Football Observer

-
Herald/Scotland
SCOTTISH FOOTBALL IN CRISIS: Game is becoming too expensive for average fan

Fans have to pay between £36 to £38 to attend and Old Firm game
Christopher Jack

0 commentsPublished on 19 Nov 2009

Money, money, money.

It might not make you happy but it will almost certainly make you sit back and wonder where it has all gone.

With the season in full swing and Christmas fast approaching, fans have something in common with their clubs. Finances are being stretched more than ever.

Football is an expensive business but for the ordinary punter, it is becoming almost too expensive. With season tickets, replica shirts, hats, scarves, programmes, pies, drinks and transport all competing for a slice of your wage, questions soon begin to arise as to whether it is actually worth it?

Many fans have turned their backs on the weekly pilgrimage to watch their teams but there are many other avenues down which they could part with their cash.

Here are a few examples of where the football finance could be used elsewhere and how it compares to the beautiful game.



SEASON TICKETS

Old Firm fans can expect to have to stump up at least £400 if they want to see their team in action with prices steadily rising towards, and beyond, the £600 mark.

Motherwell fans can see their team in action for between £270 and £370 while Kilmarnock supporters are asked to pay £300 for the privilege of watching their club in action.



MATCH TICKETS

Prices, invariably, are higher for the games that set the pulses racing and there are none more so in Scotland than the Old Firm derby. For these fixtures, fans have to pay between £36 to £38.

Elsewhere, for example Rangers v Kilmarnock, the tickets are cheaper but for a family of four to have a day out at the football, it is still more expensive than the alternatives. Rangers’ pricing of £22.50 for adults and £6.50 for children is considerably cheaper than Celtic’s £25 and £16 to see them take on a similar standard side in St Mirren. With totals of £58 and £82 respectively, it is hardly a cheap and cheerful outing for mum, dad and the two kids.

Admission to Fir Park or New Douglas Park is £22 for adults and £12 for children while Hibernian charge £20 and £10 respectively.



THE OTHER OPTIONS

Rugby For fans who don’t mind swopping a round ball for an oval one, a season ticket for Magners League side Glasgow Warriors can be purchased for just £160.

Golf Those who prefer birdies and pars can play a round of golf at clubs around the country for less than the average SPL match ticket.

Dinner Feeding the 2.2 kids can be done for around £20.

Cinema A family of four can attend the latest Hollywood blockbusters for £20 at most cinemas, again, cheaper than one ticket for SPL football.

Tenpin bowling For less than a single SPL ticket, a family of four can play two games of bowling.

Concerts X Factor live (£28.50), Lynyrd Skynyrd (£38.50), Jimmy Carr (£22.50) and Jools Holland (£31.50) span the music and entertainment tastes of the family and are of a similar or less price than some SPL fixtures and Rangers’ (£40 v Stuttgart) and Celtic’s (£32 v Hapoel Tel Aviv) European ties.

Pantomime The traditional festive family event costs around £10 for adults and £8 for children or about the same as a first division fixture.



THE VERDICT

Clubs must act now to stop the dwindling crowds and air of disinterest and discontent that is sweeping across the national game. Finance is essential to football clubs but it is even more so to those who keep them going, the fans. The love of ones team may last forever but the money to keep the love burning will not. It is time clubs gave something back to the fans and, in the long run, they might just reap the benefits.


Herald

-
QPR1st- Bring back the Fans Forum!
Saturday, 21 November 2009

Supporters provide the Club with its biggest source of income and at the very least should expect to be treated as valuable customers. Yet of course fans are more than just customers- they have an emotional connection with the Club and want a sense of involvement and participation.

Fans Forums provided exactly that, an opportunity for ordinary fans to put their questions to the Team Manager and Captain, as well as the Chairman or another representative of the Board. Those who were unable to attend could still enjoy the event through radio or the internet.

It is a great shame that a Fans Forum has not been held since the time of John Gregory, despite repeated requests from QPR1st and other Supporters Groups. Yet again we call on the Club to restore them.

QPR1st

-
The Times -November 21, 2009

Police in UK join Europe-wide probe into football ‘match-fixing’Tony Barrett

Seventeen people have been arrested in Germany and Switzerland as part of an investigation into a match-fixing scandal that a Uefa official has called the biggest in European football.

German prosecutors investigating about 200 games in Europe — including at least three in the Champions League and 12 in the Europa League — ordered more than 50 police raids in Germany, Switzerland, Austria and the United Kingdom on Thursday, leading to the arrests. The matches under investigation were played in Germany, Belgium, Switzerland, Croatia, Slovenia, Turkey, Hungary, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Austria. None was played in the UK.

All the matches under suspicion are believed to have taken place this year, although neither Uefa nor the German authorities was prepared to specify if they were qualifying games or group-stage matches.

Prosecutors believe that a criminal gang has bribed players, coaches, referees and officials to fix games and made money by betting on the results.

Peter Limacher, the Uefa head of disciplinary services, said that he believed it was European football’s biggest match-fixing scandal, but stressed that the arrests provided evidence that the detection system is working.

“We at Uefa are stunned by the magnitude of this,” Limacher said. “We feel a certain satisfaction, but we are deeply affected by the scope of game manipulations by international gangs.”

In a statement, Gianni Infantino, the general secretary of Uefa, said that the body would continue to impose “zero tolerance” on any form of corruption in European football.

“Uefa will be demanding the harshest of sanctions before the competent courts for any individuals, clubs or officials who are implicated in this malpractice, be it under state or sports jurisdiction,” Infantino said.

German police confirmed that officers in the UK had been helping in the inquiry. The Metropolitan Police said that they had carried out a search in the Greater London area after a request from German law enforcement officials." The Times

-
Herald Scotland - Top Scots football clubs owe £100m

Scotland’s top football clubs are carrying debt totalling nearly £100 million
Graeme MacPherson

0 18 Nov 2009

Scotland’s top football clubs are carrying debt totalling nearly £100 million which will burden many of them for years to come.

According to official figures, Rangers and Hearts owe about £30m each, Kilmarnock and Aberdeen approximately £9m each, Dundee United £6.6m, and Hibernian £3.6m.

Deficits at the remaining SPL clubs are less acute.

According to one leading expert in the field of Scottish football finance, it would take major changes in those clubs’ circumstances for them to be finally be rid of that financial millstone.

Kicking off a series of investigations in The Herald into football’s finances, Stephen Morrow, head of Sports Science Studies at the University of Stirling,said: “It is difficult to see, in the current trading model that Scottish football is in, how they could find a way to pay that off. That’s not to say they can’t manage that debt.

“They can look after the interest payments on it but unless something changes to the structure or the finances of those clubs – or something substantial changes to their trading environment – then all they will be doing is very, very slowly bringing the debt down. But nothing dramatic is ever likely to happen.

“You’re not getting something new for it like a new stadium or training facility, you’re just using those sums to tread water.”

Mr Morrow does not expect an SPL club to enter adminstration in the immediate future but acknowledged that those with high levels of debt needed to tread carefully.

“I don’t necessarily think so at the moment [that a club could go into administration]. [But] there is always that risk as you have clubs effectively living on the edge as, if you have a club with a high level of debt, it doesn’t take much for it to go wrong.”

Contrary to public perception, though, Morrow dismissed suggestions that the banks are considering making major changes to the facilities offered to most Scottish clubs.

