Football's Magic Money Tree

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Fri May 10, 2019 1:07 am

Sepp Blatter is perhaps the epitome of those who have benefitted from Football's Magic Money Tree - The Man with no shame - is launching a lawsuit to recover as many as 80 watches he kept at FIFA (you remember those from Brazil and such like). It would also appear that FIFA have not been paying his pension. He has been telling the NY Times all about it

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/08/spor ... ctionfront" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Fri May 10, 2019 1:19 am

The nitty gritty detail on those UEFA proposals continues to emerge

https://apnews.com/541b87ec4de94b8aa8cad950cb054845" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

couple of diagrams illustrating the plans in this twitter thread https://twitter.com/RobHarris/status/11 ... 5002939393" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Fri May 10, 2019 10:34 am

In what is being described (by some) as a glorious week for English football and/or European Football we have:

-the probability that, given it is the 4 "poorest" clubs of the big six that have reached European Finals, the Revenue gap for the 2018/19 between the big six and the rest will be £200m+ for the first time. And next season the new overseas TV rights distribution rules mean greater revenue disparity domestically

-UEFA apparently joining forces with ECA and Andrea Agnelli against the Leagues and Nations that both fund and nurture them.

- Ajax (this years star team in the CL) who went through 3 qualifying rounds before charging to the semi-finals, would not have been allowed to be in the tournament under the proposed rules because they finished 2nd in the Eredivise last season. While the finalists Spurs and Liverpool (who finished 3rd and 4th in the PL) would

Meanwhile:
- the President of UEFA who came into office promising not to forget the smaller nations and their right to take part in UEFA's biggest competitions (what happened there then) is full of platitudes about this weeks results
https://www.uefa.com/insideuefa/about-u ... 04736.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

- Andrea Agnelli is thinking let's get on with it https://twitter.com/tariqpanja/status/1 ... 4021304321" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Fri May 10, 2019 10:51 am

@AndyhHolt is on form again today (he actually started last night if you look at his feed)

https://twitter.com/AndyhHolt/status/11 ... 8481108992" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Fri May 10, 2019 11:27 am

An excellent repost to those glorifying English Football's achievements in Europe this week

https://twitter.com/james_e_bland/statu ... 1134060547" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

#schooledbyAndy

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Fri May 10, 2019 1:44 pm

In post #1018 we saw the news on Attendances in the English game at almost unprecedented levels, but just how do they stand-up against other countries. The Football Observatory have been thoughtful enough to do the research for us - No surprise that Germany is out in front for it's top 2 leagues, but the sheer depth of support through the English pyramid is astounding

http://www.football-observatory.com/IMG ... r/mr44/en/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Fri May 10, 2019 3:36 pm

Simon Chadwick on how the prices for the CL Final are indicative of UEFA now partnering with rich clubs as opposed to looking after the interests of all

https://twitter.com/Prof_Chadwick/statu ... 5697317890" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Fri May 10, 2019 3:44 pm

Matt Slater did this piece for the press association about the UEFA/ECA partnership but it didn't get picked up - which is a shame

European Leagues boss says Champions League plans are worse than breakaway risk

European Leagues boss Lars-Christer Olsson believes the threat of a closed Champions League is “more serious” than the breakaway Super League proposals of the late 1990s and early 2000s because UEFA is involved this time.

The Swede was speaking at a press conference on Tuesday after a Madrid summit on the future of Europe’s club competitions which attracted representatives from 244 clubs, 41 leagues and 38 countries.

European Leagues staged the ‘club advisory platform’ to gauge opinion from its members – which include the English Football League, Premier League and Scottish Professional Football League – ahead of a key meeting with UEFA on Wednesday, when the organisation that represents the domestic game will be shown plans for radical changes to European competitions from 2024/25 onward.

UEFA has already met the European Club Association, with whom it has recently re-signed a memorandum of understanding, and many in the game believe the governing body is getting ready to cave into the rich clubs’ wish for more European football and a bigger slice of the financial pie.
This view has provoked a war of words between the ECA, which represents the continent’s biggest clubs, and European Leagues, with UEFA caught in the middle.

Last month, ECA chairman Andrea Agnelli wrote to his members in an attempt to convince them he was not trying to create a Super League by stealth, there were no plans to play more European games on weekends and domestic champions would always have access to the Champions League.

This followed reports that he is pushing for the current Champions League structure of eight groups of four teams changing to four groups of eight, with more guaranteed games and promotion and relegation from season to season.

But as well as his protestations about the talks with UEFA being at an early stage, Agnelli also told his members not to attend the European Leagues meeting as it would suggest the clubs’ position was not united.

European Leagues general secretary Georg Pangl, the chief executive of the Austrian Bundesliga, was sat alongside Olsson and he took some delight in pointing out that around 80 ECA clubs attended the meeting and “the majority don’t agree with the ECA line”.

But it is Olsson who struck the most combative tone, saying the meeting had “strengthened” the idea that the European Leagues were representing the views of “almost 1,000 clubs” who want to be “properly included in the decision-making process”.

