Football's Magic Money Tree

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Sat Sep 12, 2020 11:13 pm

It appears that English Football has a bad feeling about the Government's plans for the return of fans to games and the consequences of such thinking - from the Mail

No fans until the New Year? More delays looming and clubs face financial chaos after the Premier League delayed test events this month due to government crackdown
- The Premier League will push the government again on letting fans into grounds
- This comes despite the deferral of top flight test events due to new limitations
- There is now pessimism that fans will be back in grounds in October as planned
- The crackdown saw test events deferred and deemed not economically viable
By ROB DRAPER FOR THE MAIL ON SUNDAY

PUBLISHED: 22:31, 12 September 2020 | UPDATED: 22:31, 12 September 2020

The Premier League will continue to push the Government to allow fans into grounds next month despite the deferral of Premier League test events this month due to new limitations.

But one industry source familiar with the talks between Government and clubs said they were now ‘pessimistic’ that fans will be back in October, as previously planned, and indeed fearful that it will now be 2021 before any fans are allowed back in significant numbers.

That could cause financial meltdown for many EFL clubs, where TV money is limited, and will even stretch Premier League clubs, leading to fresh calls for cuts to player wages. Last week’s toughening on socialising numbers, now limited to six by the Government from Monday, also saw a limit of 1,000 spectators imposed on test events for sports fans.

The Premier League responded by deferring their tests, saying that the limit meant events were neither economically viable nor would they be an effective gauge of whether they could host 15,000 fans.

Industry insiders now fear that as the test events have been cancelled, there is very little prospect of the October 1 date being met for return of fans in the Premier League.

It is possible that Leagues One and Two, with smaller crowds, may be better placed to have fans back.

But if the October date is missed, it would then be unlikely that a significant amount of fans would be admitted in November and December, as winter approaches and people are forced to socialise indoors, increasing the threat of exposure to the coronavirus.

All parties acknowledge that the next fortnight is crucial and if the disease continues to increase exponentially, then the return of fans will be delayed again and that it will be harder to make the case for a return in mid-winter.

Though clubs knew revenue would be considerably down this season because of limitations on crowds, there had been a hope that only September would be behind closed doors and that as much as 30 per cent of some major stadia could be occupied by October.

Karren Brady, vice-chairwoman at West Ham, wrote in her newspaper column: ‘We had expected at least a quarter of our stadiums would be full by October 1. Now, in the light of increased virus infections, restrictions might well be tightened further.

‘Premier League chief executive Richard Masters said this week the Premier League lost £700m in revenue due to last season’s pandemic crisis. This averages at about £35m for each club.

‘Should we lose a similar amount if full stadiums are not allowed for three or four months, then even the richest Premier League clubs - whose gate income alone is £100m a year - will take a hard look at the future. The pressures are relentless.’

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Sun Sep 13, 2020 12:59 pm

For the first time sponsorship values in the Premier League have fallen - even with the introduction of Leeds and their large deal, we are among the victims, though I feel we have gotten off lightly - from the Mail

Premier League shirt sponsorships FALL in value by £9m for the first time in history as clubs count the cost of the coronavirus crisis
- This season marks the first time that Premier League shirt sponsorship has fallen
- The value of the 20 clubs' combined deals have generated £344.5m this season
- That figure is down from £353.6m last year with the value of deals decreasing
- Manchester United were also hit with the club's Chevrolet deal falling by £4m
By ALEX MILLER and NICK HARRIS FOR THE MAIL ON SUNDAY

PUBLISHED: 00:38, 13 September 2020 | UPDATED: 00:38, 13 September 2020

Premier League shirt sponsorship values have fallen £9million this season - the first time the combined total has fallen.

The value of the 20 clubs’ combined shirt sponsorship deals have generated £344.5m this season, down from £353.6m last year.

Manchester United, Everton, Southampton and Burnley have all seen the value of their shirt sponsorships fall this season.

United’s seven-year Chevrolet deal is worth $80m a year - but has fallen £4m due to a weakened pound to £60m. Everton have signed a deal with Cazoo worth £600,000 less than its previous arrangement with SportPesa.

Sportsmail can reveal Burnley have been forced to lower the value of their £7.5million a year sponsorship with main shirt sponsor LoveBet by £250,000 this season.

Despite two years left on the deal, the club have been forced to renegotiate, just one year after announcing the partnership. A source close to the deal admitted the Premier League side have reduced the Chinese company’s inventory.

The shock decision forced Burnley officials to go to the market to find deals with alternative sponsors to make up the revenue shortfall - the equivalent of £500,000 over the remainder of the deal.

Sportsmail also exclusively revealed Southampton had been left stunned as Chinese shirt sponsor LD Sports quit the club before the new Premier League season started - a shock decision, which has cost the club £3million this year.

The three-year deal, worth a club record 7.5million a year, only began last season. The club wouldn’t comment on suggestions LD Sport had defaulted on payments.

LD Sports’ decision was a major embarrassment for the Saints with the club having already released this season’s kit, complete with the LD Sports logo.

The Saints were forced to replace the sponsor with Sportsbet.io on lower terms.

The three newly promoted clubs have deals worth £12.5m combined as things stand, whereas the three relegated clubs (Watford, Bournemouth and Norwich) had deals worth £14.5m combined.

Royboyclaret
Posts: 3865
Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 12:57 pm
Been Liked: 1273 times
Has Liked: 680 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Royboyclaret » Sun Sep 13, 2020 8:57 pm

Didn't take long for LoveBet to "adjust" our three year financial arrangement for shirt sponsorship.

Only a 3.3% downward adjustment but still represents a £0.5m shortfall over the two remaining years of the contract.

Plenty to think about for our Finance department to offset the shortfall.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Sun Sep 13, 2020 9:09 pm

Royboyclaret wrote:
Sun Sep 13, 2020 8:57 pm
Didn't take long for LoveBet to "adjust" our three year financial arrangement for shirt sponsorship.

Only a 3.3% downward adjustment but still represents a £0.5m shortfall over the two remaining years of the contract.

Plenty to think about for our Finance department to offset the shortfall.
I cannot help feeling it is rebate for last season's hiatus, and the sponsor has been good enough to spread the impact

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Mon Sep 14, 2020 1:14 pm

Frankly surprised that Mike Ashley appears to be serious about suing the Premier League over the failed Saudi takeover - from the Telegraph - he has the right Legal team though

Mike Ashley set to sue Premier League over blocked Newcastle takeover
LUKE EDWARDS SEPTEMBER 14, 2020

Mike Ashley, the Newcastle United owner, has hired lawyers to pursue a legal case against the Premier League following the collapse of a proposed takeover by a Saudi Arabia-led consortium.

In an unprecedented step, Ashley has decided to sue the Premier League as he feels they have acted inappropriately in failing to allow the takeover — in which Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund would have taken an 80 per cent stake in the club, with broker Amanda Staveley taking 10 per cent and property developers the Reuben brothers taking another 10 per cent — to progress.

The proposed takeover stalled for 17 weeks as the Premier League considered whether to allow it to pass the owners and directors test, subsequently claiming they had not received the relevant information from the buying consortium as to who would be in charge of the club. Their offer for independent arbitration to resolve the stalemate was also rejected by the consortium.

It is thought the Premier League believe the PIF are effectively controlled by the Saudi state and would therefore have the final say on decisions made at St James’ Park. The Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia and de-facto ruler, Mohammed bin Salman, is chairman of the PIF.

That has been denied by both the buyers and Ashley, who insist they have provided all the necessary legal evidence to prove the PIF are legally separate from the Saudi state.

Whether Ashley intends to take the legal action with the intention to revive the deal or whether he is seeking compensation remains to be seen.

The Premier League have denied the takeover has been rejected and there are suggestions this legal move by Ashley is to force that rejection so that the consortium can decide whether to take legal action of their own.

Blackstone Chambers, based in London, have released the following statement on their website: “Shaheed Fatima QC and Nick De Marco QC are acting for Newcastle United FC and Mike Ashley (instructed by Dentons) in a dispute with the Premier League about its rejection of a takeover bid made by PCP Capital Partners, the Reuben Brothers and the Public Investment Fund of Saudi Arabia (PIF) based on its owners and directors test.”

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Mon Sep 14, 2020 1:26 pm

More leaks over the FAI/John Delaney scandal over the weekend - from the Irish Independent

KOSI report on FAI finances finds John Delaney incurred personal expenditure of almost €1m in five-year period
Aidan Fitzmaurice September 13 2020 11:17 AM

A report into the FAI's financial affairs during the tenure of former CEO John Delaney, which was commissioned by the association, has found that Delaney clocked up personal expenditure of just under €1million in a five-year period.

Extracts from Champagne Football, a book analysing the Delaney years and the 2019 fall from grace of the long-serving CEO, were published today in the Sunday Times and details of a report by KOSI, make clear just how financially committed the association were to Delaney.

Costs incurred by Delaney but which were paid by the FAI include €316,000 on legal fees for defamation-related cases he took over coverage of the ticketing scandal at the Olympic games in 2016.

The KOSI report, which was commissioned by the FAI but never published as its contents were forwarded to An Garda Síochána and the ODCE, found that the FAI paid €70,000 to cover the costs of Delaney's 50th birthday party, that there was "personal spending" of €125,000 on Delaney's FAI credit card, including just under €50,000 for ATM withdrawals between 2015 and 2019.

The report also found that between 2015 and 2018, the FAI paid €242,000 in rent and other personal expenses for Delaney, who was on a salary of €360,000 at one stage and KOSI estimated the combined financial outlay of the FAI towards Delaney as €972,626. Delaney repaid €227,629 to the FAI, including a €50,000 payment for the costs related to the birthday party which was attended by public figures such as UEFA president Alexander Ceferin, former international manager John Giles, TD Alan Kelly and pundit Eamon Dunphy.

Reports carried out by KOSI and Mazars, commissioned by the FAI, have not been published and the Delaney matter is currently being processed by the ODCE

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Mon Sep 14, 2020 1:30 pm

@SwissRamble with a detailed thread looking at financing in the Premier League - the master strikes again and as you would expect we do not feature much - covers the last 5 years

https://twitter.com/SwissRamble/status/ ... 7844654080

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Mon Sep 14, 2020 5:33 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Mon Sep 14, 2020 1:30 pm
@SwissRamble with a detailed thread looking at financing in the Premier League - the master strikes again and as you would expect we do not feature much - covers the last 5 years

https://twitter.com/SwissRamble/status/ ... 7844654080
Today's Price of Football podcast talks about financing and debt and the rising cost of finance that clubs face - informs that a Premier League informs us that a club recently borrowed £80m and 9.5% interest with a 1.5% introduction fee (which reflects the risk lenders believe football is at the moment) - I have to say my first thought was Everton but could be wrong

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

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Mon Sep 14, 2020 6:30 pm

Apparently the Premier League have revealed how the rebates are going to affect the central Payment - and it isn't going to be spread evenly - from the Mail - must say I am not to sure about this

Liverpool to foot the biggest share of coronavirus bill as Premier League set out how £330m repayment will be paid among clubs after three-month suspension of football... while Arsenal will have to pay more than Spurs despite finishing EIGHTH!
- The Premier League has set out how a £330m rebate will be repaid by clubs
- Broadcast partners will receive the payment after the suspension of football
- Liverpool face a £17.3m loss while Manchester City will pay £16.8m
- Arsenal will pay £15m which is £200,000 more than north London rivals Spurs
By OLLIE LEWIS FOR MAILONLINE

PUBLISHED: 16:29, 14 September 2020 | UPDATED: 16:36, 14 September 2020

Liverpool will have to pay back more than any other Premier League club as the top flight foots the coronavirus bill from broadcasters.

All 20 Premier League clubs have to repay the £330m they were told they needed to pay the league's broadcast partners as a result of the three-month suspension of football.

And last season's champions Liverpool face a £17.3m cut in television revenue, pocketing £143.8m instead of a forecast £161.6m, the Premier League's 2020-21 handbook states.

Manchester City, who finished runners-up to Jurgen Klopp's side, are set to repay the next biggest bill of £16.8m, taking their earnings from £156.7m to £139.9m.

On average, most clubs will have to repay around 10 per cent of their total broadcast earnings, with the proportion paid back decreasing for the teams that finished lower in the league.

It means that Norwich City, who finished 20th last season, will see their earnings drop from £95.2m to £88.1m, representing a 7.5 per cent loss.

