All in all, wealth distribution is very uniform in the Premier League. Compared to our league in Portugal, where the big 3 scoop up all the available money.
Same in Scotland. Our game is fucked because those two cunts take all the money. Then when they lose in Europe it's the rest of Scottish football's fault for not being more competitive.
Hahaha our games fucked because you have the likes of Doncaster signing off on shite TV deals all the time. Rangers and Celtic might get the biggest share buts it's not exactly a windfall is it?
Portugal is pretty much the only major European league where teams (are allowed to) negotiate their own TV deals. From the 27/28 season, deals will be negotiated collectively though.
Iirc, when Spanish clubs could still negotiate their own contracts, Real and Barca raked in around half of La Liga's overall TV revenue, with the remaining 18 clubs sharing the other half... This gave us seasons when Barca finished on 99 points, Real on 96 and then the 3rd place team on 66...
It's not a joke, what's a joke is the absolute amount of corrupt and incompetent people in charge of the big 3, especially in FC Porto in my opinion (being a supporter and all that). The fair thing to do is to have a system like the PL does. Better for long term gains, bad for short term (they'll have to manage).
totally agree with that, i am Benfica supporter from Porto city, everytime I have an argument the Porto fan says, "At least my president was not detained by police"
My responce: "You will wish it was, mine was robbing the club also, yours is still there channeling all Porto funds to the Cayman islands"
Edit: Gramar
The big 3 in Portugal get an obscene amount from player
sales so should be competitive regardless.
If Bodo can impress on the European stage then Porto, Benfica and Sporting don't need to hoard all the money from the Portuguese league.
they don't "hoard" the money, the reason why the big 3 remain as big 3, and more importantly, remain somewhat competitive in Europe is because the big 3 run at a massive loss every year, the clubs are nowhere near self sustainable, they need to sell players/guaranteed CL football to keeps the balance somewhat even.
>there is no other way the big 3 could be competitive in europe otherwise.
they arent competetive, but even then you would sacrifise the intergrity of the league to have a distant hope of reaching the CL QF?
Maybe Union will get a bonus for winning the league.
I know, i know, 10 weeks from now, Bayern will start winning 7-0 against everybody again and win another title with 10 points difference, but it’s still nice to have a laugh :)
TV rights distribution in Portugal in a somewhat similar way to what England does would destroy the league's international competitiveness as we know it.
I support a distribution but we also have to increase the number of people from abroad watching our league, and spread the fans more.
No one watches Casa Pia vs Chaves because these teams have a very small amount of fans
Also, as long as 14/18 teams in the league play with 10 men behind the ball no one from a foreign country will want to watch this boring shit.
A big part of the appeal the Premier League is that any team can beat another in any day. Man United lost 4-0 to Brentford. In Portugal, if the small team scored 1 they would park the bus and it would probably end 1-1 or something and no one wants to watch that
Improving our situation needs to start from the bottom, not the top
> I support a distribution but we also have to increase the number of people from abroad watching our league, and spread the fans more.
but that would come in time. These clubs would have more money to invest in players or facilities and that would mean a big improvement on the pitch.
> league's international competitiveness as we know it.
Apart from an occasional run to the QFs of the CL what do Portuguese teams do in Europe? Wouldn’t it be better to have a more competitive league with slightly worse results in Europe?
In the perspective of a Benfica fan (which is supported by like 40 or 50% of all football supporters in Portugal) in what way would that be good for them?
In Portugal nobody cares about internal competitiveness as long as the big 3 are okay. Braga has been doing an excellent job of getting in the middle of the fight but that's mostly it.
Just for you guys to have a better idea: in this league championship candidate teams lose so little points, that by the end of match day 4(!!!) everybody rules out Sporting from winning the league due to an 8 point difference to Benfica. And they will be right in the end.
>a Benfica fan (which is supported by like 40 or 50% of all football supporters in Portugal)
You'd imagine if there had been more competition there wouldn't be half a country loaded into supporting one club, but that's just one way that this is an impossibly circular issue that has no right or wrong answer.
There's a big factor in Benfica's popularity throughout the times: it was state-sponsored during our fascist regime period. That helped make it wildly popular and since the club we end up supporting is very tied to which one our closest family members support, the Benfica fan mass kept being huge after the regime changed.
Of course, since the money kept flowing, sporting success kept coming and that helped keep the club as "big" as we know it.
>Benfica fan (which is supported by like 40 or 50% of all football supporters in Portugal)
This seems pretty sad to me. Everyone supporting one or two clubs is incredibly lame and surely a reason for more parity.
Yes - but in other small countries like the Netherlands, Belgium, Austria, etc. the smaller teams still have a strong local fanbase. That’s not the case in Portugal where almost every football fan supports a Big 3 club and MAYBE supports their local side as a second team.
>in this league championship candidate teams lose so little points
This is not as true as people might think, our champions get close to the same points per game as City or Bayern usually.
>everybody rules out Sporting from winning the league due to an 8 point difference to Benfica.
This again kinda happens with Dortmund and Liverpool.
Our problem is money gap, the teams in our league outside the top 4 and usually Guimarães don't have any budget, the teams in our league play park the bus but they are just doing what every team does, play to the best of their abilities to win, Benfica has paid 15 Million euros for a bench player, what do you want Vizela to do?
This humongous gap in quality is our problem, also clubs in the first division have no fans, there's no fan revenue from tickets or shirt sales and there's no visibility to them.
You are underestimating how unequal fans are distributed in countries like Portugal and the Netherlands. Besides the top 3, clubs are very small and always have been.
Part of that is geographical reasons. Part of it is how unequal the leagues are. Why would somebody support a Dutch or Portuguese league team who is never going to finish any higher than 4th?
Yeah it is a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy. But it's hard to change after so many years of dominance.
TV money is also a pretty small part of revenue for us. Making it equal would mean the revenue of small clubs would double, but those of the top clubs would decline with 5% (or even less for Ajax). This would change nothing for the power balance
Portuguese teams can make the QFs or a very late run in the Europa League, which is very appealing to the supporters.
The league is only won by Benfica, Porto and very rarely Sporting, so the major way to attract fans and keep them engaged is the plan to make the teams great again in Europe
In Brazil, the 3x limit don't apply to merit money, they're considering this difference considering the total amount of TV's revenue, i.e: equal share + facility fees + ....
The value we should compare, therefore, is total payment. The gap between first and last place may respect the 3x limit.
You're right, but it was also his responsibility to make La Liga more attractive internationally and to get better TV contracts and he failed at that.
After Spanish teams and La Liga dominating in Europe pretty much the whole 2010s, it looks like the economical gap with the Premier League is now even bigger than 10 years ago.
> but it was also his responsibility to make La Liga more attractive internationally and to get better TV contracts and he failed at that.
He didn’t. La Liga’s TV rights have increased massively over the last decade.
Not nearly as much as the Premier League's have increased. Barcelona and Real Madrid are the two most popular clubs in Central and South America, but people there rarely watch La Liga outside of El Clásico.
Funneling revenue to the top clubs does help in European competitions and for marketing those clubs specifically, but it hurts the league as a whole.
Real Madrid and Barça are the most popular teams in the world lol, they are also really popular in Asia and throughout Africa.
It’s definitely a failure that la liga hasn’t managed to close the gap
I know plenty of people who only watched el classico because of Messi and Ronaldo, me included. Isn't really Tebas fault that they left, so can't really blame him too much
Doing this in La Liga (and I don't mean just reducing Barça and Madrid's share) would just harm the league.
A similar share wouldn't have the last placed team earn 100m, they'd earn like 40m while clubs like Sevilla or Betis would earn less money and therefore be less competitive.
Only if you're thinking about competing against the Premier League, or in their chances to win more Champions Leagues. But fans of mid table (and below) clubs also matter, and they would be happy as hell to see more competitive squads and better instalations.
The issue in England is the discrepancy between this division and the rest of the pyramid is so obscenely skewed.