“Our view is very clear, you should qualify for international competitions via domestic competitions and if you don’t do that it’s impossible to keep the interest of fans – we are sure they agree domestic competitions are the backbone of the game,” he said.

“We are not against change but we have significant concerns if that change is based on the concept Andrea Agnelli released to the clubs.
“It’s not rocket science: if you are going to play more games, you need more dates but weekends are reserved for domestic competitions and should remain so.

“If you are going to have promotion and relegation it means a certain amount of clubs will be protected from qualification via domestic leagues, so that doesn’t work.”

He then said there were similarities between the current debate and the situation that existed 15 years ago when UEFA was at loggerheads with the ECA’s forerunner, the G-14 group of elite clubs.

That was when the clubs used the threat of a breakaway Super League to extract concessions from UEFA, including a bigger share of the riches generated by the Champions League and Europa League.

“It’s more complicated now because it would happen under UEFA’s umbrella…so it’s a more difficult and serious story,” he added.
LaLiga boss Javier Tebas was also at the press conference and he agreed that domestic football should come first and the leagues should have a much bigger say in the game’s future.

But he also said LaLiga has been exploring its legal options if the likes of Real Madrid and Barcelona backed Agnelli’s plan. He did not give much away but he said the league was confident it would have a good case.

He also said the Spanish league had asked the global accountancy firm KPMG to explore what impact a closed European league would have on his clubs and the findings were stark: a reduction in LaLiga’s size from 20 clubs to 18, European games at weekends, a £750million fall in annual revenue and a 45 per cent decrease in the value of its clubs.

Tebas, however, said he did not believe Real or Barca were serious about leaving LaLiga, as it was worth so much money to them.
While Agnelli did not want his members to attend the meeting, he attended in his capacity as Juventus president, as did the ECA’s vice-chairman and Ajax chief executive Edwin Van Der Sar.

Speaking to reporters afterwards, the former Manchester United goalkeeper said: “European Leagues have a meeting with UEFA tomorrow, so I think it’s quite strange that there has been talk about things that might happen from 2024 onward.

“There have been rumours about closed systems, weekend games and non-participation for certain clubs – that is not true. The main thing we are fighting for is to get more access for more countries and clubs.

“And to develop football it’s important we play more meaningful games. Sometimes that doesn’t happen in a domestic league.
“For a club like Ajax to develop players, you have to play interesting games and those games are most often in Europe. We can see that this year with how our players have grown. Others can do that.

“We still have to discuss what elements we want to develop but the process is open. Of course, you can’t have 60 different voices talking about one competition. Stakeholders need a voice but you can’t please everyone.”

Asked if this meant the debate would be driven by rich clubs, Van Der Sar said: “I don’t know what you mean by rich.

“At Ajax we get 8.5million euros in TV money. Tottenham said it was unfair that the Dutch league cancelled the fixtures before our (Champions League semi-final) but they get 180million euros in TV money. So what is fair?
“We live in different countries with different possibilities. That’s why we need to find a European solution.”

Slater also tweeted this intriguing/demoralising titbit about some research La Liga commissioned about the impact of ECA's plans - One thing to highlight here is the study La Liga asked KPMG to do on the impact of these plans on Spanish league: a reduction to 18 teams, Euro games on weekends, £750m fall in league turnover & 45% average decrease in club values. A couple would do OK, though!

Royboyclaret · Post by **Royboyclaret** » Fri May 10, 2019 4:57 pm

Chester Perry wrote:In post #1018 we saw the news on Attendances in the English game at almost unprecedented levels, but just how do they stand-up against other countries. The Football Observatory have been thoughtful enough to do the research for us - No surprise that Germany is out in front for it's top 2 leagues, but the sheer depth of support through the English pyramid is astounding

http://www.football-observatory.com/IMG ... r/mr44/en/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Some remarkable numbers there from Germany with the recent years' average of Dortmund considerably higher than Man United and even our old foes Hamburg higher than Man City.

From Burnley's point of view it's interesting to compare our attendances recently with those immediately after the WW2. Clearly the local population were relieved to see the return to peacetime and competitive football again with our gates as a Division Two club nothing short of astounding. At Turf Moor we had a home gate against Bury of 40,145 whist away from home at Newcastle of 61,255 and Manchester City of 69,463. The following season season back in Division One attendances were even higher.

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Fri May 10, 2019 5:16 pm

With The PL resurgent in Europe the biggest losers have been the Spanish - who have won the last 5 Champions Leagues and 4 of the last 5 Europa Leagues. But what of the domestic picture, we know that the Telegraph has been questioning the finances of both Barcelona and Real Madrid for some time. La Liga themselves, understandably, would like to paint a brighter picture about their overall growth, sustainability and ambitions on the global stage - the are definitely targetting the PL.

http://www.sportspromedia.com/news/la-l ... -broadcast" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

the spanish are definitely more punchy about the overseas games that the PL, even though the Spanish FA have so far refused it. Their Cup final will be played abroad (similar to the Italians) in Saudi Arabia.

http://www.sportspromedia.com/news/la-l ... ck.twitter" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

much will come down to the big two - both in need of refreshing ageing squads, which will inevitably involve talent that is not as well known, which in the new markets of the East and China is pivital as fans their attach themselves much more to players than clubs (a player retires or moves to another league that audience goes with them.)