Meanwhile, the trio of promoted clubs this season will not have to pay anything back until next season, when their broadcast earnings are accounted for and they'll have to pay £8.4m each. The same applies for the three clubs that are promoted from the Championship next season.

The Big Six are most seriously affected by the coronavirus bill, with Arsenal expected to pay £15m - which is more than Wolves - despite the fact Nuno Espirito Santo's side finished above them last season.

The Gunners £15m bill is also slightly dearer than north London rivals Spurs, who will have to pay back £14.8m.

The same applies for Chelsea who, despite finishing below Manchester United will lose £16.3m while United will lose £16.2m.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Mon Sep 14, 2020 6:35 pm

Wow it is in the Premier League Handbook as an example - see appendix 16 Calculation of Season 2019/20 Reduction Share from page 317 in the attached PDF - suggests we will lose about £13.4 m from last season's monies

https://resources.premierleague.com/pre ... 110920.pdf

this is a revised edition of the 2020/21 Handbook issued last Friday

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Mon Sep 14, 2020 6:43 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Mon Sep 14, 2020 6:35 pm
Wow it is in the Premier League Handbook as an example - see appendix 16 Calculation of Season 2019/20 Reduction Share from page 317 in the attached PDF - suggests we will lose about £13.4 m from last season's monies

https://resources.premierleague.com/pre ... 110920.pdf

this is a revised edition of the 2020/21 Handbook issued last Friday
Which means we are between £15m and £20m down on revenues last season, so I would estimate £130m to £140m in actual revenues in 2019/20

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Mon Sep 14, 2020 7:42 pm

Piece in the Telegraph saying the EFL wants £22m bail out from the Premier League for every month that fans are not in attendance

EFL wants £22m financial bailout from Premier League clubs for every month the season continues without crowds
JEREMY WILSON SEPTEMBER 14, 2020

The English Football League wants a £22 million financial bailout from the Premier League for every month the season continues without supporters, Telegraph Sport can disclose.

Talks are being held over a rescue package of up to £200 million over the season, something the EFL was on Monday night confident of securing amid Government backing for the world’s richest league to provide financial assistance to the rest of the English game.

But, with Premier League clubs now increasingly resigned to supporters not returning until at least November, there is growing internal reluctance for it to underwrite the wider pyramid.

Its members are themselves facing the double whammy of losing £5 million each match-week after terminating their television contract in China and also £100 million for every month fans are not back in stadiums.

Each individual home Premier League game is generally worth between £1 million and £5 million to clubs in revenue from tickets and other match-day income alone.

The EFL can point to the Government’s insistence that the Premier League share any proceeds from Project Restart and is resistant to conditions being imposed on any help when many clubs are facing an existential threat over the indefinite prospect of no match-day income.

While the Premier League still has the vast majority of a three-year broadcast deal that was worth £9.2 billion still intact, clubs further down the pyramid are far more reliant on actual attendance for their survival.

Top-flight clubs are lobbying Government for the return of up to 30 per cent of fans but, with pilot events of more than 1,000 supporters cancelled and ministers now reviewing their plans, there is a feeling late October or early November has become the earliest realistic date for that.

Clubs believe that they would need at least a week – ideally longer – to prepare and so would require urgent approval over the coming days to meet the initial October 1 target date.

The Premier League has argued a pilot event staged by Brighton & Hove Albion has shown a limited number of fans could return safely and responsibly.

There is also a feeling within clubs that the risk of spreading Covid-19 would actually be higher if, rather than having limited numbers of spectators safely gathering inside stadiums, supporters ended up watching matches in pubs or other people’s homes.

Although technological solutions have been explored, there is little expectation of an imminent ‘silver bullet’ solution. Indeed, even if a 90-minute Covid-19 test were to become available, the practical challenge of matching up negative tests on the day of a game to sold match-day tickets would be considerable.

Instead, the Premier League is trying to stress both what they see as the safety of the current plan, which has been drawn up by the Sports Ground Safety Authority, and the dire wider implications of fans remaining indefinitely shut out.

The Brighton example involved digital ticketing and remote temperature checks but, with socially-distanced seating and its one-way system around the aisles and concourses, it would be largely transferable across the leagues. Face coverings at Brighton were required in concourses and in queues but not while fans were in their seats.

Sports Briefing
The Premier League is also warning the Government of the wider impacts if fans are not allowed back which, beyond the threat to jobs within clubs, extends to other associated industries and their ability to support clubs lower down the pyramid, who depend upon the income from match-day fans.

Although there are vast differences depending on stadiums and individual club models, it is felt that the starting point for the return of fans needs to be at 25 to 30 per cent level to be worthwhile.

The EFL was also lobbying Government on Monday for a reversal to its decision to cut the maximum number of spectators at pilot events to 1,000.

But, unlike the Premier League, it is ready to stage more test events and Telegraph Sport can reveal that, before the new restrictions came into force, it had been planning on doing so at every one of its matches this weekend and next.

It was in talks with Government on Monday about resurrecting as many of those as possible.

Other senior figures in sport were on Monday already resigned to the October return of fans being scrapped.

Major fears were raised over the future of elite rugby union, rugby league and particularly basketball and netball in the UK if supporters remained locked out until next year.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Mon Sep 14, 2020 7:46 pm

add to the above that the Overseas Broadcasters will be looking for rebates from the Premier League this month and for every time games are moved from the contracted slots to meet the demands of supporters in this country (who want games broadcast while they cannot attend) and the fact domestic broadcasters do not want multiple games aired in the same slots

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Mon Sep 14, 2020 10:54 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Mon Sep 14, 2020 6:43 pm
Which means we are between £15m and £20m down on revenues last season, so I would estimate £130m to £140m in actual revenues in 2019/20
Apparently these numbers will be deducted in 2 equal parts - at the end of this season and the end of next - of course that doesn't account for this seasons seemingly inevitable rebates - which means we will record our best ever revenues for last season and likely a large profit - no doubt we will acknowledge the future rebates too

https://twitter.com/martynziegler/statu ... 5684745217

seems like the Times got this right a few weeks back
claretandy wrote:
Tue Aug 11, 2020 6:57 pm
Look like we will receive our full amount of TV money with no rebates due this season.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/spor ... 1597168086
EDIT - I should have spelt that our TV money for 2019/20 is - £124.7m with an expected rebate of £13.4m to be paid/deducted in 2 parts (equal I think) at the end of the 2020/21 and 2021/22 seasons
Last edited by Chester Perry on Tue Sep 15, 2020 2:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Mon Sep 14, 2020 11:26 pm

This is being seen in some quarters as the government still pressing ahead with an October return for spectators in some form in elite football - I see it as a well constructed piece that allows for any outcome the government decides

https://twitter.com/Ollie_Bayliss/statu ... 5859024897

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Mon Sep 14, 2020 11:30 pm

Liverpool have won a court case against an intermediary seeking an "introduction" payment from 2013 when Liverpool entered and agreement with BetVictor in 2016

https://twitter.com/JohnMehrzadQC/statu ... 0170591232

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Tue Sep 15, 2020 12:38 am

Didn't know this little factoid - apparently Mike Garlick and Andy Holt were in the same year/class at Burnley Grammar both running clubs the proper way, custodians trying to make them pay their own way

https://twitter.com/AndyhHolt/status/13 ... 2920482818

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Tue Sep 15, 2020 1:12 am

Chester Perry wrote:
Fri Aug 21, 2020 8:43 am
Remeber this



Not looking quite so well argued when you read this in the Yorkshire Evening Post

Barnsley FC board divided over monies owed following sale of club
THE Cryne family insist that they have been forced into taking legal action against the majority shareholders of Barnsley Football Club for payment of £2.75m as ‘a last resort’, after failing to receive monies owed following the sale of the club in December 2017.
By Leon Wobschall
Wednesday, 19th August 2020, 5:29 pm

The Cryne family have issued a response via their solicitors Knights plc to a statement released on the club’s website on Tuesday afternoon and have stressed that they have been forced into taking the action against Hong-Kong based BFC Investment Company, who own 80 per cent of the club.

They state that the decision has been taken with ‘huge reluctance and great regret’ to recover deferred payments owed.

The statement also dismissed suggestions on the Reds website that the Cryne family were refusing to sell 50 per cent of Oakwell after the club’s majority shareholders – including co-chairmen Paul Conway and Chien Lee – obtained an option as part of BFC Investment Company’s takeover.

It claimed that a third party had sought to enforce their own option to purchase half of Oakwell.

The Cryne family claim that the situation regarding Oakwell is a totally separate issue to the outstanding monies owed following the club’s sale.

A statement read: “It was agreed at the time (of sale – December 2017) that some of the purchase price could be deferred and paid in instalments.

“In April 2019, Hong Kong company BFC Investment Company asked the Cryne family for a reduction in the price and for longer to pay the deferred element. The Cryne family agreed to reduce the price substantially, and to grant longer payment terms.

“Payments due in early 2020 were still not paid and despite further time being allowed, £2,750,000 is still owed to Oakwell (Oakwell Holdings Limited, the family’s company). The failure to pay occurred before the current Covid-19 crisis.

“Despite requesting payment from the Hong Kong company several times, payment has still not been forthcoming and with huge reluctance and great regret, Oakwell has been forced to issue a claim in the High Court to recover those monies due.

“It is hoped that the matter can be resolved before the claim progresses much further but the Hong Kong company are yet to submit any defence to the claim.

“The Cryne family has remained stalwart in their support for the club. Throughout the Covid-19 crisis, the Cryne family has not taken any rent from the club and James Cryne, who is employed by the club, has forgone his salary. Their commitment to the club remains absolute but they feel they have no choice but to take steps in circumstances where they have not been paid in accordance with the contract of sale.

“It is with great regret that as a last resort, the family has instructed Knights to take court action on its behalf.”

In their own statement on the club’s website, the club’s majority shareholders pledged to ‘vigorously defend’ themselves.

It read: “The club will vigorously defend the claims, and its legitimate interests in respect of the (Oakwell) option and intend to aggressively prosecute the club’s own claims by whatever means necessary and in the strongest possible terms.

“The club has had a hard battle on and off the field in the last six months.

“It has fought through Covid-19, governance issues in the EFL and tough opponents on the field to remain in the Championship.

“The club will continue to fight these battles in the interests of its supporters and its long-term future by all means necessary. Since investing in the club in 2017, the new investors have not withdrawn £1 from the club and received no compensation as Board members.

“The club want to reassure our supporters that we will fight this litigation and continue to grow the club in a proper way.”
things are escalating at Barnsley in regards the sale of Oakwell - from the Mail - they are even looking at a groundshare in Lancashire - Burnsley anybody?

Barnsley hold talks with rival EFL clubs over shock move away from Oakwell with club involved in furious row over the purchase of their ground (and - - Yorkshire side could now play their home games in Lancashire!)
- Barnsley have been in talks with EFL clubs about a shock move from Oakwell
- The club are involved in a heated row over the purchase of their home ground
- Their owners have so far failed in an attempt to buy a half share of the stadium
- Sportsmail understands they are in discussions over a controversial switch
By MIKE KEEGAN FOR THE DAILY MAIL

PUBLISHED: 22:31, 14 September 2020 | UPDATED: 22:31, 14 September 2020

Barnsley have held talks with other EFL clubs about a shock move away from Oakwell amid a furious row over the purchase of the ground - and could even play their home games in Lancashire.

The Championship club's owners have failed in an attempt to buy a half share of the stadium and Sportsmail understands that they have now engaged in discussions with other clubs about what would be a highly-controversial switch.

A source close to Barnsley, who have played at Oakwell for 132 years, disclosed that a number of other sides have been spoken to about hosting the club's matches, including two in Lancashire.

In what may well be a high-stakes move designed to ramp up pressure on the local council, which owns 50 per cent of the ground, Barnsley have taken action.

While the club declined to comment, the source said that the blocking of a previous attempt to buy half of stadium from the authority left the majority owners - Chinese businessman Chien Lee and US colleague Paul Conway - 'discouraged and immediately seeking alternative arrangements'.

They added that the investment would have improved 'dated infrastructure which is rapidly heading into a state of disrepair' and say the move has been made on the back of limited matchday revenue forecasts thanks to the Covid pandemic and continuing behind-closed-doors football.

'The current landowners do not contribute toward maintenance which makes yearly costs very difficult for the club,' they said.