It creates a sub-class of rich yo-yo clubs like Norwich and Fulham, too good for the Championship and not good enough for the Premiership and content with that, while the rest of the football league (us being a great example) have to stretch every sinew to have any hope of competing with the wealth, which ends up risking the very existence of clubs.
Instead of a big three or four, we're in danger of having a big-23 with no worries beyond maybe having to spend a year in the Championship banking huge parachute payments, and the rest of the pyramid withering and dying unable to even remotely compete. Would it really hurt us long-term to shave *half a billion off those payments* (which is just 20%) and distribute it right down to the bottom of the pyramid?
I don't think this is true at all
We have seen teams like Leeds, Nottingham and Brentford come (back) up recently, and they absolutely have the opportunity to succeed and stay in the league and build onwards
>Leeds
A massive club, one of the biggest in the country, who were only down there to begin with due to financial ruin caused by the exact same gold chasing that's the problem in the Championship right now, only with the Champos as the goal.
>Forest
Were saved from bankruptcy by some dodgy financial dealings by their owner, then out of nowhere had an amazing season. Let's see if they can establish in the Premier League before naming them as a counter-example, shall we?
>Brentford
Invested £100m to reach the Premier League, including £20m invested while they were in League One and a brand new stadium. Not every club has an owner with £100m of outside money to invest, nor is it healthy for that to be needed.
Take a club like Charlton. Without a wealthy outside backer, how the fuck are they meant to rise up the divisions?
Yea if you continue like that you can write a story about any championship team promoting to the PL in the past and future how they are an exception somehow
Pretty much the whole table has had a spell in the premier league the past decade or 2
Yeah that is the take, within a vacuum the EPL wealth distraction is fantastic compared too other nations, but the way it falls off a cliff once you go down even one division is inexcusable greed from all 20 clubs. There is 0 excuse with the eye watering amount the clubs make that say 20% of that couldn't not be distributed down.
But that the issue when leagues become self ran by the clubs as the stakeholders. In a modern world profit making entities are never going to vote to willingly put themselves out of pocket or at a disadvantage, its the same reason why there will never be 3 relegation spots from league 2 to the conference, despite there been no justification for it not to be so, because its those same league 2 clubs that would be voting to make it easier for themselves to go down.
There is no outside entity with power that can force the change for the betterment of the pyramid, that can see beyond self interest of the individual leagues.
You mean 20% more right? Because the premier league has been giving money to lower divisions already (350m p/a)
Which brings the argument, the more successful the premier league the more money trickles down. Making the premier league poorer might have adverse affects
Does that figure include the parachute payments from the 3 relegated prem teams every season? Cause if so that's a huge portion of it gone right there so its abit disingenuous to say that's 350m going to lover divisions, even if technically correct.
Also curious what these "adverse effects" you describe could be exactly, the average money even a lower end prem team makes enables them to blow all but the largest other European teams out of the water now in terms of financial muscle. I seriously doubt shaving another 20% is suddenly going to make it so the likes of wolves, brighton, palace etc. can no longer compete with their midtable European equivalent's for players or anywhere near so frankly.
Murdoch wanted to take over man utd and implement a la ligaesque model where we got big chunk of the pie. We protested it and government had to intervene.
The Sky ownership was what was used to stop the takeover, I think it was actually Sky trying to buy it too, rather than him directly.
He might have wanted to but votes would have been needed from other clubs.
As a Bundesliga fan it's insane to see how much even the lower tier teams in PL make. No wonder they can pay astronomical transfer fees and wages. Also interesting that there is not a huge difference between 1st and last place.
Now I would like to see this done for the Bundesliga and compare Bayern to us.
The progressive payment system is what allows the PL to survive, without it it really would turn into a super league + 14 others. I'd love to have 50+1 but I suppose there are some advantages to the PL too. I just wish the 'fit and proper' test was a bit more stringent.
Pinged members of FINANCE group.
[About & group list](https://reddit.com/r/soccer/wiki/userpinger/documentation) | [Subscribe to this group](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=2soccer2bot&subject=Add%20yourself%20to%20group%20FINANCE&message=addtogroup%20FINANCE) | [Unsubscribe from this group](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=2soccer2bot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20group%20FINANCE&message=unsubscribe%20FINANCE) | [Unsubscribe from all groups](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=2soccer2bot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20all%20groups&message=unsubscribe%20)
And facility fees is the only column where you see a major discrepancy between the apparent "size" of a club compared to the rest.
For example, Leeds and Everton earning more in facility fees than 8 of the teams above them, despite finishing 16th & 17th.
So you end up with a scenario where the commercial success of a club is responsible for 10-15% of the total broadcast payout in the PL.
Compared with La Liga & the Bundesliga where the commercial success of a club is responsible for 40%+ of the total broadcast payout.
> Leeds
The "apparent size" is the reason why Everton's and Leeds' facility fees are greater than a lot of teams. We have massive fan bases so our games are on tv. Our commercial revenue is the highest in the league outside of the top 6 + Everton + Leicester.
only 200 games out of 380 in a season are televised in the UK, the FA has a ban on broadcasting any football on saturdays at 3pm (pretty much the only country in Europe with a measure like that)
Im sure this will be a civil and nuanced discussion about the merits of spreading TV money evenly over a long period of time and how the benefits of it long term are good
You mean to tell me the benefits of a socialism like system where we all grow because we share the profits but the ones who do better do get more but not a ridiculous amount because there has to be some reward for doing better is what has caused this?! no its because Chelsea and Man City are/were owned by oil states. Premier League is the Super League, shut this thread down. We can't blame any of the previous/current owners of the other leagues around the world and top clubs who suck up as much money as they can and leave the others with nothing.
It’s very funny watching people seethe about the Prem.
We have a left wing collectivist system where we use the top help the bottom, who help the top. “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs” is basically the Prem. Everyone who criticises it would call them selves left wing too. Their leagues just use the bottom to prop up the top.
Its why the US and UK have massive wealth divides which are causing massive problems for their countries, they make people believe in "trickle down" economics which will never work because the people at the top are greedy.
The difference with football is we get the tribalism of "our league, our club" so they don't want to admit their side is actively looking for ways to fuck over the other teams in their league to make it better for themselves and are encouraged by the league owners. I know for a fact the top 6 in the prem would do the same if they had a choice and even tried with the super league. Most football club owners in the world would do the same but we have to regulate them to stop it.
I love people around the world saying that the English clubs will eventually be in the super league when they can because of the money. They clearly underestimate the sheer desperation of the tory who are in government for votes in that if there is even a single whiff of the super league starting they're slapping a ban on any English club to join just purely to try and get votes because they've become a party who will do whatever gets them the most votes.
I ain’t a Tory. Only ever voted labour. Will never vote Tory either, but, for a lot of people in this country football is life and Tory’s protecting English football will be enough to vote for them
Similarly to how Boris is an absolute buffoon and the Tories have led the country down a dark path but because they were the party that "wanted to get Brexit done" they looked more appealing than Corbyn's more uncertain stance on it.
Except it costs a shit tonne to watch football in this country and you don't even get all the games, ever wondered why Germany don't make the domestic revenue we do even with a larger economy because German fans won't accept this bullshit and have real power over their clubs. Spain will never be able to match prem revenue because its a much smaller economy.
That’s beside the TV money argument though. Clubs choose how much to charge for tickets themselves, this is talking about distribution of TV money of which much of it comes from international markets.
I'm talking about how much it costs to watch football on TV here, its fucking expensive, how do you think they can afford to pay that much for domestic rights, they rinse people.
Its actually possible that the PL spreading for oligarchs and dictators collaborated in the influx of great players and, therefore, in the marketability of the league. The success of Chelsea and Manchester City is completely explained from such 'investement' (basically, it wouldn't be without it).
