Skip to main content

More money from overseas TV rights changes Premier League incentives

The authoritative Swiss Ramble takes a look at the impact of the new three-year TV deal on clubs’ revenue, particularly the changes in the distribution system for the overseas TV deals. My observations are in square brackets,.

In 2018/19 each club received equal shares for 50% of domestic TV £34m, overseas TV £43m and commercial income £5m. Each league position was worth £1.9m (merit payment), while each match broadcast live was worth £1.1m (on top of £12.2m for a minimum of 10 games).

Each club received a total of £82m from equal payments with the only differences in Premier League TV distribution due to: (a) league position, ranging from Manchester City £38m to Huddersfield £2m; (b) live TV games, Liverpool £33m to £12m for four clubs [somewhat surprising to find Watford in this group].

Total Premier League TV rights for 2019-22 cycle rose 8% (£0.7 bn) from £8.5 bn to £9.2 bn. UK domestic rights actually dropped 7% (£0.4 bn) from £5.4 bn to £5.0 bn, but this decrease was more than offset by overseas rights increasing by 34% (£1.1 bn) from £3.1 bn to £4.2 bn. The increase in PL overseas TV rights is particularly striking. These now average around £1.4 bn a year, up from £1.1 bn in the 2016-19 cycle. As recently as 2007-10, these were only worth £200m a year. [In part this reflects the attractiveness of Premier League football to East Asian gambling cultures as it is seen as free from fixing].

Overseas rights are now worth almost as much as UK domestic rights: 45% compared to 55%. In 2001-04, they only accounted for 11% of the total. It would be no great surprise if they overtook domestic rights in the next 2022-25 cycle. [Will this lead to a renewal of pressure to stage some games overseas?]

Overseas TV rights have always been distributed as equal shares by the Premier League, but this was changed in the 2019-22 deal. Clubs will continue to share current levels of overseas revenue equally, but any increase will be distributed based on where they finish in the league. [This was the result of pressure from the top six with the threat of a breakaway to a European Super League always in the background].

Based on the 7% fall in domestic rights and 34% increase in overseas rights, domestic revenue will drop by £110m, but overseas revenue will rise by £295m, resulting in a net increase of £185m a year to be shared among the 20 clubs in the Premier League.

The change in distribution for overseas revenue means that final league position is increasingly important. As Scudamore put it, this is “a subtle change that further incentivises on-pitch achievement.” Well, yes, though it is also likely to further grow the gap to the Big Six. [However, note that FFP rules have changed in a way that benefits challenger clubs like Everton and Wolves. VAR may give smaller clubs more penalties away from home].

One result of the change in overseas rights distribution, exacerbated by the fall in domestic rights, is a big difference in the additional income from the new TV deal. For example, the increase for the 1st placed club £21m will be twice as much as the 10th placed club £10m. The top 10 clubs all benefit under the new distribution model, while the bottom 10 clubs would have done better under the old approach.

As an example, City will earn £71m from overseas rights, i.e. £13m more than they would have with the old approach. In summary, all 20 Premier League clubs will earn more from the overseas rights increase, but it will be yet another case of “the rich getting richer”. In fact, half of the total £295m increase goes to just six clubs.

Estimated Liverpool Premier League TV money for 2019/20, based on same league position and live TV games, would increase by £19m (12%) from £152m in 2018/19 to £171m. This means that their Premier League TV revenue would have grown by £25m (17%) from £146m in 2017/18. Comparable estimates for growth in TV revenue for other top clubs are:

  • Manchester City, up £22m or 15 per cent.
  • Chelsea, up £22m or 16 per cent.
  • Tottenham Hotspur, up £18m or 12 per cent.
  • Manchester United, up £7m or 5 per cent. [Presumably influenced by league position].
  • Arsenal, £16m, up 11 per cent.

The Premier League noted that the maximum that any club can receive in total payments is 1.8 times the amount received by the lowest earning club, up from the current 1.6 times. The Swiss Ramble's estimates indicate that the ratio would indeed be 1.8 (though still the most equitable in Europe).

The Zurich-based analyst comments, 'On the one hand, it is difficult to argue with the Big Six’s view that they deserve more, as overseas fans are more interested in watching their games, but on the other hand the change in distribution makes it even more difficult for anyone to break into their exclusive club. Incidentally, it might also damage the “product”, as there is a risk that the Premier League becomes less competitive. The possibility of top clubs losing against less fancied opposition has been one of the competition’s key selling points up to now.'

One comment says, 'The bubble will burst eventually, but I’m not sure what will be the thing to "pop" it. Too many predictable match outcomes brought about by an unfair market for talent is one possible pin.' Possibly, but people have forecasting that the bubble would burst for years and it hasn't.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Fulham requires big funding from owner

After lengthy delays, Fulham’s shiny, new Riverside Stand has finally opened, creating “a unique Thameside destination with first class facilities for supporters and partners on match days, as well as for the wider community year-round”. This ambitious project has increased Craven Cottage’s capacity by around 4,000 to 29,600, while it has also taken advantage of the club’s fantastic location and wealthy catchment area by including two Michelin star restaurants, a rooftop swimming pool, corporate hospitality and event space, all benefiting from views of the Thames. Chief executive Alistair Mackintosh observed, “Fulham is the sort of club that can have a business class or first class and have fans that turn left on a plane.” Indeed, there is also an exclusive members club – with a football season ticket as an optional extra. It’s fair to say that “the times they are a-changing”, as this is a long way from the traditional pie and a pint. However, in a world where clubs face the tw...

Threat of financial calamity removed from Baggies

West Bromwich Albion had effectively been in decline ever since the club was sold to a Chinese consortium in August 2016, paying a figure north of £200m to buy former owner Jeremy Peace’s stake. Controlling shareholder Guochuan Lai’s ownership was fairly disastrous for the club, but his unloved tenure finally came to an end after Bilkul Football WBA, a company ultimately owned by Florida-based entrepreneur Shilen Patel and his father Dr Kiran Patel, acquired an 87.8% shareholding in West Bromwich Albion Group Limited, the parent company of West Bromwich Albion Football Club. This change in ownership was urgently required, due to the numerous financial problems facing West Brom, including growing high-interest debt and serious cash flow concerns, following years of no investment from the former owner. Indeed, West Brom’s auditors had already rung the alarm bell in the 2021/22 accounts when they cast doubt on the club’s ability to continue as a going concern without making player s...

A poor financial record, but new hope at Everton

I recently saw an amusing video online in which a group of Everton fans were rebuked in jest for being hopeful.  Football fans in general tend to swing between excessive optimism and excessive pessimism, but for many it seems that moaning is in their bloodstream (Spurs fans probably take the trophy).  However, Everton fans have had plenty to moan about on and off the pitch.   Let’s hope that a new era is about to begin for this grand old club. Everton’s 2023/24 financial results covered a fairly momentous season, when they ended up 15th in the Premier League, though they would finished three places higher if they had not received an 8-point deduction for breaching the Premier League’s Profitability and Sustainability Regulations (PSR). It was a worrying time for Everton fans, as the club faced a “perfect storm” of issues, including large financial losses, an ever increasing debt burden, a challenging stadium build and the tortuous sale of the club. There were eve...