“In the overall scheme of things, with regards to bank debts and obligations, we are still talking about relatively small sums of money here,” he said. Herald Scotand

-
David Conn/The Guardian
Chester City chief becomes first owner to fail fit and proper person test• Stephen Vaughan will have to sell or give up his majority stake
• Liverpool businessman bought the club in 2001

Chester City owner Stephen Vaughan will be forced to sell or give up at least 70% of his stake in the club. Photograph: Rick Matthews

Stephen Vaughan has become the first owner of a professional football club required to reduce his shareholding because, according to FA rules, he is no longer a "fit and proper person". Vaughan, a Liverpool businessman who bought the Conference club Chester City in 2001 and owns 100% of the shares, was last week disqualified from acting as a director of any company until November 2020, following his involvement in a £500,000 VAT fraud.

The FA's rules, which apply to Conference clubs, state that anybody disqualified as a company director cannot hold 30% or more of a club's shares. The FA will write to Vaughan requiring him to sell or give up his majority stake in City within 21 days of the disqualification taking effect on 25 November. If he does not comply, the club could ultimately be expelled from the Conference.

Relegated from the Football League last season and in administration over the summer, City already have the threat of expulsion hanging over them, unless they pay money owed to the Professional Footballers' Association, Wrexham and Vauxhall Motors FC by 30 November.

According to an undertaking Vaughan signed with the Insolvency Service, he committed the VAT fraud while a director of Widnes Vikings rugby league club, which was then in administration, in October 2007. It stated that he "caused" Widnes to buy clothes from a UK company in three transactions worth £2.9m, plus VAT of £505,265.

Payment for the clothes was not made to "the alleged supplier", but to an account at the First Curaçao International Bank, based in the Netherlands Antilles. The clothes were sold on the same day to a company based in Spain; overseas buyers do not have to pay VAT, and Vaughan tried to reclaim the £505,265 for the club from HM Revenue and Customs.

HMRC refused to pay, and proceedings were begun against Vaughan which led to him admitting the transactions were a "carousel" in which the VAT was fraudulently claimed from HMRC.

In a statement, the FA said: "We are aware of the Insolvency Service decision and will be taking necessary steps under the requirements of the fit and proper person test."

The case could test the rules' effectiveness, however, because according to City's managing director, Bob Gray, Vaughan may hand the shares to one of his sons. "He has to relinquish his shares," Gray acknowledged, "but who he gives them to is up to him. He could keep them within the family." If that happened, the FA would have to be satisfied that Vaughan was not still "exercising direct or indirect control" over the club's affairs, which the rules prohibit for somebody declared not "fit and proper". Guardian

-
Swindon Advertiser

A political tool or a real threat?
Tuesday 17th November 2009
By Anthony Marshall »

TO say there have been some dark days at the County Ground over the past decade (and beyond) is something of an understatement.

From Terry Brady to BEST Holdings, and Bill Power to Bob Holt, Swindon Town have never been too far away from off-the-pitch controversy, so just when it looked like everything was relatively rosy in Wiltshire, those past demons had to rear their ugly heads again.

National reports yesterday claim the club face a winding-up order from property company St Modwen over the non-repayment of a £2.45m loan dating back to 2005 - the borrowing itself being £1.45million, with £1million interest.

The Guardian newspaper claims that St Modwen - who originally became involved in the club when Swindon were looking to move to a purpose-built stadium - issued a demand for repayment three weeks ago following the end of a grace period.

But with no response from current Town chairman Andrew Fitton and the club’s board of directors, the report alleges that there is “no alternative now but to go to court.”

To the cynical eye, the article appears to be merely a political tool aimed to force Fitton & Co to cough up their readies, with little chance of a winding-up order ever coming to fruition.

However, it will have done nothing to help the nerves of Swindon’s long-suffering supporters, who have been thrown from one nightmare to the next under a succession of County Ground regimes.

This time does appear different though, with the fans placing their trust in Fitton’s consortium. Their honesty, willingness to communicate with supporters and general transparency since their arrival in January 2008 has been a real bright spot over the last couple of years.

And Alan Hayward, of supporters group Red Army Loud and Proud, is one of those more than happy with the current regime in place, and confident the situation will be sorted before any winding-up threats become reality.

He told the Advertiser: “This hasn’t come as a huge surprise or a shock because it has been floating around since the AGM (in October) and been sitting in the background, much like the Bill Power case.

“It just seems like two years down the road they (St Modwen) really would like their money back now.

“Most people have got a lot of faith in Andrew Fitton and the new board, and they will deal with it.

“Everybody trusts their financial acumen and business experience. Even if it got to a court case and they had to cough up a couple of million then I think they would.

“I certainly couldn’t see them pulling out and walking away - they are too far down the road for that. But my feeling is that it is all in hand and we will be fine.”

Since their arrival almost two years ago, Fitton and his fellow directors have only had the club’s best interests at heart - shelling out around £7.5million to date, improving the look and feel of the County Ground to express a much more professional approach, and investing heavily in the playing staff.

And while this latest revelation may make unsavoury reading to some, Swindon’s faithful band of supporters should have every belief that there remains a very bright future for their club. Swindon Advertiser

-Bournemouth Official Statement -

EDDIE MITCHELL STATEMENT
Posted on: Mon 16 Nov 2009

"Thanks to the hard work of the staff, the Board and our supporters, combined with the performances of the team and Eddie and Jason's efforts to get those good performances, we have been able to pay the HMRC debt.

These efforts are something that needs to be kept up for a long time so that we will be rid of all our debts. This is an inroad in to the debt, but we have to carry on the good work and make sure that our tax is paid when its due and continue to make inroads in to other debts. Whilst we can pat ourselves on the back now, we must keep the hard work going.

Currently, this will not affect the embargo we are under. We have now satisfied two important requirements of the Football League and are now up to date with our HMRC debts. When we feel it is appropriate, we will go back to the Football League and see if we can't at least get loan players. I do not want to go back to them until such time that we feel confident that the Football League will back us.

There is no resting on our laurels. All the staff, the board, the management, the players and all the supporters must keep up all the hard work and continue to play their part." Bournemouth

-
Guardian/Matt Scott

Notts County begin probe of 'financial anomalies' under former board• Chairman claims 'ongoing due diligence' unearthed problem
• HM Revenue debt 'resolved' last week, Peter Trembling adds

Notts County today claimed they are opening an investigation into unspecified "financial anomalies" allegedly relating to the time of the supporters' trust's ownership of the club.

The Meadow Lane club's chairman, Peter Trembling, confirmed that they had last week "resolved" the debt to HM Revenue & Customs, for which a winding-up order was served on the club in September and for which they had been due to appear in court on Wednesday. However, it remains unclear whether it has been paid off in cash.

Trembling added: "In dealing with this matter and as a result of further and ongoing due diligence, we have uncovered a number of financial anomalies that are being investigated.

"In an ideal world a longer period of due diligence would have been entered into before the acquisition of the club. However, the circumstances of the club and the start of the football season dictated that the purchase had to be completed in a much shorter time frame in order to protect the long-term best interests of the club."

The announcement came as a shock to the club's former board under the chairman John Armstrong Holmes. He claimed: "They came in and had free rein to go through all the club's finances at the time.

"They spent more than a month doing it, in June and July. We're in November now and I and the directors have no idea of any 'anomalies' they are talking about. They had all the financial information before the deal was concluded on 31 May.

