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 » Fri Mar 26, 2021 1:44 pm

Part 5 of The Telegraph's "To do List" looking at the issues focussing minds in the Boardrooms of the Big 5 - today it is the turn of Chelsea

Chelsea's summer to-do list: Buy a striker, sort out who stays - and what to do with Thomas Tuchel?
MATT LAW MARCH 26, 2021

The spotlight falls on Chelsea for the fifth of six pieces this week looking at the in-trays of executives and decision-makers at the Big Six. Check back in tomorrow for part six on Tottenham

Playing staff
The big question that Chelsea fans are asking is ‘will the club sign Erling Haaland?’ Anybody hoping for a definitive answer just yet will be disappointed, but Chelsea will focus their summer efforts on bringing in a No 9.

While other areas, such as the centre of defence, could be strengthened, the club are willing to spend a significant slice of their transfer budget on the right centre-forward.

Chelsea, of course, are not the only club interested in Haaland which means alternatives will have to be considered, including former Stamford Bridge forward Romelu Lukaku who has been in outstanding form for Inter Milan.

Other than looking for the right striker and possibly another defender, Chelsea have big decisions to make on the futures of a number of their players. The entire back three of Antonio Rudiger, Andreas Christensen and Cesar Azpilicueta will only have a year remaining on their contracts at the end of the season, while Thiago Silva’s initial one-year deal will run out in the summer.

Thiago hopes to sign a new deal, while talks are expected to open over Christensen’s future but there has been mixed messaging regarding Rudiger. Just days after he indicated he would like to sign a new contract, reports emerged from Germany claiming he would prefer to wait until after the European Championships, which could put Chelsea in a difficult position.

There are also doubts hanging over strikers Tammy Abraham, who is yet to start talks over an extension to his contract that will have two years left on it, and Olivier Giroud, whose contract is due to expire. It would not be a surprise, given head coach Thomas Tuchel’s preference to play Kai Havertz as a false nine lately, if Giroud decides to move on at the end of the season.

It remains to be seen whether or not fears over N’Golo Kante’s future have been erased by the form the Frenchman has shown under Tuchel in recent weeks, or whether or not Chelsea can find a club to take goalkeeper Kepa Arrizabalaga.

Non-playing staff
Tuchel has only just taken over at Chelsea and yet the German will only have 12 months remaining on his contract in the summer.

Chelsea were actually in a similar position with previous head coach Frank Lampard last year and, despite a fourth-placed finish and an FA Cup final, they decided against extending his deal.

They will argue that was a good decision, given they decided to sack Lampard and avoided being liable for a big payment and it is unlikely the club will rush a decision over Tuchel.

That seems crazy, given Tuchel remains unbeaten as Chelsea head coach and the club are in the quarter-finals of the Champions League and the semi-finals of the FA Cup, as well as sitting fourth in the league. But the season remains finely balanced between success and disappointment, and Chelsea will be wary of previous mistakes they have made even if it ends in glory.

Chelsea handed both Jose Mourinho and Antonio Conte new contracts after winning the Premier League title and, in both cases, soon faced a big bill for their departures.

One of the big questions for the summer will be over how influential Tuchel is in the recruitment process while his contract only has a year left on it and whether Chelsea will chase his targets or ‘club’ signings.

The business
With each year that previously passed without owner Roman Abramovich watching a game at Stamford Bridge, the speculation increased over whether or not he was losing interest in Chelsea.

The £220million spent in last summer’s transfer window and Abramovich’s campaigns in fighting against anti-Semitism and racism should have killed any doubts over his commitment, but the Russian billionaire also took the rare step of giving an interview last week.

In it, he reiterated his desire to make Chelsea the best club in the land, on and off the pitch, and the timing of the article with Forbes magazine would suggest he is not going anywhere in the near future.

There was one very large unanswered question from the interview, however, that revolves around Abramovich’s plans for Stamford Bridge.

In May, it will be three years since Chelsea officially shelved their new stadium plans and it remains unclear just how long their planning permission for the site runs.

Planning permission was due to expire in March last year, but, because of the coronavirus pandemic, there had been speculation it could be extended until April this year. Chelsea have not commented on the situation as it stands and Abramovich was either not asked about the subject by Forbes or declined to comment.

With supporters hoping to return to stadiums in time for next season, Chelsea will once again find themselves at a disadvantage in terms of matchday revenues in comparison to their Premier League rivals.

That puts extra pressure on director Marina Granovskaia to balance the books for Financial Fair Play by bringing money in through player sales, something she has excelled at over the past decade.

Any other business
Chelsea may have to fend off interest in their coach Anthony Barry, who was last month added to the Republic of Ireland backroom staff as manager Stephen Kenny’s assistant coach.

Barry was taken to Chelsea by Frank Lampard from Wigan and he stayed to work under Tuchel, who has been impressed with the 34-year-old.

Fleetwood Town were interested in trying to appoint Barry, whose reputation within the game is such that he could receive other offers to leave Chelsea and find himself under pressure to go full-time with the Republic of Ireland.

Barry is not the first Chelsea coach to combine his club responsibilities with international football, as Steve Holland initially became Gareth Southgate’s assistant-manager while he was still with the Blues.

Holland eventually decided he needed to leave Chelsea to focus on England, following complaints from some of the club’s Premier League rivals over a conflict of interests.

It remains to be seen whether any similar complaints are raised over Barry, although the Republic’s squad does not contain the sort of high-profile stars Holland works with for England.

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 Mar 26, 2021 1:51 pm

As the news begins to sink in that FIFA made more money from the licensing of a Video game last year than anything else The Telegraph looks at what this actually means for the actual real life game

How the FIFA video game ate football
SAM WALLACE MARCH 26, 2021

It is the phenomenon that has become fundamental to the sport that gave it life: the hyper-reality football video game franchise FIFA, launched 28 years ago and now a significant player itself in the finance and politics of the global game.

Even aside from its own thundering commercial success, FIFA - annually updated and relaunched under the EA Sports brand - has made its presence felt in the real-world game it mimics. The latest financial results from Fifa, football's world governing body from which EA Sports licenses the game, revealed that in a pandemic-hit 2020 agreements with gaming companies were its single-highest revenue stream.

For EA Sports' parent company Electronic Arts (EA), the trajectory is largely upwards. Revenue for the last quarter of last year was up £58million from the same period in 2019 to £1.2 billion. The FIFA 21 edition is its most successful launch ever. The company says it had 35 million individual “unique” console players on FIFA 20 and 150 million playing across all formats.

The market values EA at £28billion. To put that in perspective, Manchester United, the largest publicly-quoted football club in the world, is valued at £2billion. Financially EA is a giant compared to those who dominate football but the impact of FIFA could be felt even more keenly in years to come.

Andrea Agnelli, the Juventus president and leading agent provocateur when it comes to the future of the European game, has warned that the current generation of 16 to 24-year-olds, who have grown up on FIFA, are focussed on interaction and less interested in watching the full-game real-world 90 minutes. The growth of Esports – gamers competing against one another - has been rapid. The implicit threat there is to the value of the broadcast contracts that are the financial basis of the sport itself and leads to an existential conundrum: could FIFA end up eating football itself?

'Football is playing catch-up with what motivates modern audiences''
As a technical and artistic accomplishment FIFA is an astonishing simulacrum of the elite game - from the skill Mohamed Salah might use to deceive an opponent, to his facial expression, to the style of his goal celebration. It is not hard to see the attraction although it is a bigger leap to imagine a scenario in which the avatar of Kylian Mbappe, the FIFA 21 cover star, is worth more to him one day than what he does on a pitch.

The game, which was created in EA Sports’ Vancouver studios in the early 1990s, has sold 325 million copies and is available in 21 languages. EA Sports will not discuss how much FIFA accounts for in EA’s total revenues or how much is invested in the development of each edition, but the way in which the company sees its partnership with football will be critical to those who have long-term skin in the game. In particular, like Agnelli, the owners of big European clubs.

Answering questions over email, David Jackson, a vice-president of EA Sports, says that it is a critical part to FIFA’s success that its characters are based on real-life footballers, which helps “blur the lines between the virtual and real worlds of global football” for gamers.

Jackson insists that “real world football will always be more popular, and rightly so” but what constitutes 'real world' for a generation of fans who never watch their team play in person?

The very notion of what defines a football fan is changing, Jackson says. “The manner in which the modern football fan engages with their favourite league, team or athlete bears little resemblance to the relationships of even ten years ago,” he says. “As fandom has evolved, football has had to contend with that shift and is playing a little bit of catch-up regarding what truly motivates modern audiences. If a kid growing up in Tokyo or Toronto becomes a PSG fan, it’s unlikely to be because they have visited the Parc des Princes. It’s much more likely that their favourite player plays for PSG and they grew to learn about them partly through FIFA.”

A backlash from star players
FIFA's popularity among the younger generation may be beyond doubt, but for the first time there have been rumblings of hostility towards it from within the sport. Over the years, stars have become enthusiastic players themselves - including Lionel Messi - and been eager to feature on the cover of new editions. Then in an interview with Telegraph Sport in November the agent Mino Raiola declared his intention to challenge the licensing agreements that EA Sports has with Fifa, and various leagues, for the use, in FIFA, of the intellectual property rights of his clients.

There was support on social media from Raiola client Zlatan Ibrahimovic, and later Gareth Bale, represented by Stellar Group. It is understood that EA Sports has responded and there is no current ongoing legal case.

Jackson says that global football presents a “complex and often fractured licensing landscape” compared with the relative simplicity of US sport. “No individual representative body has full authority or autonomy over everything related to league, team and athlete IP in football,” he says. He describes world football as “a little more of a ‘kit of parts’”. He will not say who gets paid what. But it is clear, from what Jackson says that EA Sports see themselves as a crucial partner “connect[ing] highly valued and famous IP with 150 million players worldwide … and that offers significant value back to our rights holders and their member clubs.”

The game has also been criticised for discouraging children from enjoying the benefits of the real thing, especially among parents struggling to limit screen-time in lockdown - an accusation that prompts a forthright response from Jackson. “The reality is that for a person living without access to wide open spaces or the means to connect with a community through physical play (like for example, in a lockdown environment), games like FIFA can help people exhibit their fandom in a very productive and mentally stimulating way.

“It’s a pretty condescending and privileged view to take that kids should be outside playing. What if they can’t? What if their environment is unsafe in enabling that? When people ask whether I’d prefer my kids to be playing football or FIFA the honest answer is both, as the physical and mental exercise of understanding and ultimately falling in love with football is hugely valuable.”

The battle for new fans starts now
Either way, the success of FIFA suggests that EA Sports is winning the argument with the next generation, whatever misgivings their parents might have. Jackson says the habits of 16 to 24-year-olds are changing in many ways. “Mr Agnelli is absolutely right about the transition of consumption through generations of fans,” he says, “but video games is just one of many contemporary approaches to fandom.”

These are the kind of trends that are likely to strike fear into the hearts of those tasked with projecting football’s long-term revenues. What will be the game’s relationship with its digital twin? Both are competing for the attention, and ultimately the custom, of a new generation of fans. FIFA is a slick, engaging, constantly-changing interactive experience. Access is by no means cheap at £59.99 for FIFA 21 for the PS5 but it is less expensive than a Premier League season ticket or a pay-TV subscription - or both combined.

In the early years, it was said that Fifa, the governing body, under-priced its licensing rights offering to EA Sports – failing to predict the game’s huge potential. That, of course, has changed and in a year when international tournaments faced unprecedented postponements, its total licensing agreements were worth £115 million to Fifa. EA Sports would not comment on whether, as anticipated, its deal is up for renewal this year.

For football fans of a certain generation Fifa will always be about the World Cup finals, or more recently a morally bankrupt organisation that was purged post-2010. For the next generation, FIFA means something very different. It is for their attention that clubs, competitions and governing bodies - old football - must compete against a very powerful, very modern form of the game.

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 Mar 26, 2021 2:58 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Fri Mar 19, 2021 7:49 pm
It would seem that the Premier League is going to be subject to the block chain fan token nonsense again following an announcement from Manchester City today - The FSA are not quite rightly not happy

https://twitter.com/WeAreTheFSA/status/ ... 7088124929
Martin Cloake of The FootballFan tackles the problem of Block Chain/Fan Token route of Fan Engagement - I was sold before I read past the title. though the final sentence speaks an even greater truth

The socio path
Sometimes a bad idea is just a bad idea

Martin Cloake - 6 hr ago

If you’re a business wanting to build some profile, the favoured device these days is to present yourself as a disruptor. This has a number of advantages.

It positions you as an edgy, innovative enterprise unhindered by the baggage of the past. You are the future. And so, by definition, anyone who stands in your way is the past. The route into the future is inexorable. So you are a natural force, and those who seek to challenge you are not only backward, but defying nature itself. Modern-day King Canutes.

It also allows you to present yourself as an outsider, a rebel force cocking a snook at the established order. And you are offering your potential customers a slice of the rebel action. If they join you, they’re not just becoming customers of another business. They are sticking it to the man. And to the stupid people who don’t want to go into the future.

We’ve been hearing about disruptors in football again recently, in the wake of the deal Manchester City has signed with a company called Socios. The disruptive innovative idea Socios brings to the table is… a membership scheme. Or, as the company would prefer, the world’s first fan token platform. Socios’ chief executive Alexandre Dreyfuss gave an interview to The Independent this week in which he outlined the company’s offer. The article is peppered with words and phrases such as emerging technology, engagement – a favourite here – and blockchain, which is always useful when trying to impress people who want to go into the future.

The article itself has a noteworthy opening which in no way sets out a stance – “With pretty much any major innovation somebody’s nose is put out of joint” – and continues by listing Uber, Netflix and Amazon as examples of the kind of successful disruptors that some stupid people who didn’t want to go into the future got huffy about when they started out.

What Socios does is offer fans tokens in return for the right to have a say on decisions taken by the club. Those tokens can only be purchased by using a cryptocurrency called Chiliz. Happily enough, Chiliz can be bought, using actual money, from… Socios (for it is they).

Among the many objections to the model is one that says fans should not have to pay to be consulted on important issues by their clubs. But Dreyfus’s response utilises another popular tactic – painting your critics as bigots. He says: “I understand sometimes historical local fans don’t want to acknowledge there is a global fanbase, but that’s the case today: you have to live with it. You have fans everywhere in the world and not recognising these fans is discrimination.”

So as well as being anti-progress establishment drones, critics of this business model are also narrow-minded bigots. It’s an argument as offensive as it is spurious, because it reduces the very real need to combat bigotry to a bargaining chip in the publicity war over a business idea, providing fuel for a multitude of poundshop Nigel Farages and Brendan O’Neills.

But that’s a significant array of arguments with which to counter criticism of a business. So can those expressing doubts or opposition to the scheme be any more than bigoted, stuck-in-the-past opponents of progress who have had their noses put out of joint?

