters are jointly addressing this serious emergency by finding balanced and general interest solutions.”

Ibarra said that Sky has “proposed several solutions but has not received a response” and called on Serie A to “rediscover its constructive spirit that has marked many years of collaboration with Sky”.

However, he was met with a swift response from Serie A chief executive Luigi De Siervo, who said that, although the “door for dialogue with Sky has always remained open”, the league has “always stressed that it was necessary for Sky to meet the payment deadlines set by the contracts as a priority”.

He added: “We immediately made it clear that Sky’s request for a discount of between 15 per cent and 18 per cent, in the event of the continuation of the championship, obviously could not be accepted, especially during such a tricky financial period for our teams.”

Domestic live rights to Serie A games are currently held by Sky and DAZN in deals worth €973m ($1.05bn) per season. IMG’s international rights deal is worth just over €380m per season for international broadcast rights, club archive rights, betting rights, a marketing spend and fee for access to the broadcast signal.

It recently emerged that private equity company CVC Capital Partners is considering Serie A for its next sporting investment, through a deal involving the sale of domestic broadcast rights from the 2021-22 season onwards.

CVC is said to have held preliminary talks to present a proposal under which a newco would be created to manage and resell Serie A’s rights, potentially for a 10-year period.

CVC has held talks about acquiring a 20-per-cent stake in Serie A for €2bn, according to the Financial Times. It has also been claimed that US-based private equity group Blackstone is prepared to offer the league a €100m loan to meet the short-term needs of clubs during Covid-19.

[Chester Perry]

The 6 of richest clubs in League 1 are attempting to get the league to restart, probably bankrupting 3 or 4 of the other teams in the process - there is still far too much me, me, me in the EFL - I really do despair

https://twitter.com/DMAC102/status/1260994668331962375

I suppose now would be a good time to remind people that Darragh MacAnthony said earlier in the season that he was so confident Peterborough were going to get promoted that he said he would step down as Chairman if they didn't.

[Chester Perry]

anyone left who thinks that the Premier League has the money to support the EFL and National League?

Try this and see if it changes your mind

https://twitter.com/vysyble/status/1260158803519123458

The Culture secretary needs to get himself appropriately informed - Premier League ordered to show free-to-air games and share money to restart from the Guardian.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... government

I have said it before, and I will say it again - name me another industry where the government says competitors must share revenues with others that are not even in the same league, particularly when they are under such severe financial stress themselves that threatens jobs in their clubs and could even lead to administration for some.

[Chester Perry]

The fight to block the Saudi backed takeover of Newcastle goes on - yesterday Hatice Cengiz, who is the fiancee of murdered journalist Jamal Khashoggi wrote a direct letter to Newcastle fans

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52651771 - the letter in full https://twitter.com/MsiDouglas/status/1 ... 2189711362

today a conservative MP has called on the DCMS to fully investigate the bid

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52635008

the following was written and published before today's call for a DCMS investigation, but this Newcastle is completely and utterly paranoid, they have gone full Man City already, defend the prospective owner, say everyone else is against them. this is an example of all that is bad about the internet that such people are given a voice (and yes I know I am guilty of propagating it) - Takeover: Smelling a rat from the True Faith Fanzine website

http://www.true-faith.co.uk/takeover-smelling-a-rat/

[Chester Perry]

TifoFootball looks at the history of the maximum wage and how it changed football for ever

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUVg2yeXt1w

[Chester Perry]

The 6 of richest clubs in League 1 are attempting to get the league to restart, probably bankrupting 3 or 4 of the other teams in the process - there is still far too much me, me, me in the EFL - I really do despair

https://twitter.com/DMAC102/status/1260994668331962375

I suppose now would be a good time to remind people that Darragh MacAnthony said earlier in the season that he was so confident Peterborough were going to get promoted that he said he would step down as Chairman if they didn't.