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/25/china-i ... clubs.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

and we must remember that final paragraph from the previous post - lose the Big 2 and it is catastrophic

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Fri May 10, 2019 5:59 pm

Just a little morsel on the disparity that the UEFA/ECA are looking to increase with their post 2024 proposals - This season, just over €2.04bn will be distributed to the 32 clubs playing in the Champions League. Both Liverpool and Spurs are likely to earn as much from the Champions League as Huddersfield and Fulham in the Premier League having earned at least 1.4 times as them in the Premier League

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Fri May 10, 2019 6:39 pm

Following post #130 about la Liga, The Bundesliga also have ambitions

https://worldfootballsummit.com/robert- ... the-world/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Fri May 10, 2019 6:42 pm

And while the European Leagues and Clubs fight for share in the Eastern markets as this article suggests - do not rule out clubs from the East utilising vast resources and political will rising to be global giants themselves

https://worldfootballsummit.com/importa ... tball-wfs/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Fri May 10, 2019 6:58 pm

In post #951 I said Sunderland was for sale - well it is to be sold to a New York fronted consortium funded by monies from the Far East

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football ... 1557509100" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

or is it

https://rokerreport.sbnation.com/2019/5 ... ed-the-gun" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Fri May 10, 2019 7:29 pm

Another morsel on disparity in the vain of that in post #1032 - this time from Nick Harris @sportingIntel

For all the seismic football drama this week, by season's end the richest dozen football clubs in the world (by income) will, combined, have won the PL (and filled the top 6 places), La Liga, Serie A, Bundesliga, Ligue 1; the CL & runners-up; EL & runners-up.

- he might as well add the European Supercup and the club world cup (though Liverpool blew that last time)
- not sure where Real Madrid fit in with winning anything but you get the gist

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Fri May 10, 2019 7:39 pm

Once upon a time fans use to turn up to the game, pay cash at the gate, enjoy the game and go home - maybe even see a player or two on the bus and everyone was happy - now this is the type of things that make boardrooms excited

https://worldfootballsummit.com/global- ... universal/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Fri May 10, 2019 8:06 pm

While I have posted a lot about the Champions League being a closed shop post 2024 - Football Benchmark look at how much you need to spend to have a chance of Champions League qualification now - In Italian but subtitles available at 5th Icon from bottom right of the screen

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... 0YKw9zCDgs" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Mon May 13, 2019 11:05 am

A good piece from TIFO football explaining how Spurs should cope with the cost of the new stadium and remain competitive

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

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Mon May 13, 2019 11:07 am

@SwissRamble shows the cost of being in the Europa League as opposed to Champions League for Arsenal and Chelsea

https://twitter.com/SwissRamble/status/ ... 5860625408" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Mon May 13, 2019 11:10 am

Nick Harris @sportingintel shows the Premier League earnings this season - big drop for us and Liverpool earn more than City

https://twitter.com/sportingintel/statu ... 4245188608" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Mon May 13, 2019 1:11 pm

There is more detail emerging of last Wednesday's meeting between UEFA and the European Leagues Organisation the outcome of which was the revelation that UEFA President Aleksander Ceferin was effectively going with the ECA plan post 2024.

https://apnews.com/cbd9ed1fd30c4ac3a782bab4207321ed" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Now compare that to his thoughts about the big clubs and the payments they earned when he was first elected into his role

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

to paraphrase Mrs Merton to Debbie Magee - What is it about multi billion euro tv deals that attracted you to the ECA, Aleksander?

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Mon May 13, 2019 2:26 pm

Richard Scudamore has his say on the post 2024 European club competition proposals - it is hard not to choke when you consider the impact on the domestic pyramid that he has overseen

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/ap/ar ... order.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Mon May 13, 2019 3:22 pm

Jonathan Liew from the Independent takes a deep philosophical view on the post 2024 proposals

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/foo ... 08781.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Royboyclaret · Post by **Royboyclaret** » Mon May 13, 2019 5:31 pm

Chester Perry wrote:Nick Harris @sportingintel shows the Premier League earnings this season - big drop for us and Liverpool earn more than City

https://twitter.com/sportingintel/statu ... 4245188608" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Big drop indeed, £15m from the £119m of the previous season.

Likely to be someway offset, however, by a significant drop in the Wage bill. The £81m from last season included a £23m bonus for finishing 7th. Of course, from a financial perspective, retaining our PL status for another season was another giant step forward as the Club goes from strength to strength at least off the pitch.