I’m not only saying yes, I’m saying that Socios is one of the worst ideas anyone has ever attempted to foist on the game. Because it demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the relationship between fans and clubs. West Ham’s fans realised this when they saw off an attempt to introduce the scheme a few years ago, and fans of Manchester City need to assert themselves to do the same.

Here are a few very good reasons why this is a journey we should not be going on.

• The concept of selling the right to have a view strikes at the core of the basic relationship fans have with their club. As this newsletter argues, football clubs are different to other businesses because the strength of customer loyalty is based on the significant emotional investment fans have made over many years. Football clubs are depositories of accumulated emotion, and if they weren’t, they would not be the attractive business propositions they are.

• Monetising the right to have a view divides the fan base into those whose opinions count and those whose don’t. Socios’ own publicity talks of becoming “more than a fan”. So much for not discriminating.

• The views that fans can buy the right to have are still controlled by the Club’s owners. So you can vote on and succeed in changing the music played when a goal is scored (as fans of Juventus did through the Socios scheme) but it’s considerably less likely you’ll be able to vote on the price of a ticket. Or whether music should be played at all when goals are scored.

• The fundamental test for any fan engagement scheme should be how much it genuinely engages fans. The people engaged by the Socios scheme are defined solely by being people who have purchased Socios tokens. So that could be fans of another club trying to influence a decision (remember Manchester City almost having to name a new stand The Bell End after Manchester United fans hijacked a phone poll?), or it could be cryptocurrency speculators homing in on the latest hot prospect for quick returns.

• The cryptocurrency angle is particularly troubling. These currencies are highly volatile, and the price fluctuations can rapidly change the relative as well as the actual value of the tokens fans buy. Put simply, owning one token in a club with 1,000 tokens in circulation gives you more influence than owning one token in a club with 10,000. This point, along with a forensic dissection of the whole idea pushed by Socios, is in this recommended read from Martin Calladine’s blog The Ugly Game. https://theuglygame.wordpress.com/2020/ ... ngagement/

The bottom line here is that Socios is not a fan engagement business. It is a cryptocurrency business attempting to piggyback on the popularity of football.

It’s important to recognise that fact because there are very real issues to get to grips with. The whole question of the different and sometimes conflicting interests of matchgoing fans and fans who will realistically never get to the live event but are nonetheless passionate in their support has to be thought through much more thoroughly than it has been by both clubs and fan organisations. And that is just one detail in a bigger picture of a growing disconnect between sections of the customer base and the business.

Genuine, productive fan engagement is too important to be reduced to a transaction and hived off to a third party.
This user liked this post: Paul Waine

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 Mar 26, 2021 3:24 pm

Everton have been given government approval to go ahead with the development of Bramley Moore dock - you hope that it won't be under water in the next 25 to 30 years as a result of rising sea levels resulting from the climate crisis

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-m ... e-56541316

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 Mar 26, 2021 3:45 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Fri Mar 26, 2021 1:26 pm
Reports emerging that DAZN have finally been granted the Serie A domestic rights - I wonder what the trade off was?

https://twitter.com/JamesHorncastle/sta ... 3822636033
Bloomberg on that DAZN win for Serie A domestic rights

Tycoon’s ‘Netflix of Sport’ Beats Comcast to $3 Billion Deal
By David Hellier and Daniele Lepido
26 March 2021, 13:42 GMT Updated on 26 March 2021, 15:15 GMT

- DAZN dislodges Sky in battle for Italian soccer TV rights
- Blavatnik-backed broadcaster has been refocusing on Europe

DAZN Group Ltd., the media disruptor known as the “Netflix of sport,” has bloodied the nose of one of the world’s top broadcasters in a watershed moment for fans of live soccer in Europe.

DAZN on Friday beat out Comcast Corp.’s Sky to win a deal to become the main domestic broadcaster of Italy’s Serie A soccer league, home to players including Cristiano Ronaldo and Zlatan Ibrahimovic, people with knowledge of the matter said. It will pay a total of about 2.5 billion euros ($3 billion) over the three-season contract, the people said, asking not to be identified because the information is private.

The deal means the streaming company backed by billionaire Len Blavatnik is now the go-to broadcaster for millions of fans in the soccer-mad country. The win for DAZN underscores how a new breed of broadcasters are rising to challenge incumbents that have long leaned heavily on premium sports and entertainment packages to earn their money. DAZN offers its customers a range of online content without the need to sign up to more costly long-term contracts.

London-based DAZN will pay about 840 million euros annually for the broadcasting rights, the people said. A representative for Serie A declined to comment, while spokespeople for DAZN and Sky didn’t immediately provide comments.

DAZN’s win was not an easy one, and breaks a deadlock that has lasted for weeks. The capacity to roll out an exclusive streaming service in Italy, which has patchy internet connectivity, was questioned during the bidding process by Sky and some of Serie A’s 20 teams, people familiar with the matter said previously. With 1 billion euros of technological and financial support from phone carrier Telecom Italia SpA, DAZN was able to dislodge Sky, the pioneer of televised soccer that held the Serie A rights for almost two decades.

Shares of Telecom Italia rose as much as 3.7% in Friday afternoon trading, outpacing the 0.7% gain in Milan’s benchmark FTSE MIB Index.

Europe First
Securing the Serie A rights is another sign that a more Europe-focused strategy is starting to pay off for DAZN. It’s the second time in less than a year the group has scored a win over Sky, following a smaller victory in Germany in June.

“Investing in primary rights is a bold separation from DAZN’s past strategy,” said Maria Rua Aguete, senior research director at Omdia. “DAZN will be able to benefit from premium sports and the raised profile that goes along with it.”

Pronounced “da zone,” the company was launched in 2016 and spent quickly to acquire rights to broadcast sports including soccer, boxing and Formula 1 motor racing across Europe, Asia and the Americas. Still, the pace of that global expansion has weighed on finances.

DAZN reported an operating loss of 1.4 billion pounds ($1.9 billion) in 2019 and later saw subscription revenue take a hit when the coronavirus pandemic brought an abrupt halt to live sports. Last summer, a new leadership team was put in place under then-acting Chief Executive Officer James Rushton.

Together with former Chairman John Skipper, Rushton evaluated the core markets DAZN wanted to build on, such as Italy and Germany, and those in which it could cut back. It sought to withdraw from streaming UEFA Champions League soccer matches in Asia and pulled Serie A coverage from its Brazil platform. DAZN also cut a contract with U.S. Major League Baseball.

Deep Bench
In late 2020, DAZN unveiled a slate of original documentary programming featuring global sporting icons such as Ronaldo and British boxer Anthony Joshua.

“We want to give people a reason to return to DAZN again and again,” Ed McCarthy, the group’s chief operating officer, said at the time. “Sports fans want more than live action.”

In the meantime, Blavatnik has continued to reshape the company’s leadership bench, in January recruiting Shay Segev from the FTSE 100 gaming group Entain Plc to be co-CEO with Rushton. This month, DAZN named former Walt Disney Co. executive Kevin Mayer as chairman to succeed Skipper. Mayer has already expressed an interest in U.K. Premier League rights, according to an interview with CNBC shortly after his appointment.

“He truly wants to succeed with this,” Omdia’s Rua Aguete said. “He believes in the top team.”

Blavatnik, whose net worth is estimated at $37.4 billion by the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, has spent hundreds of millions of dollars in his bid to build DAZN into a sports broadcasting powerhouse. He’s been willing to make big bets before: Blavatnik bought Warner Music Group Corp. for $3.3 billion in 2011, a time when the industry’s revenues were heavily threatened by piracy. The business has now returned to public markets and is worth about $16.5 billion.

“His investment track record illustrates a keen ability to spot trends early and unearth opportunities that might seem counterintuitive at face value,” said Edgar Bronfman Jr., who was chairman of the record business at the time of Blavatnik’s acquisition. “Len has the resolve and drive to tackle any business challenge.”

(Updates with Telecom Italia share movement in sixth paragraph)

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 Mar 26, 2021 4:04 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Thu Mar 25, 2021 2:02 am
The Athletic on the ever increasing value of clubs/Franchises in the MLS - it kind of explains why the Americans see value in the European games. I have posted about this before, though mainly on the takeover thread

https://twitter.com/TheAthleticSCCR/sta ... 4829205504

‘They’re like tech stocks’: Why MLS team valuations have gotten so high
https://theathletic.com/2474348/?source=twitterhq
There is a podcast from the Total Soccer Show on the subject of MLS Franchise valuations, which includes the writer of that article in The Athletic

the blurb:

On this episode of Allocation Disorder, Paul and Sam talk all about MLS franchise valuations and the potential for growth in Major League Soccer.

Why are MLS franchises being bought and sold for so much money? Why aren’t folks who are flushed with cash just going out and buy a Premier League team for a fraction of the cost of an MLS franchise? How do future television rights and the 2026 World Cup factor into MLS’s growth? Is a sort of closed promotion/relegation feasible at some point down the line? And where does Liga MX fit into MLS’s future?

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/t ... 0514500550

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 Mar 26, 2021 6:23 pm

An interesting statement on the judgements against 18 clubs in the National League re refusing to play matches as scheduled as a result of the finance distribution issues

National League Statement | Outcome Of Club Charges

 about an hour ago
By Oliver Osborn

An Independent Panel, commissioned by The National League, has met to hear the cases of 18 Member Clubs charged with alleged breaches of League Rules.

16 Member Clubs were charged with a breach of League Rule 8.39, 1 Member Club was charged with a breach of League Rule 4.2 and 1 Member Club was charged with a breach of both League Rule 4.2 and 8.39.

Rule 8.39 relates to any Club without just cause failing to fulfil an engagement to play a Competition match on an appointed date. Rule 4.2 provides The National League Board with the ability to issue an instruction, by way of Board Directive, in the best interests of any matter outside of the Rules. On this occasion, Rule 4.2 has been utilised to ensure The National League’s Covid-19 protocols are followed correctly by each Member Club.

The findings of the hearings, divided into three categories, can be found below:

Dover Athletic

An Independent Panel has ruled that Dover Athletic are deemed guilty of four breaches of Rule 8.39 for failing to meet fixture obligations between February 16th and February 27th.

The Club will play no further part in the 2020/21 Playing Season, with the Club’s existing National League (Step One) results expunged. A 12-point deduction for the 2021/22 Playing Season and fine of £40,000 have additionally been issued.

The Panel had regard to financial information provided by Dover Athletic and fully respected the responsibility of the Club’s Directors under Company Law.

However, the Panel also had to consider the integrity of the Competition and the actions of Dover Athletic in relation to the other 22 Clubs that continue to incur much costs as they fulfill their fixtures. Dover Athletic had avoided costs by not completing their Season alongside the other 22 Clubs. In addition, The National League basic award meant they were significantly benefiting from not completing the Season compared to the 22 Clubs that continued.

The Panel concluded that three points per breach should be deducted from the Club’s record in Playing Season 2021/22. In view of the current financial situation and in order to reflect the approach taken in other cases of breaches of Rule 8.39, the Independent Panel reduced the initial fine by 20% to £40,000.

Non-Fulfilment of Fixtures at Step Two

An Independent Panel has ruled that 16 Member Clubs participating in National League North and South (Step Two) are guilty of breaching Rule 8.39 for failing to meet fixture obligations.

Fines ranging from £1,400 to £8,000 in addition to a suspended points deduction for the 2021/22 Playing Season has been issued to each Member Club found guilty.

Given the extremely unusual circumstances that have affected football at all levels and the financial pressures the absence of spectators has brought to bear on clubs, the Panel expressed its sympathy with the Clubs’ predicament. However, the Panel believes it must also take regard of the fact that the majority of Clubs continued to fulfil fixtures and incur much costs until the League ended on February 19th.

Per breach, each Club received a £2,000 fine and suspended two-point deduction for the 2021/22 Playing Season. A 30% reduction was made to the fine for those accepting the charge ahead of the hearing.

Covid-19 Related Breaches

King’s Lynn Town and Southport have been found guilty by an Independent Panel of a breach of The National League’s Covid-19 protocols.

Season 2020/21 had started under restrictions imposed to help control the spread of Covid-19 virus. In order to ensure the Season could continue safely, The National League had developed a number of protocols with Club Process Flow Charts which were to be followed by Clubs.

The Panel imposed a 12-month suspended fine of £2,000 on King’s Lynn Town for an unintentional error, considered to be in the best efforts to ensure a fixture was played. The Club were warned for their future conduct in relation to Covid-19 protocols, with the suspended fine only to be issued if the Club is found guilty of a further breach of Covid-19 protocols.

The Panel issued a £2,000 fine to Southport for, based on the evidence received, misinformation of the status of a player’s Covid-19 test to avoid playing a fixture on dates set by the League. The Club were also warned their future conduct in relation to Covid-19 protocols.

*There is a right of appeal to the Football Association.

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 » Fri Mar 26, 2021 6:34 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Fri Mar 26, 2021 2:58 pm
Martin Cloake of The FootballFan tackles the problem of Block Chain/Fan Token route of Fan Engagement - I was sold before I read past the title. though the final sentence speaks an even greater truth

The socio path
Sometimes a bad idea is just a bad idea

Martin Cloake - 6 hr ago

If you’re a business wanting to build some profile, the favoured device these days is to present yourself as a disruptor. This has a number of advantages.

It positions you as an edgy, innovative enterprise unhindered by the baggage of the past. You are the future. And so, by definition, anyone who stands in your way is the past. The route into the future is inexorable. So you are a natural force, and those who seek to challenge you are not only backward, but defying nature itself. Modern-day King Canutes.

It also allows you to present yourself as an outsider, a rebel force cocking a snook at the established order. And you are offering your potential customers a slice of the rebel action. If they join you, they’re not just becoming customers of another business. They are sticking it to the man. And to the stupid people who don’t want to go into the future.

We’ve been hearing about disruptors in football again recently, in the wake of the deal Manchester City has signed with a company called Socios. The disruptive innovative idea Socios brings to the table is… a membership scheme. Or, as the company would prefer, the world’s first fan token platform. Socios’ chief executive Alexandre Dreyfuss gave an interview to The Independent this week in which he outlined the company’s offer. The article is peppered with words and phrases such as emerging technology, engagement – a favourite here – and blockchain, which is always useful when trying to impress people who want to go into the future.

The article itself has a noteworthy opening which in no way sets out a stance – “With pretty much any major innovation somebody’s nose is put out of joint” – and continues by listing Uber, Netflix and Amazon as examples of the kind of successful disruptors that some stupid people who didn’t want to go into the future got huffy about when they started out.

What Socios does is offer fans tokens in return for the right to have a say on decisions taken by the club. Those tokens can only be purchased by using a cryptocurrency called Chiliz. Happily enough, Chiliz can be bought, using actual money, from… Socios (for it is they).

