This article may have been recategorised and is therefore no longer available at this URL.

You can try to find the updated link in the article archive.

Share article:

Reader Comments (9)

Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer


Alan J Thompson
1 Posted 08/05/2021 at 19:08:09
I still don't see it. Who in their right mind would put such an amount of money into anything like this unless they were guaranteed an annual return they'd be unlikely to achieve elsewhere and how difficult would it be, if they are not convinced of that profit, to divest themselves of their current shareholding. When all's said and done, business is business, if you don't look like making a profit then who is likely to offer the wherewithal to an organization that may be unable to guarantee any hard decisions to turn it around.
Paul [The Esk]
2 Posted 08/05/2021 at 23:08:55
Alan, many businesses are regulated, the utilities, financial services, professional services, and they all attract sufficient investors and investment.

The fact is that football currently only attracts a certain type of investor (by and large). Greater regulation would increase the quantity and quality of investors to football over the long term, not the predominantly dodgy lot we have now...

Alan J Thompson
3 Posted 09/05/2021 at 07:31:16
Paul, regulation is one thing but having to share ownership and/or decision-making with your customers/fans is something entirely different.

If it is really about billionaire owners wanting the biggest dollar then, however unlikely, it does nothing to stop them packing up and moving somewhere they feel they are more welcome. After all, this is mostly about TV revenue and that goose will only worry about their advertising revenue and not too much where you are based, nor will your Asian or African audiences, and how much would losing a fair portion of the British market affect which most?

Unless all bodies including FIFA and UEFA threaten total bans on all clubs and all players involved from participating in any other football under their control, thus removing a lot of players' negotiating power, then such a breakaway, at some stage, will again raise it's head. However, to give all parties equal chance of participation, problems of relegation and promotion affecting other Leagues seem the biggest drawback.

Presently, it appears that these breakaway clubs may have negotiated a punishment or penalty with UEFA but we still haven't been told which clubs were contacted and showed willing in making up the other three "permanent" and the five asked to make up the twenty.

Danny O’Neill
4 Posted 09/05/2021 at 09:14:48
Thought provoking Paul, as was Part 1.

Regulation is key. I would call it accountability. Fans, or members as they would be should have a voice to hold clubs accountable. They already do but not in a formal way like is being suggested. But, they would likely have to be paying members to have that voice. Now, some will rightly say we already pay, but I think most will know what I mean. It's why I've highlighted that the much vaunted 50 + 1 isn't necessarily the panacea we think of it at face value, but it does add a degree of accountability and gives clubs more of a conscience than our current model as we have seen very recently.

Now I don't have your financial wisdom but, as you say, other business sectors are subject to regulation and top flight football for too long has been ignored in this respect. I'm relatively new to the commercial world, but I can't think of many industry verticals that allow organisations en-masse to operate at continuous loss with wage bills exceeding 60% of income. And as you highlight, income that should, theoretically, see them operating with very comfortable profit margins if they are regulated and accountable.

Anyway, stepping out of my lane here so I'll get back in my box and get back to the football. For me, it's about fixing it from the bottom up. If I go to Holland and Germany, where I have lived, I see individual village or district teams playing on their own self-contained facility and a very good facility at that. They are coached by qualified coaches, from 6 years old. The system in place feeds the pyramid way better than ours.

I go to the local west London park near where I live now. I see multiple teams from the same area playing on 10 pitches marked out on a park by the council. In the spring they play on long unkempt grass covered in daisies. In the winter a mud quagmire. They are often shouted at by unqualified coaches who have the best intent at heart but want to win a Sunday match rather than develop footballers.

For me, it's about the point you make that despite the amount of money English football in particular has accumulated in the past decades, the investment is unbalanced and does not reach down to where it is needed most.

The pyramid starts at the foundations, not at the top.

Once again, I apologise for my rants on this subject, but it is a subject I love talking about.

Paul [The Esk]
5 Posted 09/05/2021 at 13:09:28
Great comments, Danny, keep them coming.
Paul [The Esk]
6 Posted 09/05/2021 at 13:13:48
Alan,

I appreciate your comments and I understand the scale of change we are talking about. Billionaires aren't the only source of capital and, if they don't like the rules, then they can find other sectors to invest in.

Greater regulation attracting higher quality investors might reduce the amount of control ceded to fans but what is clear is that we cannot leave the game unregulated and at the mercy of people who only have self-interest at heart and feel no responsibility or obligation to the wider game.

Tony Everan
7 Posted 09/05/2021 at 14:33:38
Hi Paul, It seems likely that the token punishments handed out by UEFA have been negotiated with the clubs in a very cosy way. “What’s the minimum we can do to make this go away?”

It should worry everyone that the same process is underway with the FA, Premier League and Government review. I am not sure they have the resolve to make the necessary binding changes to protect the league from anticompetitiveness.

These clubs particularly Arsenal Liverpool Tottenham and Man Utd are hell bent on snuffing out competition or threat to their businesses. It will take bravery and fortitude to drag them into line kicking and screaming with their million dollar lawyers crying foul.

Only time will tell how far these powerful and greedy clubs get with their lobbying and veiled threats. But make no mistake they’ve been planning this for three years , they won’t walk away easily from it . They may appear to , but it will be a facade to regroup and come back stronger in a new guise.

I suspect that there will be headline making sanctions that don’t really amount to much when dissected but will say something along the lines of how important the Premier League is and a joint statement of some sort.

I think the cartel juggernaut will roll on regardless of the inevitably diluted sanctions. The changes they want will just be introduced by ‘creep’ chipping away merrily at uefa to increase protectionism to guarantee revenues. ie The concession for qualification by past coefficients is a hammer blow to the likes of Everton trying to compete. Remember UEFA is happily on board with the greedy clubs in this assault on fair competition.

I suspect that over the next few seasons the
Greedy clubs will find ways of retaining TV money for themselves, to further make sure their status is protected.

This will then give those clubs increased power to call the shots and create a changed Champions League that is a super league in all but name.

Barry Hesketh
8 Posted 09/05/2021 at 15:04:20
Two of the owners have already said they will pay the 'huge' fines from their own pockets. UEFA are and have been in negotiations with London-based Centricus Asset Management, a sum of £6bn has been touted which will more likely go to those clubs who were involved in the Super League project.

I can't see any significant reforms of the game in the near or mid-term future, the sums of money are far too great and the richest clubs have all of the power, the fans of those clubs will cause some disruption but when everything settles, the richest owners and those with international sponsors will have their way.

Where all of this leaves Everton FC and its proposed new stadium is a cause for concern, I do wonder what the game will look like in five years' time, as individual clubs use modern technology to beam their games live to every part of the world, thereby getting an even greater share of the media revenues than they do at present.

Dave Lynch
9 Posted 09/05/2021 at 15:30:13
"For me, it's about the point you make that despite the amount of money English football in particular has accumulated in the past decades, the investment is unbalanced and does not reach down to where it is needed most."

Nail on head Danny... The FA is a very rich and lucrative body, a self serving one at that.
They can bleat on all they want about the "Big clubs" wanting a bigger share of profits but they have to look at themselves and how they re-invest at grass roots level.

The PFA are no better, in 1999 they bought a Lowry painting for near 2 million as "an investment", they all want the money but none want to spend it where it's needed to keep the game alive.


Add Your Comments

In order to post a comment, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.

» Log in now

Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and Talking Points submissions across the site.


About these ads


, placement: 'Below Article Thumbnails', target_type: 'mix' });