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Mon May 13, 2019 11:15 pm

In post #641 we learned that PSG had managed to put a binding block on investigations pre 2014 and I suggested that Man City would employ similar tactics - well if they have they have failed - that or the current investigation involves newer indiscretions (football leaks anyone). There are reports that the investigations are almost concluded and that there is a desire to ban city from European Competition for at least 1 year

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/foo ... 12411.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This story originally broke in the NY Times (I have used up my free articles), they have the edge on everyone at the moment, and has caused a bit of a ~~~~storm on social media - city fans rather upset and vindictive to say the least

Edit just because I can't read it doesn't have to mean you can't https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/13/spor ... -uefa.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Tue May 14, 2019 12:24 am

More on that City story from the Telegraph - will be behind a paywall shortly to transcribed in full

Man City at risk of Champions League ban with Uefa financial investigation verdict due - Tom Morgan, Sports News Correspondent
13 May 2019 • 10:35pm

Uefa financial investigators are reportedly expected to press ahead with recommendations for a Champions League ban against Manchester City within the next week.

Yves Leterme, the chairman and chief investigator of Uefa’s club financial control body, has been leading the review into evidence surrounding an alleged £60million payments deception detailed during the Football Leaks scandal last autumn.

Telegraph Sport disclosed in January how European football’s governing body was considering a suspension against the Premier League champions over potential breaches in Financial Fair Play rules. City deny any wrongdoing.

The New York Times now reports that investigation will conclude this week or next week, and is set to recommend a ban from the Champions League of at least one season.

The investigatory chamber is said to have finalised its conclusions two weeks ago in Nyon, Switzerland. A Uefa spokesman said it was unable to comment on a live investigation.

Leterme said in February that the club faced “the heaviest punishment” if the allegations were proven. Senior Uefa officials – who previously launched sanctions against City in 2014 – are particularly enraged by leaked files from 2015, which claim almost £60million was paid directly into the club by their billionaire Arab owners but declared as sponsorship.

“If it is true what has been written, there might be a serious problem,” Leterme said in an interview translated by German magazine Der Spiegel, which initially broke the Football Leaks scandal. “This can lead to the heaviest punishment: exclusion from the Uefa competitions.”

The documents, allegedly obtained by illegal email hacks, were previously said to show £59.5 million that was supposed to have come from City’s principal sponsor, Etihad Airways, was paid directly to the club by the Abu Dhabi United Group. To put that into context, City’s record signing is Riyad Mahrez, who cost £60 million from Leicester City last season.

According to Der Spiegel in November, City breached FFP rules by €188 million (£167 million) in 2014. City owner Sheikh Mansour was accused of funding significant parts of so-called deals with club sponsors in an attempt to escape Uefa sanctions. Der Spiegel also alleged that City set up a secret scheme called “Project Longbow”, which effectively hid about £40 million in payments to players, after the club had agreed a €20 million fine as a settlement for FFP breaches.

However, City have claimed “the attempt to damage the club’s reputation is organised and clear” and said they “will not be providing any comment on out-of-context materials purportedly hacked or stolen from City Football Group and Man City personnel and associated people”.

A spokeswoman for City told the Telegraph that the club stood by its previous "strenuous denial of any financial wrongdoing"

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Tue May 14, 2019 12:31 am

Chinese owned Southampton have announced a new shirt sponsor for the next 3 seasons in a "record breaking" deal for their club. The prime point of interest is that this is for a Chinese company that has yet to open it's doors for business but has just thrown circa £20m or more at Southampton. This could get interesting.

http://www.sportspromedia.com/news/sout ... uI.twitter" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It is an ugly logo to - like ours - https://twitter.com/SouthamptonFC/statu ... 5520528385" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Tue May 14, 2019 12:38 am

Oh dear - Man City go all Man Utd for some reason I expect better from them

https://twitter.com/frntofficesport/sta ... 9764395009" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Tue May 14, 2019 12:53 am

Just as Man City are about to be punished for it's dubious sponsorship deals PSG announce their new shirt sponsor

https://twitter.com/Prof_Chadwick/statu ... 4676169729" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Oh and if you think PSG got off lightly this year from UEFA - remember this, from @tariqpanja

“P.S.G. and UEFA have a tangled relationship. The team’s owners also run beIN Sports, the broadcaster that is UEFA’s biggest media rights buyer. Both the club and beIN Sports are run by Nasser al-Khelaifi who was elected to a position on UEFA’s executive board earlier this year.”

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Tue May 14, 2019 10:10 am

@AndyhHolt is sick to the back teeth of the lack of irresponsibility of the EFL. FA. FL, PFA - if we didn't already know. I am guessing he has had more threatening letters from them. If anything he is more determined to speak out - I happen to think he is bang on here

https://twitter.com/AndyhHolt/status/11 ... 7794905091" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Tue May 14, 2019 10:47 am

More on that Southampton shirt sponsor deal see post #1048 - there are going to be lots of questions (if only about the timing)

https://www.scmp.com/sport/football/art ... ts-who-are" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Simon Chadwick has the same thoughts as me

https://twitter.com/Prof_Chadwick/statu ... 7812722690" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I first mentioned the possiblity of Chinese state interest in Southampton in post #821

edlass · Post by **edlass** » Tue May 14, 2019 11:08 am

Chester Perry wrote:More on that Southampton shirt sponsor deal see post #1048 - there are going to be lots of questions (if only about the timing)

https://www.scmp.com/sport/football/art ... ts-who-are" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Simon Chadwick has the same thoughts as me

https://twitter.com/Prof_Chadwick/statu ... 7812722690" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I first mentioned the possiblity of Chinese state interest in Southampton in post #821

Thanks for all the posts. I am always reading them.