Among the many objections to the model is one that says fans should not have to pay to be consulted on important issues by their clubs. But Dreyfus’s response utilises another popular tactic – painting your critics as bigots. He says: “I understand sometimes historical local fans don’t want to acknowledge there is a global fanbase, but that’s the case today: you have to live with it. You have fans everywhere in the world and not recognising these fans is discrimination.”

So as well as being anti-progress establishment drones, critics of this business model are also narrow-minded bigots. It’s an argument as offensive as it is spurious, because it reduces the very real need to combat bigotry to a bargaining chip in the publicity war over a business idea, providing fuel for a multitude of poundshop Nigel Farages and Brendan O’Neills.

But that’s a significant array of arguments with which to counter criticism of a business. So can those expressing doubts or opposition to the scheme be any more than bigoted, stuck-in-the-past opponents of progress who have had their noses put out of joint?

I’m not only saying yes, I’m saying that Socios is one of the worst ideas anyone has ever attempted to foist on the game. Because it demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the relationship between fans and clubs. West Ham’s fans realised this when they saw off an attempt to introduce the scheme a few years ago, and fans of Manchester City need to assert themselves to do the same.

Here are a few very good reasons why this is a journey we should not be going on.

• The concept of selling the right to have a view strikes at the core of the basic relationship fans have with their club. As this newsletter argues, football clubs are different to other businesses because the strength of customer loyalty is based on the significant emotional investment fans have made over many years. Football clubs are depositories of accumulated emotion, and if they weren’t, they would not be the attractive business propositions they are.

• Monetising the right to have a view divides the fan base into those whose opinions count and those whose don’t. Socios’ own publicity talks of becoming “more than a fan”. So much for not discriminating.

• The views that fans can buy the right to have are still controlled by the Club’s owners. So you can vote on and succeed in changing the music played when a goal is scored (as fans of Juventus did through the Socios scheme) but it’s considerably less likely you’ll be able to vote on the price of a ticket. Or whether music should be played at all when goals are scored.

• The fundamental test for any fan engagement scheme should be how much it genuinely engages fans. The people engaged by the Socios scheme are defined solely by being people who have purchased Socios tokens. So that could be fans of another club trying to influence a decision (remember Manchester City almost having to name a new stand The Bell End after Manchester United fans hijacked a phone poll?), or it could be cryptocurrency speculators homing in on the latest hot prospect for quick returns.

• The cryptocurrency angle is particularly troubling. These currencies are highly volatile, and the price fluctuations can rapidly change the relative as well as the actual value of the tokens fans buy. Put simply, owning one token in a club with 1,000 tokens in circulation gives you more influence than owning one token in a club with 10,000. This point, along with a forensic dissection of the whole idea pushed by Socios, is in this recommended read from Martin Calladine’s blog The Ugly Game. https://theuglygame.wordpress.com/2020/ ... ngagement/

The bottom line here is that Socios is not a fan engagement business. It is a cryptocurrency business attempting to piggyback on the popularity of football.

It’s important to recognise that fact because there are very real issues to get to grips with. The whole question of the different and sometimes conflicting interests of matchgoing fans and fans who will realistically never get to the live event but are nonetheless passionate in their support has to be thought through much more thoroughly than it has been by both clubs and fan organisations. And that is just one detail in a bigger picture of a growing disconnect between sections of the customer base and the business.

Genuine, productive fan engagement is too important to be reduced to a transaction and hived off to a third party.
Hi Chester Perry, so the "magic money tree" grabs a fistful of cryptocurrency ideas. I can only repeat the final sentence: "Genuine, productive fan engagement is too important to be reduced to a transaction and hived off to a third party."

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 » Fri Mar 26, 2021 6:44 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Fri Mar 26, 2021 3:24 pm
Everton have been given government approval to go ahead with the development of Bramley Moore dock - you hope that it won't be under water in the next 25 to 30 years as a result of rising sea levels resulting from the climate crisis

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-m ... e-56541316
I love all the moves to modern 21st century stadiums. I must plan to visit all the "built in the 21st century" stadiums across the 4 English divisions.

Being flooded out of Bramley Moore dock would give a new meaning to "relegation." ;)

In Singapore there's a football pitch built in the harbour. From memory it doesn't have any sizeable spectator facilities, just a floating football pitch. Singapore loves reclaiming land from the sea. They also do the same in the Netherlands. Anyone know if any of the Dutch stadiums are on reclaimed land?

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 Mar 26, 2021 6:45 pm

Paul Waine wrote:
Fri Mar 26, 2021 6:34 pm
Hi Chester Perry, so the "magic money tree" grabs a fistful of cryptocurrency ideas. I can only repeat the final sentence: "Genuine, productive fan engagement is too important to be reduced to a transaction and hived off to a third party."
Paul. I have been posting my opposition to Socios on this thread for two years now, the concept is just awful as highlighted - not a fan of cryto-currency per se - the waste of energy involved is mind boggling

I saw a tweet yesterday responding to Elon Musk trumpeting the fact that it was now possible to by a tesla via bit-coin - it basically asked why he was destroying the reason for buying for buying the car in the first-place - Crypto-Currency is the biggest waste of our limited energy resources we have ever come up with as a species
This user liked this post: Paul Waine

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 » Fri Mar 26, 2021 6:54 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Fri Mar 26, 2021 6:45 pm
Paul. I have been posting my opposition to Socios on this thread for two years now, the concept is just awful as highlighted - not a fan of cryto-currency per se - the waste of energy involved is mind boggling

I saw a tweet yesterday responding to Elon Musk trumpeting the fact that it was now possible to by a tesla via bit-coin - it basically asked why he was destroying the reason for buying for buying the car in the first-place - Crypto-Currency is the biggest waste of our limited energy resources we have ever come up with as a species
I agree. I'm sure one or two of the "why I like crypto" fans will be along shortly to say that "high energy consumption" isn't essential for a successful cryptocurrency and, "in any case, all the bitcoin mining can be done with renewable energy." If you take a look at that thread you will see that I'm not one who sees any merit in any cryptocurrency.

Keep doing your great research and sharing of all the MMT stuff.

UTC

SingaporeClarets
Posts: 212
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 5:31 am
Been Liked: 43 times
Has Liked: 12 times
Location: The Little Red Dot

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by SingaporeClarets » Sat Mar 27, 2021 12:08 pm

Paul Waine wrote:
Fri Mar 26, 2021 6:44 pm
I love all the moves to modern 21st century stadiums. I must plan to visit all the "built in the 21st century" stadiums across the 4 English divisions.

Being flooded out of Bramley Moore dock would give a new meaning to "relegation." ;)

In Singapore there's a football pitch built in the harbour. From memory it doesn't have any sizeable spectator facilities, just a floating football pitch. Singapore loves reclaiming land from the sea. They also do the same in the Netherlands. Anyone know if any of the Dutch stadiums are on reclaimed land?
Surprisingly that "stadium" isn't itself on reclaimed land but is supposed to be the world's largest floating football stadium in amongst other uses as most of the time it's used for other things so you can't even tell that it can be used as a pitch. Not sure if they've started the demolition yet but it's being replaced with another multi purpose space over the next few years, which I think will also be floating.

Image

Image

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 Mar 27, 2021 1:11 pm

The sixth and final episode of the Telegraph's "to do list" looking at the issues focusing minds in the boardrooms of the big six - today is the turn of Tottenham Hotspur

Tottenham's summer to-do list: Overhaul squad, keep Harry Kane - and it's decision time on Jose Mourinho
MATT LAW MARCH 27, 2021

The spotlight falls on Tottenham for the sixth and final piece this week looking at the in-trays of executives and decision-makers at the Big Six.

Playing staff
Tottenham are in need of an overhaul of the squad, but whether or not chairman Daniel Levy is prepared to sanction it or accept that he will not be able to sell his players at the very top of the market remains to be seen.

If Jose Mourinho remains as head coach, then it is likely that Dele Alli and Harry Winks could consider their futures while the Portuguese would presumably like to move on Serge Aurier. Goalkeeper Hugo Lloris may well feel that it is time for a change, possibly back to France with Paris Saint-Germain. Burnley’s Nick Pope is currently viewed as his most likely successor, although funding such a move may depend on European qualification or player sales.

Mourinho would prioritise strengthening the centre of the Spurs defence and, even if the Portuguese leaves at the end of the season, then a new manager is likely to make the same conclusion. Lille’s Sven Botman and Southampton’s Jannik Vestergaard are two defenders who have been watched by Tottenham over recent months. Whether or not Aurier leaves, Spurs look in need of a new right-back. The club have long been admirers of Max Aarons at Norwich City, but Mourinho was previously not so keen on the England Under-21 international.

Gareth Bale has now confirmed that he expects to return to Real Madrid at the end of his season-long loan, but two players that Tottenham, Mourinho and any new manager would be desperate to keep are Heung-Min Son, who should sign a new contract, and Harry Kane. Is this really the summer Kane could go? Given his price tag, which exceeds £120million, it seems unlikely but Levy will hope that his resolve and Kane’s ambition is not seriously tested by a huge offer from one of Europe’s biggest clubs.

Non-playing staff
Jose Mourinho - stick or twist? This is the debate that has been doing the rounds with Tottenham fans since the turn of the year and it will not be an easy conclusion for Levy to come to. Should Spurs finish in the top four, then Mourinho will certainly stay, but what if they finish fifth and win the Carabao Cup? Then the decision becomes really difficult.

A first trophy in 13 years would normally be considered a success, but beating Manchester City in next month’s Carabao Cup final will not be enough to guarantee Mourinho job security past this season. The elimination from the Europa League was a huge blow to him and the club and he is now under serious pressure to deliver European football through Tottenham’s league position. Europa League qualification might just be enough if Spurs finish the season positively, but the club are desperate to avoid dropping into the newly-formed Europa Conference League or out of Europe all-together.

Levy must also consider the fans, who have not been able to attend games for a year and he will not want their return overshadowed by any sort of protests against the manager or widespread dissatisfaction. Were Levy to feel forced into sacking Mourinho, then RB Leipzig’s Julian Nagelsmann will be Tottenham’s top choice to replace him and it is believed the German is keen on the prospect of managing in the Premier League. Brendan Rodgers is another name that has been mentioned, but, other than being extremely expensive, he is unlikely to leave Leicester City for Spurs.

The business
The elephant in the room for Levy is that fact his £1billion Tottenham Hotspur stadium still does not have a name, two years after opening. The coronavirus pandemic has undoubtedly impacted Levy’s attempt to find a naming sponsor, but so too has his astronomical £25m-a-year asking price, which he had hoped, over 15 years, could earn the club £375m.

It is unclear whether or not Levy’s demands have dropped, but it became obvious he was no closer to finding a sponsor when he last month hired former Miami Dolphins executive Todd Kline as Tottenham’s new commercial officer. Kline’s principle responsibility is to find a naming rights partner for the stadium and his arrival coincided with a major shake-up of senior staff that has seen the departure of a number of department heads in commercial, marketing, retail and legal.

Spurs insiders believe the club has so far struggled to move from its traditional set-up towards the super-club that Levy has been trying to build and there is a concern that the connection with the traditional match-going supporters is gradually being eroded. That is an extremely tough balancing act for Levy, particularly as he quickly needs to maximise the huge earning potential of Tottenham’s new stadium once fans are allowed back in and corporate packages can be taken up again. No matter how nice the stadium experience is, however, it will be hard to charge premium prices to sponsors, businesses and wealthy supporters if Tottenham are not competing in the premium tournaments.

General housekeeping
Levy this year celebrated 20 years as chairman of Tottenham and yet the very best he can hope for is for the team to have won two League Cups during that period. Nobody can doubt he has transformed the club and yet it still operates far more successfully as a business than it does a football club.

Spurs, perhaps more than any other Premier League club in recent years, look in desperate need of a director of football who would be given the responsibility to manage the football side of Levy’s business. Steve Hitchen holds the job description of technical performance director, but, as proved by the loan signing of Gareth Bale last summer, it is still Levy who calls all the shots. And it would presumably be Levy who would choose a successor to Mourinho if the Portuguese were to leave at the end of this season.

Although Nagelsmann is clearly a strong leading candidate, what if he turned down the role or got a job elsewhere? Levy’s record for hiring managers is not particularly strong and the out-and-out successes can be counted on one hand with Mauricio Pochettino, Harry Redknapp and Martin Jol, the stand-out picks he has made so far. Jacques Santini, Juande Ramos, Andre Villas-Boas were sure-fire misses and the jury is still out on Mourinho and which side of the fence he will eventually land on.

elwaclaret
Posts: 8928
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:57 am
Been Liked: 1985 times
Has Liked: 2875 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by elwaclaret » Sat Mar 27, 2021 1:27 pm

It is the old story... how can a manager mould the club when a few points either way is considered success and failure. Each season Spurs seem to see some of their world class performers leave meaning often they have to bed in replacements. Players or rather their agents seem to have no interest in big projects and future improvement as they chase the big bucks and instant silverware options. Until clubs get less fire happy no manager can build what Levy wants... simply because not everyone buys into the big picture and he does not allow systematic progression to develop before new ideas rip up each ongoing plan.

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 Mar 27, 2021 2:06 pm

It appears that the Government/DCMS is actually wanting to go ahead with it's review into Football Governance (a manifesto pledge) - They are advertising for someone to head up the review process - here are the details

https://www.civilservicejobs.service.go ... de=1713797

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 » Sat Mar 27, 2021 6:06 pm

SingaporeClarets wrote:
Sat Mar 27, 2021 12:08 pm
Surprisingly that "stadium" isn't itself on reclaimed land but is supposed to be the world's largest floating football stadium in amongst other uses as most of the time it's used for other things so you can't even tell that it can be used as a pitch. Not sure if they've started the demolition yet but it's being replaced with another multi purpose space over the next few years, which I think will also be floating.

Image

Image
Great photos, SC. Thanks for posting. It looks like the "floating venue" has been further developed since the last time I was in Singapore in 2015. I used to visit for work at least 4 times a year, usually for 2 weeks at a time. I'm now retired and will visit Singapore again on some of my travels - when the world gets back to pre-covid times.

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 Mar 27, 2021 11:26 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Mon Jul 01, 2019 1:10 pm
Simon Chadwick picked up on something he saw at Glastonbury, reckoned that PSG and Qatar would be pleased and then illustrated why as he linked it to his soft power arguments

https://twitter.com/Prof_Chadwick/statu ... 4040012800" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://twitter.com/Prof_Chadwick/statu ... 7265216512" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Anyone remember this that iconic performance of "Thiago Silva" that took Glastonbury by storm in 2019 - Amid all of this weeks questioning of Qatar's record on human rights as the 2022 World Cup campaign gets under way Simon Chadwick looks at how Qatar have turned PSG into a huge vehicle of soft power that appears particularly influential to the so-called Generation X -

https://www.iris-france.org/155771-soft ... -of-qatar/

Soft Power Songs: PSG, Rap and the State of Qatar
Tribune26 mars 2021
By Professor Simon Chadwick, Professor and Director of Eurasian Sport at EMlyon, and Dr Paul Widdop, Associate Professor of Sport at Manchester Metropolitan University

The last time Glastonbury took place, in pre-pandemic 2019, a highlight of the music festival was the appearance of British rapper Dave on the ‘Other Stage’. During his performance, he beckoned a fifteen-year old onto the stage to join him in a rendition of what remains Dave’s best-known track – ‘Thiago Silva’.