Any such move would need permission from the EFL board. Fellow Championship club Coventry City, in dispute with landlords Wasps over the Ricoh Arena, are currently playing their matches at Birmingham City's St Andrew's.

Barnsley are also in dispute with former owners the Cryne family, who own the other 50 per cent of Oakwell. They say the family will not part with their share, which was agreed in the initial deal and have rejected 'a variety of proposals'.

The Crynes, who still own 20 per cent of the club, deny suggestions they refused to sell and told the Barnsley Chronicle that they are taking legal action for £2.75m they claim they are still owed from the sale of the club against Lee and Conway as 'a last resort'.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Tue Sep 15, 2020 2:30 pm

following the news of Barcelona's losses last season, Juventus have announced their 2019/20 financial results - it is a big ouch but nothing like the drop in revenues at Barcelona - from SportsProMedia

Juventus hit by €71.4m loss for 2019/20
Deficit increases by €31.5m as Serie A winners fall into the red for third consecutive year.

Posted: September 15 2020By: Ed Dixon

- Revenues down from €621.4m to €573.4m
- Juve posted €39.9m loss in 2018/19
- Covid-19 means club expect another negative financial showing next year
I
talian soccer champions Juventus have posted losses of €71.4 million (US$84.8 million) for the year ending 30th June 2020, a rise of €31.5 million (US$37.4 million) on their previous financial results.

It means the Serie A club have posted their third straight year in the red, following a €39.9 million (US$47.5 million) deficit in 2019.

For the pandemic-hit 2019/20 season, which saw Juve scoop their ninth consecutive league little, the Old Lady saw year-on-year (YoY) revenues fall from €621.4 million (US$738.6 million) to €573.4 million (US$681.6 million). Matchday and merchandise income were severely impacted during lockdown and when the campaign resumed behind closed doors.

Juve’s YoY costs did drop from €458.5 million (US$545.1 million) to €414.1 million (US$492.2 million), but it was not enough to prevent the overall increase in losses.

In a further setback, the club have said the economic downturn from coronavirus means another loss is expected for 2020/21.

It is a mark of the financial severity attributed to the health crisis that the club is posting a bleak financial picture already for next year, despite numerous commercial deals signed during the 2019/20 season.

Notably, a reworking of their contract with Jeep means Juve will pocket an extra €25 million (US$29.7 million) per year until the end of 2020/21, while an extension with global insurance firm Allianz until 2030 is set to bring in €103.1 million (US$122.5 million).

Deals with Budweiser, Coca-Cola, 10Bet, Ganten, Konami and Linglong Tire were also struck, as was a two-year back-of-shirt agreement with Cygames reportedly worth as much as €10 million (US$11.8 million).

According to Gazzetta dello Sport, Juve’s sponsorship revenue from their kit alone brings in more than €100 million (US$118 million) annually.

Ahead of the new Serie A season, which kicks off on 19th September, Juve have again added to their list of commercial partners through agreements with Hong Kong-based financial services group Raffles Family Office (RFO) and Italian coffee brand Lavazza.

The values of the two deals are undisclosed, but RFO will collaborate with the team on a range of branding and marketing activations, with Juve also planning to bring players to Asia in the future.

Lavazza, which becomes the club’s official coffee, has also secured exposure on pitchside advertising boards during Serie A and Coppa Italia matches, and at Juve’s training ground, as well as a string of other digital activations which also cover the Juventus women’s team.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Tue Sep 15, 2020 2:34 pm

This analysis piece from SportsProMedia shows how MLS side LAFC have used data to their commercial advantage

https://www.sportspromedia.com/analysis ... g-strategy

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Tue Sep 15, 2020 3:06 pm

SportsBuisness.com with an article on why financiers involvement in football is set to stay even with 23 Capital bowing out of the marketplace

Despite Covid uncertainty and 23 Capital’s demise, football’s financiers are here to stay
Callum McCarthy, Europe office - September 15, 2020

In April last year, 23 Capital chief executive Jason Traub said his boutique lender aimed to provide $20bn in financing across the sport, entertainment and music sectors in the five years from 2019 to 2023, becoming sport’s most aggressive lender in the process.

Traub wanted 23 Capital to be at “the cutting edge” of lending across the sectors, perhaps taking risks others wouldn’t in order to fuel the company’s exponential growth.

And it might have come to pass, if not for Covid-19. Instead, 23 Capital is winding down just a year on from funding nine-figure football transfers.

Traub – along with fellow directors Andrew Bray and Nick Gonella – officially stepped down from the company on July 24. According to Companies House, corporate services and fund management firm Intertrust took the reins on the same day.

Intertrust is now responsible for managing 23 Capital’s hefty loan book, headlined by a €100m-plus credit facility made available to Portuguese giants Benfica, a €96m loan to Atlético Madrid to cover the cost of João Félix’s transfer from Benfica, and a loan to FC Barcelona – thought to be €88m – to fund Antoine Griezmann’s move from Atlético.

Intertrust is already abreast of one of those loans. Back in 2018, the company was appointed as the security trustee (an entity that manages a debt on behalf of multiple parties) for Credit Suisse, Thomas Creek Capital and QBS Holdings – the three lenders from which 23 Capital borrowed in order to provide the €100m-plus non-recourse credit facility to Benfica.

The Financial Times reported that Traub, who headed up the company’s sport financing efforts, had ‘realigned’ 23 Capital’s borrowing arrangement with Credit Suisse and parted ways with his former business partner Stephen Duval, who headed up the lender’s music and entertainment business.

Experts in the football finance sector say that prior to Covid-19, late or missed payments on loans or credit facilities provided to clubs were almost unheard of.

The security provided by guaranteed broadcast rights payments, and the threat of sporting sanctions should transfer fees go unpaid, made football finance a golden balance of risk v reward for specialist lenders that could charge between five and ten per cent interest on credit to clubs.

That isn’t to say there wasn’t risk involved for lenders – as 23 Capital will attest.

Kieran Maguire, football finance expert and lecturer at Liverpool University, told SportBusiness: “The sense of security around broadcast payments wasn’t necessarily false. I think there was a false view that it could only head in one direction.

“The business of funding transfers is low volume, but high, high value. You only need one non-payment to cause what is ultimately a boutique institution to be very, very vulnerable.”

High risk, high reward
Traub is now understood to be in discussions with Credit Suisse over funding for a new football financing venture, implying his faith in the sector remains strong despite the challenges 23 Capital faced. Indeed, 23 Capital has been the only casualty in a sector that immediately kicked back into gear once football leagues and competitions restarted in May, June and July.

On June 29, English Premier League club Southampton struck an agreement with MSD UK Holdings Limited, a subsidiary of technology billionaire Michael Dell’s investment firm MSD Partners and a newcomer to football finance. Industry insiders say MSD is providing a credit facility of roughly £80m to the club at an interest rate of between nine and ten per cent – a rate considered unusually high for the sector, but representative of the risk MSD is taking.

MSD has also taken a debenture over Southampton’s assets as security for the loan, granting MSD the right to put Southampton into administration and recover its losses should the club fail to keep up repayments.

On July 29, fellow Premier League club Wolverhampton Wanderers struck an agreement with Australian investment bank Macquarie – a leading lender in the sector – which provides Wolves with up to £50m in credit. The credit facility is secured against the club’s broadcast income from February 2022 to January 2023 meaning that, should Wolves be unable to pay, Macquarie can reclaim the amount owed from Premier League broadcast rights payments received by Wolves during that period.

In addition, Leicester City (Macquarie), Sheffield United (Macquarie), Everton (Metro Bank; Rights and Media Funding), West Ham United (Rights and Media Funding), Watford (Barclays) and Derby County (MSD UK) have all borrowed against future broadcast rights income since professional football restarted.

This form of ‘receivables finance’ was a common arrangement before Covid-19. Clubs borrow large amounts at the beginning of a season to fund transfers and use broadcast rights payments staggered across the season to repay the loan(s).

23 Capital were also active in this market – the €100m plus loan to Benfica was secured against broadcast rights payments, while a £25m loan provided to Watford in 2018 was repaid with media rights fees received by the club.

For many clubs across Europe, the prevalence of borrowing money against receivables like broadcast rights, future transfer income, commercial income and even season ticket income means that it has almost become a prerequisite for clubs outside of Europe’s financial elite to be competitive in the transfer market.

As evidenced by the Premier League clubs borrowing against receivables this summer, it is mid-table clubs that are keenest to gain access to upfront finance in the top tier of English football. This is either to fund player acquisitions for the upcoming season or, in some cases, to protect against top six clubs taking advantage of tough economic circumstances and poaching players for less than market value.

“If clubs don’t invest in players, they increase the risk of relegation which in turn adds to their risk profile,” says Maguire. “They are between the frying pan and the fire. If they invest, they’re going to have to borrow money unless they have owners prepared to underwrite that investment, and many owners might be asset rich but cash poor following the pandemic.”

Approved lenders
This practice has continued unabated post-shutdown, but both clubs and lenders are at greater risk due to the uncertainty surrounding a second wave of Covid-19 in Europe as well as a reduction in overall revenues at clubs.

Paul Tagg, senior director at Shawbrook Bank, has been active in the football finance sector since 2018, primarily funding transfers between English clubs. He told SportBusiness that while club demand for upfront cash has increased, the cost of borrowing has also increased due to increased risk for lenders.

“There are now greater pressures on financial stability given gate receipts are effectively zero and even broadcast rights income has been impacted,” Tagg said.

He continued: “We have seen an increase in inquiries, particularly since the transfer window has re-opened, and there appears to be plenty of transactions being completed. The shifting risks and fluctuating availability and cost of liquidity, particularly for non-bank lenders, has altered the dynamics of the market, including price. I suspect the range of pricing in the market has widened.”

For Premier League and English Football League-approved lenders like Shawbrook and Close Brothers, the risk has only slightly increased, if at all. To be a Premier League-approved lender, a company must be a deposit-taker in the UK – i.e. it must function as a bank, as opposed to specialist lenders such as 23 Capital, MSD UK or Rights and Media Funding.

Being an approved lender grants that entity a claim to being a ‘football creditor’ – meaning if a club it has loaned money to goes into administration, that entity is at the front of the queue alongside players, staff and other football clubs to claim what they are owed in full.

This provided an extra layer of security for Close Brothers, enabling them to continue lending money throughout a crisis period without taking on greater risk.

“We don’t think risk has increased for us because the way we structure deals is quite robust from a credit point of view,” Price says. “Other funders don’t see it that way because they definitely take more risks.”

Close Brothers will lend no more than the value of a Premier League parachute payment – around £40m – to a club in any given season. This ensures the borrowing club has the means to repay the loan even if it is relegated from the league.

“Close Brothers have been great and have stuck with the business,” Price says. “A lot of my competitors pulled out of the market during lockdown, at a time when a lot of clubs were starting to experience cashflow problems.”

NCF and Close Brothers provided over £50m worth of financing to English clubs throughout the shutdown of professional sport, much of which involved providing upfront cash to clubs secured against outstanding transfer instalments.

“Our deals are done at an interest rate of between 5.5 per cent and nine per cent,” Price says. “There are not many deals at nine and not many deals at five and a half, but plenty of deals at six and seven per cent, including our fee. For other lenders, that fee fluctuates depending on risk. Ours doesn’t.”

No sign of decline
Covid-19 may have delivered a sharp, unpleasant jolt to football and its financiers – as evidenced by 23 Capital’s winding down – but the sector looks set to grow in the coming years.

Football financiers remain upbeat about the future of the sector and believe that the part- and non-payment of broadcast rights from rights-holders to clubs this summer shouldn’t overshadow almost two decades of near-perfect performance.

“As a form of lending these structures will remain robust, accessible and relevant to the financial requirements of a football club,” says Tom Sheldon, senior partner at sports advisory firm Keith Harris & Partners and former head of high street bank Santander’s football finance department.

“From a credit perspective, receivables-backed financing structures in football have demonstrated a very strong track record in terms of loan performance. I’m not aware of a single default or impairment on contracted payments due under a player transfer deal.”

Sheldon cited the consistent commercial performance of top level of professional football and the introduction of Financial Fair Play – suspended for the 2020-21 season but otherwise still active – as strong indicators that, Covid-19 aside, football clubs will be good for the money they owe.

“Covid-19 has undoubtedly had an unprecedented impact upon the game, but it represents an exogenous shock to the system rather than market failure within the industry,” Sheldon says.