Is the suggestion here that this company is a front for Southampton's owner to pump more money in under the guise of a separate company?

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Tue May 14, 2019 11:10 am

In post #697 I posted @Prof_Chadwick piece on how the European/West's old approach to a rule based structure for sport makes no sense to those entering from the East - and suggests why UEFA will have to change it's FFP approach

In post #1050 I posted about both PSG's new shirt sponsor and the tangled web UEFA have got into with Qatar

which led to this serious and pertinent exchange that illustrates just how complex the regulation of our beloved game is becoming

@Prof_Chadwick - Notwithstanding concerns about how PSG's ownership & club's commercial portfolio sit within UEFA FFP, the more fundamental issues are around role sport plays in nation building, nation branding, political influence, soft power, industrial development & so forth....

Chris Anderson @soccerquant - I think this is a huge issue for football in general & one that needs to be addressed. I worry when football clubs become geopolitical footballs (pun intended) or purely commercial projects disconnected from the communities & cultures that made them. Regulators should take note.

@Prof-Chadwick - Really interesting observation, not just in context of PSG/Qatar but also e.g. (un)English club appearances in this year's UCL/UEL finals. With so many claiming a stake in clubs, in a globalised world, whose community/culture is it anyway? Domestic/continental regulatory........intervention increasingly ineffective. Which in turn raises questions of: what needs to regulated? Why? For what purpose? In what ways? With what consequence?

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Tue May 14, 2019 11:16 am

edlass wrote:Thanks for all the posts. I am always reading them.

Is the suggestion here that this company is a front for Southampton's owner to pump more money in under the guise of a separate company?

you might think that but I couldn't possibly comment - is the saying I believe

It will be difficult to prove - but to announce a major sponsorship like this with nothing behind it, will always cause questions and has even back in China as that South China Morning Post article shows. If it was combined with a Company/Product launch that would be slightly strange but this way it just smells very wrong

Happy to hear you think the thread is a worthwhile read - I do wonder if it is just a handful who thinks so sometimes

edlass · Post by **edlass** » Tue May 14, 2019 11:30 am

I love the thread, I would definitely credit it with my increased interest in football finances. Although now when I talk to people about football I cant help myself but to turn it to the finances or start quoting losses but I think people like to stay ignorant to it all.

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Tue May 14, 2019 11:36 am

edlass wrote:I love the thread, I would definitely credit it with my increased interest in football finances. Although now when I talk to people about football I cant help myself but to turn it to the finances or start quoting losses but I think people like to stay ignorant to it all.

I get enough of these

on here to risk talking about it elsewhere

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Tue May 14, 2019 11:36 am

A little piece from football benchmark on the self fulfilling prophecy in Europe (virtuous circle???)

https://www.footballbenchmark.com/libra ... _of_powers" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Tue May 14, 2019 11:51 am

The Betting industry pours a huge amount of sponsorship into football and only does so for the return it gets - but what they contribution to Britains biggest gambling addiction charity raise questions

https://twitter.com/healthystadia/statu ... 3400019969" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Tue May 14, 2019 12:09 pm

Manchester City react to that Tariq Panja article in the New York Times see post #1046

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

they refused to comment to Panja yesterday but are now talking to what was The Manchester Guardian hmmmm - strange choice of pr machine given Mr Conn's record

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Wed May 15, 2019 7:43 am

Surprising but welcome move - it appears that the FA Cup will be free to air from 2021/22 - with games shared between BBC and ITV - deal not done but close according to reports

https://twitter.com/TimesSport/status/1 ... 5912369152" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Wed May 15, 2019 11:31 am

Remember post #821 and the suggestion that Southampton may be Chinese State owned - The PL say they are not

https://twitter.com/OffThePitch_com/sta ... 3601372160" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

- I cannot see the article as it is behind a paywall - but interesting that the news is not available through either PL or Southampton media outlets

but those with a grater understanding of how these things work remain sceptical

https://twitter.com/Prof_Chadwick/statu ... 2595594240" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Wed May 15, 2019 11:51 am

On the subject of Southampton - that shirt sponsorship deal see post #1058 and #1052 - Simon Chadwick gives offthepitch.com a more detailed analysis (it keeps bounce in font and behind a paywall so while I have the opportunity I will transcribe)

Expert: Southampton’s record-setting sponsorship carries hallmarks of Chinese state influence

It is surprising that the new Southampton main sponsor, who is yet to launch, has been allowed to spend money overseas, says Professor Simon Chadwick. “It is not just a short-term arrangement involving the placement of a name on a shirt.”
Henrik Lønne loenne@offthepitch.com

Southampton’s record-breaking shirt sponsor deal with Chinese company, LD Sports, raises the eyebrows of Professor Simon Chadwick.
He describes it as no ordinary deal. When Chinese companies make big investments abroad, these are subject to state approval to avoid capital outflow.