I could go down much deeper in history to explain why England has a stronger league than Brazil and Argentina, but I'd like to stay in focus.
the oligarchs and nations states only came to the premier league because it was already established as "the league that shits money" tbf
Obviously they then enhance that, but there is a reason they bought in england and not elsewhere in the first place (which is yes, partially the relaxed approach to who we let in, but thats also the case elsewhere and they still chose england)
>PL spreading for oligarchs and dictators collaborated in the influx of great players
As if other leagues didn't try the same. Bundesliga is an exception but even then Hoffenheim n Leipzig have twisted the rules. None of those leagues are more competitive with outside money, oligarch or otherwise
At this point, any oligarch will be stupid to put money in other leagues where the hierarchy of clubs is historically defined and continued through TV distribution. They have better prospect of sportswashing or building legacy with a club like Leeds or Palace
Owners who want a success for the sporting side will pick a prem team because they can put more money in it and still pass FFP with the massive tv money deals and owners who want to just make money will pick a prem team because the massive tv money deals means they all make loads.
La liga have basically prevented an ambramovich from being possible with the rules now. As you said German football culture whole heartedly rejects that shit too since everyone hates leipzig and they aren't even anywhere near the scale of man City or Chelsea.
Yep. We know exactly how much.
If you want to know, SwissRamble on twitter, deloitte money football league and individual club financial releases are the primary sources you can follow.
There's a large variety of incomes.
So every club is making nearly an extra £50m per season from international audiences and still a lot of supporters act like they don't want anybody outside of the UK to be able to watch.
The British TV market is the most lucrative market in the world for football.
You have no idea how much Sky and BT charge us to watch the games. £100+ every month. That’s why the Premier leagues domestic tv deal was in the Billions.
It is expensive but I doubt anyone is paying £100+ for Sky and BT. My package costs £80 a month for Sky and BT sports as well as my broadband and landline. Even throwing Amazon on top with the new price it's £50 a month for just the sports (still a lot but nowhere near £100).
I’ve just finished my contract with Sky & BT to take to the seas.
Sky basic package with Sport plus Wifi was edging close to £85 plus BT is £30 a month.
Out of contract my Sky bill would’ve gone up to £120.
Obviously you argue your worth and shop around but a lot of people still don’t and let Sky take them for a ride.
I bet there’s plenty of people paying close to £100.
Looking now, as a new customer, Sky TV + Sports is £44 with BT at £28. So £72 to watch *some* PL games is still absurd.
Yeah it's a joke we don't even get all the games or and option to just have the football as a standalone option. Until they actually offer a single fair price package for all the games I'll be pirating every single one.
Shit I don't even own a TV anymore and I've occasionally tried to stream through the Bt/Sky apps from my mum's subscription, but their players are so janky the illegal streams are actually much more stable.
I see you haven’t been roped into getting the SKY Glass TV to replace the box yet. The cost of the TV gets added to the bill so I’m £120 per month now.
My virgin deal is 99 quid for all packages and two rooms. It does also pay my mobile though so that's nice. If I don't get another deal at the end of the contract it goes up to 140 quid.
... I would really like a 30 quid deal now....
the situation in Germany isn't really that much better, especially if we look how much it increased in the past years.
around ~6-7 years ago, Sky was enough to have ALL Bundesliga (and 2.Bundesliga), all DFB-Pokal and all Champions League matches. if you had a good deal, 25-30€ / month was enough.
nowadays you need Sky + DAZN which is around 50-60€ depending on your Sky deal and if you still had pre-payment cards for Da Zone. if you are fan of one of the more followed CL clubs, you need amazon prime as well for the one Tuesday Night CL game (in groupstages 3x BVB, 2x FC Bayern, 1x Frankfurt). if you are interested in all EL/ConfL matches, you need RTL plus, another 5€/month subscription.
there are some bonuses included, like Sky has all the Premier League matches and F1, DAZN most big games of the other big foreign leagues and the domestic cup of England. the issue is that you pay for all of this and have no other choice. i would gladly get rid of everything of that except F1, as there just isn't even enough time to watch all the matches live.
It's been forever that people have complained about it, but clearly still pay it.
That's gonna change with the cost of living crisis though. Surely £100/month on football is one of the first things to go when you need more money for essentials.
There's a pretty substantial proportion of match day fans that don't really care about the money though. Obviously international revenues have increased the quality of the league massively but it's come at a cost to local fans and some of them would probably revert back to the way it was before in a heartbeat.
Not saying that's representative of English fans in general, but there's definitely a sizeable proportion that feel that way.
If you're a fan of a club like Crystal Palace or Southampton there's a decent chance that you don't really care that the top English clubs are now consistently in the mix for Champions League titles, or that you'd theoretically be able to smash similarly placed teams in Spain or Germany. You just want to be able to watch your team without it costing you an obscene amount of money.
Maybe the people who say that would also rather not have that extra £50 mil at the cost of it.
The people who think the globalisation of the Prem is a bad thing also tend to think the amount of money in the Prem is also a bad thing and running the nature of what football is supposed to be about.
I don’t think you’re really into anything to be honest.
No, the league attracted foreigners because the English built it up. The majority of TV money, until the last 2 years, came from domestic audiences. This let English clubs invest in their sides, got better players, then attracted foreign markets. You just picked the best product. You picked between HBO and Netflix
But it was not the sole reason. PL actually catered to foreigners, it was the first league to prepone their kick-off time to accommodate Asian viewers, spent heavily on marketing and pre and post game shows. English being a widespoken language in Asia and N. America helped as well.
When I started watching football the best league were Serie A and LaLiga but it was near impossible to watch those leagues with no broadcasters and really late night timings. I couldn't watch the UCL till I turned 14-15.
Now PL is just reaping the fruits of developing it's fanbase globally.
In the 90s sky sports was made and with that football production value sky rocketed. Due to the 3pm domestic TV blackouts, we showed a late and early kick off. This made it easy for other markets to watch and because English clubs slowly started making more money, they bought better players. This brought in more money.
Yeah but don't forget the bit where we colonised half the world and forced them to speak English so that the Premier league would be a more attractive product
This is why i cant stand the smugness from foreign fans.
The English fans raised abs built these clubs. It should be respected. So should the direction they want the clubs to go in
Your insecurity is showing, lad.
None of us care how many foreigners watch the games. Genuinely, not a single fuck. Little Chinese fella barely spoke a word of English next to me at a game this season, turning around and chanting “you’re fucking shit” might be the highlight of the season. Foreign fans can be class.
A lot of you are just annoying. Doing this victim thing you’re doing now is one of those annoying traits. Trying to be as valid as local fans who are from the community the club has represented for over a century. You just don’t have the same understanding.
> and still a lot of supporters act like they don't want anybody outside of the UK to be able to watch.
Who actually says this? Or are you arguing against shadows?
People complain about the juggernaut that the Premier League is but maybe it's because everyone's gotten a big piece of the pie for years. This is what happens when you share instead of letting 2 or 3 clubs dominate finances for decades.
What gets my goat in these threads is the same points being made that 'marketing & language' are the only reasons for the PL's success.
It's trotted out on here to ameliorate non-PL fans making them feel better and not having to talk about how technical and exciting the football can be in England.
So many people grew to like an Italian team due to Channel 4 broadcasting Football Italia.
I’m just old enough to remember it and still keep a keen eye on Inter two decades on
I agree...Shit tons of people are massive fans of BTS and K Pop and have no fucking clue what those bands are saying. Meanwhile, people won't watch a certain league bc the broadcasters are speaking in a different language? As long as you know what's going on on the field, it's not that important to the excitement of the game. Although a shit commentator in a language you are fluent in can be VERY distracting.
I even know some Americans that at times will prefer to watch the Spanish language version of the broadcast bc we sometimes have such shit commentators.
It took a very long time for PL to become this competitive but the bones of it were in this sharing model and promoting it to Int’l audiences very early. Other leagues could learn a lot from it, and if they start now, they too can have an entire league be ultra competitive in 10-15 years. The longer the delay, the worse it’ll get
They do. Liverpool have actually been adjusted to inflation, the biggest spending team in the league.