At that time, Brazilian international footballer Silva was a stalwart centre-back, the main stay of Paris Saint Germain’s ‘le défenseur’ during its ascent to the top of French professional football. As the teenager clambered upon the stage, it became clear that he was wearing a now iconic PSG shirt replete with the logos of sponsors such as Ooredoo and QNB.

The Glastonbury PSG fest seemed inevitable; the video to accompany the track’s original launch in 2016, in which fellow British rapper A.J. Tracey appeared, was an homage to all things PSG including the club logo, its stadium and the suburbs of Paris from which the club traditionally draws its support.

It is not the first time that PSG, football and diverse urban communities have appeared together on-stage or in music videos. Other rap track videos in which PSG apparel appears centre-stage include Sugar MMFK’s ‘Trikot von Paris’, and Guy2Bezbar’s ‘BEBETO’.

Strong links between football, sports apparel and fashion are hardly new, the likes of the Fred Perry, Kappa and Lacoste brands have long had a symbiotic relation with the sport. Nor are connections between football and music a surprise, indeed one can even think of bands such as the Kaiser Chiefs which is named after a football club in South Africa and Saint-Etienne, named after a French Ligue 1 club.

However, the bonds and associations now being forged between Generation Z and PSG are particularly notable. Socio-culturally, they appear to reflect a sense of place and an urban identity that is rooted in sub-groups with diverse and sometimes multiple heritages, where consumption is inextricably bound-up in lifestyle, fashion and digital technology.

The role that PSG plays in people’s identity and sense of place warrants analysis in and of itself. However, it is the political backdrop to the clustering of young people around PSG, that is particularly intriguing. After all, the club is owned by Qatar Sports Investment, an investment vehicle through which the Gulf nation’s government acquires stakes in sports properties around the world. Meanwhile shirt sponsors Ooredoo (a telecommunications company) and QNB (a bank) are both Qatari stated-owned, adding a further interesting cultural-political dimension to the relationship between nation state and publics.

Qatar wrestled with its position in the world from a western standpoint. Indeed, this is a country that has struggled to shake-off its controversial associations with the right to host FIFA’s World Cup in 2022. Ever since the decision was made, Qatar has also been trying to shrug-off stories about its mistreatment of migrant workers and bribery. There are also concerns relating to equality, freedom and democracy.

Yet in the world of rap and the urban environments of Paris, London and other big European cities, for some young people Qatar-owned PSG is the epitome of cool and the embodiment of style, an unlikely emblem of their collective values. Whilst the symbols of state-led corporate Qatar add to the status-laden mix, as they adorn one of world football’s most desired items of apparel.

Nowhere is this convergence more apparent than in the video for Niska’s track ‘Freestyle PSG’, which depicts a lifestyle to which numerous people across the world presumably aspire. Indeed, when watching the video one is reminded of a banner that is often seen when driving around Doha: ‘Qatar deserves the best’.

Whilst the government in Qatar has tried to convince itself and the country’s population that they too deserve the best, the country has been similarly engaged in creating an equally compelling narrative in Paris and beyond. The world-record breaking signing by PSG in 2017 of Brazilian international Neymar being the most prominent example of this.

Neymar’s signing was classic soft power projection, especially as it took place at a time when Qatar’s near neighbours (such as Saudi Arabia) had just cut diplomatic relations with the government in Doha. Much has also been made of the small Gulf nation’s hosting of the 2022 World Cup, another attempt at soft power projection designed by Qatari government to convince the world that they want what many others also want.

Crucially, soft power is the opposite of hard power which involves coercion and force. Soft power is attractive power, a means through which a country attempts to convince others that it wants the same things as they do. But it is still power, which raises the issue of what it is that Qatar actually wants.

A small Gulf nation of less than three million people which, until 1971, was a British protectorate, Qatar is a strategically vulnerable country (precariously wedged in-between Saudi Arabia and Iran) about which people have historically known very little. It is also a country with huge oil and gas wealth.

Yet it is a country that is not without issues, the treatment of immigrant labourers being one such challenge. At the same time, Qatar remains a somewhat conservative nation, bound by the doctrine of Wahhabism. This has typically dictated that matters of gender equality and sexual orientation have not been addressed in the same way as in many other countries.

Nevertheless, Qatar is trying to reform, develop and change whilst at the same time trying to ensure that it becomes a relevant, legitimate and prominent member of the international community. It may seem like a big jump from the committee rooms of government in Doha to the ‘Other Stage’ at Glastonbury; in fact, it is not.

The legitimacy, relevance and visibility delivered by an association with rap, apparel and Thiago Silva is classic soft power. Instead of questioning the country’s ideology or highlighting the state’s failings, all that most people see is status, fashion and a lifestyle statement. In a world where symbols are an increasingly important measure of distinction or uniqueness, PSG’s is shining brighter than others influencing the everyday activities of influential youth groups. This is perhaps the underlying mechanism of soft power projection

In the same way that most people eat at McDonalds without questioning US foreign policy, or marvel at Brazilian football without thinking about deforestation in the Amazon, so Sugar MMFK and PSG make Qatar cool without people feeling the need to question the nation and its state. This, then, is the (rap) power of soft power.

—————–
This article belongs to the GeoSport platform, developed by IRIS and EM Lyon.

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 Mar 28, 2021 12:40 am

Chester Perry wrote:
Fri Mar 26, 2021 6:23 pm
An interesting statement on the judgements against 18 clubs in the National League re refusing to play matches as scheduled as a result of the finance distribution issues

National League Statement | Outcome Of Club Charges

 about an hour ago
By Oliver Osborn

An Independent Panel, commissioned by The National League, has met to hear the cases of 18 Member Clubs charged with alleged breaches of League Rules.

16 Member Clubs were charged with a breach of League Rule 8.39, 1 Member Club was charged with a breach of League Rule 4.2 and 1 Member Club was charged with a breach of both League Rule 4.2 and 8.39.

Rule 8.39 relates to any Club without just cause failing to fulfil an engagement to play a Competition match on an appointed date. Rule 4.2 provides The National League Board with the ability to issue an instruction, by way of Board Directive, in the best interests of any matter outside of the Rules. On this occasion, Rule 4.2 has been utilised to ensure The National League’s Covid-19 protocols are followed correctly by each Member Club.

The findings of the hearings, divided into three categories, can be found below:

Dover Athletic

An Independent Panel has ruled that Dover Athletic are deemed guilty of four breaches of Rule 8.39 for failing to meet fixture obligations between February 16th and February 27th.

The Club will play no further part in the 2020/21 Playing Season, with the Club’s existing National League (Step One) results expunged. A 12-point deduction for the 2021/22 Playing Season and fine of £40,000 have additionally been issued.

The Panel had regard to financial information provided by Dover Athletic and fully respected the responsibility of the Club’s Directors under Company Law.

However, the Panel also had to consider the integrity of the Competition and the actions of Dover Athletic in relation to the other 22 Clubs that continue to incur much costs as they fulfill their fixtures. Dover Athletic had avoided costs by not completing their Season alongside the other 22 Clubs. In addition, The National League basic award meant they were significantly benefiting from not completing the Season compared to the 22 Clubs that continued.

The Panel concluded that three points per breach should be deducted from the Club’s record in Playing Season 2021/22. In view of the current financial situation and in order to reflect the approach taken in other cases of breaches of Rule 8.39, the Independent Panel reduced the initial fine by 20% to £40,000.

Non-Fulfilment of Fixtures at Step Two

An Independent Panel has ruled that 16 Member Clubs participating in National League North and South (Step Two) are guilty of breaching Rule 8.39 for failing to meet fixture obligations.

Fines ranging from £1,400 to £8,000 in addition to a suspended points deduction for the 2021/22 Playing Season has been issued to each Member Club found guilty.

Given the extremely unusual circumstances that have affected football at all levels and the financial pressures the absence of spectators has brought to bear on clubs, the Panel expressed its sympathy with the Clubs’ predicament. However, the Panel believes it must also take regard of the fact that the majority of Clubs continued to fulfil fixtures and incur much costs until the League ended on February 19th.

Per breach, each Club received a £2,000 fine and suspended two-point deduction for the 2021/22 Playing Season. A 30% reduction was made to the fine for those accepting the charge ahead of the hearing.

Covid-19 Related Breaches

King’s Lynn Town and Southport have been found guilty by an Independent Panel of a breach of The National League’s Covid-19 protocols.

Season 2020/21 had started under restrictions imposed to help control the spread of Covid-19 virus. In order to ensure the Season could continue safely, The National League had developed a number of protocols with Club Process Flow Charts which were to be followed by Clubs.

The Panel imposed a 12-month suspended fine of £2,000 on King’s Lynn Town for an unintentional error, considered to be in the best efforts to ensure a fixture was played. The Club were warned for their future conduct in relation to Covid-19 protocols, with the suspended fine only to be issued if the Club is found guilty of a further breach of Covid-19 protocols.

The Panel issued a £2,000 fine to Southport for, based on the evidence received, misinformation of the status of a player’s Covid-19 test to avoid playing a fixture on dates set by the League. The Club were also warned their future conduct in relation to Covid-19 protocols.

*There is a right of appeal to the Football Association.
TwoHundredPercent.com on those judgements from the National League

The National League: From Despair to… Where?
by Ian | Mar 27, 2021

A rancorous season in the National League hit a new low yesterday afternoon, with the news that clubs that were unable to fulfil fixtures as the season ground to its inevitable halt will be punitively fined and docked points for next season as a result. In the perverse world that these three divisions have become over the course of this season, we probably should be surprised by this. The National League has acted all season as though it doesn’t actually like a lot of their member clubs, but they should still be called to account over the small question of what good this latest act of idiocy is actually intended to achieve.

To rewind briefly first, though, The National League season only even began after funding was made available through grants to enable this to happen. The grants were awarded at the start of October, and the calculation used to distribute it among clubs was heavily criticised. Whatever this calculation was, clubs had been led to believe that attendances and costs would be the driving factor behind it, but when the announcement of the distribution was made, few could work out any rhyme or reason behind the amounts given to different clubs. After calling investigators to look at the calculations they used, they then refused to make the findings public.

An altogether more egregious state of affairs, however, was already brewing. These grants were supposed to fund clubs through to the end of the year, but when the new year came around, the announcement was made that future funding would only come from loans from Sport England. It was clear that clubs had been misled. Many would not have started the season at all had they known that they would have been forced to borrow heavily against their future, while others complained that the league seemed to be encouraging clubs to take out loans that they would (at best) struggle to ever repay or, at worst, even effectively leading them towards the likelihood of a future insolvency event, which might even be considered illegal, under current insolvency law. The league ignored such complaints – though it never did explain how so many clubs could have got such a distinct impression that future funding would come through grants as well – and ploughed on regardless.

When it came around, the league’s vote over whether to continue the season only added to the mess. The clubs of the league voted overall for the National League season to continue for its North & South to be curtailed, all of which started to cause rifts between clubs that wanted to continue and those who felt that they couldn’t afford to. In the National League, Dover Athletic furloughed their players and stated bluntly that they couldn’t afford to continue and would be playing no further matches, while newly-promoted King’s Lynn Town stated that they could afford to play two further matches and no more.

Meanwhile, as the National League tried to continue as though everything was normal, the clubs below it who wanted to play on submitted a proposal for mini-leagues so that they could continue. The combined mini-league would have seen clubs play each other once, with the champions promoted automatically and another via play-offs, but the FA rejected this proposal, a decision which also ensured that there will no relegation from the National League come the end of this season. Their statement read:

Consideration was also given to an alternative sporting solution at step two in line with a proposal submitted by certain step two clubs that wished to continue playing.

The Alliance Committee rejected the proposal, and any alternative, in the interest of the integrity of the National League System.

Further reasons for this decision will be communicated directly to clubs in due course.

Setting aside the small matter of whether there is any integrity left at this level of the game after this disastrously managed season, that did, at least, seem to be that. The calculations had been made, the votes had been cast and, no matter how imperfect it might all have been, at least the matter of what actually was happening was finally put to bed once and for all. This, however, turned out to be wishful thinking, and late yesterday afternoon the National League announced that its independent panel had decided what to do with clubs who had to stop playing earlier this year because they couldn’t afford to continue.

The worst affected club is Dover Athletic. Dover have at least been consistent in being vocal about their precarious financial position since before the start of the season, and furloughed all of their players, management and staff in February because they felt they could not continue without ‘appropriate funding’ being put in place. They have been hit with a £40,000 fine and a twelve point deduction to be put in place for the start of next season. If the club were to end up folding – and it wouldn’t be remotely surprising if the owners thought, “What, exactly, is the point?” – then the National League itself can only be considered directly responsible for this having happened.

They’re not the only ones, either. Not all of them have made their fines public, but sixteen other clubs have also been hit with fines or points deductions, including Dulwich Hamlet and Slough Town (£8,000 each), Bradford Park Avenue (£6,000) and Southport (£4,000). Two clubs, Southport and King’s Lynn Town, have also been fined a further £2,000 each for breaches of Covid-19 protocols, with King’s Lynn’s being suspended because theirs was unintentional. Gateshead received a 30% deduction on a £2,000 fine imposed for failing to fulfil an away fixture at AFC Fylde that should have been played on the 13th of February because they accepted the charge.

Unsurprisingly, the response to all of this from the clubs most severely affected has been incandescent. Dover Athletic haven’t spoken publicly yet, other than to confirm that they “will be appealing to the Football Association and are also seeking legal advice”. Dulwich Hamlet’s chairman Ben Glasper told the Southwark News that, “We’ve put it to them in writing that we’re not going to put our players or physios in a position where we compel them to play, but it falls on completely deaf ears. It’s this idiotic determination to continue. They’ll get you onto a pitch whenever and how often they can.” Bradford Park Avenue’s Director of Football Martin Knight told the Bradford Telegraph & Argus that, “It is a joke – we could not financially afford to play those games They lied to us in October and put our club in financial jeopardy.”

Slough Town issued a statement in which they said that, “We are dismayed with the decision and will be submitting an appeal to the Football Association at the earliest opportunity.” Southport said that, “It is hugely disappointing that at a time when the clubs have had no income of their own whatsoever for over 12 months, and a number of clubs are clearly struggling to survive, the National League have seen fit to effectively ‘put the boot in’ by imposing financial sanctions for games that are of no relevance at all as they have been deemed “null and void”.