According to Professor Chadwick, this means that this deal will have been approved by the Chinese authorities and that it is aligned with state interests.

“What is particularly surprising is that LD has yet to launch, though still the company is being allowed to spend money overseas on a high profile, expensive sponsorship contract. This implies that the sponsor, possibly the club too, is connected to important state decision makers and has been able to persuade them to consent to this deal,” said Professor Chadwick from Sports Enterprise at Salford University in Manchester.

He is also co-director of the Centre for Sports Business, in addition to being a senior visiting fellow at the University of Nottingham's China Policy Institute and a founding director of its China Soccer Observatory.

“Football is a means to an end”

The Chinese National Development and Reform Commission divides outbound foreign direct investment into three groups: encouraged, restricted, and prohibited transactions.

That a company that has yet to launch may make a record-setting investment shows that Southampton is much more than a football club to the Chinese, explains Professor Chadwick:

“This deal is the epitome of how China conducts its business - football is a means to an end and not an end in itself. One suspects that the club's owners (and their probable links to Chinese government) always had it in mind that Southampton would form the hub for a network of investments.”
As explained previously by offthepitch.com, Southampton as a city has strategic significance as Britain’s second-largest deep-sea port and the biggest port for trade with countries outside the EU. The city also has strong infrastructure links to the rest of the country.

A bigger Chinese role in English football
With LD Sports being a sports content, marketing and entertainment platform, Professor Chadwick expects the deal to be about more than mere brand building and foresees a bigger Chinese role in the distribution of English football media.

“One reason for this could be that LD may be seen in China as being capable of generating net inward revenue flows that justify whatever expenditure the company is making. This could give the Chinese a foothold in the acquisition and distribution of English football content.
“Indeed, one wonders whether the long-term goal of this sponsorship deal is motivated by China's intention to acquire the Premier League's domestic rights in the UK. This is a deal worth watching in some detail, as I suspect that it is not just a short-term arrangement involving the placement of a name on a shirt,” concluded Professor Chadwick.

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Wed May 15, 2019 2:18 pm

The Independent on the farce that is UEFA's showpiece finals for clubs

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/foo ... 14336.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Wed May 15, 2019 2:38 pm

A thoughtful piece from the New York Times on the approaching moment of Reckoning for both European Club football and Man City (This is the paper that broke the 2 biggest stories in football this month) - I will transcribe as their are limited views for the article

Manchester City and European Soccer Arrive at a Moment of Reckoning
Both a proposal to alter the Champions League and the news that Manchester City could be barred from playing in it were stories about the same thing: power, and who holds it.

By Rory Smith - May 15, 2019 - MANCHESTER, England —

Strip away the jargon and the euphemisms and the disorientating forest of acronyms, tune out the noise from claim and counterclaim and strident denial, pick a way through the laborious detail and the tangled minutiae, and a simple truth emerges: At the very apex of European soccer, a moment of reckoning is coming.

The report last week that UEFA is studying not so much a revamp as a total reset of its crown jewel, the Champions League, is not an administrative story about the format of a competition. The New York Times’s report, on Monday, that Manchester City might yet be banned from that same tournament is not a story about rule breaches or misleading financial declarations or malicious leaks.

Both are about something far broader and, in a way, far easier to understand. Both are about a struggle for control, between UEFA — the body that has overseen European soccer for decades — and the globe-straddling, extravagantly wealthy superclubs that provide much of its revenue.
Both are about power, and who can exert it. And both are about who runs soccer — on whose behalf, and for whose benefit.

To recap: Last Wednesday, a UEFA document came to light, one that maps out a vision of what the Champions League, soccer’s most glamorous, most lucrative, most exalted club competition, might become.

It set out what would be a fundamentally different tournament to the one that currently occupies screens and minds: 24 teams would, under the proposal, no longer have to qualify for the Champions League through domestic competition. They would become, essentially, a permanent class of Champions League teams, a continental superleague in all but name, and the death knell, according to Richard Scudamore, the outgoing chairman of the Premier League, of more than a century of domestic soccer.

And then, on Monday, as they were still clearing up the detritus left at the Etihad Stadium by Manchester City fans celebrating a second successive Premier League title, The Times reported that the body investigating suggestions that the club had misled UEFA financial regulators over its commercial income was expected to recommend that City be sanctioned for its transgressions. The punishment could be as harsh as a season-long ban from the Champions League, the tournament whose trophy the club’s ownership group prizes above all others.

It is easy to become detached from stories like these. They have an air of remoteness, a whiff of futurology. It is tempting to file them as somewhere between soothsaying and speculation. A chorus of voices, each offering a different tangent, strikes up as soon as they appear. The facts are easily lost in the flood of comment.