“Significant short-term challenges lie ahead but as the game returns to stadiums and screens I believe the long-term outlook for the market remains healthy. The availability of capital through relevant funding structures, including receivables financing, will be critical to help clubs navigate the present environment and secure future growth.”

Having been involved in financing transfers since the early 2000s at corporate bank Investec, it’s hard to imagine Traub will remain on the fringes of football finance for long given current market conditions. The FT reported that he will continue as a football financier under the 23 Capital name, focusing purely on providing capital to European football clubs.

As for the investors, banks, funds and holdings that provide capital for boutique lenders to distribute across the football industry, there will always be someone willing to provide credit to an experienced hand in the business.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Tue Sep 15, 2020 4:08 pm

The American grip on European football appears to be growing, here is news that Parma look to be the latest acquisition (reports in the last 24 have linked Burnley, Southampton and West Ham with American bidders) - from the Financial Times

Parma football club poised for sale to America’s Krause family
SARA GERMANO SEPTEMBER 14, 2020

The US billionaire Krause family is nearing an agreement to acquire a majority stake in Italian football club Parma, in a move that would make it the latest American investor in Serie A.

A deal valuing the club at more than €100m could be reached by the end of the week, according to people briefed on the matter.

The Krause family would control up to 60 per cent of the group after eclipsing a bid by a Qatari investor, the people said.

Existing investors, including Italian billionaire Guido Barilla of the eponymous pasta brand, would retain a stake for at least five years, according to one of the people.

The Krause family’s attempt to buy Parma follows last month’s €591m acquisition of AS Roma by Texan billionaire Dan Friedkin and last year’s purchase of ACF Fiorentina for an undisclosed sum by New York media mogul Rocco Commisso.

Clubs in Serie A, Italy’s top football league, have drawn investments from across the globe in recent years.

Chinese retail and media conglomerate Suning Holdings paid €270m for a majority stake in Inter Milan in 2016.

AC Milan was acquired by Chinese businessman Yonghong Li for €740m in 2017 but he lost control to Elliott Management in 2018 after defaulting on more than €300m in high-interest loans from the US hedge fund.

Parma was once among Italy’s top clubs, which under the ownership of dairy company Parmalat in the 1990s won three major European titles having spent heavily on star players including Argentina’s Hernán Crespo, Bulgaria’s Hristo Stoichkov and France’s Lilian Thuram.

After Parmalat collapsed in 2003 following a huge financial fraud, the club was reformed under new management to preserve its Serie A status. But in 2015 Parma fell into insolvency under the weight of debts and a new corruption scandal, leading to its relegation to the fourth division of Italian football.

Over recent seasons, Parma achieved three successive promotions and returned to Serie A in 2018.

The Krause Group, which reported $2.8bn in revenues in 2019, already owns lower-tier US football club the Des Moines Menace.

The family built its fortune on the Kum & Go convenience store chain in the US Midwest, which boasts 400 petrol and snack stations in 11 states, as well as their local petrol transport service Solar Transport. In recent years it has expanded its holdings to include two wineries in the Italian region of Piedmont.

The Krause Group did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The proposed takeover of Parma comes as a number of private equity groups have submitted bids to acquire a minority stake in Serie A, seeking a rare opportunity to invest in one of Europe’s biggest leagues.

CVC Capital Partners has teamed up with Advent International and Italian investment fund Fondo FSI, offering €1.3bn to acquire 10 per cent in a new company that would manage Serie A’s broadcasting rights, its international trademark and commercial development. They face a rival bid from Bain Capital, which has offered a slightly higher sum, according to people familiar with the bids.

It remains unclear whether enough clubs support a proposal to bring in outside investors, rather than launching the new media company through other means such as a debt deal that would allow them to maintain control of commercial affairs.

Italian football’s finances are under pressure because of the coronavirus pandemic, which is preventing fans from entering stadiums and prompting broadcasters to seek rebates to compensate for the lack of action during this year’s lockdown.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Tue Sep 15, 2020 4:13 pm

You could also wonder if the Geopolitical stand-off between China and America is being played out in Italy with it's football clubs right at the centre of it (like so much else in Italy)

https://twitter.com/Prof_Chadwick/statu ... 2871741443

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Tue Sep 15, 2020 4:43 pm

Remember how Sky built a huge multi-billion pound business off of the back of Premier League exclusivity (and the enormous riches it brought to the Premier League) well NBC are now trying to do the same with their Premium service Peacock - which may just be good news for the Premier League in the next cycle

https://www.sportbusiness.com/2020/09/p ... ming-wars/

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Tue Sep 15, 2020 7:41 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Mon Sep 14, 2020 11:26 pm
This is being seen in some quarters as the government still pressing ahead with an October return for spectators in some form in elite football - I see it as a well constructed piece that allows for any outcome the government decides

https://twitter.com/Ollie_Bayliss/statu ... 5859024897
The EFL is getting panicky now over the return of fans - as this Guardian report shows


EFL enters 'critical' 48 hours in push to get crowds and avoid financial disaster
League to continue with pilot events capped at 1,000 fans
Monthly loss of about £22m expected without spectators
Paul MacInnes - Tue 15 Sep 2020 18.42 BST Last modified on Tue 15 Sep 2020 18.55 BST

Pressure is growing on the government to allow the return of fans to live football, with a leaked letter from the EFL describing the next 48 hours as “critical” in an attempt to stave off financial disaster for clubs.

Plans for a partial return of crowds from 1 October, in all sports, have been put on hold following the recent growth in coronavirus cases across England. But EFL clubs, whose revenues are dependent on getting people through turnstiles, are to continue with pilots this weekend, capped at 1,000 fans, in the hope that the original plans can be enacted.

Brian Barwick, chairman of the National League and former Football Association chief executive, has also called on government to decide in favour of fans returning, with the beginning of its season set for 3 October in the hope that supporters could attend.

The issue is money, with the EFL projecting a £200m loss across its three divisions if fans cannot return this season, roughly £22m per month over the course of the season.

In a letter sent to clubs on Tuesday the EFL’s head of policy, John Nagle, encouraged them to lobby for a reopening, arguing that the necessary procedures have been undertaken to make it safe to do so. “From our various political channels, we now understand that the next 48 hours are likely to be critical in determining the direction of travel on this issue,” Nagle wrote.

A select number of pilot matches are to be a part of this process. A spokesperson for the EFL said the league remained in discussions over the pilot programme, “which may include a limited number of further pilot matches during September with capacity limited to 1,000”.

The spokesperson said: “The league is clear in its view that social distancing can be applied safely in football stadia and that having crowds at matches is an absolutely essential part of helping to protect club finances, which remain under extreme pressure.”

Barwick said in his appeal for a reopening: “The National League restart depends upon crowds being allowed back in stadiums as live attendance is our clubs’ largest source of income. The government urgently needs to set out a credible pathway for the safe return of supporters, and to ensure our football clubs can continue to function, and to perform their significant role in the sporting life of the country.”

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Wed Sep 16, 2020 12:43 am

the Guardian are reporting of a 2nd bid for West Ham - apparently turned down - and the price is really quite strange for a club that doesn't own it's own stadium and is as yet unable to raise season tickets to a price where the revenue matches the size of the ground they do use

US consortium see second £400m West Ham offer rejected but plan third bid
- Gold and Sullivan rejected second offer after initial £350m bid
- Consortium exploring possibility of buying the London Stadium

Jacob Steinberg - Tue 15 Sep 2020 22.30 BST Last modified on Tue 15 Sep 2020 23.33 BST

The American consortium proposing a takeover of West Ham were rebuffed for a second time after following up their first approach with a £400m offer at the end of last month.

It is understood the would-be buyers, who are involved in US sport, were not disheartened after failing with an opening offer of £350m at the start of August. The group remain interested in buying West Ham, who are owned by David Gold and David Sullivan, and have made their intentions clear by returning with a higher offer.

Their second bid was not enough to tempt West Ham into a sale. Although Sullivan and Gold have seen their standing with supporters fall since the move to the London Stadium in 2016, it will take a much higher price to convince them to alter their stance.

The bidders have entered a cooling-off period and plan to monitor developments before making a fresh bid in the next month. A source has told the Guardian that the group has drafted a seven-year business plan to improve the club’s finances. West Ham, who pay £2.5m a year to rent their ground, made a pre-tax loss of £28.8m in the last financial year and have encountered difficulties because of Covid-19.

The consortium, who are exploring the possibility of buying the London Stadium, acknowledge that completing a takeover will be hard. An obvious complication is that the deal under which West Ham moved to the London Stadium includes an agreement that Sullivan and Gold will have to pay a 20% penalty to the taxpayer if the club is sold for more than £300m before March 2023. The bidders accept that Sullivan and Gold, who bought the club in 2010, will want a return on their investment.

But the bidders believe that Gold, Sullivan and Karren Brady, the club’s vice-chair, could be under greater pressure if West Ham’s results are poor in the next month. The trio encountered anti-board protests from supporters earlier this year and were strongly criticised following the recent sale of Grady Diangana to West Bromwich Albion.

West Ham’s board promised they would challenge at the top of the Premier League after leaving Upton Park. They have made no signings since narrowly avoiding relegation last season and face a daunting run of Premier League fixtures after losing 2-0 to Newcastle in their opening game. Their next six games are against Arsenal, Wolves, Leicester, Tottenham, Manchester City and Liverpool.

London Stadium sources have questioned the strength of the group’s interest and pointed out that Premier League clubs receive inquiries on a regular basis. Club sources have also said the group has not supplied proof of funding.

The bidders insist their interest is genuine. The value of their first offer was based on the proposed £300m takeover of Newcastle by a Saudi Arabian-led consortium, plus an extra £50m because of West Ham’s London location. The offer was rebuffed by Sullivan, who owns a majority shareholding of 51.5%.

Sullivan made it clear he was not interested in a sale and raised the possibility of the bidders investing in a minority stake but the consortium will consider a partial sale only in return for a controlling interest.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Wed Sep 16, 2020 12:59 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Wed Sep 16, 2020 12:43 am
the Guardian are reporting of a 2nd bid for West Ham - apparently turned down - and the price is really quite strange for a club that doesn't own it's own stadium and is as yet unable to raise season tickets to a price where the revenue matches the size of the ground they do use

US consortium see second £400m West Ham offer rejected but plan third bid
- Gold and Sullivan rejected second offer after initial £350m bid
- Consortium exploring possibility of buying the London Stadium

Jacob Steinberg - Tue 15 Sep 2020 22.30 BST Last modified on Tue 15 Sep 2020 23.33 BST
seems I am not the only one looking at that West Ham bid and going "how much?!"

https://twitter.com/vysyble/status/1306157607493738501

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Wed Sep 16, 2020 5:37 pm

I have already posted about this. but now the English media are finally catching on - from the Telegraph

Premier League clubs fear rebate from overseas broadcasters if matches continue to be moved
JEREMY WILSON SEPTEMBER 16, 2020

Premier League clubs fear that continuing the September model of moving matches for television could leave themselves open to rebate claims from overseas companies, but are ready to consider home season-ticket only broadcast access.

With clubs increasingly resigned to fans only returning in significant numbers in late October or November at the very earliest, attention has turned to how they will manage broadcast arrangements beyond the end of September.

Although the September model has allowed every match to be broadcast domestically, with some on free-to-air television, there is specific concern that continuing to move matches to later weekend time slots and Monday evenings could upset broadcasters in other parts of the world.

The three rounds of fixtures in September, for example, have meant broadcasting additional matches on a Monday evening rather than a Saturday or Sunday afternoon.

Evening matches, however, have significantly less value across Asia, especially on a weeknight. In Beijing, for example, the kick-off period between noon and 3pm on a Saturday or Sunday equates to a very watchable late evening weekend time of between 8pm and 11pm.

Late afternoon or evening weekend kick-offs fall after midnight and that problem is then further exacerbated during the week when people are working. That makes the current pattern of a Monday night double header of matches at 6pm and 8.15pm inaccessible to most Asian fans, when the respective kick-off times in Tokyo, for example, would be 2am and 4.15am on a Tuesday morning.

According to several sources, there is concern that a lengthy continuation of the current scheduling pattern might leave the league vulnerable to issues with some of their international broadcast partners.

The balancing act is further complicated by an acceptance that the domestic fanbase who have paid out for their season-tickets really should be provided with some broadcast access while supporters cannot attend matches.