"On 3 June they began internal due diligence and had accountants looking over the books, including the payment schedules agreed with HMRC. All financial matters were perfectly clear to them from the outset."
Printable version Send to a friend Share Clip Contact us larger | smaller EmailClose Recipient's email address Your first name Your surname Add a note (optional)
Guardian

-
$250,000 is how much it cost Bud Adams to flip the bird to Bills fans.

NFL Owner Fined $250,000 Titans Owner Flipped Off Bills Fans

BY LUKE FUNK

MYFOXNY.COM - The NFL has fined Tennessee Titans owner Bud Adams $250,000 for making an obscene gesture at Bills fans.

It happened Sunday in Nashville. After the Titans beat the Bills 41-17, Adams was seen "flipping off" fans from his luxury suite at the stadium.

Adams apologized later in the day for the display of his middle fingers.

"I do realize that those types of things shouldn't happen," Adams said in a statement. "I need to specifically apologize to the Bills, their fans, our fans and the NFL. I obviously have a great deal of respect for Ralph Wilson and the history we have shared. I also understand there will probably be league discipline for my actions and I will accept those."

NFL commissioner Roger Goodell happened to be at the game Sunday and even had breakfast with Adams that morning.

He was in the suite with Adams until the fourth quarter of the game.


http://www.myfoxny.com/dpp/news/national/091116-Bud-Adams-Fined


New York Times
Owner of Titans Is Fined $250,000 for Crude Gesture

The N.F.L. fined the Titans owner Bud Adams $250,000 on Monday for making an obscene gesture at Buffalo fans while celebrating Tennessee’s victory over the Bills on Sunday in Nashville.

Commissioner Roger Goodell notified Adams of the fine, and the league spokesman Greg Aiello said it was for conduct detrimental to the league. Adams was seen making the gesture while in his luxury suite and again on the field after the Titans’ 41-17 victory.

Adams, 86, issued an apology a few hours later, saying he had been caught up in the moment.

The Titans declined to comment after the fine was issued. But Adams said in his earlier statement that he expected league discipline for his actions and would accept any punishment.

“I do realize that those types of things shouldn’t happen,” Adams said in the statement. “I need to specifically apologize to the Bills, their fans, our fans and the N.F.L.”

Adams and the Bills’ Ralph Wilson were original owners in the American Football League, and Sunday’s matchup was a legacy game, with both teams in throwback uniforms. The two franchises have been involved in some emotional playoff games.

The Bills staged the greatest comeback in N.F.L. history on Jan. 3, 1993, against what was then the Houston Oilers in a 41-38 overtime victory, and the Titans pulled off the Music City Miracle in 2000, a game-winning kickoff return for a touchdown with three seconds remaining.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/17/sports/football/17nfl.html



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTxHuUGG_2c&feature=player_embedded

-
Guardian/Nick Fletcher

Swindon football club facing crisis over unpaid loan• Property group St Mowden is demanding £2.45m
• Swindon Town was taken into administration twice before
-
Swindon Town, the League One football club, faces a winding-up order from the quoted property company St Modwen tomorrow over the non-repayment of a £2.45m loan dating back to 2005.

Swindon is controlled by a consortium whose shareholders include the City grandee Sir Martyn Arbib and the serial entrepreneur Andrew Fitton, the chairman of the club who has businesses in engineering and technology. Fitton's consortium – which also includes Jeremy Wray, brother of one of the founders of online gaming group Betfair – took over Swindon Town in 2007. The sellers included the Wills family, who made their fortune from the tobacco industry.

St Modwen originally become involved when the club was considering moving from its County ground to a purpose-built stadium.

The plan would have seen the original site redeveloped for housing and leisure use. In 2005, as part of this partnership, St Modwen lent the club £1.45m, which went towards paying off a VAT bill. Swindon Town had already gone into administration twice before, and was facing the prospect of going under again unless it settled the debt to the tax authorities.

When Fitton's consortium took over, St Modwen asked for its loan to be repaid, since the proposed move from the County ground – which is owned by the local council and leased to the club – had fallen through and the property developer had no further interest in the matter.

The two sides agreed a two-year grace period for the outstanding amount to be repaid, but that deadline ran out in August with no settlement forthcoming.

Three weeks ago St Modwen issued a statutory demand for repayment. Since then it has heard nothing to indicate the debt will be repaid, and believes it has no alternative now but to go to court. It is claiming the original £1.45m loan plus £1m in interest.If Swindon's directors do not pay up, and St Modwen is successful in its winding up order, the club will go out of business and its assets will be sold for the benefit of creditors.

It will join a growing number of football clubs which have found themselves in severe financial difficulties with the likes of Stockport County already in administration, and even Premier League club Portsmouth struggling to pay players' wages earlier this season - The Guardian

-
Independent/By Ian Herbert
- City facing Euro ban if they don't break even
- Cook angry that Sheikh's spending is frowned upon – unlike the debt of rivals
-
The Manchester City chief executive Garry Cook has said the club cannot put a date on when they will begin to break even, despite the Uefa president Michel Platini's proposal that clubs who fail to balance their books within three years will be barred from European competition.

City's wage bill has more than doubled to an estimated £90m since Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed al Nahyan took ownership 14 months ago. And the unpredictability of future wage demands makes it impossible to predict when the club will, as Platini desires, be spending only what they earn from their television income, ticket receipts and commercial activities. The European Club Association backs Platini's proposals that clubs who fail to do so will be excluded from Europe.

"You can't predict the wage base," Cook said. "From a business standpoint it's not the smartest thing to start to predict long-term financial profit and loss statements. That's not lack of discipline or naivety – that's the reality of a business model which is a moving target. It's foolish to put a line in the sand and predict dates by which you break even."

Though no transfer window will be quite like the summer's in which City spent £120m, their Abu Dhabi owners proved then that they will react to changing conditions in the transfer market. That they spent so voraciously was, in part, a response to their discovery that the economic downturn had made it a buyer's market.

City are aware that as Chelsea have less ambition to buy, and that Liverpool and Manchester United have high levels of debt, they are able to consider themselves the main players in the Premier League market.

Cook's chairman, Khaldoon al Mubarek, argues that Platini's proposals would curb the freedom of owners to buy and invest in "mid-tier" clubs and deliver a monopoly on European success to what are already the richest clubs. City, Cook indicated, will lobby through the Premier League against any plans which create a disincentive to prospective foreign investors. "We should always allow investment in the Premier League. It's the greatest league in the world – a truly global entity – and we should always allow that investment, as long as everybody manages the integrity and the Premier League puts governance in place to control who [invests] and how."

There is indignation at City that the levels of investment by Sheikh Mansour are being frowned upon in a way that debt-leveraged clubs are not – even though the Sheikh's capital investment at every level of the club has gone some way to quell initial suspicions that he was simply out for rapid glory.

Evidence of the investment was everywhere among the 83-strong City contingent in Abu Dhabi last week. In Cook's company at the Emirates Palace hotel, for instance, was one of the specialists brought in by the Arabs to ensure City's training pitches include four levels of grass to allow them to prepare for the exact conditions of various Premier League games.

While Liverpool's £30m Champions' League income is vital to cover their American owners' annual debt repayments, Cook said City will be able to budget for seasons in which they do not make it to the tournament.

Not qualifying, Cook said, has "a financial impact on your overall performance as an entity, a business, and you have to adapt and react to that. But what I don't want anybody to think is that we don't worry whether we are in it or not because we don't need the money. I'm building a financial plan that includes playing in the Champions' League. I also have a scenario B, in the event we don't make it – because that's good business".