Last week, in the midst of possibly the most dramatic few days the Champions League in its current incarnation has ever produced, most of Europe’s major leagues came out against the plan to change the competition. UEFA immediately insisted it was just part of a consultation process. Everyone would get a say. It was just an idea. Nothing was set in stone. The panic abated. The fury faded. Nothing changed, not immediately: Tottenham beat Ajax, the Champions League was still as good as ever. The world turned.

On Tuesday, Manchester City reiterated its denial of any wrongdoing at all. Ever since the accusations first surfaced on the Football Leaks whistle-blowing platform, the club has steadfastly dismissed all allegations that it deliberately inflated sponsorship deals in order to comply with the so-called financial fair play regulations UEFA created to govern clubs’ spending.

In a statement that described the accusation of any financial regularities as “entirely false,” City said it was extremely concerned by the fact The Times had cited “people familiar with the case.”

Either the club’s “good faith” in the independent investigators reporting to UEFA was misplaced, Manchester City said, or the process was being “misrepresented by individuals intent on damaging the club’s reputation and its commercial interests. Or both.” UEFA did not comment on the Times article.

Focusing on the existence of the leaks, though, misses the point, just as the debate over the validity of financial fair play rules — whether European soccer needs someone telling its owners how to spend their money — does, and just as the dispute over whether the Champions League would be better or worse if it was played on a Saturday did a week or so ago.

It is not ridiculous to think that F.F.P. is an inherently anti-competitive measure. It is not absurd to believe that owners should be allowed to spend whatever they like on their plaything, and it is not crazy to feel that clubs should be allowed to gamble their very existences on the whim of a benefactor, or that the whole edifice was designed to protect, and enshrine, the primacy of the established elite. Perhaps the rules, as they currently stand, are wrong.

The converse is true, too: There is a perfectly logical case to be made that F.F.P. is a good thing, that clubs should have to live within their means, that longstanding sporting and social institutions being deployed as vanity projects or soft-power plays or reputation-laundering devices for regimes with questionable human rights records is less than ideal. Perhaps the rules are the rules, and the clubs should have to abide by them, while lobbying to get them changed, rather than just picking and choosing which ones they like.

Equally, maybe the Champions League would be better if Europe’s giants played one another more frequently. Maybe it would be in the best interests of the game if high-profile European games were played on weekends, and domestic fixtures in midweek. Maybe the handful of teams from Greece and Poland and Belgium who make it are just a waste of time.

Or maybe not. Maybe Europe’s elite clubs — who had, after all, conjured an idea for what the Champions League should look like that was eerily, entirely coincidentally, similar to the idea UEFA is currently workshopping — are in danger of overestimating their own place in the firmament. Maybe changing the Champions League is killing the golden goose. Maybe it works as it is, and it does not need to be altered.

It is perfectly feasible to make a case for all of the above, but the question of which of them is most convincing — which of them, if any, is correct — is not the most pressing. It is the fact that these questions have, now, to be asked, that matters most. The significance of the plan to change the Champions League runs beyond its potential impact on domestic tournaments. The consequences of Manchester City’s possibly being banned from European competition run much further than its Etihad Stadium.

In both cases, something far deeper is at stake. These stories, at their heart, once everything else is stripped away — the acronyms and the arguments and all the rest — are about who will get to run European soccer, whose voice carries the most weight, and who answers to whom.

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Wed May 15, 2019 2:45 pm

The Bundesliga is the latest of the big European leagues to come out against UEFA's proposed reforms of European Club Competition post 2024

https://www.dfl.de/en/news/statement/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

no surprise, but they have waited for a formal meeting to assess the feeling of their members - good for them

EDIT - both Bayern and Dortmund are co-signees of that statement - even though they have been public with their support of the proposals

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Wed May 15, 2019 2:47 pm

Marina Hyde in the Guardian makes a case that any punishment that Man City receive if found guilt should be meaningful (we all know the threat of expulsion from the Champions League is unlikely to happen)

https://www.theguardian.com/football/bl ... rick-clubs" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Wed May 15, 2019 9:52 pm

So we now know the finalists of the Championship play-offs - it will be billed as a £170m game but is likely to be worth even more

https://twitter.com/sportingintel/statu ... 9569010694" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Wed May 15, 2019 9:57 pm

following on from the Bundesliga, The French league general assembly rejects idea for largely closed Champions League from 2024.

32 reject idea. 3 abstentions (My guess PSG, Lyon and Marseille - possibly Monaco)

Apparently French football plans to propose alternative an proposition

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Wed May 15, 2019 11:01 pm

The owner of Legia Warsaw has published an open letter in support of the proposals for post 2024 European Club competition.

https://twitter.com/RobHarris/status/11 ... 3690413061" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

On the face of it this is bizarre because his is the kind of club that could be marginalised by them. But @DariuszMioduski is Vice Chairman of the ECA (i.e. a close friend of Agnelli)

It could be that he sees a longer term opportunity for his team

https://twitter.com/Marcotti/status/1128698012379828227" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chester Perry · Post by **Chester Perry** » Wed May 15, 2019 11:55 pm

Real Madrid, PSG and Manchester United are not the only clubs who will be looking to making significant buys this summer - Barcelona may have just won la liga (again) but they are aging and need to freshen up - Antoine Griezmann is a probable target now he has confirmed he is leaving athletico, but how are they going to pay for him, fee and wages? - The Telegraph continues it's mission to query the finances of the Spanish big two - transcribed as likely to soon go behind a paywall

Antoine Griezmann being sold to Barcelona by Atletico Madrid? Fine: but how are they going to pay for him?
Sam Wallace - Chief Football Writer

A tough Tuesday for those behind the original 2018 Antoine Griezmann film La Decision which chronicled every conceivable aspect of his life in the build-up to his putative departure from Atletico Madrid and culminated with him announcing that, actually, nothing was changing.

