New Premier League deal?

Should a majority of Premier League clubs vote through the proposed hard spending cap for the 2025-26 season, it would not only aid the competitive nature of what is the world’s strongest domestic league, but also enforce a subtle shift in the perceived power base of English football.

The cap idea is based on the concept of “anchoring”, designed to limit the amount of money any club can invest in their squad by tying it to a multiple (probably five) of what the division’s lowest earners get from the league’s centralised broadcast and commercial deals.

The Premier League’s broadcast revenue sharing has always been, by European football standards anyway, a relatively noble meritocratic arrangement.

It is less that sharing ratio which clubs such as Everton, West Ham and Palace are worried about — and more the consistent advantage clubs such as City, Chelsea and Manchester United have accrued from decades of participation in European football.

Not only do the ‘Big Six’ tend to pocket extra millions every season from qualifying for one of the three UEFA competitions, they also get to strike more lucrative commercial deals each year because of it. Newcastle and Aston Villa are doing their best to prise open the door to that clique, but the established gap already seems fairly structural.

A larger Champions League designed to ward off a European Super League and next summer’s first, much-expanded Club World Cup will only reinforce the gap between the Premier League’s long-standing haves and have-nots.

It took an interesting coming-together of not only the top flight’s minnows and its middle classes — such as Palace, West Ham and Fulham — but also some of that upper-class elite to get anchoring on the agenda so firmly.

However, Chelsea, Manchester City and Manchester United have already expressed their concerns about the idea, pointing out it is potentially a breach of UK competition law (and they are probably right). Arsenal and Liverpool may see more in it.

If Premier League footballers revolt strongly at the potential for pay cuts, it could throw the whole deal into doubt. Nobody will want the potential for U.S.-style sporting strikes, such as the mid-1990s baseball walkout that saw two major-league seasons left incomplete.

An alternative explanation is that like any industry facing external regulation, they are looking at a way of fudging the appearance of self-regulation to ward off anything that the independent regulator might impose. Knowing the Premier League, loopholes and workarounds will be baked in.

Meanwhile, they are lobbying hard against the regulator, somewhat incongruously supported by the National League.

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/

The Political Economy of Football V2

Search This Blog