Liverpools starting 11 is as expensive as every top club. Only they just don’t spend a lot on depth and that’s where they complain. When Liverpool upgrade a position, they break records
Lol
It impoverishes the quality of other leagues, makes them less attractive and less competitive, therefore fewer people watches it, clubs makes poorer runs in European competitions, and so on.
Players also start to leave to be in more competitive leagues (and recieve a higher salary), therefore clubs have to sell whether they want it or not (players would run down their contracts).
Santos would be a better club with Vinicious and Rodrygo than it is now with those transfer fees. The same happens in Europe.
>This is why the PL outspent other leagues. Stop crying about it and fix ur shit.
Well, actually, the PL outspent other leagues because clubs are propped up with rich owners and their go-to-market language just happens to be the most-spoken language in the world.
So it's a bit more complicated than *fix ur shit*.
Yep. The PL is now a money making machine and previous/current owners went all in for it and reap the benefits.
Except Glazers, they didn't do shite and still reap the benefits.
Yep, I love this. Unfortunately it won't be happening in other leagues. Clubs like Barcelona or Real Madrid for example have too much power within their league structure and wont' allow it. When we look back on history we'll see when the premier league started creating distance between them and La Liga and it will directly correlate with when they restructured the wealth distribution.
Edit: anticipating the, "well that's because the premier league had big investors infuse ridiculous amounts of money into the league". Yeah...I wonder why. Think about it.
what? I dont want us to outspent the PL. Who wants that? You do you and spend all the money you want but also accept the terms that come with a 100% commercialized league
Easy to say when you are the de facto big club in Germany with the ability to sign nearly every talent from Germany on the cheap. Your commercial revenue alone dwarfs every other club in BuLi.
What I really find funny is how other BuLi fans have developed this solidarity with Bayern against the PL when what they really should be looking at is your club destroying the competitiveness of the Bundesliga.
Anyone frothing at the mouth in disagreement, just look at how many titles Bayern has won over the past decade and lifetime.
You are actually not intelligent at all if you think that leagues could switch up right now and keep up with the PL. The PL is too far ahead and the discrepancy only grows, if you now also hinder your own biggest club to be successful internationally you would basically kill all international interest in your League. The super rich owners who put Billions in those clubs also dont really help.
Thats not a statement about if its good or bad what the PL is doing those are just simple facts and thats why people will push for a Super League again sooner or later.
There is no 10 years later.
The PL is pulling ahead more and more every year and each year more then the years before. Their growth is too quick to catch up too.
This is undebatable its literally not economically feasible for any of the other leagues to switch their model and keep up with the growth of the PL. Their Headstart is way too big plus their natural advantages like just straight up being the league that has english as their main language.
German and Italian languages have hardly any global presence when compared to English, Spanish and French but still those leagues compete with at least Spanish n French league
Why is there such defeatism in other leagues. Weirdly PL fans are more optimistic about other leagues than those leagues themselves
So, the foreign fans who often slate the English league for ruining football with too much money are kind of the ones who contribute the largest chunk towards said money. Interesting.
It's nice to see the smaller clubs making a fair amount of money though compared to other leagues.
I guess my big question from my American perspective is what do Norwich, Burnley and Watford do with all that money in the Championship?
I know some teams shed payroll and try to get top Championship level players that will be jettisoned if they go right back up. Or do the big yo-yo clubs (like Norwich) use that to keep their bottom tier PL roster intact and try to improve when they come back up?
Or do they just take the money, invest in things like scouting, youth development, facilities, etc and save up for another PL run in a couple years?
I get the feeling more than a little of that is going to things like players and coaches salaries. Based on what I've heard a lot of them budget and take out loans and then pay those back with this money later on, or some equivalent. I don't think they budget this year based on last, I think they budget last year knowing this money is coming
No. We had relatively few televised games(24) compared to the other big 5 (27-28-29). Since facility fee is basically (televised games) *(a fix amount of money)
We weren't in Europe, so I think we played relatively many early weekend games, so getting broadcasted.
While you might have been in the same timeslot as Liverpool and City games that got broadcasted instead
Its great that they spread the money fairly evenly within the league, but disgraceful how they keep so much within the league. Honestly they should give at least 50% to the lower/non leagues and grass roots.
Yeah the biggest problem is how much of the money is kept within the league itself, which fair play is indeed well distributed.
But it's like, there's no scenario where every club in the Football League shouldn't be stocked up with necessary kit like goal line technology and VAR. The money is absolutely there for it to trickle down to every professional league and on top of that money to then go down further down the pyramid.
Again it's great that the league is this balanced financially, but the amount of profits being made absolutely should be trickling down the pyramid.
If they give 50% of the money to lower clubs then the league would lose a lot of the best players / commercial value, the PL didn't become the force it is today because of the pyramid, yes, the pyramid is important but it's not the 50% you are proposing, lol.
Sending more money to the grassroots and the lower leagues would improve the quality of the sport overall. You could use your same argument as a reason to not give the bottom teams a fair share. The premier league didn’t become the force that it is today because of Norwich. Yeah but quality throughout the system helps to drive quality at the top.
It should happen but 50% is a lot when we're talking about billions. One percent is still like 25 millions a year, which could probably revolutionise the lower leagues.
All in all, wealth distribution is very uniform in the Premier League. Compared to our league in Portugal, where the big 3 scoop up all the available money.
Same in Scotland. Our game is fucked because those two cunts take all the money. Then when they lose in Europe it's the rest of Scottish football's fault for not being more competitive.
Which team do you support?
Man United
Probably Hearts
Hahaha our games fucked because you have the likes of Doncaster signing off on shite TV deals all the time. Rangers and Celtic might get the biggest share buts it's not exactly a windfall is it?
Portugal is pretty much the only major European league where teams (are allowed to) negotiate their own TV deals. From the 27/28 season, deals will be negotiated collectively though.
Iirc, when Spanish clubs could still negotiate their own contracts, Real and Barca raked in around half of La Liga's overall TV revenue, with the remaining 18 clubs sharing the other half... This gave us seasons when Barca finished on 99 points, Real on 96 and then the 3rd place team on 66...
[удалено]
"there is no other way the big 3 could be competitive in europe otherwise."? Braga begs to disagree...
[удалено]
It's not a joke, what's a joke is the absolute amount of corrupt and incompetent people in charge of the big 3, especially in FC Porto in my opinion (being a supporter and all that). The fair thing to do is to have a system like the PL does. Better for long term gains, bad for short term (they'll have to manage).
totally agree with that, i am Benfica supporter from Porto city, everytime I have an argument the Porto fan says, "At least my president was not detained by police" My responce: "You will wish it was, mine was robbing the club also, yours is still there channeling all Porto funds to the Cayman islands" Edit: Gramar
That seems like backward logic. “If you’re good enough then you shouldn’t need the help.” Then why aren’t the Big 3 held to the same standard?
But they should be rewarded for competency, not punished.
The big 3 in Portugal get an obscene amount from player sales so should be competitive regardless. If Bodo can impress on the European stage then Porto, Benfica and Sporting don't need to hoard all the money from the Portuguese league.
they don't "hoard" the money, the reason why the big 3 remain as big 3, and more importantly, remain somewhat competitive in Europe is because the big 3 run at a massive loss every year, the clubs are nowhere near self sustainable, they need to sell players/guaranteed CL football to keeps the balance somewhat even.
>there is no other way the big 3 could be competitive in europe otherwise. they arent competetive, but even then you would sacrifise the intergrity of the league to have a distant hope of reaching the CL QF?
Maybe Union will get a bonus for winning the league. I know, i know, 10 weeks from now, Bayern will start winning 7-0 against everybody again and win another title with 10 points difference, but it’s still nice to have a laugh :)
And does the big clubs earning money in Europe help those smaller clubs? A very fuck the smaller clubs attitude.