as the lower leagues go to war with each other today in a desperate effort to have the season finished @KieranMaguire shows us that financially the league is greatly overstretched

https://twitter.com/KieranMaguire/statu ... 9553013762

@AndyhHolt reminds us that while the press are making out the great drama out of the current situation, this kind of infighting has been the norm in his 4 and a bit years of being involved in football

https://twitter.com/AndyhHolt/status/12 ... 0835401728

and yet the talk is still very much of the need for a bail-out for the EFL

The Culture secretary needs to get himself appropriately informed - Premier League ordered to show free-to-air games and share money to restart from the Guardian.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... government

I have said it before, and I will say it again - name me another industry where the government says competitors must share revenues with others that are not even in the same league, particularly when they are under such severe financial stress themselves that threatens jobs in their clubs and could even lead to administration for some.

https://theathletic.com/1813859/2020/05 ... ed_article

I understand the simple logic of wanting to finish the season and establish a "true" set of results - and that would be fine if everyone waited for the crowds to return safely, but they are not. Both FIFA and UEFA are planning for their International and club competitions to be played behind closed doors. this forces top tier domestic leagues to resolve their competitions as that is where qualifiers come from. The Premier League is contractually bound to relegate 3 teams and accept 3 promoted from the EFL, forcing the Championship to resolve it's competition in the same short time frame. This then cascades all the way down. the problem is not resolving the leagues, the problem is the time frame in which that is being forced through by the games highest powers because they want to maintain their income streams.

as we entered lockdown I said very clearly that the game needed to work on it's restructure, but the self interest remains and it continues to eat itself.

It is also deeply depressing that not one of these organisations has consulted with the key ingredient to the games success - the fans - today's Ornestein and Chapman podcast asks Does football take the fans for granted? - I would very much say YES

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

[Chester Perry]

Today's Ornstein and Chapman Podcast is very good by the way - some great points particularly:

- When big clubs price football as entertainment, expectations of fans will change to include the expectation of them to win and more importantly the style in which they do it (may explain all the anti-football nonsense we get labelled with)
- Fans TV being owned and financed by major media organisations (a new one to me but makes sense in Football's Magic Money Tree universe), and taking advantage of people in ways they would not be allowed to in traditional media arenas.

Ornestein and Chapman podcast asks Does football take the fans for granted?

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

[Chester Perry]

It comes as no surprise to learn that today's EFL League 1 and 2 meeting ended with no decision as to the conclusion of the season

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52679614

[Chester Perry]

The fight to block the Saudi backed takeover of Newcastle goes on - yesterday Hatice Cengiz, who is the fiancee of murdered journalist Jamal Khashoggi wrote a direct letter to Newcastle fans

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52651771 - the letter in full https://twitter.com/MsiDouglas/status/1 ... 2189711362

today a conservative MP has called on the DCMS to fully investigate the bid

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52635008

Another conservative MP takes up the fight against the proposed Saudi backed takeover of Newcastle

https://www.conservativehome.com/platfo ... tball.html

Interesting that he says that he supports 3 different clubs - Newcastle fans have already declared war on him, and you have to say his past communications are pretty scandalous yet quite in tune with Saudi apart from his Islamaphobia

https://twitter.com/Gibbo2910/status/12 ... 1664581632

[Chester Perry]

It comes as no surprise to learn that today's EFL League 1 and 2 meeting ended with no decision as to the conclusion of the season

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52679614

Update - League 2 have seen sense and ended the season

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52679614

[Chester Perry]

Article from Soccerex about the choices facing Serie A in those competing bids from Blackstone and CVC for a share of ownership - Blackstone offer more direct funding immediately, CVC greater revenues through the mid to long term.

Could Private Equity Provide Serie A With A Shot In The Arm?
Written by Dan Tracey - 11 May 2020

Michel Platini, Marco Van Basten, Diego Maradona, Ronaldo. A mere sample of names that at one time plied their trade in Italian football and more importantly at a time when Serie A, was considered the dominant league in the world.