It mighe be argued that there is a logic behind these decisions. With no relegation to play for at the bottom of the National League, we might assume that the League wanted to send out a warning to other clubs who are still playing, but without anything much to play for. This, however, only really serves to underline how ridiculous the decision to force clubs to keep playing when they’d voted to send their season early. Unless we’re working to the ridiculous principle that clubs that have not been fulfilling their fixtures because they don’t want to, then why on earth are they being sanctioned when they’re already in a desperate financial position, and in no small part because the League itself lied to them and allowed them to believe that future funding beyond the end of last year would also come in the form of grants rather than loans?

Indeed, even the idea that clubs would be supported for the rest of the season by loans isn’t, strictly speaking, true. Clubs haven’t been given low interest loans – they were invited to apply for them, and not all of them were successful. When the grant money was distributed by the National League last year, Boreham Wood were, by the mysterious algorithm used by the League, one of its biggest beneficiaries. If they needed this support in October, one might assume that their application for a loan to continue would have been an open and shut case, but instead the club was told three weeks ago that its loan application had been rejected.

They’re not the only ones, either. Earlier this week, Chester found that their loan appplication had also been rejected, and the club’s financial prudence has been given as the reason for this rejection. The club’s statement on the matter hinted at the exasperation that is now being felt by many clubs at the cack-handed way in which this is being managed. If clubs that have been prudently run throughout this crisis are being rejected for loans, then what does that say about the National League’s attitudes to club finances? If loans were likely to be rejected, were the terms under which clubs could apply even made clear before they voted on whether to continue or not?

Because as things stand, the National League’s attitude seems to be that clubs should play on come what may, and that if there are casualties as a result of this, then, well, tough ****. It is a disgusting, amoral and negligent pose to strike, and the league’s reputation has already been shredded by the events of the last few months. Furthermore, the anger has now reached such a level that the directors of the League itself may well end up coming to reap what they’ve sewn. A number of clubs are now reported to be considering a vote of no confidence in the board of directors of the National League, and if those directors do all end up losing their positions come the League’s AGM in June, it can only really be considered that they will only have themselves to blame.

The National League lied to its clubs about future funding at the start of the season, when (and likely “because”) many of them would have refused to start the season had they known that would have had to be borrowing money to keep going come the turn of the year. The oversaw a hopelessly convoluted and divisive vote over whether to continue the season under the false pretence that clubs would definitely be able to get loans. Their conduct and their conduct alone has dragged the name of the League through the mud and they are now endangering the existence of their member clubs through punitive fines and apoints deductions over matters that the clubs could barely control. Morally bankrupt and dangerously incompetent, those running the National League need to be replaced at the earliest available opportunity, if only to safeguard the future of the clubs in their three divisions.

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 Mar 28, 2021 12:57 am

UEFA has had to remove two officials from office this week, one 3 years after he was first found guilty of the criminal offence that cost him his job - that is how long the appeal has taken apparently (very lucrative that extra three years at UEFA), the same official was a founding director of the ECA - This from the Associated Press

https://apnews.com/article/europe-inter ... b4142c6d40

UEFA removes 2 soccer officials linked to criminal cases
By GRAHAM DUNBAR
March 26, 2021

GENEVA (AP) — A Croatian soccer official sentenced to prison in a corruption case linked to a Luka Modrić transfer was removed from a committee overseeing the European Championship, UEFA said Friday.

Damir Vrbanović lost an appeal last week against his conviction and a three-year sentence in a ruling by the supreme court of Croatia.

Vrbanović, a former executive at Dinamo Zagreb and the Croatia soccer federation, had been reappointed by UEFA to its National Team Competitions Committee in 2019 while awaiting his appeal against the conviction the previous year.

UEFA also removed former Serbia soccer president Slavisa Kozeka from its committee overseeing the 55 European member federations.

Kozeka resigned as head of Serbian soccer on Monday after being linked to a fan group with alleged ties to organized crime.

“They are no longer members of their respective UEFA standing committees,” the European soccer body said Friday of Vrbanović and Kozeka.

In the Croatian case, the conviction was also upheld for Dinamo Zagreb coach Zoran Mamić, who resigned two days before his team beat Tottenham last week to reach the Europa League quarterfinals.

The case related to millions of dollars embezzled from transfers abroad of Dinamo players, including Modrić to Tottenham in 2008 and Dejan Lovren to Lyon in 2010. Both players testified in court in 2018 and had been accused of perjury.

The embezzlement trial in Croatia led to verdicts one week ahead of the 2018 World Cup in Russia. Soccer federation vice president Zdravko Mamić fled to Bosnia-Herzegovina before being sentenced to 6½ years in prison.

Mamić was a close ally of federation president Davor Šuker, the former Dinamo and Real Madrid forward who has been a member of UEFA’s executive committee since 2015.

Despite the turmoil, Modrić captained a Croatia team with Lovren in defense to the World Cup final, losing 4-2 against France. Modrić was voted FIFA best player in the world for 2018.

Vrbanović made headlines at the tournament when, as the convicted director general of Croatia’s soccer body, he sat in the VIP section at the quarterfinals game against Russia. In the same row of seats were then-Prime Minister of Russia Dmitry Medvedev and Croatia’s then-president Kolinda Grabar-Kitarović.

FIFA later said there was no restriction on Vrbanović because his conviction was not final while under appeal. UEFA said in 2018 it was awaiting developments in the case before taking action.

As a former Dinamo executive, Vrbanović was a founding board member in 2008 of the European Club Association.

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 Mar 28, 2021 11:59 am

We have been aware for a number of years now of HMRC's investigations into image rights for players and deals cooked up by agents and clubs, now it seems that the FA was guilty of it too - from the Mail, who as they often seem to do these days lift the story from another source

Harry Kane, Harry Maguire and Raheem Sterling 'among England stars facing tax demands from HMRC worth tens of thousands of pounds following probe into FA's image rights payments worth around £100,000-a-year to each player'
A HMRC probe into image rights payments to England stars may be launched
The Sun claim the FA and lawyers on behalf of the players met with the taxman
It has been reported that HMRC may demand tens of thousands of pounds in tax
The FA insisted they are adamant they want all payments to be 'correctly taxed'
By DANIEL DAVIS FOR MAILONLINE

PUBLISHED: 02:00, 28 March 2021 | UPDATED: 02:02, 28 March 2021

England's senior players may be involved in a tax probe with HMRC potentially set to demand tens of thousands of pounds from them, according to reports.

The investigation is said to centre on image rights money, which is paid by the FA.

The Sun claim the FA and lawyers on behalf of players met with HMRC last month - and the governing body are adamant they want to see all payments 'correctly taxed'.

Agreements around image rights see the FA paying its big-name stars for taking part in the promotional and commercial aspects of representing the national team.

It has been reported that Three Lions players will each net around £100,000-per-year in return for their names being used in material.

As part of the same report, The Sun highlighted that footballers will typically set up companies which will be tasked with overseeing their off-field income.

These separate firms will pay corporation tax at a rate of 19 per cent.

The top rate of tax for the hefty playing salaries of the athletes, however, stands at 45 per cent in comparison.

It is believed that the taxman is keen to crack down on the payments to companies.

The entirety of Gareth Southgate's senior squad is said to be involved in the probe.

An FA spokesman told The Sun: 'Promotional payments are paid either directly to the player, or into a player's designated image rights company.

'The players and the FA have engaged with HMRC to ensure all payments are correctly taxed.

'These discussions are ongoing and confidential.'

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 Mar 28, 2021 1:54 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Mon Oct 26, 2020 6:06 pm
TwoHundredPercent.com wonder if the bell is tolling for Southend Utd - this article echoes my own thoughts on the matter quite clearly - Wednesday really could be a death knell for the club, who have no one to blame but it's own board


https://twohundredpercent.net/bell-toll ... nd-united/
It is a while since I have posted about Southend Utd - things have not really improved - this is a fan's plea, an open letter to the club in video form - it is extremely moving

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSdOgXYl9kY

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 Mar 28, 2021 3:13 pm

Nick Harris better known on this thread as @SportingIntel with a piece outling the depth of gambling sponsorship in the English game for the Mail

There is NO guarantee betting firms will be banned from sponsoring football shirts after the Government concludes its review as audit reveals there are 193 deals with gambling companies in top four divisions
- The 20 Premier League clubs have 77 betting contracts worth £78m collectively
- Eight Premier League clubs have their shirts sponsored by betting companies
- EFL Chairman Rick Parry has warned against a ban on gambling sponsorship
- The Football League's 72 clubs have as many as 116 betting company contracts
By NICK HARRIS FOR THE MAIL ON SUNDAY

PUBLISHED: 00:15, 28 March 2021 | UPDATED: 02:17, 28 March 2021

There is no certainty betting firms will be banned from advertising on football club shirts when the Government's review of Britain's gambling laws concludes later this year, according to Whitehall sources.

The development comes as a Mail on Sunday 'audit' reveals that the 92 clubs in England's top four divisions have at least 193 separate sponsorship or advertising contracts with gambling firms between them, collectively worth £116.8 million.

Of those 193 deals, eight are shirt sponsors of Premier League clubs, 12 are shirt sponsors in the Championship, and two are shirt sponsors in the bottom two divisions, although neither of those, while still 'principal partners', appear on the shirts (at Ipswich and Wigan) after fan kickback at the agreements.

An outright ban on gambling shirt deals has long been mooted and in recent months it has been suggested the Prime Minister Boris Johnson might personally push for this.

'It's an option and not ruled out, although it's becoming clear that gambling money is an important revenue stream at some clubs,' said one insider.

Asked if shirt sponsorship might be banned as all other gambling tie-ups remain legal, whether via official club 'betting partners', pitch-side hoarding adverts for gambling firms or in-stadium betting providers, another person familiar with the review said: 'Nothing is off the table. You could see nothing banned or everything banned, but I wouldn't think the latter.'

Rick Parry, the chairman of the EFL and thus responsible for the 72 clubs in the three divisions below the Premier League, said earlier this month that a ban on gambling sponsorship in football would be 'catastrophic'. Arguing that there is nothing intrinsically harmful about betting firm ads, he told the Financial Times: 'There's no evidence to suggest that banning sponsorship will reduce the prevalence of problem gambling.'

Others would argue otherwise, citing leaps in gambling addiction as betting has become more 'normalised' and accessible, not least via the internet. The Royal College of Psychiatrists say 'problem gambling' (defined as 'gambling that disrupts or damages personal, family or recreational pursuits') affects almost one per cent of people and that seven per cent 'gamble at risky levels that can become a problem in the future'. Other studies estimate between 300,000 and 1.2m problem gamblers in the UK.

The review will be finished 'in months not weeks' and even when recommendations are made or the law is change, any amendments are likely to be phased in over a period of years rather than in one go.

The Mail on Sunday 'audit' found the 20 Premier League clubs this season to have 77 betting firm contracts worth £78m collectively, at least.

Eight have gambling firms as main shirt sponsors, from West Ham's £10m-a-year deal with Betway to Fulham's £3m-a-year deal with BetVictor; three clubs have betting firm sleeve sponsors; 16 clubs have a combined 28 betting partners who are not also shirt sponsors (Leicester alone have five); 18 have in-stadium betting contracts for match day wagers; and all 20 have deals that facilitate one or more betting firms placing hoarding ads.

The Football League's 72 clubs have 116 betting company contracts collectively worth around £38.8m, with 61 of those in the Championship (12 shirt sponsors, plus assorted betting partners, on-site betting partners and hoarding deals) collectively worth £26.8m.

The 48 clubs in the bottom two divisions have 55 deals worth around £12m, with all EFL clubs being obliged to promote EFL sponsors SkyBet.
Last edited by Chester Perry on Mon Mar 29, 2021 1:10 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 » Sun Mar 28, 2021 10:39 pm

Dover Athletic come out fighting against the national Leagues latest judgement against them

https://twitter.com/Ollie_Bayliss/statu ... 8947445767

"We won't be paying the fine, we'll be taking legal action.

They know we've got no money. They know we've done this to prevent the club becoming insolvent & yet they've fined us £40,000 which will push us into insolvency."

elwaclaret
Posts: 8928
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:57 am
Been Liked: 1985 times
Has Liked: 2875 times

Re: Football's Magic Money Tree

Post by elwaclaret » Sun Mar 28, 2021 10:59 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Sun Mar 28, 2021 10:39 pm
Dover Athletic come out fighting against the national Leagues latest judgement against them

https://twitter.com/Ollie_Bayliss/statu ... 8947445767

"We won't be paying the fine, we'll be taking legal action.

They know we've got no money. They know we've done this to prevent the club becoming insolvent & yet they've fined us £40,000 which will push us into insolvency."
Seems a fairly even split of opinion. One of those were you can see both sides, a lot more than those involved who seem very partisan either way. Are Dover a flash club, has that led to the anti-feeling?

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 Mar 28, 2021 11:27 pm

elwaclaret wrote:
Sun Mar 28, 2021 10:59 pm
Seems a fairly even split of opinion. One of those were you can see both sides, a lot more than those involved who seem very partisan either way. Are Dover a flash club, has that led to the anti-feeling?
Not a flash club, well run by all accounts, which is why Sport England refused to give them any money - a common issue, see my post about Chester FC earlier this week - Dover were one of the clubs protesting about the National Leagues distribution of Lottery money earlier in the season.

In short the administration of the National League in the last 12 months has been nothing but divisive and they have been particularly lacking in empathy to those clubs that are well managed and are more concerned with survival than those who want to finish the league and earn promotion (not all of them can). The attitude seems to be that someone will come along and save them or another team will take their place. Pretty Shoddy all round and Brian Barwick (National League Chair) should have left by now.
This user liked this post: elwaclaret

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 Mar 29, 2021 11:17 am

The non-league paper with an article illustrating the have's and have not's in government support this winter

Chesterfield bag £1 million Sport England loan but Chester denied
on 28 March 2021
By Jon Couch

CHESTER have confirmed that the club’s application to the Sports Winter Survival Package for a loan has been turned down – while Chesterfield were granted a cool £1 million!

The National League North Blues were one of a number of clubs to request for financial help from the Government with revenue streams blocked by Covid restrictions.

It was initially understood that assistance to clubs at Steps 1 and 2 would come by the way of grants but that was later denied by the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport (DCMS) with clubs urged to apply for a low-interest loan instead.

Despite their season at Step 2 being declared null and void last month, Chester filed an application through the £300 million Sports Winter Survival Package but announced this week they have been turned down as the club were deemed to be no longer at risk.

A club statement read: “Sport England has provided a detailed explanation of its reasoning, and while disappointed, we accept the decision of the assessment board and thank them for their consideration.

“We are pleased the assessment board acknowledged we have experienced a significant fall in revenues due to the impact of COVID and noted our prudent financial management.

“Chester FC operates as a financially-sustainable football club without debt and maintains a special reserve, so therefore, we were not considered to be at risk of no longer trading viably by the end of this financial year.”