The longer City take to break through to the top four, the longer they will need to provide extra wage incentives to entice players to the club and Cook believes that Britain's new 50 per cent higher tax rate – seven per cent higher than Spain's equivalent – will make the task of bringing in players tougher. "It is going to be challenging getting players in because there's [additional] financial demands on a club to bring those players in. But there is that emotional effect of the game which says the Premier League is one of the best leagues to play in."

City have no intentions of allowing Robinho to leave for Barcelona, though there is a view within the club that the Catalans have been unsettling their £160,000-a-week Brazilian. Mark Hughes sees the player as an important component of an assault on a top-four place this year, an attainment Cook believes is within City's reach. "When do I want to be in the Champions' League and when is it feasible?" he said. "I want us to be in the Champions' League next season, I want us to be playing Champions' League football every season." Independent

-
Mark Bright/Metro
Football fans must be more realistic
By MARK BRIGHT - Tuesday, November 10, 2009

Metro columnuist Mark Bright calls for football supporters across the country to be be realistic and accept their club's limitations.

Many years ago at Crystal Palace I attempted an overhead kick during training. Someone shouted: 'Don't let your ambition exceed your ability, Brighty.'

Many a true word said in jest. It's something that's stayed with me throughout my career and led me to think about fans' ambitions.

Take two of my former clubs, Charlton and Sheffield Wednesday. At Charlton the fans felt Alan Curbishley had taken the club as far as he could. New Valley fans had renewed ambition, Curbishley left, and Charlton supporters now find themselves watching League One football.

Sheffield Wednesday fans also had delusions of grandeur. Trevor Francis led the club to five appearances at Wembley including League and FA Cup finals. But the general feeling was Trevor was too soft and out he went.

He was replaced by David Pleat, who in my opinion is the least impressive manager I have worked with. To me he lacked structure, complicated the game and confused the players.

It was the beginning of the end for Wednesday and the biggest club in Sheffield are currently maintaining a mid-table presence in the Championship.

My point is, maybe fans need to be more realistic with their ambitions. I think we all agree the 'Big Four' of Manchester United, Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool are virtually impregnable.

Attempting to break that monopoly are Manchester City, Tottenham, Aston Villa and Everton. City fans quite rightly expect to be watching Champions League football next season after Mark Hughes' huge spending spree of around £116million this summer.

Last year, while nowhere in City's league, Aston Villa manager Martin O'Neill spent big to try to break the top four and finished sixth.

Shouldn't fans, as much as they hate it, just say, we're a mid-table team and as long as we stay in the Premier League we'll be happy, but we must throw everything at the League and FA Cups?

Bolton, Stoke, Blackburn, Wigan, Fulham, West Ham, Portsmouth and Hull are all in danger of relegation sooner or later, while Birmingham look to have won the Lottery but we'll have to wait and see.

The reason I believe this is because, along with the promoted teams, all the above cannot afford a bad season but the bigger clubs can have a bad season and still survive.

But the aforementioned teams need only look at Leeds, Newcastle, Nottingham Forest, Ipswich, Crystal Palace, Sheffield Wednesday and West Brom. Not to mention Luton, Coventry and Middlesbrough.

Fans should be careful what they ask for, because change isn't always for the good. Metro

-
David Conn/Guardian

The decision to strengthen the crown jewels is a bold oneAdministrators are entitled to be frustrated by David Davies' recommendations as the Premier League gets off scot-free

David Davies and his Crown Jewels panel have shown backbone in expanding the list of sporting events recommended for protection on "free to air" television, facing down BSkyB's dominance of televised sport, and the intense lobbying from sports governing bodies already howling about the Sky millions they now stand to lose.

Yet before they protest too much, the England and Wales Cricket Board and other governing bodies should acknowledge Davies' panel's headline finding in the report delivered to the Department of Culture, Media and Sport today. Even after 17 years of Sky dominating live sport on TV, since BSkyB first claimed the Premier League football rights in 1992, 82% of British people still believe they are entitled to watch major sporting events without paying extra, because they have already paid a licence fee.

We have become used to Sky's capture of sport over the years, there is admiration for the quality of its coverage, and sports have enjoyed golden windfalls on BSkyB cheques. It seems a far-off world in which, when the Premier League rights were first sold exclusively to Sky, 67 Labour MPs signed a motion in Parliament protesting against it as a seizure of the people's game. Buying up sports rights exclusively here has transformed BSkyB's fortunes from a financial drain then pitching Rupert Murdoch's whole News Corporation empire into serious financial difficulties, to a cash cow fundamental to his empire's current corporate profits and political power.

Yet for all Sky's undeniable success, the pay broadcaster has still accumulated under a quarter, six million, of British homes as subscribers. Despite huge marketing spend and a tempting offer of exclusive sport and other programmes, the overwhelming majority of British people remain unwilling to pay for Sky. For many, £400 or so for TV packages annually is an expensive luxury they cannot justify, and some still reject it on principle, resisting the idea that in Britain, where the major sports were invented, we have to pay Rupert Murdoch's company to watch them live.

Davies' panel's job was to decide which events should qualify as having "national resonance," and they decided all competitive home football internationals do, the Open golf and rugby union World Cup, as well as the Ashes. The ECB is taking issue with the selection and the rigour with which it was arrived at, but the Ashes provided to Davies' panel the clearest evidence of free-to-air's broader public benefit. In 2005, the peak Ashes moments drew more than eight million viewers to Channel Four, while this year, for another tense, gripping England series victory, Sky's audience struggled to reach two million.

The ECB, seething at the prospect of losing money - BSkyB has paid £300m for exclusive cricket rights from 2010-13 – is arguing that the process was flawed, and that the BBC should be encouraged to bid competitively against Sky to show cricket live on terrestrial TV, not be anointed effectively as the sole broadcaster. The BBC is under a duty to pay "a fair price" and Davies recommends sports governing bodies can appeal to the BBC Trust if they feel they are being short-changed, but the ECB does not accept that is a robust appeal process.

Those are all valid arguments, and Ben Bradshaw, the secretary of state for culture media and sport, now has to consult and consider the recommendations, weighing in the balance the "economic impact" of removing the Sky dollars from the sports recommended by Davies.

Yet the sports should also celebrate the prospect of retaining a mass, terrestrial audience, and Davies, partly, is challenging them to make the most of it, commercially and in other ways. His strengthening of the "crown jewels" list is a vote for the principle, which has been under pressure in these free market, multi-channel days, that sport fundamentally still belongs to everybody. Most people appear to agree with that, including fans of the sports complaining most today.

The ECB's argument that its grass roots programmes will suffer does have some validity of course, but the bulk of Sky's money, to any sport, does not find its way to the grass roots. Last year the ECB's largest spending by far, £32.8m, went to the 18 first-class counties, who spend most of their money in wages to cricketers, while £12m went under the broad heading of "enthusing participation at grass root and recreational level." Listing would mean that the governing bodies affected would suffer a drop in income, but they can reorder their priorities for how they spend the money.

One competition, though, has escaped glaringly lightly. The Premier League did not fall to be considered at all, because the tradition of the "crown jewels" is that they protects moments of "national resonance" which have never included club league football, only the FA Cup Final. Yet the Premier League's own success, achieved despite Sky's live monopoly but with the ever-present tempter of Saturday night highlights, has turned matches between its top clubs into "watercooler moments" too. The audience even for a Manchester United v Chelsea match is still barely 2 million on Sky (although Sky claim more people watch games in pubs), while viewing figures would swell above 10 million if prime Premier League matches were shown live on terrestrial TV. It is an irony that the English Premier League is watched extremely cheaply by multitudes around the world, but costs a chunky direct debit to see live here.