The production team had got almost everything when it came to the elite footballer lifestyle; massive houses, massive tellies, home tattooing services, Fortnite addiction – just not the dramatic ending. Imagine how they must have felt when Griezmann surfaced on a video on Atletico’s website this week somewhat dazed and dishevelled, looking as though he had been dragged from his bed in the middle of the night by Diego Simeone’s famously combative assistant German Burgos.

No moody shots of him in a hoodie, no drone footage of his huge garden, but what a plot twist. Griezmann announced he will be leaving Atletico, although for reasons that will later become clear he cannot say where he is going. Witness-protection perhaps, given the startled look in his eyes and the fact that Burgos almost certainly knows where he lives.

Of course, all the signs point to Barcelona, who along with Real Madrid are being linked with every new hotshot or disenchanted superstar in Europe.

Griezmann has a buy-out clause of about €120 million (£105 million) in the contract that he signed at Atletico which kicks in on July 1. He says that, at 28, he is ready to leave the club, now 32 per cent owned by the Israeli billionaire Idan Ofer. But for where?

For their part, Barcelona have been very quiet, their financial situation similar to Real Madrid. The Catalan club are cash poor with nothing like the funds to make a signing of this size without cutting back elsewhere.

Their intermediary accounts for the first half of the season are overdue, although the full accounts will have to be submitted in time for the club’s general assembly in September when members will get a chance to question president Josep Bartomeu on the finances.

This month may well see Barcelona seal their second consecutive domestic double against Valencia in the Copa del Rey final on May 25. The league title is their eighth in 11 seasons. The question that remains is how they meet the wage bill that is coming at the end of June. They pay their players twice yearly, a total bill of €633 million spread across two payments becoming due at the end of January and the end of June. Last season they opened a €140 million credit line with a New York-based lender to cover that bill, and it may well be the same again this summer.

Even so, they need to wait until July 1 and hope that by then they can move on one or more of their squad – perhaps even Philippe Coutinho or Ousmane Dembele – to fund a summer rebuild. The most important part of the negotiation for Griezmann would be to persuade Atletico to accept that Barcelona pay for him in instalments. If Atletico want the money up front, then Barcelona have a problem.

Not one that faces Paris St-Germain, or even the likes of Manchester City or Manchester United, as Barcelona will be aware. It was an embarrassment to the club last summer that Atletico were able to beat Griezmann’s €17 million annual wage offer from Barcelona. Strictly speaking, the great cinematic denouement to La Decision should have been Bartomeu staring out at the empty Nou Camp car park, while in the background someone played a sad, wistful arrangement on the office piano.

Barcelona are still run as a functioning members’ club accountable to their socios, as opposed to the faux democracy over which Real Madrid president Florentino Perez presides. Yet the financial problems are notably similar.

Neither have the kind of cash that the new-money clubs can wield for the marquee transfers, they have the two highest wage bills in European football, and both are struggling this summer to offload high-earning unwanted stars to make way for new names. Both clubs are very fortunate that La Liga rules absurdly do not include money owed to fellow clubs in transfer fees and add-ons among the debt carried by a club.

Under Barcelona’s constitution, should debt exceed a sum equal to twice that of their annual EBITDA [earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation], the board have two years to remedy the situation or, failing that, resign. Last year the club had just €40 million in cash at the end of June, forcing them to borrow in order to pay their twice-yearly wage bill.

At 28, Griezmann comes at a premium price. Playing for Atletico, the expectation was always that one or other of the big two would be in a position to sign him at some point, but for the salary, the transfer fee and the long-term value, he comes with considerable risk.

As ever with Real Madrid and Barcelona, the fans believe that the money will come from somewhere. Perhaps there is a market out there for Coutinho, which allows Barcelona to pay back their considerable liability to Liverpool and still get out with a profit. Perhaps they will eventually sell poor old Rafinha, who keeps coming back like a lucky peseta every time a transfer breaks down. But at some point this club will have to explain to its members that the funds to sign every available big name who declares he wants a transfer are not simply going to appear by magic.

Atletico, the great debt zombie, currently the owners of two stadiums and €506 million in the red, may yet just accept the instalments payment model and let Barcelona have Griezmann on credit. In the meantime, a window is open for the likes of PSG and others in the Premier League. Griezmann and his representatives clearly believe there is a move out there for him. The clock is now ticking for Barcelona to find that money.