In contrast, however, Chesterfield – who are still playing behind closed doors in the National League at Step 1 – say they have been approved for a loan of just under £1 million.

Chairman Mike Goodwin told the club’s website: “We are one of the first clubs to receive the loan, which will be used to underpin our operational costs.

“It will make a significant difference to us during these challenging times and we would like to thank the National League and Sport England for their valued support.”

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 Mar 29, 2021 11:31 am

Bournemouth have released their 2019/20 financial accounts, just a £60m loss, nothing to see there!! I am wondering how they will go on for FFP in the EFL this season and that may account for the fire sale

Club Statement
https://www.afcb.co.uk/news/club-news/c ... ccounts-1/

Accounts
https://www.afcb.co.uk/media/189462/afc ... e-2020.pdf

The Athletic look like they had an early view of them

https://twitter.com/AhmedShooble/status ... 4914193411

https://theathletic.com/2480733/2021/03 ... -on-demin/

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 Mar 29, 2021 1:21 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Thu Nov 26, 2020 6:03 pm
The vultures are at the door

following the apparent success in getting involved in Italy's Serie A and decreased value in recent sales of Bundesliga rights - Private Equity is now looking to get involved in the ownership overseas Broadcast rights of the Bundesliga - from SportsProMedia

Report: Bundesliga’s overseas media rights attracting private equity interest
Advent International and BC Partners eyeing minority stake in Bundesliga International.

Posted: November 25 2020 By: Sam Carp


- Bain Capital, CVC Capital Partners, General Atlantic and KKR & Co named as other potential bidders
- DFL reportedly to discuss whether to invite proposals at 7th December board meeting
- CVC and Advent saw €1.7bn Serie A offer accepted last week

Advent International and BC Partners are among a handful of private equity firms showing an interest in the Bundesliga’s international media rights, according to Bloomberg.

The news agency reports that the two companies have approached the German Football League (DFL) about potentially acquiring a minority stake in Bundesliga International, which handles overseas media rights sales for Germany’s top two soccer leagues.

Other potential bidders could include Bain Capital, CVC Capital Partners, General Atlantic and KKR & Co, according to Bloomberg, which added that there is no guarantee firm offers will materialise.

The DFL declined to comment when contacted by SportsPro.

The report comes a week after Italian soccer’s Serie A accepted a €1.7 billion (US$2 billion) offer from CVC, Advent and state-backed FSI for a ten per cent stake in a new company managing the competition’s media rights.

The value of the Bundesliga’s overseas media rights currently lags behind that of England’s Premier League and La Liga in Spain.

A report by Sponsors.de in September claimed that the DFL could see the amount it receives from its international broadcast contracts for the 2020/21 season fall by as much as 20 per cent from the €250 million (US$295 million) Bundesliga International brought in during the last campaign.

That came shortly after BeIN Sports, the Bundesliga’s previous broadcast partner in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), chose not to renew its five-year, €200 million (US$236 million) rights deal with the league over piracy concerns.

Should the DFL choose to go down the private equity route, it would use the new investment to grow its brand globally, according to Bloomberg, which said that league officials will now discuss whether to invite proposals at a board meeting scheduled for 7th December.
The vultures are being invited in by the Bundesliga, who have now sent a prospectus to Private Equity groups with a view of selling a 25% stake in it's commercial media and digital arms - from SportsBusiness.com

Bundesliga could offer PE firms ‘up to 25.1-per-cent stake’ in new unit, prospectus reveals
Ben Cronin, Europe Editor
March 29, 2021

The German Football League (DFL) has sent a prospectus to private equity firms outlining how it could share up to a 25.1-per-cent stake in a new unit marketing the Bundesliga’s international media and data rights.

The prospectus, which has been sent to 30 private equity firms and data specialists, reveals the DFL would seek to create two new subsidiaries – ‘MediaCo’ and ‘DigitalCo’ – to enable outward investment, Frankfurter Allgemeine reports. The DFL has confirmed the report is accurate.

The MediaCo unit would market the league’s foreign media rights and build a new OTT platform for the league, while a second DigitalCo would market the rights to the Bundesliga’s esports competitions. The existing ‘Bundesliga International’ subsidiary, which has been marketing the league’s global media rights since 2008, would be merged into the new MediaCo unit.

The league, which is being advised by the Nomura investment bank, will give interested parties around six weeks to express their interest before submitting non-binding indicative offers towards the end of April or early May.

The DFL and its advisors would then shortlist five proposals for more serious consideration before the 36 clubs in the top-tier Bundesliga and second-tier 2. Bundesliga would be called to vote on the proposals at an extraordinary session.

DFL managing director Christian Seifert told the German publication: “The construction essentially envisages a new company that will receive the license to exploit international media rights and global marketing rights for 25 years.

“This underlines the solid long-term investment approach, which offers both clubs and investors security when entering and also when exiting. Private equity firms are usually partners on a temporary basis, and under our model an exit is possible after a few years without any problems.”

SportBusiness understands the proposal does not currently have unanimous support from the clubs, with leading Bundesliga side Borussia Dortmund thought to be the strongest opponent.

Asked by Frankfurter Allgemeine how the clubs would react, Seifert said: “I cannot estimate that yet, we are talking about 36 small- and medium-sized companies with heterogeneous structures and individual strategies. Ultimately, it will be up to the bidders to convince the 36 Bundesliga and 2. Bundesliga clubs of the value and strategic relevance of their offers.”

The DFL is also at pains to stress that it had been talking to private equity houses before the Covid-19 pandemic, and the calls for outside investment were not completely related to the health crisis.

Seifert said: “There is a huge amount of interest in the market. The DFL was founded as a league organization, but is now also an international media group. We have been approached repeatedly by well-known private equity firms in recent years. In the course of the Corona crisis, the demand for investment opportunities in sports and media companies has increased again. It would be negligent for the clubs not to consider such options.”

Nomura previously advised the Bundesliga last April about the possibility of securing a bridging loan in the event that the league was unable to complete its season as a consequence of the Covid pandemic. However, games were eventually able to resume behind closed doors.

Reports that the league was considering private equity investment for its international arm first emerged last November. At the time Bloomberg reported Advent International and BC Partners were among suitors to have contacted the DFL.

Elsewhere in European football, Serie A clubs have accepted an offer from private equity companies including CVC for a 10-per-cent stake in a new entity that will manage its media-rights business. However, the deal has yet to be rubber-stamped and appears more doubtful following a better than expected domestic media rights tender.

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 Mar 29, 2021 1:40 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Mon Mar 29, 2021 11:31 am
Bournemouth have released their 2019/20 financial accounts, just a £60m loss, nothing to see there!! I am wondering how they will go on for FFP in the EFL this season and that may account for the fire sale

Club Statement
https://www.afcb.co.uk/news/club-news/c ... ccounts-1/

Accounts
https://www.afcb.co.uk/media/189462/afc ... e-2020.pdf

The Athletic look like they had an early view of them

https://twitter.com/AhmedShooble/status ... 4914193411

https://theathletic.com/2480733/2021/03 ... -on-demin/
@KieranMaguire has been looking at those Bournemouth 2019/20 financial results

https://twitter.com/KieranMaguire/statu ... 0574399489

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 Mar 29, 2021 1:49 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Mon Mar 29, 2021 11:17 am
The non-league paper with an article illustrating the have's and have not's in government support this winter

Chesterfield bag £1 million Sport England loan but Chester denied
on 28 March 2021
By Jon Couch

CHESTER have confirmed that the club’s application to the Sports Winter Survival Package for a loan has been turned down – while Chesterfield were granted a cool £1 million!

The National League North Blues were one of a number of clubs to request for financial help from the Government with revenue streams blocked by Covid restrictions.

It was initially understood that assistance to clubs at Steps 1 and 2 would come by the way of grants but that was later denied by the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport (DCMS) with clubs urged to apply for a low-interest loan instead.

Despite their season at Step 2 being declared null and void last month, Chester filed an application through the £300 million Sports Winter Survival Package but announced this week they have been turned down as the club were deemed to be no longer at risk.

A club statement read: “Sport England has provided a detailed explanation of its reasoning, and while disappointed, we accept the decision of the assessment board and thank them for their consideration.

“We are pleased the assessment board acknowledged we have experienced a significant fall in revenues due to the impact of COVID and noted our prudent financial management.

“Chester FC operates as a financially-sustainable football club without debt and maintains a special reserve, so therefore, we were not considered to be at risk of no longer trading viably by the end of this financial year.”

In contrast, however, Chesterfield – who are still playing behind closed doors in the National League at Step 1 – say they have been approved for a loan of just under £1 million.

Chairman Mike Goodwin told the club’s website: “We are one of the first clubs to receive the loan, which will be used to underpin our operational costs.

“It will make a significant difference to us during these challenging times and we would like to thank the National League and Sport England for their valued support.”
There are moves to try and get an Extraordinary General Meeting of the National League so that the board can be voted out

https://twitter.com/Ollie_Bayliss/statu ... 0277411842

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 Mar 29, 2021 2:47 pm

Sounds like there may be a scandal brewing in Spanish football - along the lines of British Cycling - Clubs involved include Barcelona, Real Madrid, Valencia and Real Betis - Though we have been here before with a whole range of Spanish sport (not that we as country appear much different it has to be said)

https://twitter.com/tariqpanja/status/1 ... 6434288647

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 Mar 29, 2021 3:11 pm

Saudi Arabia appears to be building up it's soft power/sports washing/legitimisation presence in football - following taliks earlier in the year of a huge sponsorship for Real Madrid's women's team the sport's based city of Neom (still in construction) is to sponsor the Asian Football confederation). This is a definite ramp=up in activity - how long before a major European men's team follows - though they would have to beware the fall out of losing refional tv deals offered by BeIN Sport, which kind of opens the door to the Bundesliga and Serie A.

https://twitter.com/Prof_Chadwick/statu ... 5211134976

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 Mar 29, 2021 3:22 pm

We know West Bromwich Albion have been up for sale for a while -- things might just have got a hurry up from the Chinese government who have removed the license for the owners Chinese team

https://twitter.com/Prof_Chadwick/statu ... 6293378051
Last edited by Chester Perry on Tue Mar 30, 2021 3:20 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 Mar 29, 2021 6:12 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Mon Mar 29, 2021 1:49 pm
There are moves to try and get an Extraordinary General Meeting of the National League so that the board can be voted out

https://twitter.com/Ollie_Bayliss/statu ... 0277411842
Today's Price of Football Podcast has an excellent interview with a Director of Chippenham one of the clubs fined by the National League

https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cH ... IBBAF&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 Mar 29, 2021 11:07 pm

the EFL has finally managed to borrow some money £171.5m to help put Championship clubs from the American based MetLife Investment Management - it is suspected that much will be used to meet tax obligations that have been deferred until now. There is no indication of interest rate but it will be much higher than the 0.5% from the BoE whose terms the EFL clubs could not abide by - EFL statement


League secures Championship loan fund
3 Hours ago

The EFL has today agreed a new £117.5m funding package from MetLife Investment Management, the institutional asset management business of MetLife Inc., to support Championship Clubs in meeting PAYE liabilities.

It follows the announcement in December 2020 in respect of up to £50m of financial aid being made available for League One and Two Clubs by the Premier League, who have also provided a payment commitment of up to £15m in support of the EFL securing this loan facility.

The transaction was agreed with MetLife Investment Management following a competitive bidding process in which the EFL received solicited and unsolicited financing proposals from a wide range of potential private financing providers and UK banks alongside discussing loan options with the UK Government that could not be progressed due to the restrictions being imposed.

This funding commitment from MetLife Investment Management will provide immediate additional funding to Championship Clubs, who have now played the equivalent of a full season without spectators in attendance and during which time have lost approximately £150m in gate receipts and missed out on other matchday revenue streams.

The size of the loan facility being provided by MetLife Investment Management matches the total amount requested by Championship Clubs.

EFL Chair, Rick Parry said:

“This past month has marked an unwelcome anniversary for football with supporters now being unable to attend matches for a 12-month period, resulting in multiple negative consequences. This is therefore a much welcome, timely package of support for Championship Clubs, whose operations have continued to incur significant costs without generating anywhere near normal levels of revenue.

“I’d like to thank MetLife Investment Management for the positive, proactive approach they adopted throughout our negotiations and for meeting our requirements in what are a unique set of circumstances. The support will be pivotal to Clubs being able to re-evaluate their financial position and help them start to plot their way out of the pandemic and plan with greater certainty for 2021/22 when we are hoping for the return of fans in large numbers.”

Steven J. Goulart, President of MetLife Investment Management and Chief Investment Officer, MetLife Inc., said:

“We know that a healthy and vibrant football environment with strong and resilient clubs is important for the U.K.

“We’re pleased to work with the EFL so that they can support their Championship Clubs with additional funding in a time of need, further building a strong and sustainable football landscape and ultimately supporting the communities of which they are a part.”

Additional information:

- EY acted as Independent Financial Advisor to the EFL in respect of this financing
- Herbert Smith Freehills acted as external legal counsel to the EFL.
- MetLife Investment Management was advised by Linklaters in respect of their provision of this loan facility
- As part of this financing package, the EFL obtained an investment grade private credit rating from Fitch Ratings
- This was reflective of the underlying credit strength of the EFL and enabled the League to secure attractive and competitive financing terms.
- The loan facility is provided to support Clubs in the Championship to meet PAYE liabilities up to the end of 30 June 2021.
- Any Club in receipt of a loan payment as detailed will be required to continue to maintain compliance with the EFL’s financial regulations.

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 Mar 29, 2021 11:15 pm

If you remember the EFL were given an "up to" £200m funding package for the Championship a few months back, though the small print and qualifications meant that hardly any club met the criteria - what was given was the £15m to cover the fees/interest for this loan - this article in the Athletic is the only one I have found so far that seems to remember this with me

https://twitter.com/mjshrimper/status/1 ... 0921255938
https://theathletic.com/news/efl-bailou ... uWgSASDPXo

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 Mar 29, 2021 11:24 pm

This report from the Financial Times on that EFL loan gives a refresher to those who have forgotten about why the BoE loan was unworkable

Football League turns to MetLife after BoE Covid support falls through
SAMUEL AGINI MARCH 29, 2021

The English Football League has turned to US insurer MetLife to help finance clubs after its deal to borrow from the Bank of England’s emergency coronavirus financing scheme collapsed.

MetLife Investment Management, a unit of the insurer, has agreed to lend £117.5m to the EFL, which runs lower league football in England. It will use the money to provide funding to clubs in the second-tier Championship to help them meet employee tax liabilities until June.

“The support will be pivotal to clubs being able to re-evaluate their financial position, and help them start to plot their way out of the pandemic and plan with greater certainty for 2021-22 when we are hoping for the return of fans in large numbers,” said Rick Parry, chair of the EFL.

The EFL had in January agreed to borrow £75m through the Bank of England’s emergency Covid-19 support facility, but was forced to seek alternatives because the Treasury imposed conditions requiring restraints on player pay.