With an image that was more defensive than attacking, Italian clubs in the 1980’s and 90’s were known for their financial firepower and with a litany of world class players gracing stadiums such as the San Siro and Stadio Delle Alpi, European dominance was never that far away.

However, all great dynasties must come to an end at some point and with the creation of the Premier League in 1992, it would only take until the turn of a new millennium and a huge increase in television rights, to change the football landscape forever.

Since Serie A was knocked off its lofty perch 20 or so years ago, its global standing has been somewhat dwarfed and although there is still an impressive amount of talent throughout the league, household names are fewer and farther between.

With the competition wrestling for a share of football’s global audience, it finds itself jostling for exposure alongside the likes of Germany’s Bundesliga and Spain’s La Liga and with it being currently considered the fourth pillar of the “Big Five”, that status could be set to change.

In any scenario that sees a downturn, there is also the potential for a reversal in fortunes and with two private equity firms reportedly in discussions regarding investments in Serie A, this could prove to be a welcome shot in the arm for the competition.

CVC Capital Partners and Blackstone Group have taken a separate view regarding potential investment – with the former looking to purchase a 20% stake for 2 billion euros and the latter suggesting a lending plan to Serie A’s member clubs.

While with two proposed options, there is a sense of who stands to benefit the most and here there is something of a quandary, because if CVC get their way, it will make the governing body a lot richer but if Blackstone’s proposal is passed, there will be direct and quicker funding to teams in need.

Of course, there could be scope for both equity firms to add to their portfolios – although whether either would be too keen on the other party muscling in, is probably not a plan that goes ahead anytime soon.

Which means, Serie A can either look to a injection of funds which enables their clubs to exist or it looks for an investment, which subsequently enables the league to land bigger television deals and adds some bulk to their rather lean financial muscle.

The case for brokering a deal with CVC, is that more money from television, soon trickles down to the top flight teams and they can then compete in the transfer market, in a bid to bring star names to Italian shores.

In addition to that, the 20% stake could also lead to the creation of an in-house Serie A television channel and the potential to then garner further revenues via subscriptions and the selling of content abroad.

However, there is almost a sense of urgency regarding finance in the home of the 2006 World Cup winners and there is a growing belief, that the mindset should be more about protecting the league now and strengthening later.

If the nightmare scenario comes around and several clubs go to the wall, any hopes of increased television rights will all but evaporate and at that point, CVC may well be questioning their decision to invest a rather substantial outlay.

Then again, with COVID-19 acting as the great unknown in all of this, who is to say which is the right way to turn. However, if Italian football can ride out this current global storm, their league could soon find itself emulating the glory days of decades past.

It appears that Serie A is looking beyond the short term as it enters exclusive talks with CVC

https://twitter.com/muradahmed/status/1 ... 2563836928

[Chester Perry]

I understand the simple logic of wanting to finish the season and establish a "true" set of results - and that would be fine if everyone waited for the crowds to return safely, but they are not. Both FIFA and UEFA are planning for their International and club competitions to be played behind closed doors. this forces top tier domestic leagues to resolve their competitions as that is where qualifiers come from. The Premier League is contractually bound to relegate 3 teams and accept 3 promoted from the EFL, forcing the Championship to resolve it's competition in the same short time frame. This then cascades all the way down. the problem is not resolving the leagues, the problem is the time frame in which that is being forced through by the games highest powers because they want to maintain their income streams.

more evidence of this today - The financial losses across Europe are potentially huge, but it looks like UEFA are going to press on with their club competitions even though they know many of the clubs from smaller leagues cannot afford to take part. to my mind that is playing right into the hands of Agnelli and the ECA

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52680124

[Chester Perry]

Interesting article from TheConversation.com about how home advantage disappears in behind closed doors games - (published just before the Bundesliga restart)

https://theconversation.com/as-football ... 1589547167

[Chester Perry]

The Swiss join the French in offering state backed loans to the countries League clubs

https://twitter.com/CIESsportsintel/sta ... 0253825025