It does seem a little cruel on the ECB, FA and SFA that they will now appeal desperately to the government against the recommended listing, while the world's richest league is sailing away with a £1.7bn TV deal already struck for 2010-13 exclusively with Sky and ESPN, and has never shown a single live match free to air, in 17 years. Guardian

-
David Conn/The Guardian
Bundesliga votes to keep clubs owned by members
The overwhelming majority of German clubs opted this week to remain under the control of their fans

The clubs of the German Bundesliga this week voted overwhelmingly to keep the rule that they must all be controlled by their members, and cannot be taken over by private investors. Even Bayern Munich, Hamburg SV and the other great names of the Bundesliga have to be owned 50% plus 1, a majority, by their members ( there are two exceptions, Wolfsburg and Bayer Leverkeusen, which were originally works teams).

Many fans treasure this system, believing it has been instrumental in keeping German football close to its fans and roots even in the slick, commercial modern age. Ticket prices are low, affordable to young fans and the grounds, among the best in the world, boast the highest average attendances in Europe.

The national supporters group Unsere Kurve had led a mass campaign to retain the 50+1 rule, and on Tuesday delivered a petition signed by more than 100,000 fans of all clubs.

Keeping the "50+1" rule is a statement of confidence in the system which directly rejects the English approach, where football clubs are in reality companies, available to be bought and sold by businessmen from anywhere. Several Bundesliga clubs have grumbled throughout this decade that the rule has held them back from attracting private investment which could improve their finances. Yet at their meeting this week, an application from Hannover 96 to overturn the "50+1" ruling was overwhelmingly rejected, with 32 clubs voting against it, 3 clubs abstaining - and only Hannover 96 themselves voting for the proposal.

Dr Reinhard Rauball, the League Association president, said after the vote:

"The Bundesliga is remaining true to its principles and maintaining its reliance on the factors which have made a decisive contribution to the success of the professional game in Germany in recent decades: stability, continuity and proximity to fans."

This is a sporting tradition we should study more closely. In Germany, they have preserved member-ownership of even their greatest professional clubs, maintain accessible ticket prices, their clubs field teams in a wide spread of sports, and are centres for massive community use of excellent facilities.

That is enlightened, and very different from the landscape here, where sport began and is blessed by splendid qualities, yet where we have never truly agreed on the values it should have, or how best to protect them. Guardian

-
The Guardian/Matt Scott
Fifa to give up regulating player agents• Fifa to withdraw from global transfer market supervisory role
• FA and French federation oppose move

[b]Fifa is preparing to abandon all rules relating to player agents, in a move that could turn the global transfer market into a free for all.[/b]

A circular that football's world governing body has distributed to all of its 208 national associations is canvassing opinion on a proposal that will see it withdraw from its role as regulator of the international transfer market. The development was the talk of an agents' conference at Wembley yesterday, with one delegate claiming the move signals that football is heading "back to the wild west".

At a time when criminal inquiries are under way on both sides of the Channel over allegedly illegal activities in football transfers, the proposal has already met with a cold reception in France. In that country the statutory authorities also regulate sports agents under national laws. The French football federation's legal director, Jean Lapeyre, said: "We are going to make clear to Fifa that our stance towards this sort of idea is hostile."

Fifa's stance is a pragmatic one. It has made clear that only one in five transfers worldwide employs a licensed agent and under its one-member, one-vote policy the removal of costly red tape is likely to gain considerable support.

Currently the administrative burden on regulating agents lies with the national associations and even the tiny island nation of São Tomé and Príncipe, off the west coast of cental Africa, has three licensed agents working from its shores.

For major football nations such as England, that is not a problem. Indeed, the Football Association has been a world leader in its enforcement of agents' regulations, bringing in additional rules and licensing arrangements following the Quest inquiry into allegations of "bungs" in football.

The FA refused to comment yesterday on how it will respond to Fifa's survey. However it is believed privately to be dismayed that the progress it has made in recent years could be undermined.

There is some speculation that Fifa will even forbid national associations from having any involvement in governing the activities of agents, which the FA would certainly resist. However, there is a strong feeling among agents that Fifa's withdrawal from the regulatory space will be of benefit to world football.

"It would be a blessing if Fifa backed out," said Mel Stein of the Association of Football Agents. "They do nothing, they respond to nothing: the whole regulatory structure is a mess. This is them throwing their hands up, they can't cope."

There is a severe backlog of cases at Fifa. Among them is the FA's complaint about Pini Zahavi's presence at the meeting at which Chelsea "tapped up" Arsenal's then left-back, Ashley Cole. As an agent registered in Israel, the FA has no authority over Zahavi and must rely on Fifa's role as the international regulator. Yet more than three years since it was given an extensive dossier relating to the incident, Fifa says only that the case is "ongoing".

By contrast, the FA has won praise. "The FA has tried very hard to come to terms with the commercial reality and has done some very good work. It would be a terrible shame to throw the baby out with the bath water," Stein said. He believes that the AFA and its European counterparts would be willing to self-regulate if Fifa does strip back federations' rights to govern transfers.

A Fifa spokesperson said: "Fifa has engaged itself very actively in trying to find a solution to the regulation of international transfers, working together with its member associations and also with the clubs. It is also fair to recall that players' agents are not licensed by Fifa, but by the national associations already since 2001."


West Ham sweetener

West Ham United's fans might want rid of their club's current owner but they owe Straumur more than they think. Such has been the disastrous financial landscape – with millions owed to clubs, players, former managers and wronged parties – at Upton Park that Straumur has covered projected cashflow deficits with a £5m injection in recent weeks. A spokesman for Straumur refused to comment but it is likely the cash infusion was a gift, since any shareholder loans would presumably be vetoed by other banks whom the club already owe about £50m. The recovery in global financial markets has improved Straumur's fortunes no end, but it comes to something when a collapsed Icelandic bank is relied upon to support a Premier League side.

Guardian

-
Independeny/Nick Harris
English top flight rejects the Old Firm

Gartside's plan to create two-tier Premier League is dismissed by club chairmen

The 'Big Four' - including Ryan Giggs' Manchester United - were among those most opposed to plans for Celtic, and neighbours Rangers, to play in England

England's 20 elite clubs yesterday killed off any hopes that Celtic and Rangers held of joining the Premier League in the foreseeable future by voting against proposals to invite them south. The idea of the Old Firm joining the League was described in an official League statement as "not desirable or viable". One source said: "In a vote, the clubs came up with an emphatic 'no' to the idea". The League's chief executive Richard Scudamore said yesterday that the Old Firm would "never" be welcome.

The Old Firm had hoped for lengthier consideration to plans put forward by Bolton's chairman, Phil Gartside, for a restructured, two-tier, 38-team Premier League, which would have seen Celtic and Rangers joining the lower of those two divisions from the start of the 2013-14 season.

But while Gartside's overall proposals for change will be given more thought – with the rationale that the League's riches could be more evenly shared – there was an unexpected vote on the Old Firm, because, as one source said: "It had become an issue that needed to be put to bed."

Some high-profile managers have backed a move to England for the Old Firm in the past week, including Everton's David Moyes, Tottenham's Harry Redknapp and Aston Villa's Martin O'Neill. And Gartside is not without support in some other Premier League boardrooms, notably at other unfashionable, unprofitable clubs, like his, that despite their top-flight riches, still lose money. Bolton's accounts for the year to June 2009, released last week, showed a loss of £13.2m.