Several clubs have privately told Telegraph Sport that they are ready to explore options if fans still cannot attend into October but there would be reluctance to open every match to millions of viewers. This could have other knock-on implications on the value of broadcast deals that have already been agreed and clubs are determined not to leave themselves open to the double financial whammy of further TV rebates at the same time as all the lost income from absent fans.

The Premier League is in talks with clubs over its strategy beyond October and is also continuing to lobby the Government for the return of fans according to the protocols that have been drawn up by Sports Ground Safety Authority, which would allow between 25 per cent and 30 per cent of capacity.

“In consultation with all relevant stakeholders, the Premier League is considering appropriate arrangements for matches which will take place after 1 October,” said a spokesperson.

“The Premier League is working on a step-by-step approach, while monitoring the developments regarding the League’s number one priority of getting fans back into full stadia as soon as possible, with safety always being our priority.”

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Wed Sep 16, 2020 5:56 pm

FIFA has put a number on the cost to the global football economy from Covid so far - from the Guardian


'It’s a huge number': Fifa believes football has lost £11.1bn to Covid
- Figure ‘covers the football economy in its entirety’
- European clubs have lost most but Latin America badly affected

Paul MacInnes - Wed 16 Sep 2020 12.26 BST Last modified on Wed 16 Sep 2020 14.33 BST

Football across the world lost $14.4bn (£11.1bn) during the coronavirus crisis, analysis conducted by Fifa suggests. The governing body of the global game has revealed that 150 of its 211 member associations have applied for emergency Covid grants, with one executive describing the situation as “impossible” for Fifa to mitigate alone.

The effect of the pandemic is estimated to have wiped $14.4bn from club and international football, even with restarts taken into account. “It’s a huge number and it covers the football economy in its entirety,” said Olli Rehn, the chairman of the Fifa Covid-19 relief plan steering committee. “It cannot be an exact figure, but it is an estimate of losses in 211 member associations.”

Fifa estimates that the club game generates $40-45bn annually. Rehn says that whereas European clubs have lost the most money in total, the relative losses incurred elsewhere are much greater, with Latin America and Brazil in particular seriously affected. These estimates are Fifa’s baseline scenario.

“If you look at the breakdown of losses in absolute and relative terms, European clubs and member associations were most impacted in absolute figures,” he said. “But relatively those outside Europe have struggled more, especially in Latin America, mainly as a result of revenue mix and season timing. Smaller countries that are dependent on Fifa will actually be hit least.”

Rehn, a former European commissioner and head of the bank of Finland, said: “The loss under any scenario was too great for Fifa to mitigate alone. We are working very intensively with confederations to improve the situation.”

This summer Fifa announced a $1.5bn programme of grants and loans designed to help its members. Each association was entitled to $1.5m in grants, with a third of that figure ringfenced for the development of the women’s game.

Rehn said the majority of associations had applied for the women’s game grants, which he insisted would be subject to strict regulations that would stop the money being spent on other purposes. “Conditions are constructed so that you cannot use it, for example, for building new pitches,” he said. “Fifa’s funding flows are transparent. All beneficiaries have to account for ever single cent to auditors … We have learned our lesson and we are improving our actions.”

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Wed Sep 16, 2020 6:18 pm

Interesting opinion piece from SportsProMedia - suggesting that it is likely that more investors are looking to move into football (this article covers two stories that I posted last week) - it certainly seems to be what we are witnessing

Jamie Gardner | Capital and control will be critical for club soccer’s long-term survival
A soccer finance expert believes clubs can expect offers of outside investment to increase in the wake of Covid-19, with newly introduced or proposed cost controls making them a more attractive bet. Press Association's chief sports reporter considers whether that mix of fresh capital and financial restraint is vital for clubs' long-term survival.

Posted: September 16 2020 By: Jamie Gardner

Premier League chief executive Richard Masters said this month that his clubs lost UK£700 million due to the disruption caused to the 2019-20 season, including UK£330 million in rebates to broadcasters.

The European Club Association (ECA) reports clubs in the top 20 divisions on the continent will lose a combined €4 billion over 2019-20 and 2020-21, a figure which would have almost doubled if major leagues and the European competitions had not largely been completed.

ECA chairman Andrea Agnelli said on 8th September that clubs would lose around UK£520 million in Uefa prize money because of rebates to broadcasters over the delays and changes of format to the Champions League and Europa League.

The pandemic has acted as an accelerant to the problems facing English Football League (EFL) clubs, with severe restrictions on crowds set to be in place at least until the end of 2020, if not far beyond, decimating their balance sheets.

Yet despite all that, Ian Clayden, the head of professional sports at accountancy firm BDO, believes cost controls such as the salary caps in League One and League Two are more likely to have investors running towards, rather than away from, the game.

‘It is folly to expect the difficulties faced in 2020 to deter investors,’ he wrote in the foreword to BDO's annual survey of football finance directors. ‘In fact, expect the opposite.’

He continued. ‘If anticipated and necessary financial adjustments promote sustainability (and indeed profitability), a new balance of central control with enhanced global digital opportunities will excite institutional and profile-building investors alike.

‘Anecdotally, we can assure you that new investors are waiting in the wing and they have growth capital to invest. However, as always in football, the completion of transactions will depend on whether potential sellers are willing to walk away from sunk costs, or, alternatively, whether buyers will relax their appetite for a bargain and bridge the gap a little. In reality, both are probably needed to some extent.

‘In summary then, as always, we find ourselves in a period of transition in football. Accelerated transition - and regrettably for some, a painful transition - but ultimately, where rising player costs have largely consumed increases in revenues for some time, an inevitable transition. However, if we fast-forward to a time of unrestricted attendances, the challenges to be overcome are not demand side, and supply side adjustments are in football's control.’

The effectiveness of the measures brought in to keep the game running will be key to securing that investment clubs need for their long-term survival.

The BDO report heard from finance directors at 42 clubs across England's top four leagues. Some 43 per cent reported they had been approached by would-be investors within the last 12 months, with nearly half of the clubs reporting those approaches had come since the UK's national lockdown began in March.

More than a quarter of the approaches were from global institutional investors, with US private equity taking a particularly keen interest in the sport, often forming consortia with high net worth individuals, industry specialists and other sports franchises.

The report found half of the directors were concerned to some degree about the health of their club's books as a consequence of Covid-19, with 45 per cent saying their finances were 'in need of attention' - up from 21 per cent compared to the 2019 edition of the survey.

A further five per cent said their club's finances were of 'grave concern', though this was consistent with the previous two years.

Agnelli seemed surprised when he addressed the media on 8th September that his opening address to ECA members earlier that day had been described as ‘bleak'. But it was hard to view it any other way, with ECA chief executive Charlie Marshall putting further detail around the estimated €4 billion losses.

"We’re looking at the dip in broadcasting income, sponsorship income, the total cessation largely of matchday income and then the other fourth and famous revenue stream is merchandising," he told reporters.

"What you tend to find is that it is the bigger clubs which suffer almost disproportionately because as a proportion of their income the merchandising and the sponsorship is relatively high.

"Broadcasting income, whilst not completely even, is actually more equitably spread largely than those other forms of income. So you do find those clubs who have more proportional diversification of revenues do tend to suffer more but all clubs in all leagues are suffering."

Agnelli said that while the quantitative losses were greater at bigger clubs, smaller clubs stood to lose more in relative terms. In England, and in Europe more widely, the finances of football are at a crossroads, hence Agnelli's willingness to "stall" Champions League reforms which he has previously described as being urgently needed.

The effectiveness of the measures brought in to keep the game running will be key to securing that investment clubs need for their long-term survival.

Jamie Gardner is the chief sports reporter at the Press Association, an official SportsPro media partner. Follow him on Twitter @PAJamieGardner.

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

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Paul Waine » Wed Sep 16, 2020 6:47 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Tue Sep 15, 2020 12:38 am
Didn't know this little factoid - apparently Mike Garlick and Andy Holt were in the same year/class at Burnley Grammar both running clubs the proper way, custodians trying to make them pay their own way

https://twitter.com/AndyhHolt/status/13 ... 2920482818
Hi Chester, that is a fascinating fact. I wonder whether it is, in part, the inspiration for UCFB. I wonder how many other football club owners were at school together? Does it make Burnley the equivalent of Windsor - there's a school in Windsor called Eton, for those that didn't know? ;)

More importantly, I want to congratulate you, again, for all these excellent mmt posts. I find them very informative. The financing deals are a little scary - certainly for anyone who is cautious with their money. Place those alongside the "investor" stories (whether WHU, Clarets or any others) and I get the sense that there's a lot of appetite to be part of the "televised sport money machine" - my choice of words, though I can imagine it captures the essence of excited discussions in many hedge funds etc.

I was in the Lake District a few weeks back. I discovered the "magic money tree" one afternoon walking around Derwentwater. I've not posted a pic before. I might try and see whether I can add this to my "technology skills/experience."

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Wed Sep 16, 2020 9:38 pm

The EFL are still trying to ramp the pressure up on th Premier League to bail them out - from the Guardian

Football League rings alarm for Premier League to help save clubs from ruin
- EFL says time running out to prevent clubs going bankrupt
- Proposals being discussed with Premier League for financial aid
Paul MacInnes Wed 16 Sep 2020 18.51 BST Last modified on Wed 16 Sep 2020 21.23 BST

The Football League believes it is running out of time to secure a bailout that would prevent some of its 72 clubs from going bankrupt. On the day discussions with the government regarding the return of fans to stadiums failed to reach a conclusion, the EFL is facing up to the prospect of unsustainable losses across its three divisions unless long-standing discussions with the Premier League over financial assistance can come to fruition.

The two parties have spoken weekly since football went into lockdown in March. The chairman of the EFL, Rick Parry, made clear his demands in the spring, calculating a £250m black hole in finances if crowds were unable to return. The debate has long since been about whether it is the Premier League’s responsibility to plug that gap.

A number of proposals have been discussed, including the redistribution of parachute payments unused by West Brom and Fulham after being promoted this summer to the Premier League. That idea was dismissed and the Premier League is understood to be considering a new series of proposals from the EFL.

Sources close to the discussions suggest a settlement is necessary in a matter of weeks if lower-league clubs, and perhaps even some Championship sides, are to avoid administration. The EFL is increasingly reliant on the intercession of government, however, if that is to happen.

The EFL has announced eight pilot matches will take place this weekend, conforming to guidance that limits capacity to 1,000 people. Plans to also host fans at Luton’s Championship fixture against Derby, were abandoned after the club said it would not have enough time to make the requisite preparations.

It remains unclear whether these pilots will help lead to a permanent return of supporters. In what will feel like a pincer movement for clubs, the immediate prospects of limited-capacity crowds were receding after Wednesday’s round of government talks. Governing bodies from across sport were included, but it is understood there was no debate on what would be necessary in order to hit the government’s previous ambition of an 1 October return, a plan under review after the recent rise in coronavirus cases.

In a joint statement the bodies in attendance at the meeting said: “We conveyed to the secretary of state the very serious financial situation now facing our sports, clubs and venues and that we believe we can stage events safely. It is clear that if fans cannot return soon that there will be very serious economic implications across our sporting sector.”

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Thu Sep 17, 2020 12:43 pm

The EFL are still pushing ahead with their we need financial assistance message - the Rick Parry is (as he is want) being a bit more considered in his message - I personally think that the Premier League will wait until after October the 12th (transfer deadline in England and there are still pickings to be had on the carcass) before agreeing to anything - this is from the BBC this morning

EFL chairman Rick Parry says it is not inevitable football clubs will fold in the new year
Last updated 2 hours ago.

It is not inevitable that English Football League clubs will fold as a result of the coronavirus pandemic but a financial solution is needed quickly to "keep every single one of them alive", says EFL chairman Rick Parry.

On Wednesday, BBC Sport was told that clubs will struggle to stay afloat beyond Christmas if there is a delay to the wider return of fans to stadiums.

Parry said EFL clubs are collectively "haemorrhaging" £25m a month and that rescue packages are urgently needed to "secure the future of our clubs".

Speaking to BBC Radio 4's Today Programme, he added: "We will do our utmost to make sure [clubs going out of business] doesn't happen, we don't regard it as inevitable.

"The challenges are enormous, and we're working literally night and day on trying to secure financial rescue packages for the short term, and longer term I've been talking on that topic pretty much non-stop since May.