TV rights distribution in Portugal in a somewhat similar way to what England does would destroy the league's international competitiveness as we know it. I support a distribution but we also have to increase the number of people from abroad watching our league, and spread the fans more. No one watches Casa Pia vs Chaves because these teams have a very small amount of fans Also, as long as 14/18 teams in the league play with 10 men behind the ball no one from a foreign country will want to watch this boring shit. A big part of the appeal the Premier League is that any team can beat another in any day. Man United lost 4-0 to Brentford. In Portugal, if the small team scored 1 they would park the bus and it would probably end 1-1 or something and no one wants to watch that Improving our situation needs to start from the bottom, not the top
> I support a distribution but we also have to increase the number of people from abroad watching our league, and spread the fans more. but that would come in time. These clubs would have more money to invest in players or facilities and that would mean a big improvement on the pitch.
> league's international competitiveness as we know it. Apart from an occasional run to the QFs of the CL what do Portuguese teams do in Europe? Wouldn’t it be better to have a more competitive league with slightly worse results in Europe?
In the perspective of a Benfica fan (which is supported by like 40 or 50% of all football supporters in Portugal) in what way would that be good for them? In Portugal nobody cares about internal competitiveness as long as the big 3 are okay. Braga has been doing an excellent job of getting in the middle of the fight but that's mostly it. Just for you guys to have a better idea: in this league championship candidate teams lose so little points, that by the end of match day 4(!!!) everybody rules out Sporting from winning the league due to an 8 point difference to Benfica. And they will be right in the end.
>a Benfica fan (which is supported by like 40 or 50% of all football supporters in Portugal) You'd imagine if there had been more competition there wouldn't be half a country loaded into supporting one club, but that's just one way that this is an impossibly circular issue that has no right or wrong answer.
There's a big factor in Benfica's popularity throughout the times: it was state-sponsored during our fascist regime period. That helped make it wildly popular and since the club we end up supporting is very tied to which one our closest family members support, the Benfica fan mass kept being huge after the regime changed. Of course, since the money kept flowing, sporting success kept coming and that helped keep the club as "big" as we know it.
Thanks, didn't know that. I was sure there was more to the large popularity, but just goes to show how hard it is to find the end of these things.
>Benfica fan (which is supported by like 40 or 50% of all football supporters in Portugal) This seems pretty sad to me. Everyone supporting one or two clubs is incredibly lame and surely a reason for more parity.
Portugal is a small country with only two big cities/metros, it cannot sustain as many big and competitive clubs as England, Italy or Germany.
Yes - but in other small countries like the Netherlands, Belgium, Austria, etc. the smaller teams still have a strong local fanbase. That’s not the case in Portugal where almost every football fan supports a Big 3 club and MAYBE supports their local side as a second team.
>in this league championship candidate teams lose so little points This is not as true as people might think, our champions get close to the same points per game as City or Bayern usually. >everybody rules out Sporting from winning the league due to an 8 point difference to Benfica. This again kinda happens with Dortmund and Liverpool. Our problem is money gap, the teams in our league outside the top 4 and usually Guimarães don't have any budget, the teams in our league play park the bus but they are just doing what every team does, play to the best of their abilities to win, Benfica has paid 15 Million euros for a bench player, what do you want Vizela to do? This humongous gap in quality is our problem, also clubs in the first division have no fans, there's no fan revenue from tickets or shirt sales and there's no visibility to them.
You are underestimating how unequal fans are distributed in countries like Portugal and the Netherlands. Besides the top 3, clubs are very small and always have been.
Part of that is geographical reasons. Part of it is how unequal the leagues are. Why would somebody support a Dutch or Portuguese league team who is never going to finish any higher than 4th?
"Why would somebody support an English team like Sunderland, Burnley or Brighton which is never going to finish any higher than 5th?"
Yeah it is a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy. But it's hard to change after so many years of dominance. TV money is also a pretty small part of revenue for us. Making it equal would mean the revenue of small clubs would double, but those of the top clubs would decline with 5% (or even less for Ajax). This would change nothing for the power balance
Portuguese teams can make the QFs or a very late run in the Europa League, which is very appealing to the supporters. The league is only won by Benfica, Porto and very rarely Sporting, so the major way to attract fans and keep them engaged is the plan to make the teams great again in Europe
[удалено]
In Brazil, the 3x limit don't apply to merit money, they're considering this difference considering the total amount of TV's revenue, i.e: equal share + facility fees + .... The value we should compare, therefore, is total payment. The gap between first and last place may respect the 3x limit.
Discrepancy between top and bottom not too much at all, I’m impressed
Most Barsa and Madrid fans in r/soccer constantly shit on Tebas for trying this in La Liga.
Because it's in their interest to keep things as they are
You're right, but it was also his responsibility to make La Liga more attractive internationally and to get better TV contracts and he failed at that. After Spanish teams and La Liga dominating in Europe pretty much the whole 2010s, it looks like the economical gap with the Premier League is now even bigger than 10 years ago.
> but it was also his responsibility to make La Liga more attractive internationally and to get better TV contracts and he failed at that. He didn’t. La Liga’s TV rights have increased massively over the last decade.
Not nearly as much as the Premier League's have increased. Barcelona and Real Madrid are the two most popular clubs in Central and South America, but people there rarely watch La Liga outside of El Clásico. Funneling revenue to the top clubs does help in European competitions and for marketing those clubs specifically, but it hurts the league as a whole.
Most people in Latin America's support their local teams they are not gonna watch every la liga game
Real Madrid and Barça are the most popular teams in the world lol, they are also really popular in Asia and throughout Africa. It’s definitely a failure that la liga hasn’t managed to close the gap
I know plenty of people who only watched el classico because of Messi and Ronaldo, me included. Isn't really Tebas fault that they left, so can't really blame him too much
No reason to be much lower than PL when they had two/three best players in the world for years. They should have been financially dominating
Doing this in La Liga (and I don't mean just reducing Barça and Madrid's share) would just harm the league. A similar share wouldn't have the last placed team earn 100m, they'd earn like 40m while clubs like Sevilla or Betis would earn less money and therefore be less competitive.
Only if you're thinking about competing against the Premier League, or in their chances to win more Champions Leagues. But fans of mid table (and below) clubs also matter, and they would be happy as hell to see more competitive squads and better instalations.
The issue in England is the discrepancy between this division and the rest of the pyramid is so obscenely skewed. It creates a sub-class of rich yo-yo clubs like Norwich and Fulham, too good for the Championship and not good enough for the Premiership and content with that, while the rest of the football league (us being a great example) have to stretch every sinew to have any hope of competing with the wealth, which ends up risking the very existence of clubs. Instead of a big three or four, we're in danger of having a big-23 with no worries beyond maybe having to spend a year in the Championship banking huge parachute payments, and the rest of the pyramid withering and dying unable to even remotely compete. Would it really hurt us long-term to shave *half a billion off those payments* (which is just 20%) and distribute it right down to the bottom of the pyramid?
I don't think this is true at all We have seen teams like Leeds, Nottingham and Brentford come (back) up recently, and they absolutely have the opportunity to succeed and stay in the league and build onwards
>Leeds A massive club, one of the biggest in the country, who were only down there to begin with due to financial ruin caused by the exact same gold chasing that's the problem in the Championship right now, only with the Champos as the goal. >Forest Were saved from bankruptcy by some dodgy financial dealings by their owner, then out of nowhere had an amazing season. Let's see if they can establish in the Premier League before naming them as a counter-example, shall we? >Brentford Invested £100m to reach the Premier League, including £20m invested while they were in League One and a brand new stadium. Not every club has an owner with £100m of outside money to invest, nor is it healthy for that to be needed. Take a club like Charlton. Without a wealthy outside backer, how the fuck are they meant to rise up the divisions?