But for now, it seems, a majority of the elite still think there would be more to lose than gain from embracing the Old Firm. The "big four" of Manchester United, Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool see no benefit in encouraging competition from the Scottish giants, who, armed with League cash, might challenge them. The same philosophy is probably also in play at Manchester City, Everton, Tottenham and Villa, whatever the managers at the latter say. And if Celtic and Rangers did move to England, there would be two fewer places in the League, however many divisions it had, for two English clubs, possibly two of the current 20.

Yesterday's vote will not end the debate, far from it. Depending on the financial crises that are slowly but surely squeezing the life from Bolton, West Ham, Portsmouth, Hull, Blackburn, Fulham, Wigan and others, any plan that might offer more money will get an airing from time to time. Celtic and Rangers would certainly add value to Premier League TV deals. But unfortunate timing meant Gartside got shorter shrift than anyone expected.

Rangers' finances are woeful (£31m in debt and annual losses of £13m last year, according to figures released yesterday) and their latest episode of fan violence, in Romania last week, hardly make them this week's pin-up club. Uefa fined them £17,988 yesterday. Meanwhile, the group of Celtic fans who marred a Remembrance silence last weekend at Falkirk only highlighted that sectarianism remains Scotland's not-so-secret shame.

Gartside is concerned that the Premier League's top and bottom clubs have disparities in League income (winners Manchester United pocketed £52.3m of League TV money, while West Bromwich got £31.6m), although this ratio is much narrower than most European leagues. He is also concerned that the top clubs make £20m-£33m per year in Europe on top. "Addressing this polarisation of clubs and the increasing revenue differentials will, I believe, be the major strategic issue for the Premier League over coming years," he wrote in Bolton's annual report.

A League statement said: "The other relevant ideas contained within Bolton's paper will now be taken forward as part of the wider strategic review being undertaken by the Premier League since November 2008 with the aim of providing recommendations before December 2010." Independent

-
David Conn/The Guardian

Premier League rejection of Old Firm should open debate about inequality
English football's diverse financial disparity now needs to be discussed, as Bolton chairman's Phil Gartside's proposals reveal

So, Bolton Wanderers' chairman Phil Gartside's proposal for two Premier League divisions has been folded away for further discussion, but England's top 20 clubs went out of their way in their meeting today to knock the inclusion of Celtic and Rangers on the head. The news, sending Glasgow's want-away football giants back to their dilemma of being huge clubs in a small country, was released even while the Premier League meeting was still going on, with a sharp statement ending the debate which has chewed airtime up all week.

"The clubs," the statement said, "were of the opinion that bringing Celtic and Rangers into any form of Premier League set-up was not desirable or viable."

The statement did not expand, but the clubs are thought to have seen too many problems - contravening football tradition, practical difficulties over incorporating Celtic and Rangers, damage to the Scottish game, upsetting Uefa and Fifa, taking on the security burden of the Old Firm's legions of fans – for too little gain.

That explains their keenness to reject the idea quickly, outright, rather than allow the discussion to run, and the blunt wording, that the clubs see the Old Firm's inclusion as "not desirable or viable."

An accident of timing drilled home why the Glasgow clubs have long looked for an escape from the SPL; Rangers published awful financial figures today, even as the Premier League clubs were sitting down for their meeting. For the year to June 30 2009, in which they did not qualify for last season's European Champions League group stage, Rangers' income fell by almost £25m, they made a £12.7m loss and debts rose to £31.1m. The contrast with Spurs, who on Tuesday announced pre-tax profits of £33.4m from a season in which they did not play in the Champions League either but finished 8th in the Premier League, must be painful.

Gartside, though, will be pleased that the main thrust of his proposal, for a two-division Premier League with 18 clubs in each, survives to be discussed another day. He would acknowledge that the idea is self-serving; a second Premier League division is intended to give clubs relegated from the top one – as Bolton might be some season soon - a softer financial landing. He would accept that charge to an extent, by arguing that his job is indeed primarily to look after his own club.

Others might propose that the solution to the huge financial chasm between the world's richest league and the venerable Football League below it is, as it has been for 17 years, to re-unite them, and redistribute money more evenly throughout the system. The Premier League stands alone because in 1992 the then First Division clubs broke away from the Football League so that they would not have to share the millions which poured into football from the first TV deal of the satellite age.

Yet the big clubs now, feasting on the current £2.7bn three-year TV deal, and expecting around the same again from 2010-13, see no reason to change the format or share of money in a Premier League which serves them nicely indeed. They are unlikely to have any appetite for Gartside's restructuring proposals, let alone for the idea of re-unifying their TV deals with the Football League, whose chairman, Lord Mawhinney, has proposed that.

Gartside, however, said he wanted at least to spark a debate about English football's divisive and damaging financial inequality. Now that Celtic and Rangers are out of the way, perhaps we can have one." The Guardian

Guardian/Owen Gibson

Big clubs prepare to block Phil Gartside's two-tier Premier League• Plans include involvement of Celtic and Rangers
• 'The minuses outweigh the pluses' says Stoke chairman

The Bolton chairman, Phil Gartside, will tomorrow outline his revised proposal for a two-tier Premier League that would include the Old Firm, sparking a vigorous debate about the way in which revenues are shared between clubs.

While the plan is expected to receive short shrift from the larger clubs, and is thought unlikely to result in a concrete proposal, Gartside could achieve his aim of triggering a wide-ranging debate about the way in which TV revenues are distributed among clubs at tomorrow's Premier League shareholders meeting.

In his preface to Bolton's annual report,Gartside recently wrote that addressing "the polarisation of clubs and the increasing revenue differentials will be the major strategic issue for the Premier League over coming years". He said a "fear factor" was "beginning to emerge among Premier League clubs outside the top few".

Last season, Manchester United were the biggest earners from the Premier League's broadcasting pot with £51.5m. Relegated Middlesbrough earned the least with £30.95m.

But the bigger clubs will argue that the Premier League already distributes TV revenues more fairly than any other major European league. Premier League executives will also point out that control of the major destabilising factor — the Champions League money earned by the top four— is not in its gift.

The big clubs will, then, oppose any major change to the status quo, insisting they have already levelled the playing field by agreeing to every club receiving an equal share of TV income, which last year totalled £13.9m. That is then topped up with facility fees of at least £5.9m [which is based on how many times each club appears on television] and a merit payment depending on league position. They will also argue that the next overseas TV deal — revenue from which is also split equally — will be close to £1bn, almost twice as much as the current £650m deal.

But the financial difficulties faced by Portsmouth, Hull City and West Ham indicate the increasing pressure on clubs who feel they must spend beyond their means to compete and yet are terrified about the impact of relegation. Last season, £74.4m was paid out in parachute payments, which last for a maximum of two season following relegation. Some clubs will argue that figure should be increased.

Under Gartside's original plan, the two-tier Premier League would have become an exclusive club with no relegation. The new proposal, for two divisions of 18 including Celtic and Rangers, is believed to include limited scope for relegation and promotion involving what would remain of the Football League on a two-up, two-down basis. The two Scottish clubs, under increasing financial pressure of their own, would welcome the opportunity to join the Premier League. But despite support for the idea from managers including Martin O'Neill, Harry Redknapp and David Moyes, it is expected that self-interest will prevail among chairmen worried that the inclusion of the Scottish clubs would hurt their own position.