"We do need rescue packages and we're hoping that by securing rescue packages, we can secure the future of our clubs. Our aim is to keep every single one of them alive if at all possible."

Up to 1,000 fans will be allowed to attend eight EFL games this weekend as part of the government's crowd pilots, while discussions between the EFL and the government about a return for more supporters from 1 October continue.

Football has been played behind closed doors since its return following the coronavirus lockdown.

Discussions are taking place about what financial assistance the Premier League might provide, with a request having been lodged for around £200m.

However, Parry said the top flight was not their only hope of help.

"The Premier League are certainly one of the parties that we are talking to, but not exclusively," he said.

"We haven't put all of our eggs in one basket, our message is clear, the amounts that we need have been spelled out with clarity and with simplicity, but we need solutions really very quickly.

"This isn't a matter of months away, this is a matter of we need solutions in the next few weeks."

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Thu Sep 17, 2020 12:54 pm

That didn't take too long - The Premier League has announced a new Chinese TV Partner for the current season only - from the Financial Times

Premier League secures 1-year China broadcast deal with Tencent
MURAD AHMED SEPTEMBER 17, 2020

The English Premier League has secured a new broadcast deal with Tencent in China, moving quickly to replace its previous $700m contract in the country that was abruptly ended in a dispute triggered by the pandemic.

English football’s top tier agreed the one-year digital streaming deal with the Chinese internet giant on Thursday, according to people familiar with the talks, after scrambling to find a new broadcast partner in the country over the past two weeks.

The first round of this season’s matches, which began on Saturday, had been taken off air in one of the competition’s largest television markets after the league terminated a three-year contract with PPTV, a streaming service owned by Chinese retail conglomerate Suning, that was due to expire in 2022.

The replacement deal with Tencent, which was approved unanimously by the league’s 20 member clubs, runs until the end of the season and includes a fee, as well as a revenue-sharing agreement with the Premier League based on subscriber numbers. But it is worth less than the amount PPTV was due to pay this season, according to people with direct knowledge of the terms.

Clubs have been reassured by Premier League chief executive Richard Masters that they will not be out of pocket from the new arrangements, partly because PPTV had already paid for half of its $700m contract, the people said.

PPTV withheld an instalment due to the Premier League in March, at a time when matches were postponed because of the pandemic.

While the Premier League has agreed rebates worth £330m with some of its broadcast partners to compensate for the three-month break during lockdown, it refused to renegotiate the value of its deal for this season as PPTV wanted, according to people with knowledge of the talks.

Tencent at present has 114m video subscribers and a number of deals with sports groups around the world, including a five-year $1.5bn arrangement with the National Basketball Association in North America.

The Premier League will also seek additional revenues by offering broadcasters in China the right to show “free-to-air” matches and short clips this season. It will also begin the search for a long-term broadcast partner in the country, aiming for a four-year deal starting in 2021.

The Tencent deal comes as the league scrambles to limit pandemic-related losses, which have already caused a revenue shortfall worth £850m for last season. A further £570m drop in revenues is expected this season from the expected loss of match-day income. Fans are not expected to be able to return to stadiums before next month at the earliest.

The league’s previous deal in China was among its most lucrative overseas agreements, alongside contracts with US broadcaster NBC worth $1bn over six years and Qatar-based beIN Sports, which has paid £1.3bn for rights to screen Premier League matches in the Middle East since 2015.

Television contracts have powered the Premier League’s growth over the past two decades, making it the world’s biggest football league in terms of revenues and global viewership.

Last year, the Premier League said it would net £4.2bn from the sale of international rights for the next three seasons to 2022, compared with £3.2bn for the three preceding years.

Mr Masters said in a statement on Thursday: “We and our clubs have an extremely passionate fan base in China and are looking forward to working with the team at Tencent.”

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Thu Sep 17, 2020 1:05 pm

the Premier League's official statement on that China TV deal - it is likely to be on significantly reduced terms which will be used by PPTV/Suning to support their case in their rumoured legal proceedings

Premier League agrees partnership in China with Tencent Sports
17 Sep 2020

Premier League Shareholders have today unanimously agreed a partnership with China’s leading digital sports media platform Tencent Sports, which will bring Premier League action to fans in China for the remainder of the 2020/21 season.

From Saturday 19 September, supporters in China will be able to watch all 372 remaining Premier League matches live and follow the latest updates and news about their favourite clubs and players via Tencent’s digital platforms, including WeChat, QQ.com, Tencent Video, Penguin Live App, Tencent News App, Tencent Sports App and Kan Dian.

Tencent will make more than half of all matches available for free to the millions of Premier League fans in China, with the remaining fixtures available on Tencent Sports' membership service.

Clubs to share in-match clips
Through the partnership, the Premier League will launch an official Penguin Channel across Tencent's content platforms, where fans will enjoy a daily content mix of videos and features about the Premier League competition, its clubs and players.

In addition, for the first time globally, Premier League clubs will be able to share short clips during matches to engage directly with their supporters in China and enhance the Tencent partnership.

Passionate fans in China
Premier League Chief Executive Richard Masters said: "We are excited to have agreed this partnership with Tencent ensuring our supporters in China can enjoy following Premier League action throughout this season.

"We and our clubs have an extremely passionate fanbase in China and are looking forward to working with the team at Tencent to engage with fans in new ways over the coming season."

'Bringing the drama'
Tencent Sports General Manager Ewell Zhao said: "The Premier League is one of the world's most popular sports competitions and has many fans in China.

"In collaboration with the Premier League, Tencent Sports hopes to leverage its platforms and technology to bring the drama of Premier League matches to fans and share with them the passion and excitement of football."

The Premier League will continue to explore opportunities for free-to-air broadcast coverage in China for the 2020/21 season.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Thu Sep 17, 2020 1:08 pm

Simon Chadwick is (inevitably) looking at the bigger China/Premier League/UK Gov East/West Geo-political picture

https://twitter.com/Prof_Chadwick/statu ... 7728663554

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Thu Sep 17, 2020 1:26 pm

The Football Today Podcast looks at the growing close relationships between super agents and networks in football - including Jorge Mendes and Wolves

https://www.footballtodaypodcast.com/po ... and-wolves

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Thu Sep 17, 2020 1:35 pm

If you ever need convincing that finance is possibly the biggest single topic in football these days, then look at this non-story which is doing the rounds - from the Mail

Billionaire Mikhail Prokhorov DENIES Russian reports that he is launching a takeover bid for Manchester United... with former Brooklyn Nets owner not plotting imminent return to sports ownership
- Reports in Russia said billionaire Mikhail Prokhorov wanted Manchester United
- Sportsmail has been told the former Brooklyn Nets owner firmly denies that
- Prokhorov has a net worth of £8.7billion having been valued this year by Forbes
- Manchester United have been largely owned by the Glazer family since 2003
By NATHAN SALT FOR MAILONLINE

PUBLISHED: 12:36, 17 September 2020 | UPDATED: 13:01, 17 September 2020

Russian billionaire Mikhail Prokhorov firmly denies he is planning a takeover bid of Manchester United, sources have told Sportsmail.

Reports in Russia on Wednesday had suggested the former Brooklyn Nets NBA team owner, who is valued by Forbes as having a net worth of $11.3billion (£8.7bn), was targeting a return to sports ownership.

Sportsmail has learned that is not the case and Prokhorov has no immediate plans to make a return.

Prokhorov, 55, made a large portion of his fortune from selling his stake in metals giant Norilsk Nickel in 2008.

He has stakes in Russian power, insurance and banking sectors and also gained prominence when running against Vladimir Putin in Russia's 2012 presidential race.

Prokhorov's time as a sports owner came to an end in 2018 when he sold his 49 per cent stake in NBA franchise Brooklyn Nets in a $2.3bn deal to Chinese billionaire Joseph Tsai.

Manchester United have been owned by the Glazer family since their buyout of existing shareholders between 2003-05.

Supporters have protested against their ownership of the Glazer family for years now but with the club valued at close to £3bn by Forbes, potential owners have found a. takeover bid increasingly difficult to finance.

Prokhorov, who invested heavily into the Nets before selling his share, is an individual who does have the wealth to fund such a deal but, for now, he has firmly denied any interest in a return to sports ownership.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Incidently Manchester United are due to report year ends earnings to the New York Stok Exchange in the next week - which will give us the clearest picture yet of the financial strife in the Premier League (and take us back to the source of this thread)

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Thu Sep 17, 2020 10:57 pm

The Premier League are starting to play hardball with the EFL over a bailout according to this report in the Mail - if it is to believed you have to wonder where that leaves parachute payments and more importantly the competitiveness of newly promoted teams

Premier League clubs say they will provide financial support to the EFL... but only if the Championship introduces a player wage cap
- Premier League clubs are demanding the Championship introduce a wage cap
- The EFL is seeking a rescue package of around £200million after losses this year
- Top flight teams are reluctant to have a bailout go towards lavish player wages
By MATT HUGHES FOR THE DAILY MAIL

PUBLISHED: 22:30, 17 September 2020 | UPDATED: 22:34, 17 September 2020

Premier League clubs are demanding that the Championship introduce a wage cap before they agree to provide financial support for the EFL.

Sportsmail revealed last month that talks among the 24 Championship clubs over new wage limits had been put on hold until later this year after their failure to agree to the proposed annual cap of £18million, but it may be forced back on to their agenda.

Top flight clubs want any rescue package to be contingent on gaining support for the PL’s strategic objectives, particularly on issues such as post-Brexit immigration policy and the future calendar. Their demands also extend to having some control over smaller clubs’ spending.

West Brom, Swansea and Stoke all had wage bills of around £70m in the Championship last season and PL clubs are reluctant to provide a bailout that would immediately go on subsidising lavish wages for players.

The EFL are seeking a rescue package of around £200m to make up for projected losses in the absence of gate receipts this season, but have yet to receive any PL reassurances despite Government demands.

Last week the PL rejected the EFL’s request that it should get back Fulham’s £35m parachute payment for this season, which was returned to the top flight following the club’s promotion. Other options include a bank loan to distribute to struggling clubs.

Macclesfield were liquidated this week with £500,000 in unpaid debts, while Southend have been given six weeks to avoid the same fate by settling a tax bill of £490,000.

PL clubs are split over whether they should help the EFL, but forcing the introduction of salary caps in the Championship would suit their own interests. As well as making it more difficult for promoted clubs to survive in the PL — making the top flight even more of a closed shop — lower wages in the second tier would make it easier for clubs in the higher division to poach the best players.

The EFL support salary caps in the belief that they will promote greater sustainability and limits of £2.5m and £1.5m have been introduced in League One and League Two respectively, but the Championship clubs cannot yet reach an agreement.

The PL on Thursday agreed a new broadcast deal for China with internet giant Tencent, going some way to replacing the £564m, three-year contract with Suning that was cancelled this month.

But the new deal is only for one season, so clubs have yet to recoup initial losses of £300m.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Thu Sep 17, 2020 11:04 pm

Martin Samuel launches an impassioned defence for the money that swills around football

MARTIN SAMUEL: Money wasn't killing football, it's what made it so much fun... the next time someone begins lecturing on the obscenity of Chelsea's spending or Aubameyang's new contract, just tell them to shut up
Those crimes laid at football's door, it turns out they were signs of health and life
Money wasn't killing football, it was making football in its own sweet way
By MARTIN SAMUEL - SPORT FOR THE DAILY MAIL

PUBLISHED: 22:30, 17 September 2020 | UPDATED: 22:30, 17 September 2020

Macclesfield have gone. There are boarded-up shops and empty pubs on the way to Moss Rose, and now the football club will pass the same way.

Southend have 42 days to find the £493,000 needed to survive. Rick Parry reckons his Football League clubs require £250million to stay afloat. Can we now admit: the boom was better.

All those reckonings that were wished for are with us now. And those crimes laid at football's door — the rising wages, the enormous transfer fees, the vaunting ambition — it turns out they were signs of health, signs of life. What we have now, is our alternate reality.

Everyone's skint, everyone's frightened, yet the desperation is such that even as swathes of the country are placed in lockdown amid fear of a pandemic resurgence, it is still being argued that fans must return to stadiums or our entire sporting edifice will fall.

So the next time someone begins lecturing on the obscenity of Chelsea's spending, or Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang's new contract, or loudly explains how many nurses can be employed with Gareth Bale's salary, save your sanity and just tell them to shut up. The money spent by football was not evil. It was fun.