The MetLife financing underlines the growing reliance of football leagues and clubs on private sources of capital as they look to survive the financial strains caused by the coronavirus pandemic.

It also highlights the government’s unwillingness to offer financial support to football clubs because of the billions of pounds in the game. The government has allocated hundreds of millions of pounds to other sports, however, including rugby and cricket.

Championship clubs’ pursuit of promotion to the elite Premier League, the richest domestic football division in the world, has led to soaring salary inflation. Those costs have become stifling in the absence of fans from stadiums because of pandemic restrictions.

Championship clubs have missed out on about £150m in ticket sales and other match-day revenues.

The interest rate charged by MetLife was not disclosed but the EFL said the terms of the loan were “attractive and competitive”. The governing body had, however, pursued state lending because it was cheaper than in the private sector.

Talks between the EFL and MetLife were previously reported by the Financial Times.

People close to the EFL said the Treasury had imposed restrictions on salary increases and bonuses that would extend from board directors and executives to the players themselves.

Without adhering to those curbs, the BoE loan would have had to be repaid on May 19, when pay restraints would have been due to come into force.

“Companies taking out these loans must agree to certain conditions on dividends and pay restraint, including pay rises and bonuses for footballers, as taxpayers would expect,” the Treasury said.

The EFL said it received an investment-grade private credit rating from Fitch Ratings as part of the MetLife financing, while the Premier League previously guaranteed that it would meet interest payments of up to £15m a year on its debt.

“We’re pleased to work with the EFL so that they can support their Championship clubs with additional funding in a time of need, further building a strong and sustainable football landscape and, ultimately, supporting the communities of which they are a part,” said Steven Goulart, chief investment officer of MetLife.

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 Mar 29, 2021 11:42 pm

On Wednesday there will be a significant meeting at UEFA, it will essentially ratify the proposals for a revamped post 2024 Champions league, it will make it bigger, it will use the Swiss system, it will likely ignore the demands of the European Leagues and fan groups and have a 10 game group stage. It will not determine how the extra 4 teams will qualify or what the financial distribution model will be (we don't know what it will be for the Europa Conference next season yet and that will impact the Europa League and possibly the Champions League). Unfortunately for Football Wednesday is not April 1st - this is going to happen. Here the New York Times explains how it is going to work

The Champions League Is Changing. Here’s How It Will Work.
MARCH 29, 2021

European soccer’s premier club competition, the Champions League, is remaking itself.

After more than a generation in its current form, the Champions League is about to become an actual league for the first time. Organizers say the changes will produce better matchups, fewer meaningless games, and more drama. Critics say it’s about what these kinds of changes are always about: money.

The new-look Champions League is set to be rubber-stamped and revealed by the leaders of European soccer’s governing body, UEFA, perhaps as soon as their meeting this week. What will emerge is a competition expanded to 36 teams from its current 32, and one that dispenses with its long-established group-stage format in favor of a single league table that will decide who advances to the knockout rounds.

The benefits for organizers are obvious: By the time the winner has lifted the European Cup, the competition will have produced 100 new games to sell to broadcasters, and the finalists will have played at least 17 matches, four more than under the current format.

European soccer officials have promoted the changes by arguing the new format will add more excitement, and ensure that nearly all the teams will have a chance to make the knockout rounds right up to their final games. They have spent less time highlighting the added workload on weary players, or that they plan to reserve two places in the league for so-called historically significant teams who might have otherwise failed to qualify.

But first, everyone will have to learn how it works.

How the Champions League works now
Before we explain the new setup, here is a brief look at how the tournament unfolds now, using the current season and teams.

Currently, the opening round of the Champions League, the group stage, is made up of eight groups with four teams each.

The 32 teams are placed into the groups through a draw. Rankings keep the groups roughly equal in difficulty, and teams from the same country are intentionally kept apart at this stage.

Each team plays home and away games against the other three teams in its group. Three points are awarded for a win and one point for a draw.

The knockout round that follows resembles the latter stages of the World Cup or the N.C.A.A. basketball championship, except that paired teams play home and away matches to determine a winner, rather than a single elimination game.

How the new format will work
UEFA’s new plan does away with the group stage in favor of a single Champions League table, a format familiar to anyone who follows a domestic league.

By placing all the participants into one 36-team table, the organizers had two goals. The first was economic: more games meant more revenue from ticket sales, sponsorships and broadcast rights. The second, more altruistic objective, was to increase the chances that the later games would matter, and matter to more teams.

In the new format, each team will play 10 games against a group of opponents diverse in both quality and geography. The league setup is not perfect; not all teams will meet, and there will inevitably be grumbling about harder or weaker draws.

But its length could help negate minor injuries as decisive factors, and could ensure that nearly all participants still have a shot at making the knockouts — or at least to prevent an opponent from advancing — right up until the last round of games.

Here’s how it might work.

The spots in the 36-team field will almost all be awarded through existing qualifying matches and domestic league performance in the previous season.

A draw, with the teams placed in one of four pots based on their previous performances in the Champions League and the second-tier Europa League competition, will match each club with 10 opponents from throughout the table.

Let’s use Bayern Munich, last season’s champion, as an example. Bayern would play each of these opponents once.

Five of the games would be home matches and five would be away.

Groups are out, a single table is in
Once they are announced, the changes will be final, but the grumbling about the new Champions League will continue. Some of the changes — like the carveouts for legacy clubs — will infuriate those who believe participation should be on merit alone.

Others in Europe’s top leagues had been militant in opposing the possibility of extra games. Still more will oppose any alterations to a beloved soccer competition on principle, and especially because UEFA appears to have bowed to most of the demands of a group of elite clubs, who’ll likely only grow richer.

But there will be plenty of time for those complaints. The changes would not take effect until 2024.

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 Mar 29, 2021 11:51 pm

It is interesting how the ECA's vision for the women's game parallels and and diverges from that Agnelli has for the men's game. Today the ECA added membership to the top women's clubs as it extended it its reach and power base. - this from the Associated Press

https://apnews.com/article/europe-socce ... bd411d3309

European women’s soccer vision sees place for indie clubs
By GRAHAM DUNBAR
today

GENEVA (AP) — Independent teams should have a place beside storied names from men’s soccer even as the women’s game develops rapidly, the organization of Europe’s top clubs said Monday.

Clubs such as Fortuna Hjørring and Glasgow City — which do not have men’s teams — are currently a fixture in the later knockout rounds of the UEFA Women’s Champions League.

The competition figures to get only tougher for the long-standing independents after Juventus and Real Madrid bought into women’s soccer in the past four years.

Creating new clubs is one of six key goals in a strategy for women’s soccer published by the European Club Association, which represents around 250 men’s clubs.

Those new clubs should include “big brands” and “green field clubs” joining the sport, said ECA chief executive Charlie Marshall.

“Finding avenues to launch, to grow and to professionalize new clubs is a big part of what we want to try to achieve,” he told reporters in an online briefing.

The document also foresees providing a “care package” to support clubs that are “teetering on the verge of existence.”

Marshall acknowledged the bigger men’s clubs would continue to invest in women’s soccer and “that is not something that is going to be prevented or indeed should be prevented.”

Juventus and Madrid bought the license of local women’s clubs that were then rebranded in their names, while Manchester United created a team in 2018 that won promotion to the top-tier English division in its debut season.

The appeal of the Women’s Super League in England was shown with a breakout domestic broadcasting deal announced this month.

One attraction for the biggest clubs is changes to the UEFA Women’s Champions League, which was won for the past five seasons by Lyon.

Next season it will have three teams instead of two from the top-ranked nations — including England and Spain — plus a new 16-team group stage. The final will be hosted at the 41,000-capacity home of Juventus in Turin.

Another key aim in the ECA is “development of the competition landscape,” with a second European club competition targeted.

FIFA also has a long-time goal of creating a Club World Cup. With strong opponents from the United States, Europe would be less likely to dominate as it has in the men’s version.

The ECA strategy also seeks to run more medical research and data analysis projects that are currently lacking in women’s soccer.

Sharing details of running youth academies is a main target, said Claire Bloomfield, the ECA head of women’s football.

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 Mar 30, 2021 12:04 am

There are suggestions that Red Bull are looking to acquire a team in LigaMX

https://twitter.com/herculezg/status/13 ... 6859012096

not sure how that would work in a combined MLS/LigaMX

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 Mar 30, 2021 1:03 am

@YannickRamcke with a really detailed blog-piece looking at the new realities for sports rights holders/owners in a world of Audience fragmentation and regulation preventing exclusivity. - in short there is a need for a lot of extra effort from the rights owners in the provision on meaningful and timely content if they want to maximise opportunities, including getting the right content and distribution channels for the audience sector they are targeting (something clearly demonstrated by the NFL in their new deals recently).

https://www.offthefieldbusiness.de/sing ... -licensees

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 Mar 30, 2021 11:41 am

KPMG's Football Benchmark with a piece that analyses the relationship between clubs’ social media followers1 and their commercial revenues and how this has evolved over the past five years. The day after they Real Madrid won the title last season they produced 180 different releases across a range of social media platforms. Many of us freely acknowledge just how much our club under-utilises it's platforms as a way of growing it's audience and revenues. This illustrates why it can be so important. It is also interesting that in what has been a middling season for Real Madrid that they have grown their social media presence by 15 million subscribers - a total beyond the wildest dreams of our club.

https://footballbenchmark.com/library/c ... cial_media

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 Mar 30, 2021 12:09 pm

A fascinating article looking at relegation from the top 5 Leagues in Europe - some great stats on how previous finishes can increase the odds of relegation in the next season too - from Tifosy.com

https://www.tifosy.com/en/insights/rele ... ce=Twitter

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 » Tue Mar 30, 2021 12:12 pm

Good article that one about social media activities.

Have you seen the Athletic interview with the 2 agents?
Some strong words about Fifa in that.

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 Mar 30, 2021 12:21 pm

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:
Tue Mar 30, 2021 12:12 pm
Good article that one about social media activities.

Have you seen the Athletic interview with the 2 agents?
Some strong words about Fifa in that.
yes it is very interesting and part of the ongoing campaign against FIFA regulation I have posted about in the last year, interesting change in tome from these guys to how they usually present themselves though Raiola cannot help being Raiola. I have said before that they are good at looking after their clients, and they seem to have convinced the guys at the Athletic of their worth in the last few months following a series of interviews with these two and Mendes. Though Mendes is actually under investigation I think in Spain/Portugal.

for those who missed it the article is a decent read

https://theathletic.com/2483756/?source=twitteruk

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 Mar 30, 2021 12:45 pm

the vultures are at the door - A good thought piece on a crucial question from SportsBusiness.com

Private equity investment raises question of control for governing bodies
Frank Dunne - March 30, 2021
  • Complex negotiations are required to marry profit motive with wider interests of sport
  • Financial crisis is leaving governing bodies in weak bargaining position with fund managers
  • Firms like CVC and Silver Lake understand that sport is not like any other industry
Professional sport has entered the most rapid phase of modernisation in its history. The cluster of private equity investment deals over the last 12-18 months is a part of that. The tectonic plates of the industry are moving, and new structures will solidify as the decade unfolds. Covid has accelerated this process, rather than creating it. But it has left sports bodies in a weak position to decide how the future looks.

Private equity investments in the sports industry are not new. But deals with sport’s governing bodies are. The International Volleyball Federation (FIVB) last month agreed a deal with CVC Capital Partners which gave the private equity firm a one-third stake in the federation’s commercial arm, Volleyball World. Also last month, Silver Lake tabled an offer for a 15-per-cent stake in the commercial activities of New Zealand Rugby. Rugby Australia has “approved a pathway” to secure private equity funding. The governing body’s chief executive, Hamish McLennan, said this week the private equity funding would help modernise structures in Australian rugby, as well as shore up its finances. Fiji Rugby is exploring similar options. Many more will follow.

In 2019, Fifa was criticised for holding talks with CVC about funding for the planned expansion to the Fifa Club World Cup. In retrospect, it was merely ahead of the curve.

Unlike clubs and leagues, governing bodies have a remit to protect the wider interests of a sport, involving many promotional and educational activities which, on a standalone basis, are loss-making. They invariably try to secure the largest possible revenues to run their sports but – critically – they are not-for-profit organisations. The money is supposed to go back into the sport, not into the pockets of fund managers.

Voting mechanisms become central to any negotiation between a fund and sports body. Even though private equity companies are typically taking a minority stake in the commercial vehicle of a league or federation, they want a say in how that is run. In some cases, they want the final say.

These deals and negotiations raise important questions for the future of sports governance. They include:
  • Is selling equity to a private fund appropriate for the governing body of a sport?
  • Where does control really lie in these relationships? Who has the final say?
  • Are there ways for governing bodies to secure cash and expertise without sacrificing control?
Red lines
For some senior figures in sport, governing bodies should be taking a different approach to funding than leagues or clubs. Alex Phillips, former head of governance at Uefa, tells SportBusiness: “For me, it’s a massive red line to sell equity for a governing body because it’s in perpetuity.”

He argues that the profit motive animating the funds may be inimical to the logic of operating a governing body. “Funds want to make a profit in the short term, whether it’s three years, five years or 10 years. They will want to see the asset increase and then they’ll disappear. That is obviously going to tend towards short-term thinking at the cost of long-term health. For example, a shift to pay-TV might create additional revenue short term but might have a negative impact on development and participation. It’s often better to take less cash but get greater exposure and the know-how and reach of a major partner.”

Phillips argues that while sports clubs will need funding from time to time for investing in things like new stadiums, which require a substantial capital investment, this does not apply to federations. “The economic model is fundamentally different to a club or a league’s economic model because they don’t have to pay for the main costs of production. In team sports the main costs are borne by the clubs. They’re paying the players. The federation business model is massively insulated. Most governing bodies don’t need private equity financing. The big ones already have big reserves.”

The reason so many are turning to private equity is because – suddenly – the offers are there. “It’s very intoxicating to be shown vast amounts of money by people who talk a very good game. And people do get intoxicated by it, especially if they come from sports administration – blazer – backgrounds,” he says.

Others think the professionalisation of sports management is overdue and applies equally to governing bodies. Simon Thomas, the former chief commercial officer of Fifa, who is now a partner in strategy consultants Colgan Bauer, says: “I think there is a need for governing bodies to up their game, and if the introduction of greater expertise and financial discipline via third-party investment achieves this, that’s a good thing. They may also bring a less conservative approach, with a greater appetite for risk and innovation. It should benefit the sport involved. Maybe the balance of power shifts away from the governing bodies long term, but that’s OK if, at the end of the day, the fan is still at the centre.”

The price to pay for maybe being able to make a quantum leap is some degree of control, he adds. “The governing body will usually want to retain approval on strategy and execution of deals. But they have to be realistic and professional about it. If they’re accepting funds from a third party, it’s not a free lunch. They’ll need to work with them and allow the opportunity to earn an appropriate return. I don’t actually see a problem with that, if there’s the right fit between the two, and the private equity fund has the right level of expertise and understanding of the sporting issues.”