Stoke's chairman, Peter Coates, said today he would not support the Old Firm proposal: "We have lots of fine clubs in England to play and we have a system that has worked very well in a competitive sense. If Celtic and Rangers were to come in, after a while that would become the norm. It would be no big thing. I think the minuses outweigh the pluses."

Any fundamental change to the Premier League's structure would require the approval of 14 of the 20 Premier League clubs, as well as the FA.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009/nov/11/premier-league-two-tier-old-firm










Telegraph By Paul Kelso, Chief Sports Reporter

Two-tier Premier League plan featuring Celtic and Rangers faces rejection
Plans for a radical overhaul of the English football pyramid based on an expansion of the Premier League to cover two divisions and the inclusion of Celtic and Rangers are expected to get a lukewarm reception from Premier League chairmen on Thursday.

The plans, drawn up by Bolton chairman Phil Gartside, are intended to bridge the financial gap between the Premier League elite and the rest of the game, but they are thought to have little chance of being accepted by a majority of club chairmen.

Gartside has circulated a summary of his proposals running to just two pages to club chairmen in the Premier League and Championship.


Related Articles
Chelsea's Jose Bosingwa out for three months
Sport on television The document, produced in response to Premier League chairman Richard Scudamore's call for contributions to a strategic review, outlines six key points, which Gartside says will increase the popularity and profitability of the game.

The document proposes increasing the total number of teams in the Premier League by extending it to two divisions, split into an upper and lower tier.

The upper tier would be 18 teams, while Celtic and Rangers would be invited to join the lower tier, which has an unspecified number of clubs.

Increased overseas TV revenues and the £36 million in parachute payments that presently go to relegated clubs would be used to "seed fund" the expansion.

Sources at the Premier League and Football League have indicated that the Gartside proposal, though well-meaning, has little chance of gaining momentum among clubs.

His motivation is to protect the ability of sides such as Bolton to compete, and to cushion the blow for those relegated, where broadcast revenues are less than 10 per cent of those in the Premier League.

While a number of club chairmen share his concerns, he is likely to fall short of the 14 that will be required to effect change. A more likely outcome is that his intervention will spark renewed debate about the distribution of television revenue within the league.

At the moment the club finishing bottom receive about 60 per cent of the sum paid to the champions. Last season that amounted to a gap of £20 million between the £51m paid to Manchester United and the £31m received by West Bromwich Albion.

This gap is exacerbated by the extra revenue earned by Champions League clubs, which has helped polarise the league between the 'Big Four' and the rest.

Bridging that gap increasingly looks beyond medium-sized clubs like Bolton, who have to run to standstill. In the club's holding company annual report, published last week, Gartside said that addressing this income gap was the league's greatest challenge: "Addressing this polarisation of clubs and the increasing revenue differentials will, I believe, be the major strategic issue for the Premier League over the coming years.

"The gap between Premier League revenues and those of the Championship continues to widen and I believe a 'fear factor' is beginning to emerge among Premier League clubs outside the top few."

Such are the financial realities of the league that last season Blackburn cautioned in their accounts that there was little or no chance of them making a profit in the medium-term, despite the unprecedented media revenues.

Three years ago the Premier League responded to concerns raised by Gartside and others by changing its distribution formula so that all clubs were guaranteed a minimum of 10 "facility fees", received for appearing in live games, which last season amounted to more than £5m. That debate is likely to be revived even if Gartside's revolutionary proposal is not pursued.

Celtic and Rangers' inclusion is also likely to meet with opposition, with Scudamore already having indicated that it is unlikely.

There are major security concerns about admitting the Old Firm clubs to English football, and there would be significant resistance from the Football Associations in England and Scotland.

The impact on Scottish football would be devastating, removing the primary source of income for all clubs.

Stoke chairman Peter Coates agreed with Gartside that the English game needed reviewing but said he would not support the Old Firm proposal: "We have lots of fine clubs in England to play and we have a system that has worked very well in a competitive sense.

"We have 20 teams in the Premier League and they are all tough games. If Celtic and Rangers were to come in, after a while that would become the norm. It would be no big thing. I think the minuses outweigh the pluses."

Gartside's formula:

1: Expand total number of teams in Premier League.

2: Extend league to two divisions split into upper and lower tier.

3: Reduce upper tier to 18 teams. Number in lower tier not specified.

4: Use extra overseas TV revenue and £36 million parachute payments to fund expansion.

5: Invite Celtic and Rangers to join lower tier.

6: Consider the regulatory challenges, mainly from English and Scottish FAs
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/leagues/premierleague/6547311/Two-tier-Premier-League-plan-featuring-Celtic-and-Rangers-faces-rejection.html


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BBC

Premier League rejects Old Firm

Celtic and Rangers will have to stay in the SPL
The Premier League has rejected a plan to bring Celtic and Rangers into English football's top flight.

The Old Firm pair had hoped to be part of new plans put forward by Bolton chairman Phil Gartside for a two-tier league of between 36 and 40 teams.

It was thought that there would be a top tier of 18 clubs, with promotion and relegation to and from the league.

The SPL pair would have been invited to join the lower league but the proposal was overwhelmingly rejected.

The Premier League said in a statement: "Bolton Wanderers submitted a discussion paper detailing ideas concerning the restructuring of the Premier League into two tiers with the inclusion of Celtic and Rangers.

"The clubs welcomed the additional input into an ongoing process, however, they were of the opinion that bringing Celtic and Rangers into any form of Premier League set-up was not desirable or viable.

"The other relevant ideas contained within Bolton's paper will now be taken forward as part of the wider strategic review being undertaken by the Premier League since November 2008 with the aim of providing recommendations before December 2010."

Aston Villa manager Martin O'Neill and Spurs boss Harry Redknapp had backed the inclusion of the Scottish clubs in the Premier League.

The proposals were a revival of Gartside's ideas which received a hostile reception from the Premier League's 20 chairmen six months ago.

More to follow.

http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/eng_prem/8353937.stm

-
Will have to return to this part!

2008 Letter to QPR Shareholders:
"The company is required to repay an existing loan of £10M to ABC on or before the 31/7/08. ABC currently has an option over the Loftus Road Stadium which becomes exercisable if the company fails to repay the loan in full by 31/7/08.

The company requires financing in order to repay the loan. The company has sought to secure this financing from various financial institutions, but has been unable to do so owing to conditions and requirements of those institutions. As a result Amulya has agreed to advance a loan of £10m to the company in order to allow the company to repay the loan by 31/7/08 and thereby avoid the possibility of ABC exercising their option and acquiring the title to the stadium.

However as a condition to advancing the loan, Amulya requires the company to enter into the option. The option is on substantially similar terms to the ABC option. It grants Amulya an option to buy the stadium for £10M which is exercisable in the event the company fails to repay Amulya when the loan is due.

[b]The term of the Amulya loan is two years. The rate is 8.50% compared with ABC's 10 %.[/b]Amulya Property Limited is a company that both Briatore and Amit Bhatia are connected with and also happens to share its name with a large Indian Property Company."


Wednesday, August 06, 2008

"New Loan Pushes ABC Out of the Picture"-
Ealing Gazette - New loan pushes ABC out of the picture

QPR have averted the prospect of ABC Corporation acquiring their Loftus Road ground, the club have confirmed.

ABC had the option to take ownership of the stadium if a £10m loan they made to the club’s holding company in 2002 was not repaid in full by the end of last month.