It brightened the day, kept the nation amused. What Manchester City paid for Kevin De Bruyne did not stop hospitals being built; it helped rejuvenate a dead part of town. The money Real Madrid lavished on Gareth Bale passed via trickle down economics to upwards of 500 football clubs across at least four continents, and counting.

All of those clubs employ people, serve communities. That money worked hard. Take one player who Tottenham bought, Paulinho from Corinthians in Brazil.

Corinthians then bought players from Cerro Porteno, Coimbra, Botafogo, Penapolense and Ponte Preta. And Cerro Porteno, from Paraguay, appear to have then recruited players from 14 different clubs. Those 14 clubs would subsequently do transfer business, too.

Get the idea? That is preferable to austerity. Money wasn't killing football. It was making football, all across the world, in its own sweet way. Not a perfect system, far from it. But better than this, which must only bring joy to those hair shirts who resented the thought of young, working class men earning like bankers.

Turns out, it wasn't so bad. Turns out Wayne Rooney signing for Derby wasn't the coming of the Apocalypse.

Before coronavirus, very rich folk still fancied an ego trip on the coat-tails of a football club. They wanted to invest, to build, to buy their way in, to have a bang for their buck. And that's good; or certainly it's better than this. Better than redundancies, closures, the tightening of belts, the grim fight for survival. And this is not the payback for football's economic incontinence either. Restaurants haven't been recruiting £100m chefs, airlines weren't paying pilots £200,000 a week, but they all as good as went skint overnight the moment customers were banned.

Football has done rather well to get this far actually, propped up by another despised entity, that it now transpires was a positive: the Premier League's inflated television deal. Everything it was said was ruining football was actually doing the opposite: television money, big transfers, the wages that attracted global talent.

These were signs of vibrancy, not decay. Those who looked forward to the day the bubble burst, well now you've got it. Not much fun, is it? Turns out depression, recession, misery and fear doesn't build hospitals, doesn't increase the gaiety of nations, doesn't deliver more nurses to the ward.

Turns out if those very rich folk are cutting back on their football clubs, they are cutting back on everything else, too: jobs, investment, ideas, ambition.

So if the day ever arrives when Manchester United do want to spend £100m on Jadon Sancho, it may be an idea to put out bunting.

For it will mean this is ending and people are ready to be daft, to be frivolous, to be ambitious, to be bold again. And, from here, perhaps be careful what you wish for. For we have seen both sides of the economic argument now: and austerity sucks.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Fri Sep 18, 2020 1:05 pm

The Telegraph with more of the demands that the Premier League are putting on the EFL before they agree to a rescue package - as the clock keeps on ticking

Premier League wants EFL to fall into line with curtailment rule before granting bailout
BEN RUMSBY SEPTEMBER 18, 2020

The Premier League wants the English Football League to fall into line with its yet-to-be-agreed curtailment rules before it approves a coronavirus bailout to lower-league clubs of up to £250 million.

Telegraph Sport has been told the condition is among several the EFL is resisting being placed on the £22 million-a-month rescue package, which chairman Rick Parry this week admitted was urgent amid fears some teams could go bust before Christmas.

As revealed by Telegraph Sport, new rules over exactly what happens in the event of an incomplete season in the professional game were not introduced before the start of the current campaign.

That is despite top-flight clubs having wanted to avoid kicking off without clear regulations in place in case Covid-19 caused football to be suspended again.

Premier League teams have still to agree how many matches should be played for a season not to be declared null and void, amid disagreement over whether it should be at the two-thirds or three-quarters mark.

Clubs also postponed a debate over curtailment back in June following a row over whether sides should be promoted or relegated if their fate had not already been decided before a campaign was called off.

That was after EFL teams voted for promotion and relegation to take place last season across its own divisions. Parry also vowed to resist any scrapping of promotion to, and relegation from, the Premier League.

Both governing bodies want to agree a harmonised set of curtailment rules but the EFL is not prepared to agree a special exemption for promotion and relegation, while it is also unwilling to make any other concessions in order to secure a bailout.

Those include the Premier League’s other strategic objectives, such as its post-Brexit immigration policy and the future football calendar.

The world’s richest league also wants to ensure any bailout is not used by lower-league clubs to buy new players or to pay inflated wages, something the EFL has sought to provide assurances over.

To that end, the Premier League is said to be demanding Championship clubs follow those in League One and Two in introducing a salary cap, talks over which had been put on hold after a failure by second-tier teams to agree an annual limit of £18 million.

The EFL is confident of securing a bailout after the Government made it clear it expected the Premier League to provide financial assistance to the rest of the football pyramid.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Fri Sep 18, 2020 2:20 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Tue Sep 15, 2020 4:08 pm
The American grip on European football appears to be growing, here is news that Parma look to be the latest acquisition (reports in the last 24 have linked Burnley, Southampton and West Ham with American bidders) - from the Financial Times

Parma football club poised for sale to America’s Krause family
SARA GERMANO SEPTEMBER 14, 2020
The sale of Parma has been confirmed - from the New York Times

Krause Group Buys Parma, Adding to American Influence in Italian Soccer
RORY SMITH SEPTEMBER 18, 2020

At the start of the summer, Kyle Krause still regarded the idea of owning an Italian soccer team as somewhere between an ambition and a pipe dream. It was the kind of thing, he said, that he would like to do “someday.”

Not quite six weeks later, it is a reality: Krause Group, the family business, has taken a controlling interest in the Serie A club Parma. It will take a 90 percent stake in the club, with its current majority owners — a group of local industrialists — retaining the rest.

The deal valued the team at more than $100 million, and turns Parma into the latest addition to the growing band of North American-owned clubs in Italian soccer’s top tier. Earlier this summer, the Texas investor Dan Friedkin bought A.S. Roma from another American, James Pallotta. Last year, the media billionaire Rocco Commisso acquired Fiorentina.

Elliott Investment Management has been running A.C. Milan since 2018 after the club’s previous owner, Li Yonghong, defaulted on a loan to the company, while the Canadian Joey Saputo, the owner of Major League Soccer’s Montreal Impact, has controlled Bologna for six years.

Krause joined the North American ownership club with what even he acknowledged was “astonishing speed” for any transaction, let alone one in which a family that made its fortune from the Kum & Go chain of convenience stores in the American Midwest bought into the complex, emotionally fraught world of European soccer.

The Krause Group, which had revenues of $2.8 billion last year, has been searching “earnestly” for opportunities to become involved in Serie A for some time, he said. He picked the brains of both Commisso and Saputo, both of whom made it clear their door “was always open” for advice and help.

But it was only in early August that discussions started over the potential purchase of Parma, a former Serie A title contender that had ceased to exist, at least officially, after going bankrupt five years ago.

“It has not been an easy five weeks,” Krause said. “But from my standpoint, to some extent the club’s previous financial complications meant that this was a cleaner, smoother transaction.”

Two decades ago, Parma was one of Italy’s most glamorous teams. Backed by Calisto Tanzi and his Parmalat dairy empire, it acquired some of the world’s best players and competed regularly for domestic and Continental titles.

Its history this century is more checkered. After Parmalat’s collapse in a financial scandal in 2003, the club listed between owners and flirted with bankruptcy. Twice it was sold for the nominal sum of one euro. In 2015, after yet another corruption scandal and with a mountain of debt, it was declared insolvent.

Parma had to start again — officially as a new entity — in Italy’s fourth division. Backed by Nuovo Inizio, a group comprising several high-profile local investors, it won an astounding three consecutive promotions and returned to Serie A in 2018.

To Krause, that group of owners are “heroes” for “saving the team for the city,” but he said it was now time for “logical change,” and for the club to pass into the hands of a group that has the financial firepower to take Parma “back to where it deserves to be.”

That is not likely to be an overnight transformation. Though Krause has plenty of experience in soccer — his family has owned the Des Moines Menace of the United Soccer League, a lower tier of the American soccer pyramid, for more than two decades — he does not pretend to be an expert in the intricacies of Serie A.

He will take advice from his minority partners on how to best plot Parma’s future, though he said it will more likely focus on young players than the sorts of headline-grabbing signings the club made in the 1990s. “All of our investments, what we do as a family, is look for long-term, generational, continued success,” he said. “We are not here for the quick dollar.”

Krause’s desire to buy in to Serie A — at a time when the coronavirus pandemic threatens to undermine the revenue streams that keep European soccer afloat, with some estimates suggesting the continent’s clubs might lose as much as $4.5 billion this year — is, in part, romantic. His family has Italian ancestry, and the company already has investments in wineries and resorts in Italy.

But it is also, he said, rooted in economic sense. He cited the “collective investment” of the league’s owners in new infrastructure, and ongoing talks with a number of private equity firms to take a stake in the league’s marketing and broadcasting business, as proof that Serie A is growing and could yet regain the status it had before the rise of the Premier League.

“There are plenty of opportunities,” Krause said. “It used to be the No. 1 league in the world. There is no reason it cannot get back to that, or close to it.”

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Sat Sep 19, 2020 3:09 pm

Since March Brighton have probably been the most accessible and open club, media wise, in the Premier League, they have also benefitted from having a owner who is a lifelong fan and a self made billionaire - his family connections with the club go back a couple of generations too. So it is interesting when they say that they are struggling too much financially to help the rest of football - is it just a ruse to get the fans back, the Premier League (and the EFL) have spent the week ramping up the pressure this week on that subject - from the Telegraph

Brighton cannot afford to bail out EFL clubs until Government lets crowds return, says chief executive
TOM MORGAN SEPTEMBER 18, 2020

Brighton have ramped up pressure on the Government to reopen stadiums next month by warning smaller Premier League clubs cannot afford to bail out the cash-strapped lower tiers until crowds are back.

In an interview with The Telegraph, Paul Barber, the club's chief executive, explained in detail how pre-season spectator testing at the Amex had convinced him England's top tier is safe to welcome back fans, despite a fresh surge in Covid-19 cases nationally.

Barber said getting crowds back next month was of critical importance to ensure the world's richest domestic league is able to get its own finances in order to support the lower tiers, as ministers want. "As a club that is very much in touch with its past and remembers what it was like to be at the lower levels, we in principle certainly support helping our colleagues in the lower levels if and where we can," he said. "But we need to be able to pay our own bills first and if we are able to pay our own bills first then we need to get our fans back in the stadium soonest."

Barber's first priority is to protect the "near 1,000" jobs at Brighton before he can consider helping out the lower tiers. Brighton are planning lengthy pre- and post-match entertainment, including on-pitch manager interviews, in a bid to ease the pressure on transport networks when crowds return. The club is also renting out park and ride schemes, and putting on more drop-off spaces, as part of a "carrot rather than stick" approach to staggered arrival times.

Speaking out after Boris Johnson announced a review over the proposed Oct 1 return, Barber stresses that "football is not in any way strident when it comes to the challenges that Government are facing", particularly with Covid-19 infections at their highest rates since May.

"What we're trying to say is that, in support of the Government's rule of six, we believe it's safer for people to watch games live in a stadium where we are heavily-regulated ... than it would be for people to gather in their own living rooms or in bars or in pubs," he said. Citing the success of his pilot for 2,500 supporters in a pre-season friendly against Chelsea, Barber added: "We think in the open air, with strict regulation and very significant safety measures and mitigation measures, we can have people watching football more safely than almost any other means. Clearly if you're sitting in your own living room on your own, that's going to be as safe as you can possibly be, but football fans, as we know, like to watch football together - that's one of the key reasons that we will love the game."

The Telegraph disclosed earlier this week how the English Football League bail-out of up to £250 million from the Premier League remains unresolved, with lower-tier clubs on the brink of collapse following the pandemic. Sources close to talks say the EFL must fall into line with its yet-to-be-agreed curtailment rules before it is approved. Barber said "everything can flow" from the reopening of stadiums "because it's really important that we recognise that at this club alone, we've got over 300 full time jobs and up to 600 or 700 part time jobs" to protect.

"I've got a responsibility to protect the near thousand people that directly rely on us for their livings and their livelihoods," he added. "That's my first priority. And in order to do that, I've got to get fans back in the stadium soon. Once I've got the fans coming back into the stadium the combination of matchday income and television income should then leave us in a position where we can provide support further down the pyramid. But we've got to make sure that we get things in the right order because we're ourselves under huge pressure."

