Skip to main content

The parachute payments controversy

Parachute payments mean that the Championship is anything but a level playing field.  In many ways it is a de facto Premier League 2.

Relegated clubs receive 55 per cent of the Premier League media rights revenue for each club in year one, 45 per cent in year two and 20 per cent in year three. Clubs who are relegated after one season receive parachute payments for only two years.

That adds up to about £42m for each club in year one, £34m in year two and £15m in year three.   The remaining Championship clubs receive £4.5m each, while those in League One and League Two receive £675,000 and £475,000 respectively.

QPR chief executive Lee Hoos told The Times: 'The balance is tipping away from the original purpose which was to prevent a fire sale of players and cover the cost of relegation and contractual commitments, to where we are now, where clubs have a ton of extra financial firepower and can blow everyone else out of the water.'

The origins of parachute payments are rather obscure.  Some believe they were a means of securing support for the idea of the Premier League rather than a means of compensating for relegation.  However, their value soared alongside Premier League broadcasting revenue.   In 2006/07 six clubs received total parachute payments of £39m.  This season eight clubs received about £240m.

Premier League solidarity payments to the EFL total about £400m each season, but eight of the 72 clubs received 60 per cent of the available funding.

Rob Wilson of Sheffield Hallam University collected data over 11 seasons and found that clubs with parachute payments are twice as likely to be promoted as those without them.  Nearly one in five clubs with parachute payments gained promotion in a given season (this year it will be at least two-thirds).

Wilson's personal view is that they are not necessary and clubs should be more robust in their contract negotiations with players.   If players were tied to 75 per cent relegation clauses, there would be less need for parachute payments.  [I can't see sought after players accepting that].   If parachute payments were abolished, the Premier League could distribute about £120m more in solidarity payments.

Hoos commented that 'Anyone who has been in the Premier League, and has been relegated, will know it's not as simple as stopping the payments.   For clubs who have been there for a while and then go down it can be hugely damaging.  You can't just tear up onerous contracts.'

A reasonable compromise might be to limit payments to one year at, say, 40 per cent.   Certainly a third year of payments is hard to justify.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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
1 comment
Read more

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
Post a Comment
Read more

Spurs to sell minority stake

Tottenham Hotspur is in talks to sell a minority stake in a deal that could value it at up to £3.75 billion and pave the way for Joe Lewis and his family to sever ties with the Premier League football club. Tottenham chairman Daniel Levy is seeking an investment that values the club at between £3.5 billion and £3.75 billion, including debt. While the terms of any deal have not been finalised, City sources expect Spurs to sell about 10 per cent. The club is being advised by bankers from Rothschild on the sale. Tottenham wants to raise fresh capital for new player signings and to help fund the development of an academy for its women’s team, as well as a 30-storey hotel next to its north London stadium. The financier Amanda Staveley, who brokered the deal for Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund to take over Newcastle United, is understood to be among the parties to have expressed an interest in Tottenham. Staveley’s fund, PCP Capital Partners, has raised about £500 million to depl
Post a Comment
Read more