Anthony Indaimo, a partner in the Withers Worldwide law firm, whose clients are drawn from across the whole sports ecosystem, believes there is no in-principle incompatibility in federation/private equity deals. “The federation will still have a majority stake in the commercial entity. And it will have to reinvest the money it derives from the commercial entity into the sport as per its by-laws or constitution. It is not driven for a profit. It is driven to reinvest back into the sport, so you’ve got a better quality of product, an increase in participation at a grassroots level and pathway for future talent, an increase in prize money, and a more flourishing ecosystem for the sport globally. As an adviser, one of the things we bake into the shareholders’ agreement is that the money needs to be reinvested. You have to make sure that everybody wins.”

However, Adam Sommerfeld, managing partner at Certus Capital Partners, whose clients include both private equity companies and US sports franchises, predicts that when the dust settles, governing bodies will be less important in the sports ecosystem than they are today. “They will always have a prominent role in rules and regulations and the calendar. But you’ll see private equity companies looking to take a far more prominent position in decision-making,” he says. “We’ve seen that with the proposal for a European Super League with JP Morgan and other financiers behind it and I think we’re also seeing it now in rugby and any other sport where there is potential for change.”

Balance of power
Striking a shareholder agreement which enables a governing body to unlock value without losing control of commercial strategy is the challenge currently facing many federations. The financial crisis which has made governing bodies open up for the first time to the idea of external funding has also put them in a poor negotiating position.

For Sommerfeld, the losses many sports bodies have suffered due to Covid have made them vulnerable. “Now is the time to come in with something aggressive and I think funds can sense that. They can smell blood. They can sense an opportunity for a well-priced deal. And their lead-off position can be something quite aggressive. PE is going for the jugular in terms of the running of these bodies.”

Finding the right mechanism to balance the needs of both parties is not simple. In at least two cases, private equity interests in football leagues have – so far, at least – foundered on the issue. Those are the offer for a 20-per-cent stake in Serie A’s planned media company by CVC, Advent International and Fondo Strategico Italiano and TPG’s offer for a stake in the commercial rights of the English Football League.

Indaimo, who has constructed such agreements, explains the challenges and the ways to overcome them. “If I’m the private equity fund with 30 per cent of the commercial vehicle, I will say that there are material decisions at a board level, or at shareholder level, that we should take unanimously with the governing body or federation. They will normally be around the direction the sport goes in, strategic decisions that have a commercial impact. If I’m putting up, in some cases, over a billion dollars, I want to have a say on material decisions and don’t simply wish to be a passive investor.”

But if a vote ends in deadlock, whose interests should prevail? “Those shareholder agreements will also provide a mechanism for when we can’t agree on something material that prevents the commercial entity from proceeding. Then we would refer it to a third party, or we might need to mediate, and escalate the decision-making process to the CEO or chairman of our respective organisations. But it is designed to be as consensual as possible because of the significant amount of money that is invested for the minority shareholding by the fund.”

Alternative models
Private equity funds provide both capital and know-how, with access to expertise in a whole range of areas – from advanced technologies to debt restructuring – that many governing bodies don’t have in house. In the last four decades, federations have looked to secure these things with other models, which did not involve selling an equity stake. These range from long-term partnerships with sports marketing agencies like Infront or IMG to joint ventures with media companies, like the deals the International Basketball Federation and the Women’s Tennis Association have with streaming operator DAZN. There is even a DIY option available to federations: taking bank loans and recruiting wisely.

“There are always other sources of capital, but they will inevitably ask for something,” Sommerfeld says. “A drawdown facility or credit line is clearly one way. But why would they want to? With smart private equity, like a Silver Lake or a CVC, you’ll welcome that level of expertise and financial ability.”

And not all money is the same. In most cases, what is attracting federations is the idea of getting access to a large pot of capital that can be ring-fenced for projects which could be transformational for their sport. This is very different to securing loans indexed against future income from agencies or joint ventures, which has to be divided up each year among the members.

One senior rugby source explained how this difference could play out in practice. “World Rugby has talked for a long time about investing significant amounts of money in the US, China and Brazil, which ultimately is going to help grow the sport. Because of the way monies are distributed, the members are never going to sanction spending a disproportionate amount to invest in new markets, for two reasons. One, you’re taking money out of those unions’ pockets. Two, you’re taking money to potentially help other countries compete better against them. You can’t do it unless you have a private equity company coming in and saying, ‘we believe that we can make a much bigger pie for rugby in the future, and in order to do so we need to invest money here, here and here’.

One of the reasons for the residual anxiety about working with private equity companies is that the ‘barbarians at the gate’ image persists. This is one of funds who cut costs, ‘sweat the asset’, cash out and move on after five years. But some say that while such a modus operandi still exists in many other sectors, the private equity companies with experience in sport understand they have to approach sport differently.

As Indaimo puts it: “That’s not a model that works in sport. And it can’t. The members of any federation have to vote on what is being proposed. The first thing they will want to hear from the board of the federation is why they think that this private equity fund is good for their sport. And that is why most federations will run an auction process with clear objectives and metrics for what a successful outcome looks like at the end of the process.”

The ITT for such processes should make it clear, he adds, that the investment should be used to make improvements to the sport and that the life of the investment is longer than private equity funds are used to. “And just as important is what happens when the private equity fund needs to sell out and you’ve got a new third party. The federation will want to have approval rights over that.”

Thomas concurs that a different approach is required for sport. “In other industries, you might just buy off a multiple of Ebitda [Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization], improve performance, cut costs and flip it. Sport is more complex and nuanced. There is a multitude of stakeholders that you have to take into account. The partnership isn’t just with the asset, it’s with the sport itself and its fans.” Where funds don’t understand that, he says, “I can see that things may not work out well”.

He concludes with a word of advice for governing bodies pondering private equity deals. “Everyone, ultimately, needs to be on the same page, and the good [private equity firms] will be. Choose your partner wisely. Don’t make it just about who writes the biggest cheque.”

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 Mar 30, 2021 1:08 pm

Having finally decided on DAZN Serie has failed to come to an agreement with Sky on the remain ing package of non exclusive games amd will therefore put it back out to tender. from Yahoo news

Serie A rejects Sky's bid for non exclusive broadcast rights in Italy

Mon, 29 March 2021, 8:39 pm·1-min read
By Elvira Pollina

MILAN (Reuters) - Serie A rejected on Monday a 263 million euros ($310 million) bid by U.S. Comcast' Sky to screen some of Italy's top-flight soccer championship matches over the next three seasons on a non exclusive basis in the league's home market.

The move paves the way for a new tender process for the package, which comprises non-exclusive rights to screen three out of 10 games per matchday.

"Within two weeks a new auction will be launched to tender unsold broadcasting rights", Serie A said in a statement.

Last week Serie A awarded sport streaming service DAZN the rights to screen all Serie A matches for 2.5 billion euros in the 2021-2024 period in Italy, including exclusive rights for seven out of 10 games per matchday

Serie A said on Friday it would hold talks until Monday with Sky about screening three games per matchday on a non-exclusive basis. SKY initially offered some 210 million euros for the package.

At a teleconference meeting on Monday, SKY's improved offer was backed by 13 out 20 clubs, missing a required 14 vote majority as seven clubs, including Juventus, Inter Milan and Lazio abstained, the sources added.

Under the current three-year agreement, Serie A raised some 2.9 billion euros from Sky and DAZN.

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 Mar 30, 2021 1:10 pm

That decision came after DAZN talked up finding a terrestrial partner in Italy but ruled out a link-up with Sky Italia over the weekend - This from InsideSport.com

DAZN explores terrestrial broadcast ‘backup’ after ruling out Sky sublicense
By Holly Hunt- March 29, 2021

DAZN is in the process of looking into a ‘backup solution’ for digital terrestrial coverage of the Serie A, after clubs raised concerns about the compatibility of an exclusive streaming agreement and the country’s inconsistent internet connectivity.

On Friday, DAZN completed a deal for the domestic broadcast rights to the Italian top tier for the 2021 to 2024 cycle. The digital streaming service acquired the rights to screen seven exclusive games per match week and co-exclusive rights to three further fixtures for €840 million, seeing off competition from incumbent broadcaster Sky Italia.

However, DAZN’s Chief Customer and Innovation Officer, Veronica Diquattro, told Italian newspaper Il Sole 24 Ore that it is ‘aware that there is an issue of areas with (internet) difficulties’.

She continued: “But we are confident that our offer will in fact accelerate the digitisation of the country, as was recently declared by the CEO of Lega Serie A, Luigi De Siervo. However, in order to serve all our customers, even in areas with some coverage difficulties, we are working to ensure that we have a backup solution specifically for these cases, which will be digital terrestrial (television). In the absence of alternatives, offers of this type will be activated.”

DAZN’s bid received the backing of Telecom Italia (TIM), which offered to cover 40% of the proposed investment fee.

In the wake of the rights assignment, the telecommunications company has confirmed that the partnership will bring the streaming services’ content to TIMVISION for the next three years, with dedicated DAZN service offers reserved for TIM customers, including Serie A matches.

In edging Sky to the coveted rights package, it was reported that Lega Serie A would hold discussions with the pay-television broadcaster over the non-exclusive rights to air three games per matchday.

However, Diquattro ruled out striking a new sublicensing deal with rivals Sky, insisting there ‘are no conversations in progress’ with the broadcaster’s ‘competitors’.

In July 2018, Sky negotiated a deal to allow its subscribers to have access to DAZN’s coverage of three top flight Serie A matches per round, along with second tier Serie B fixtures via the Sky Q service.

Nonetheless, the DAZN employee appeared to insinuate that the streaming service will allow the agreement to expire at the end of the current rights cycle.

“When we launched the combined offer with Sky we did it to reach a type of audience accustomed to a linear approach and therefore essentially to ensure that the product and service were better known,” Diquattro added.

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 Mar 30, 2021 2:44 pm

I have posted a number of pieces on this thread over the years about the difficulties of making a career in the game for young footballers - this is another good one from the BBC looking at the contrasting fortunes of two players who were released at 14 from their Academies in the mid 90's

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/extra/hfe5e ... ible-Dream

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 Mar 30, 2021 3:27 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Mon Mar 29, 2021 11:42 pm
On Wednesday there will be a significant meeting at UEFA, it will essentially ratify the proposals for a revamped post 2024 Champions league, it will make it bigger, it will use the Swiss system, it will likely ignore the demands of the European Leagues and fan groups and have a 10 game group stage. It will not determine how the extra 4 teams will qualify or what the financial distribution model will be (we don't know what it will be for the Europa Conference next season yet and that will impact the Europa League and possibly the Champions League). Unfortunately for Football Wednesday is not April 1st - this is going to happen. Here the New York Times explains how it is going to work

The Champions League Is Changing. Here’s How It Will Work.
MARCH 29, 2021

European soccer’s premier club competition, the Champions League, is remaking itself.

After more than a generation in its current form, the Champions League is about to become an actual league for the first time. Organizers say the changes will produce better matchups, fewer meaningless games, and more drama. Critics say it’s about what these kinds of changes are always about: money.

The new-look Champions League is set to be rubber-stamped and revealed by the leaders of European soccer’s governing body, UEFA, perhaps as soon as their meeting this week. What will emerge is a competition expanded to 36 teams from its current 32, and one that dispenses with its long-established group-stage format in favor of a single league table that will decide who advances to the knockout rounds.

The benefits for organizers are obvious: By the time the winner has lifted the European Cup, the competition will have produced 100 new games to sell to broadcasters, and the finalists will have played at least 17 matches, four more than under the current format.

European soccer officials have promoted the changes by arguing the new format will add more excitement, and ensure that nearly all the teams will have a chance to make the knockout rounds right up to their final games. They have spent less time highlighting the added workload on weary players, or that they plan to reserve two places in the league for so-called historically significant teams who might have otherwise failed to qualify.

But first, everyone will have to learn how it works.

How the Champions League works now
Before we explain the new setup, here is a brief look at how the tournament unfolds now, using the current season and teams.

Currently, the opening round of the Champions League, the group stage, is made up of eight groups with four teams each.

The 32 teams are placed into the groups through a draw. Rankings keep the groups roughly equal in difficulty, and teams from the same country are intentionally kept apart at this stage.

Each team plays home and away games against the other three teams in its group. Three points are awarded for a win and one point for a draw.

The knockout round that follows resembles the latter stages of the World Cup or the N.C.A.A. basketball championship, except that paired teams play home and away matches to determine a winner, rather than a single elimination game.

How the new format will work
UEFA’s new plan does away with the group stage in favor of a single Champions League table, a format familiar to anyone who follows a domestic league.

By placing all the participants into one 36-team table, the organizers had two goals. The first was economic: more games meant more revenue from ticket sales, sponsorships and broadcast rights. The second, more altruistic objective, was to increase the chances that the later games would matter, and matter to more teams.

In the new format, each team will play 10 games against a group of opponents diverse in both quality and geography. The league setup is not perfect; not all teams will meet, and there will inevitably be grumbling about harder or weaker draws.

But its length could help negate minor injuries as decisive factors, and could ensure that nearly all participants still have a shot at making the knockouts — or at least to prevent an opponent from advancing — right up until the last round of games.

Here’s how it might work.

The spots in the 36-team field will almost all be awarded through existing qualifying matches and domestic league performance in the previous season.

A draw, with the teams placed in one of four pots based on their previous performances in the Champions League and the second-tier Europa League competition, will match each club with 10 opponents from throughout the table.

Let’s use Bayern Munich, last season’s champion, as an example. Bayern would play each of these opponents once.

Five of the games would be home matches and five would be away.

Groups are out, a single table is in
Once they are announced, the changes will be final, but the grumbling about the new Champions League will continue. Some of the changes — like the carveouts for legacy clubs — will infuriate those who believe participation should be on merit alone.

Others in Europe’s top leagues had been militant in opposing the possibility of extra games. Still more will oppose any alterations to a beloved soccer competition on principle, and especially because UEFA appears to have bowed to most of the demands of a group of elite clubs, who’ll likely only grow richer.

But there will be plenty of time for those complaints. The changes would not take effect until 2024.
It seems that the clubs (ECA) and UEFA are still at loggerheads over the commercial rights and who controls them in the new world of UEFA club competitions- remember there are about to go into partnership with a separate company. I suspect a lot has to do with revenue distributions and shares of each competition as well as the wider football family - as Zammo once said - "Just say no" come on UEFA you know you want too

https://theathletic.com/news/champions- ... =twitteruk

Though it appears tomorrow's meeting will go ahead to ratify the competition the seem to want though no one else does - you have to feel that this weakens the UEFA position

https://twitter.com/mjshrimper/status/1 ... 9028064259

Post Reply