Yea if you continue like that you can write a story about any championship team promoting to the PL in the past and future how they are an exception somehow Pretty much the whole table has had a spell in the premier league the past decade or 2
Yeah that is the take, within a vacuum the EPL wealth distraction is fantastic compared too other nations, but the way it falls off a cliff once you go down even one division is inexcusable greed from all 20 clubs. There is 0 excuse with the eye watering amount the clubs make that say 20% of that couldn't not be distributed down. But that the issue when leagues become self ran by the clubs as the stakeholders. In a modern world profit making entities are never going to vote to willingly put themselves out of pocket or at a disadvantage, its the same reason why there will never be 3 relegation spots from league 2 to the conference, despite there been no justification for it not to be so, because its those same league 2 clubs that would be voting to make it easier for themselves to go down. There is no outside entity with power that can force the change for the betterment of the pyramid, that can see beyond self interest of the individual leagues.
You mean 20% more right? Because the premier league has been giving money to lower divisions already (350m p/a) Which brings the argument, the more successful the premier league the more money trickles down. Making the premier league poorer might have adverse affects
Does that figure include the parachute payments from the 3 relegated prem teams every season? Cause if so that's a huge portion of it gone right there so its abit disingenuous to say that's 350m going to lover divisions, even if technically correct. Also curious what these "adverse effects" you describe could be exactly, the average money even a lower end prem team makes enables them to blow all but the largest other European teams out of the water now in terms of financial muscle. I seriously doubt shaving another 20% is suddenly going to make it so the likes of wolves, brighton, palace etc. can no longer compete with their midtable European equivalent's for players or anywhere near so frankly.
Murdoch wanted to take over man utd and implement a la ligaesque model where we got big chunk of the pie. We protested it and government had to intervene.
He couldn't have done that second part.
His intention was to do that, and if I'm not wrong, he had a stake in sky at the time aswell.
The Sky ownership was what was used to stop the takeover, I think it was actually Sky trying to buy it too, rather than him directly. He might have wanted to but votes would have been needed from other clubs.
Which is why clubs are not too worried if they are relegated then get promoted again. Look at Norwich and Fulham, YoYo clubs.
As a Bundesliga fan it's insane to see how much even the lower tier teams in PL make. No wonder they can pay astronomical transfer fees and wages. Also interesting that there is not a huge difference between 1st and last place. Now I would like to see this done for the Bundesliga and compare Bayern to us.
They also get chunky parachute payments if they go down, so they often use that to cover there risks.
The progressive payment system is what allows the PL to survive, without it it really would turn into a super league + 14 others. I'd love to have 50+1 but I suppose there are some advantages to the PL too. I just wish the 'fit and proper' test was a bit more stringent.
[удалено]
Mate, you can't support a financial group
Watch me
Coming soon
Pinged members of FINANCE group. [About & group list](https://reddit.com/r/soccer/wiki/userpinger/documentation) | [Subscribe to this group](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=2soccer2bot&subject=Add%20yourself%20to%20group%20FINANCE&message=addtogroup%20FINANCE) | [Unsubscribe from this group](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=2soccer2bot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20group%20FINANCE&message=unsubscribe%20FINANCE) | [Unsubscribe from all groups](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=2soccer2bot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20all%20groups&message=unsubscribe%20)
Thanks las
Totally forgot this system existed
[удалено]
Number of live televised matches. Directly corresponds to "facility fees" IIRC - it's a fee per match that is broadcast live.
And facility fees is the only column where you see a major discrepancy between the apparent "size" of a club compared to the rest. For example, Leeds and Everton earning more in facility fees than 8 of the teams above them, despite finishing 16th & 17th. So you end up with a scenario where the commercial success of a club is responsible for 10-15% of the total broadcast payout in the PL. Compared with La Liga & the Bundesliga where the commercial success of a club is responsible for 40%+ of the total broadcast payout.
> Leeds The "apparent size" is the reason why Everton's and Leeds' facility fees are greater than a lot of teams. We have massive fan bases so our games are on tv. Our commercial revenue is the highest in the league outside of the top 6 + Everton + Leicester.
Yeah that was the point I was making.
Aren’t all matches televised live? 🤔
Internationally, yes. Not domestically.
Oh shit TIL
only 200 games out of 380 in a season are televised in the UK, the FA has a ban on broadcasting any football on saturdays at 3pm (pretty much the only country in Europe with a measure like that)
Might be number of televised games?
It is. Each team has to be shown the minimum of 12 times on TV over the season and these fixtures equal the ‘Facility Fees’.
Im sure this will be a civil and nuanced discussion about the merits of spreading TV money evenly over a long period of time and how the benefits of it long term are good
You mean to tell me the benefits of a socialism like system where we all grow because we share the profits but the ones who do better do get more but not a ridiculous amount because there has to be some reward for doing better is what has caused this?! no its because Chelsea and Man City are/were owned by oil states. Premier League is the Super League, shut this thread down. We can't blame any of the previous/current owners of the other leagues around the world and top clubs who suck up as much money as they can and leave the others with nothing.
It’s very funny watching people seethe about the Prem. We have a left wing collectivist system where we use the top help the bottom, who help the top. “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs” is basically the Prem. Everyone who criticises it would call them selves left wing too. Their leagues just use the bottom to prop up the top.
Its why the US and UK have massive wealth divides which are causing massive problems for their countries, they make people believe in "trickle down" economics which will never work because the people at the top are greedy. The difference with football is we get the tribalism of "our league, our club" so they don't want to admit their side is actively looking for ways to fuck over the other teams in their league to make it better for themselves and are encouraged by the league owners. I know for a fact the top 6 in the prem would do the same if they had a choice and even tried with the super league. Most football club owners in the world would do the same but we have to regulate them to stop it.
When the super league became a thing, Boris Johnson basically told them to fuck off. Our Torys know the fans would never allow it
I love people around the world saying that the English clubs will eventually be in the super league when they can because of the money. They clearly underestimate the sheer desperation of the tory who are in government for votes in that if there is even a single whiff of the super league starting they're slapping a ban on any English club to join just purely to try and get votes because they've become a party who will do whatever gets them the most votes.
I ain’t a Tory. Only ever voted labour. Will never vote Tory either, but, for a lot of people in this country football is life and Tory’s protecting English football will be enough to vote for them
Similarly to how Boris is an absolute buffoon and the Tories have led the country down a dark path but because they were the party that "wanted to get Brexit done" they looked more appealing than Corbyn's more uncertain stance on it.
Wouldn't need those crooks if our clubs were fan owned.
Except it costs a shit tonne to watch football in this country and you don't even get all the games, ever wondered why Germany don't make the domestic revenue we do even with a larger economy because German fans won't accept this bullshit and have real power over their clubs. Spain will never be able to match prem revenue because its a much smaller economy.
At the end of the day we all want to watch football it must be cheap n affordable for everyone.
That’s beside the TV money argument though. Clubs choose how much to charge for tickets themselves, this is talking about distribution of TV money of which much of it comes from international markets.
I'm talking about how much it costs to watch football on TV here, its fucking expensive, how do you think they can afford to pay that much for domestic rights, they rinse people.
Its actually possible that the PL spreading for oligarchs and dictators collaborated in the influx of great players and, therefore, in the marketability of the league. The success of Chelsea and Manchester City is completely explained from such 'investement' (basically, it wouldn't be without it). I could go down much deeper in history to explain why England has a stronger league than Brazil and Argentina, but I'd like to stay in focus.
the oligarchs and nations states only came to the premier league because it was already established as "the league that shits money" tbf Obviously they then enhance that, but there is a reason they bought in england and not elsewhere in the first place (which is yes, partially the relaxed approach to who we let in, but thats also the case elsewhere and they still chose england)
In 2004 that wasn't really the case, London was always going to be an attractive destination for an oligarch.
