Skip to main content

The cost of promotion to the Premier League.

It's not a revelation that clubs will take financial risks to access the riches of the Premiership but a new report does provide some detailed data on how big those risks can be and how value can be destroyed. A good strategy can be to accept that promotion may be followed by relegation and to preserve the balance sheet. Without generous benefactors, the situation is unsustainable in the longer run.

Building on the success and international coverage of its examination of Premiership football finances, financial analysts vysyble have announced further football-related research with the launch of a new report entitled ‘Over The Line – The Economic Cost of Promotion into the English Premier League’. This report is a detailed assessment of those clubs and their economic demands during their promotion-winning season into the Premier League. The report covers the period 2008-9 through to 2015-16 (last available accounts) and is based upon their usual metric of examination – economic profit; a measure which includes all the costs of operation.

They find that compared to the riches of the Premier League, Championship club revenues are relatively modest. Consequently, losses are keenly felt due to the lack of a lucrative TV/media broadcasting arrangement. Over the eight seasons in question, the 19 clubs analysed generated economic losses totalling £379.10m in their successful pursuit of promotion whilst achieving revenues of £596.35m. In addition, there has only been one occasion where a club has generated an economic profit during a promotion-winning season – Crystal Palace in 2012-13 with an economic profit of £1.13m.

The average economic loss for a promotion-winning season is £14.67m from an average revenue of £24.85m. Economic losses for promotion-winning clubs have grown 63.7% from 2008-9 season to 2015-16 season whilst revenue has grown at 54.97% (£56.97m to £103.63m) over the same period. When the Football Profitability Index® (FPI) calculation is applied (where the efficiency in generating economic profit is expressed as a single number), the resulting FPI Values illustrate the scale in the destruction of value that is taking place in the Championship to achieve promotion into the Premier League. The average FPI Value for the period and clubs in question is 36.43. This compares with the current FPI Value for the Premier League of 91.13. This means that the successful Championship clubs generated average economic losses of £63.57 for every £100 of revenue (ie 36.43 – £100) whilst Premier League clubs in 2015-16 alone generated economic losses of £8.87 for every £100 of revenue (ie 91.13 – £100).

'Getting to the Premier League is seen by fans and owners of aspirational EFL clubs as the golden ticket to untold riches, which is arguably why so many investors are getting involved with clubs in the Championship. But our work reveals that, far from being a golden ticket, trying to remain and compete in the Premier League without a sound financial strategy is both costly and ultimately loss-making. Clubs that over-extend themselves whilst in the Premier League struggle to survive over the longer-term and incur significant damage to their balance sheets in doing so. This frequently renders any parachute payment as ineffective and usually brings with it a prolonged tenure in the Championship and beyond. Therefore, staying in the Premier League is not a one-way ‘wealth creation’ scheme, or a solution to a club’s financial woes. Big-spending English Football League (EFL) clubs are, in fact, chasing a dream that can rapidly become a financial nightmare,' commented vysyble's Roger Bell.

The lowest FPI Value was achieved by the promotion-winning trio of Cardiff City, Crystal Palace and Hull City in 2012-13 where the combined economic loss was £154.11 per £100 of revenue despite Crystal Palace’s modest economic profit achievement. The revenue trend has increased from a low point of £40.15m in 2012-13 to £103.63m in 2015-16 as certain relegated clubs from the Premier League avail of the parachute payment system and seek immediate promotion e.g. Hull City, Norwich City and Burnley.

Roger Bell said: 'This work demonstrates that by monitoring the economic performance of clubs, under certain circumstances, it is possible to predict which clubs are at an increased risk of financial and operational difficulty. Owners who accept the risk of relegation but also preserve the balance sheet face much better prospects if the club is indeed relegated with Burnley, Norwich City and Newcastle United proving to be excellent examples.'

Bell added: 'Our work looks at EFL clubs that were promoted to the Premier League, rather than the Championship as a whole, but our numbers indicate that the losses are likely to be significant throughout the division. Without the presence of extremely generous benefactors, the current situation is wholly unsustainable in the longer term unless the EFL starts to recognise and measure the economic health of clubs.

'Given the recently reported differences between Premier League clubs over the future distribution of foreign TV revenue, the EFL may face significant issues in the future should the structure of the Premier League change or fragment and the parachute payment system is reduced or even ceases to exist. [I think that is unlikely, WG]. Furthermore, the EFL has just committed to a five-year TV deal with Sky which it may not be able to renegotiate if circumstances do change. All of which is, in our view, a potentially challenging combination.'

'Central to our work is the in-going belief that “You cannot manage what you cannot see”. In using and applying the economic profit metric, club owners and the game’s administrators will be able to see the real economic picture and will also be able to observe dynamics that they could not see before. We believe that both the Premier League and the English Football League will benefit from a deeper and more robust understanding of the game’s economics which over the longer term will lead to more enlightened and effective decision making, particularly in relation to Financial Fair Play.'

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Wolves get raw deal from FFP

  I used to see a lifelong Wolves fan for lunch once a month.   He was approaching ninety, but still went to games.   Sadly he passed away the other week. As football finance guru Kieran Maguire has noted, Wolves continue to be constrained by financial fair play rules.  Radio 4 this morning described them as this year's 'crisis club' and the pessimists have certainly been piling in. Martin Samuel wrote sympathetically in the Sunday Times yesterday, saying that the Premier League drives talent away with regulatory red tape: 'Why could Al-Hilal sign Neves? Because Wolves needed the money. And why did Wolves need the money? Because the club had to comply with an artificial construct known as financial fair play. So Wolves are going skint, yes? No. There is no suggestion that Wolves are in financial trouble, only that they are failing to meet the rigours of FFP. Wolves’ owners appear to have the money to run the club, and invest in the club, and in fact came up with a pow

Gold standard ground boosts Tottenham's income

The gold standard in European football grounds is the Tottenham Hotspur stadium in north London, a £1bn construction project completed in 2019. Its impact on the club’s finances has become increasingly clear as the effects of the pandemic have faded. Previously, the average fan would spend less than £2 inside the ground on a typical match day, but now that figure is about £16, thanks to new facilities including the longest bar in Europe and an on-site microbrewery. Capacity has gone up from 36,000 at the club’s previous home of White Hart Lane to 62,000.  The new stadium — built on land adjacent to White Hart Lane — has opened the door to a broad range of other events that have helped to push commercial income up from €117mn in 2018 to €215mn in 2022. Last year, Tottenham hosted US singer Beyoncé for five nights on her global Renaissance tour, two NFL matches, as well as rugby games and heavyweight boxing bouts.  Money brought in from football has gone up too. Match day income is

Charlton takeover approved

The long awaited takeover of Charlton Athletic by SE7 Partners from Thomas Sandgaard has been approved:  https://londonnewsonline.co.uk/se7-partners-obtain-efl-approval-for-charlton-athletic-takeover/ Charlton have had unhappy experiences with owners for over a decade, so how this works out will remain to be seen.  There is certainly potential there, but will it be realised? This interview with Charlie Methven gives detail not available elsewhere:  https://thecharltondossier.com/charlie-methven-on-the-record/