Brighton's contribution to the local economy is estimated at £250m a year. "That's a massive impact on the local people and their job prospects, and all of the things that go with that," he said. "So if you multiply that up and down the country, then the effect of not having fans in the stadiums for a very long period is significant and potentially very, very damaging."

Barber described the painstaking efforts that clubs were going to ensure stadiums were safe. For the Chelsea friends, an operational plan ran to almost 200 pages. One immediate hurdle for the Amex to overcome was that the stadium had been granted planning approval on the basis of limited parking as part of a sustainable transport plan by the club. "In this particular environment, we've got an added challenge at the Amex having to effectively reverse the whole procedure procedure that we have in place for getting fans to and from the game because we have limited car parking here," he said. "For the pilot event, what we did was to expand the amount of parking as far as we could and we will make use going forward of more Park and Ride facilities."

Barber still believes he can get "somewhere between 25 and 30 per cent capacity under the current guidelines" if the Government gives the go-ahead. For the Chelsea game, all transport networks were quiet, with some fans walking and cycling, he said. The Amex has also converted all its ticket barriers to digital entry to prevent the risk of contamination. In the concourse areas, all fans wore masks, but stewards were under strict instruction to encourage rather than order fans to be vigilant over social distancing. Fans were three seats apart from each other once in the stadium. There was also colour-coded signage to remind fans of the risk. Stewards, he said, were asked to be "as light in their touch as they possibly could in terms of don't bark at people".

"We had representatives from Sports Ground Safety Authority and from the DCMS here in and around the stadium, just observing everything that was going on," he said. "What was really striking about the whole experience - and I think the DCMS and SGS would 100 per cent concur with this - is just how compliant people were with the new rules and regulations that they were being asked to support. There were a couple of reasons for that: One, that it was six months since most people have watched a live football match, and they were delighted to be here, albeit for a friendly match with eight per cent of the stadium capacity. Secondly, we deliberately in our communications with everybody had put the emphasis and the onus on the people attending to look after themselves, each other and our staff. We pushed a lot of responsibility to the people attending and we trusted them. And they actually supported that trust by 100 per cent complying."

"Don't shout at people, don't scream at people if they make a mistake. Just encourage them to do the right thing, ask them for their support, ask them to keep everyone safe. And that light touch - as opposed to the sort of the stick approach of threatening people to be ejected if they did do this or didn't do that - really worked well with the fans that were there. They felt not only that they were safe, but they were also able to enjoy the match in a way that they would normally enjoy it. We didn't stop them from standing up and shouting at the ref or singing or whatever. We just simply asked them to be respectful of people around them and to keep each other safe. I think over the last six months, the majority of the population have learned to keep themselves and each other safe by doing the right thing wherever they're asked to. It was no different in the football stadium. It was just as important in the football stadium, they did that."

One issue of concern for public health experts has been the impact on local communities when fans use nearby pubs before and after matches. The Amex's relatively remote location means fans generally drink inside the ground. "We wouldn't be asking the other local businesses to close as that wouldn't be within our gift or remit," Barber says. "But certainly we always encourage fans to come to our stadium early and leave late and we deliberately open and close our bars earlier and later to accommodate that".

The football executive, who has previously worked at Tottenham and with the Football Association, says the Government should stick with its October timetable even if subsequently it has to suspend plans over a "circuit break" lockdown later in month.

"Of course it would be disappointing to take a couple of steps forward and one back again, but I think we've also got to be pragmatic," he said. "And if we want the Government support, which we do, and we have had, then we've also got to recognise that we've got to respect their particular wishes and needs any particular given time and support them as well.

"In my experience the football industry as a whole will do whatever it takes to get things moving in the right direction again, and it's important for Premier League clubs like us to get our fans back, but it's even more important for those clubs, lower down the football pyramid, who don't have the TV income. So again, if we can move forward together as an industry, and accept that there's still going to be potentially some bumps along the way, then I think people would accept that because they would rather move forward and have to be paused again, rather than not move forward at all. I think we're all realistic that this is a challenging time. There's no script here."

GodIsADeeJay81
Posts: 14562
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
Been Liked: 3435 times
Has Liked: 6339 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by GodIsADeeJay81 » Sat Sep 19, 2020 3:31 pm

I think that's the first time I've seen someone from Brighton be concerned about money.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Sun Sep 20, 2020 2:36 am

BienSport have been threatening for some time that the level of Broadcast Piracy in the Middle East North Africa region was making sports rights untenable - well now they have delivered a major shock to the Bundesliga by walking out on negotiations for a 5 year extension of the current deal - from Bloomberg - there is likely to be a combination of factors in play including the ongoing regional stand-off between Qatar and Saudi Arabia

German Bundesliga Loses Mideast Broadcaster in Piracy Fight
By David Hellier
18 September 2020, 13:35 BST Updated on 18 September 2020, 15:41 BST

- BeIN walks away hours before Bayern-Schalke kicks off season
- Network already pulled some sports coverage over piracy issue

The Middle East broadcaster of German top-flight soccer walked away from contract renewal talks hours before the new season kicks off.

Qatar-based BeIN Sports told the Bundesliga Friday it was pulling out of the negotiations on a new five-year deal, blaming piracy as the primary factor.

“Our business plan is clear. We will only bid for rights at levels that make economic sense and have a value proposition,” Richard Verow, chief sports officer at BeIN, said in a statement. “Piracy has crippled the market so we have made the decision not to renew with Bundesliga there.”

The company had paid 200 million euros ($237 million) in the previous five-year deal and has been showing Bundesliga games live in 24 countries in the region. The new season begins on Friday evening with Bayern Munich’s match with Schalke.

A spokesman for the German league declined to comment.

BeIN has blamed Qatar’s regional rival Saudi Arabia, with whom it has a political and economic dispute, for supporting a rival broadcaster that it says took BeIN content illegally and sold it on to viewers who would otherwise be paying BeIN for the service.The Saudi government denies the allegation.

After lobbying governments and international sporting bodies to help it scuttle the rival operation, BeIN has turned to more direct action in recent months. It pulled a contract to show Formula One motor racing and briefly dropped coverage of Italian soccer after disputing the price of the broadcast rights.

During a failed bid for English club Newcastle United by a consortium headed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund, BeIN wrote to all the Premier League’s 20 clubs, warning them not to throw their support behind the Saudis.

BeIN and the Bundesliga still have contracts with each other in France and the Asia-Pacific region.

It isn’t only piracy that’s been putting downward pressure on rights fees for soccer, Europe’s most valuable broadcast sport. The Premier League made sizable rebates to broadcasters when it restarted the season after lockdown, as did other leagues. The broadcasters argued that the matches they showed -- many of them played in empty stadiums -- were not equal to the ones they had contracted to broadcast.

The Premier League recently lost its most lucrative overseas contract, in China, after a disagreement over rights fees and discounts. It replaced it with a one-year deal with Chinese social media and gaming giant Tencent Holdings Ltd.

However, European soccer is still attractive to many overseas investors. Italian team Parma said on Thursday it had agreed to be bought by the American Krause family. That follows U.S. purchases of French club Toulouse and Italy’s Roma.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Sun Sep 20, 2020 2:42 am

OffthePitch.com with a piece on Gestifute/Jorge Mendes - for the moment it is visible here https://offthepitch.com/a/deeper-look-g ... noteworthy and worth looking at for the table of transactions on there - the text is transcribe here - It is unusual to be available as every article has been behind a paywall in the last year

A deeper look into Gestifute's transactions involving Portuguese clubs following Fabio Silva's noteworthy transfer
18 September 2020 1:19 PM

- Jorge Mendes' Gestifute agent firm has a good hold on the biggest transfers coming out of Portugal, according to stock market releases from the past three years.
- The records show it is not unusual for the firm to take compensation of around a sixth of the total transfer fee – sometimes even more.
- Global spending on intermediaries last year rose 19 per cent to €554 million.

EMIL GJERDING NIELSON nielson@offthepitch.com

It caught headlines when it was revealed last week that Jorge Mendes' agent firm, Gestifute, received €7 million of the €40 million transfer fee Wolverhampton this summer paid Porto for Fabio Silva - corresponding to around a sixth of the total amount.

But Gestifute's seemingly large compensation for the transfer of a player it does not even represent is not unusual, an investigation offthepitch.com has conducted into publicly available records from the Portuguese stock market can reveal.

When Rui Patricio transferred from Sporting to Wolverhampton for €18 million in 2018 the firm received €4 million in compensation, almost a fifth of the total fee. However, according to a stock release by the Portuguese club, the original amount Gestifute was demanding was €9 million – half the total amount of the transfer fee.

Gestifute did not wish to comment when contacted by offthepitch.com.

Sporting president Bruno de Carvalho at the time accused Gestifute of blackmail, something the firm denied. According to the statement from Sporting, the final sum was lowered only due to the simultaneous sale of Adrien Silva to Leicester.

Ederson stands out

When Ederson was bought by Manchester City from Benfica for €40 million in 2017 he became the second-most expensive goalkeeper in the world at the time. However, the Portuguese club were only able to record a profit of less than half the total transfer fee at €16 million due to compensation for intermediaries and third-party ownership.

A full €24 million was split between Gestifute, who was reportedly entitled to 20 per cent of the fee, and his former club Rio Ave who were entitled to 30 per cent of the fee, and the intermediaries on the transaction. FIFA has since banned third-party ownership.

Since Mendes became involved with Wolverhampton when their Chinese owner Fosun in 2015 bought 15 per cent of Gestifute's parent company, Start SGPS, for about €42 million, the firm has profited nicely from dealing with the Premier League club.

Of Raul Jimenez' €38 million transfer to Wolverhampton in 2019, Benfica could record a profit of €23 million despite having amortised more than two thirds of the €22 million fee they paid Atletico Madrid for him in 2015. More than a third of the transfer fee, €14.9 million, was assigned to intermediaries, i.e. Gestifute (and possibly others), and to write off his net book value.

When Willy Boly transferred from Porto to Wolverhampton in 2018 for €12 million, €6.4 million was paid to intermediaries and to write off his net book value.

Rising agent fees

Global spending on intermediaries last year rose 19 per cent to €554 million, according to FIFA. Since Wolverhampton were promoted to the Premier League in 2018 their spending on agents has risen from €2.2 million in the 2017/18 season to €9.4 million last season.

That remains in the lower end among clubs in the Premier League, however, with Liverpool's €49.7 million paid out in the 2019/20 season being the highest amount ever. Among European clubs Dortmund were the second-biggest spenders that season, having paid out €44.5 million to intermediaries.

The Premier League in total last season paid out €356.2 million in agent fees.

FIFA's Football Stakeholders Committee in 2019 recommended a cap on agents' commissions of ten per cent for agents of the releasing club, three per cent of the player's remuneration for player agents, and three per cent of the player's remuneration for agents of engaging clubs

It also recommended to limit multiple representation to avoid conflicts of interest. No such measures have yet been implemented.

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

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by RammyClaret61 » Sun Sep 20, 2020 3:43 am

The above post is everything that is wrong with football today. Money going out of the game into the pockets of leaches. Also smacks of conflict of interests. Wolves basically paying themselves for players. But the fans will still cheer, and ours will moan. Modern day football, it stinks.

AndyClaret
Posts: 1349
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 2:08 pm
Been Liked: 217 times
Has Liked: 543 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by AndyClaret » Sun Sep 20, 2020 5:57 am

Why are they including amortization in it though ?

huw.Y.WattfromWare
Posts: 3393
Joined: Fri May 08, 2020 7:04 pm
Been Liked: 1004 times
Has Liked: 905 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by huw.Y.WattfromWare » Sun Sep 20, 2020 7:54 am

Chester Perry wrote:
Sun Sep 20, 2020 2:42 am
...
Hi Chester. Read a piece t’other day that Dafabet are back involved with Burnley. I’ve been without internet most of the week and expected to find news of the deal on here. Can you enlighten me? Cheers.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by Chester Perry » Sun Sep 20, 2020 2:23 pm

huw.Y.WattfromWare wrote:
Sun Sep 20, 2020 7:54 am
Hi Chester. Read a piece t’other day that Dafabet are back involved with Burnley. I’ve been without internet most of the week and expected to find news of the deal on here. Can you enlighten me? Cheers.
It was covered here viewtopic.php?f=2&t=49803

we also had this deal announced this week viewtopic.php?f=2&t=49794
This user liked this post: huw.Y.WattfromWare

Post Reply