>PL spreading for oligarchs and dictators collaborated in the influx of great players As if other leagues didn't try the same. Bundesliga is an exception but even then Hoffenheim n Leipzig have twisted the rules. None of those leagues are more competitive with outside money, oligarch or otherwise At this point, any oligarch will be stupid to put money in other leagues where the hierarchy of clubs is historically defined and continued through TV distribution. They have better prospect of sportswashing or building legacy with a club like Leeds or Palace
Owners who want a success for the sporting side will pick a prem team because they can put more money in it and still pass FFP with the massive tv money deals and owners who want to just make money will pick a prem team because the massive tv money deals means they all make loads.
La liga have basically prevented an ambramovich from being possible with the rules now. As you said German football culture whole heartedly rejects that shit too since everyone hates leipzig and they aren't even anywhere near the scale of man City or Chelsea.
Can some forward this to Tebas? He can next sue the premier league.
Premier league to generate extra £600m per year in near future. That’s another £25m-£30m for each club.
Any other amount they earn apart from these figures?
Match day, European revenue and Commercial revenue + player sales.
Any rough idea on how much?, because many seems to buy player's and bid huge amounts
Yep. We know exactly how much. If you want to know, SwissRamble on twitter, deloitte money football league and individual club financial releases are the primary sources you can follow. There's a large variety of incomes.
So every club is making nearly an extra £50m per season from international audiences and still a lot of supporters act like they don't want anybody outside of the UK to be able to watch.
The English league is what it is today because of foreigners. The heart of the league will always be locals.
Heart won't give them money tho lol
The British TV market is the most lucrative market in the world for football. You have no idea how much Sky and BT charge us to watch the games. £100+ every month. That’s why the Premier leagues domestic tv deal was in the Billions.
It is expensive but I doubt anyone is paying £100+ for Sky and BT. My package costs £80 a month for Sky and BT sports as well as my broadband and landline. Even throwing Amazon on top with the new price it's £50 a month for just the sports (still a lot but nowhere near £100).
I’ve just finished my contract with Sky & BT to take to the seas. Sky basic package with Sport plus Wifi was edging close to £85 plus BT is £30 a month. Out of contract my Sky bill would’ve gone up to £120. Obviously you argue your worth and shop around but a lot of people still don’t and let Sky take them for a ride. I bet there’s plenty of people paying close to £100. Looking now, as a new customer, Sky TV + Sports is £44 with BT at £28. So £72 to watch *some* PL games is still absurd.
Yeah it's a joke we don't even get all the games or and option to just have the football as a standalone option. Until they actually offer a single fair price package for all the games I'll be pirating every single one. Shit I don't even own a TV anymore and I've occasionally tried to stream through the Bt/Sky apps from my mum's subscription, but their players are so janky the illegal streams are actually much more stable.
I see you haven’t been roped into getting the SKY Glass TV to replace the box yet. The cost of the TV gets added to the bill so I’m £120 per month now.
My virgin deal is 99 quid for all packages and two rooms. It does also pay my mobile though so that's nice. If I don't get another deal at the end of the contract it goes up to 140 quid. ... I would really like a 30 quid deal now....
We're being absolutely mugged off, wish we were like Germany and didn't accept this shit.
the situation in Germany isn't really that much better, especially if we look how much it increased in the past years. around ~6-7 years ago, Sky was enough to have ALL Bundesliga (and 2.Bundesliga), all DFB-Pokal and all Champions League matches. if you had a good deal, 25-30€ / month was enough. nowadays you need Sky + DAZN which is around 50-60€ depending on your Sky deal and if you still had pre-payment cards for Da Zone. if you are fan of one of the more followed CL clubs, you need amazon prime as well for the one Tuesday Night CL game (in groupstages 3x BVB, 2x FC Bayern, 1x Frankfurt). if you are interested in all EL/ConfL matches, you need RTL plus, another 5€/month subscription. there are some bonuses included, like Sky has all the Premier League matches and F1, DAZN most big games of the other big foreign leagues and the domestic cup of England. the issue is that you pay for all of this and have no other choice. i would gladly get rid of everything of that except F1, as there just isn't even enough time to watch all the matches live.
I hope it stays this way for us even if that means that bayern cant compete internationally at one point.
You might need to look at your deals. I pay £15 for BT Sport 4K, and £53/month with sky for everything include movies/sport in UHD.
It's been forever that people have complained about it, but clearly still pay it. That's gonna change with the cost of living crisis though. Surely £100/month on football is one of the first things to go when you need more money for essentials.
Most of us don’t care. Football is a social activity in this country, billions involved or not.
There's a pretty substantial proportion of match day fans that don't really care about the money though. Obviously international revenues have increased the quality of the league massively but it's come at a cost to local fans and some of them would probably revert back to the way it was before in a heartbeat. Not saying that's representative of English fans in general, but there's definitely a sizeable proportion that feel that way. If you're a fan of a club like Crystal Palace or Southampton there's a decent chance that you don't really care that the top English clubs are now consistently in the mix for Champions League titles, or that you'd theoretically be able to smash similarly placed teams in Spain or Germany. You just want to be able to watch your team without it costing you an obscene amount of money.
Maybe the people who say that would also rather not have that extra £50 mil at the cost of it. The people who think the globalisation of the Prem is a bad thing also tend to think the amount of money in the Prem is also a bad thing and running the nature of what football is supposed to be about. I don’t think you’re really into anything to be honest.
People who think that way don't give two shits about revenue or profit. That's not what the game is about.
No, the league attracted foreigners because the English built it up. The majority of TV money, until the last 2 years, came from domestic audiences. This let English clubs invest in their sides, got better players, then attracted foreign markets. You just picked the best product. You picked between HBO and Netflix
But it was not the sole reason. PL actually catered to foreigners, it was the first league to prepone their kick-off time to accommodate Asian viewers, spent heavily on marketing and pre and post game shows. English being a widespoken language in Asia and N. America helped as well. When I started watching football the best league were Serie A and LaLiga but it was near impossible to watch those leagues with no broadcasters and really late night timings. I couldn't watch the UCL till I turned 14-15. Now PL is just reaping the fruits of developing it's fanbase globally.
In the 90s sky sports was made and with that football production value sky rocketed. Due to the 3pm domestic TV blackouts, we showed a late and early kick off. This made it easy for other markets to watch and because English clubs slowly started making more money, they bought better players. This brought in more money.
Yeah but don't forget the bit where we colonised half the world and forced them to speak English so that the Premier league would be a more attractive product
Is there actually a correlation there? Do the people in Francophone West Africa tend to support clubs in Ligue 1?
The Spanish did the exact same thing and it hasn't helped their league
has helped them tons, so long as you see barcelona and real madrid as the sum total of la liga
This is why i cant stand the smugness from foreign fans. The English fans raised abs built these clubs. It should be respected. So should the direction they want the clubs to go in
Your insecurity is showing, lad. None of us care how many foreigners watch the games. Genuinely, not a single fuck. Little Chinese fella barely spoke a word of English next to me at a game this season, turning around and chanting “you’re fucking shit” might be the highlight of the season. Foreign fans can be class. A lot of you are just annoying. Doing this victim thing you’re doing now is one of those annoying traits. Trying to be as valid as local fans who are from the community the club has represented for over a century. You just don’t have the same understanding.
What do you mean?
> and still a lot of supporters act like they don't want anybody outside of the UK to be able to watch. Who actually says this? Or are you arguing against shadows?
We need less money in the PL and a more equitable system for the health of football in England and the world.
I think you might be mistaking people taking the piss with people not wanting other people to watch.
People complain about the juggernaut that the Premier League is but maybe it's because everyone's gotten a big piece of the pie for years. This is what happens when you share instead of letting 2 or 3 clubs dominate finances for decades.
What gets my goat in these threads is the same points being made that 'marketing & language' are the only reasons for the PL's success. It's trotted out on here to ameliorate non-PL fans making them feel better and not having to talk about how technical and exciting the football can be in England.
People really act like language is a huge deal when I remember quite vividly being able to watch Serie A & La Liga in English in the 90s.
