Real obtener la jorba over enhanced tv access

Over La Liga’s opening weekend, fans of 19 Spanish top-flight clubs had access to scenes and areas where cameras have never previously been allowed. Live broadcasts brought us right into the huddle as Barcelona coach Xavi implored his team to play “one or two touches, one or two touches” to get around Getafe’s obstinate defence.

All but one La Liga club collaborated with the new broadcast initiatives. Madrid decided to boycott all interactions with rights holders before, during and after their 2-0 win at San Mames. And Los Blancos will miss out on about €13million (£11.1m; $14.2m) if they do not change tack and take part in the extra “voluntary” features championed by La Liga president Javier Tebas.

The idea behind these features — newly introduced this season — is to make La Liga more interesting to viewers both in Spain and around the world, with the aim of increasing the money paid by broadcasters for the rights in the future.

There were no cameras in Madrid’s dressing room on Saturday, and there was no informal pre-game televised chat between coach Carlo Ancelotti and his Athletic counterpart Ernesto Valverde.

In an apparent protest at the new approach, Madrid even went a step further. Nobody from the club — neither director Emilio Butragueno, nor Ancelotti, nor the players — did their required usual media duties with rights holders either before or after the game either.

A difficult relationship with broadcasters

During Florentino Perez’s presidency, Madrid have generally had a difficult relationship with broadcasters, including ESPN in the United States and Movistar in Spain. It is not unprecedented for their staff to be instructed not to participate in media duties, which has led to punishment and fines from La Liga in previous campaigns.

However, the latest boycott on the first day of the 2023-24 season is a further step outside the regulations and can be understood as yet another battle in the long-running war between Perez and Tebas for power, money and influence in Spanish football.

Ever since Tebas became La Liga president in 2013, when he quickly brought in the collectivised sale of TV rights, there has been constant conflict. That move meant the league as a whole has earned more money, but Madrid have felt penalised by not being able to sell their games individually as before.

Over the last decade, the Bernabeu hierarchy have taken more than 20 different court cases against La Liga actions, including numerous objections to how the TV money is shared out. Judges have regularly found in La Liga’s favour — most recently in May when an appeal by Madrid against punishment for not fulfilling their obligations under the regulations was rejected.

The bigger clubs are still very much favoured by the system, as Spanish law mandates that factors such as historical record and size of fanbase count as much as finishing position in calculating what share each club gets each year.

During the 2021-22 season — the most recent campaign for which figures are available — Madrid received just over €160m, slightly more than second-placed Barcelona, and over three times more than the €46m given to lowest earners Real Mallorca, Elche and Rayo Vallecano.

Under the revised share-out introduced for 2023-24, 75 per cent of TV revenue will continue to be distributed as before, with part of the remaining 25 per cent now depending on how each club collaborates with the “audience recognition” innovations.

Barca cannot afford not to take part

Financially troubled Barca are in no position to turn down any revenue they can get their hands on, and the relationship between Tebas and Blaugrana president Joan Laporta has improved markedly in recent months.

La Liga has not made public exactly how the calculations are made, but continuing to boycott all the new voluntary broadcasting initiatives would mean a cut of about €13m from Madrid’s total La Liga broadcast revenue for 2023-24.

Even for a club with an annual income of well over €800m, that is a significant cost. But it may not be enough for Perez and Madrid to change tack and embrace Tebas’ new measures.

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

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

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

The Political Economy of Football V2

Search This Blog