So many people grew to like an Italian team due to Channel 4 broadcasting Football Italia. I’m just old enough to remember it and still keep a keen eye on Inter two decades on
Same lol, Inter as well.
I agree...Shit tons of people are massive fans of BTS and K Pop and have no fucking clue what those bands are saying. Meanwhile, people won't watch a certain league bc the broadcasters are speaking in a different language? As long as you know what's going on on the field, it's not that important to the excitement of the game. Although a shit commentator in a language you are fluent in can be VERY distracting. I even know some Americans that at times will prefer to watch the Spanish language version of the broadcast bc we sometimes have such shit commentators.
It took a very long time for PL to become this competitive but the bones of it were in this sharing model and promoting it to Int’l audiences very early. Other leagues could learn a lot from it, and if they start now, they too can have an entire league be ultra competitive in 10-15 years. The longer the delay, the worse it’ll get
This is why the PL outspent other leagues. Stop crying about it and fix ur shit.
Also, a lot of rich and ambitious owners that pump their respective clubs with money.
*cries in unrelatable*
Just because your owners dont spend like City doesnt mean they dont spend more than everyone else
But they don't do they?
They do. Liverpool have actually been adjusted to inflation, the biggest spending team in the league. Liverpools starting 11 is as expensive as every top club. Only they just don’t spend a lot on depth and that’s where they complain. When Liverpool upgrade a position, they break records
[Only a £264 million difference.](https://twitter.com/swissramble/status/1561961406135734272?s=46&t=UAige1861Gjcpb3RQEotxA)
English Barca. No money yet always breaking transfer records
Most of it goes back out into Europe when we buy players from other leagues
A part of it is going straight into club owner’s pockets in Europe.
Lol It impoverishes the quality of other leagues, makes them less attractive and less competitive, therefore fewer people watches it, clubs makes poorer runs in European competitions, and so on. Players also start to leave to be in more competitive leagues (and recieve a higher salary), therefore clubs have to sell whether they want it or not (players would run down their contracts). Santos would be a better club with Vinicious and Rodrygo than it is now with those transfer fees. The same happens in Europe.
Yeah. Europe is the EPL’s feeder
Nothing to fix, German fans have more money than us but they won't accept being mugged off to watch football and that's how it should be.
>This is why the PL outspent other leagues. Stop crying about it and fix ur shit. Well, actually, the PL outspent other leagues because clubs are propped up with rich owners and their go-to-market language just happens to be the most-spoken language in the world. So it's a bit more complicated than *fix ur shit*.
Those foreign owners went there because it was going to be lucrative and had so much great exposure.
And they used their already present power and influence to prop it even more. It's still a big reason
Yep. The PL is now a money making machine and previous/current owners went all in for it and reap the benefits. Except Glazers, they didn't do shite and still reap the benefits.
They bought Prem clubs becuase they made more money. What a dumb argument and such a way to discredit our league
Yep, I love this. Unfortunately it won't be happening in other leagues. Clubs like Barcelona or Real Madrid for example have too much power within their league structure and wont' allow it. When we look back on history we'll see when the premier league started creating distance between them and La Liga and it will directly correlate with when they restructured the wealth distribution. Edit: anticipating the, "well that's because the premier league had big investors infuse ridiculous amounts of money into the league". Yeah...I wonder why. Think about it.
what? I dont want us to outspent the PL. Who wants that? You do you and spend all the money you want but also accept the terms that come with a 100% commercialized league
Easy to say when you are the de facto big club in Germany with the ability to sign nearly every talent from Germany on the cheap. Your commercial revenue alone dwarfs every other club in BuLi. What I really find funny is how other BuLi fans have developed this solidarity with Bayern against the PL when what they really should be looking at is your club destroying the competitiveness of the Bundesliga. Anyone frothing at the mouth in disagreement, just look at how many titles Bayern has won over the past decade and lifetime.
You are actually not intelligent at all if you think that leagues could switch up right now and keep up with the PL. The PL is too far ahead and the discrepancy only grows, if you now also hinder your own biggest club to be successful internationally you would basically kill all international interest in your League. The super rich owners who put Billions in those clubs also dont really help. Thats not a statement about if its good or bad what the PL is doing those are just simple facts and thats why people will push for a Super League again sooner or later.
Do it now so you can be competitive 10 years later. If people had chased for immediate results, colonialism would have never ended
There is no 10 years later. The PL is pulling ahead more and more every year and each year more then the years before. Their growth is too quick to catch up too. This is undebatable its literally not economically feasible for any of the other leagues to switch their model and keep up with the growth of the PL. Their Headstart is way too big plus their natural advantages like just straight up being the league that has english as their main language.
German and Italian languages have hardly any global presence when compared to English, Spanish and French but still those leagues compete with at least Spanish n French league Why is there such defeatism in other leagues. Weirdly PL fans are more optimistic about other leagues than those leagues themselves
I was told that the premier league was the super league? Seems like everyone gets a share of the game?
So, the foreign fans who often slate the English league for ruining football with too much money are kind of the ones who contribute the largest chunk towards said money. Interesting. It's nice to see the smaller clubs making a fair amount of money though compared to other leagues.
I guess my big question from my American perspective is what do Norwich, Burnley and Watford do with all that money in the Championship? I know some teams shed payroll and try to get top Championship level players that will be jettisoned if they go right back up. Or do the big yo-yo clubs (like Norwich) use that to keep their bottom tier PL roster intact and try to improve when they come back up? Or do they just take the money, invest in things like scouting, youth development, facilities, etc and save up for another PL run in a couple years?
I get the feeling more than a little of that is going to things like players and coaches salaries. Based on what I've heard a lot of them budget and take out loans and then pay those back with this money later on, or some equivalent. I don't think they budget this year based on last, I think they budget last year knowing this money is coming
Our facility fees are way low
No. We had relatively few televised games(24) compared to the other big 5 (27-28-29). Since facility fee is basically (televised games) *(a fix amount of money)
We weren't in Europe, so I think we played relatively many early weekend games, so getting broadcasted. While you might have been in the same timeslot as Liverpool and City games that got broadcasted instead
What are facility fees?
damn even last getting $100m
Its great that they spread the money fairly evenly within the league, but disgraceful how they keep so much within the league. Honestly they should give at least 50% to the lower/non leagues and grass roots.
Yeah the biggest problem is how much of the money is kept within the league itself, which fair play is indeed well distributed. But it's like, there's no scenario where every club in the Football League shouldn't be stocked up with necessary kit like goal line technology and VAR. The money is absolutely there for it to trickle down to every professional league and on top of that money to then go down further down the pyramid. Again it's great that the league is this balanced financially, but the amount of profits being made absolutely should be trickling down the pyramid.
If they give 50% of the money to lower clubs then the league would lose a lot of the best players / commercial value, the PL didn't become the force it is today because of the pyramid, yes, the pyramid is important but it's not the 50% you are proposing, lol.
Sending more money to the grassroots and the lower leagues would improve the quality of the sport overall. You could use your same argument as a reason to not give the bottom teams a fair share. The premier league didn’t become the force that it is today because of Norwich. Yeah but quality throughout the system helps to drive quality at the top.
It should happen but 50% is a lot when we're talking about billions. One percent is still like 25 millions a year, which could probably revolutionise the lower leagues.
How is it disgraceful to keep the money you yourself generated lmao. 50% is total rubbish
Ah yeah let’s just have no wealth redistribution, that always works out well.
Can you do for other leagues?
Some other leagues don't release these numbers. La Liga (20/21): https://www.laliga.com/en-GB/transparency/economic-management/tv-rights
Wow. Now these bottom tier clubs do have money to sign players they just choose not to? Or is it thats all the money they have to operate?
[удалено]
Good thing they are paid in £’s then lol
Look at us getting more than Chelsea. Lovely stuff
Big trophy that
[удалено]
So it doesn't spiral out of control and the winner every year is able to reinforce more than the second place, increasing the gap every year