A recent letter to shareholders explained that the debt was paid by securing another £10m loan from a different company, Amulya Property Ltd, who now have a similar option to acquire the stadium in two years’ time if they are not repaid.

The interest rate on the new loan is 8.5% and Amulya has links with both Rangers’ co-owner Flavio Briatore and QPR holdings vice-chairman Amit Bhatia, whose father-in-law Lakshmi Mittal bought a 20% stake in the club last year.

The ABC loan has posed a threat to the club’s future for some time and the interest payments of nearly 11% were a major financial burden.

The loan was arranged so Rangers could come out of administration by making a payment to former owner Chris Wright, who was then a major creditor having made a series of directors’ loans during his tenure.

It also left the club with significant working capital which was used to fund the squad that won promotion from the Second Division two years later.

"The ABC loan has been of great concern to QPR fans, and has been a noose around the neck of this football club for far too long," Briatore told QPR’s website.

"I am delighted that we have now made arrangements to put this saga to an end." Ealing Gazette


August 5, 2008 - BBC - QPR complete payment of £10m loan

Queens Park Rangers have repaid the £10m they owed the ABC Corporation.

The loan was taken out in 2002 to assist the west London club in coming out of administration.

QPR Holdings Limited were required to repay £10m to the Panama-registered corporation on or before the 31 July 2008 deadline.

ABC had an option over the club's Loftus Road ground which could be exercised if the debt had not been met in full.

QPR Holdings Limited chairman Flavio Briatore said: "The ABC loan has been of great concern to QPR fans, and has been a noose around the neck of this club for far too long.

"I am delighted that we have now made arrangements to put this saga to an end.

"Building for the future is what is important to me, and the rest of the QPR board. However, with certain issues it is always necessary to deal with elements from the past, and today we have done this.

"This once again highlights our commitment to this football club, and now I am looking forward to working on the continued growth of Queens Park Rangers, both as a club and as a brand."


QPR Official Site - ABC LOAN REPAID IN FULL

Queens Park Rangers Football Club are delighted to announce the full repayment of our £10 million loan from ABC.
The loan was taken out into 2002 in order to assist the Club in coming out of administration.

QPR Holdings Limited was required to repay the existing loan of £10m to ABC Corporation on or before 31 July 2008.

ABC Corporation had an option over the Loftus Road Stadium, which would become exercisable if QPR Holdings Limited failed to repay the loan in full by 31 July 2008.

This loan was repaid in full today. Therefore, the option that ABC Corporation had over the Loftus Road Stadium no longer exists.
QPR Holdings Limited Chairman Flavio Briatore said: "The ABC loan has been of great concern to QPR fans, and has been a noose around the neck of this Football Club for far too long.
"I am delighted that we have now made arrangements to put this saga to an end.

"Building for the future is what is important to me, and the rest of the QPR Board. However, with certain issues it is always necessary to deal with elements from the past, and today we have done this.

"This once again highlights our commitment to this Football Club, and now I am looking forward to working on the continued growth of Queens Park Rangers, both as a Club and as a brand." QPR


July 28, 2008 "Remembering the ABC Loan"




Chairman's Report With Accounts - June 2009

"...Subsequent to the year-end, the ABC Corporation loan that attracted an interest rate of 11.76%was repaid and refinanced in July 2008 with a loan fromAmulya Property Limited, a company with which Amit Bhatia and I are connected. The interest rate under the Amulya Loan is 8.5%..."

http://qprreport.blogspot.com/2009/06/flavio-briatores-chairmans-report-in.html

-

The Guardian/Matt Scott Wednesday 11 November 2009

Curious case of Notts County, former adviser and a North Korean bigwig
Notts County told the Football League they had severed all ties with Russell King. His trip to Pyongyang casts doubt on that

The controversy over Notts County's ownership has been reopened as it emerged that Russell King, whom Notts County assured the Football League had nothing to do with the club, travelled to Pyongyang last month to visit Kim Yong-nam, one of North Korea's most powerful officials. He was representing Swiss Commodity Holdings (SCH), the company which has such close links with County that its distinctive logo now sits in the badge of the historic club.

Sven-Goran Eriksson was offered a substantial shareholding in SCH as part of his agreement to become director of football at County. Sol Campbell also held an "ambassadorial contract" with the company before he quit Meadow Lane in September. King was one of the figures who negotiated with Eriksson to bring him to the club.

King was photographed in the Mansudae Assembly Hall in Pyongyang as part of a delegation representing Swiss Commodity Holdings, which says it has considerable mineral reserves, on 22 October. That was two days after the Football League announced that Notts County's new owners had passed the fit and proper persons test. In that announcement the League was careful to note the club's assurance that Russell King no longer had any role in its affairs. The Football League was troubled by the fact that his alleged involvement in a £1.9m fraud is under investigation by the authorities in Jersey.

Previously the club had said that King had a role in advising on communications and strategy. He was involved in a number of high-profile recruitments to the club.

When asked to explain King's trip to Korea with SCH, his lawyer said: "Notts County Football Club did not have any business in North Korea on 22 October and has no comment on Mr King's personal business travels." Also in the photograph is Nathan Willett, who along with his father, Peter – himself a Notts County board member – is one of only two directors listed in company filings in Switzerland as being involved with SCH. Willett Jr says he is also a director of Qadbak, which owns Notts County via a convoluted chain of companies in the UK and British Virgin Islands. He was a signatory to the purchase agreement that gave Qadbak control of the Meadow Lane club in June through its subsidiary, the BVI shell company Munto Finance.

The photograph, which was released to accompany a statement in the North Korean official media, shows Shanti Sen, SCH's chief executive, and King immediately flanking Kim Yong-nam, with Nathan Willett to King's left. Although in practice Kim Jong-il, the "Dear Leader", rules the country, Kim Yong-nam is perhaps the most powerful official in North Korea.

The official North Korean statement said: "Kim Yong-nam, president of the Presidium of the DPRK Supreme People's Assembly, met and had a conversation with the visiting delegation of the Swiss Commodity Holding AG led by chief executive Ms Shanti Sen at the Mansudae Assembly Hall on 22 October."

That was only 48 hours after the Football League approved Qadbak's takeover of Notts County. On doing so, the league said in a statement: "The league has also noted the club's announcement on Monday, 12 October, that its consultancy arrangement with Russell King has been terminated." Notts County had said in the 12 October statement that "the club is happy to make clear that it has severed all ongoing connections with Mr Russell King".

The decision to pass the Qadbak takeover was made on the basis of evidence provided by the club. The league stated on 20 October: "This decision is based on the extensive disclosure provided by the club with regard to its ownership structure. This structure is complicated, and features both offshore entities and discretionary trusts.

"Together with the initial hesitation of the club's ultimate owners to identify themselves, this made for a lengthy and at times difficult process. Following greater co-operation from the club more recently, the league is now in a position to confirm that it is in possession of the appropriate details for those individuals that exercise control over the club."

However, what documents were presented to the Football League cannot be verified independently. The Guardian can reveal that no filings have ever been made with the British Virgin Islands Companies Registry relating to shareholdings or directorships for Munto or Qadbak.

Football staff at Meadow Lane have also been informed that Eriksson has made trips to North Korea, with a separate report in the North Korean media also said to confirm that he has paid at least one visit.

Last month the Guardian revealed that the former England manager had held preliminary talks with intermediaries representing the North Korean Football Association with a view to him providing technical advice to its national team, who have qualified for next summer's World Cup. Guardian

-
David Conn/The Guardian - November 11, 2009

Alarm bells leave Hull seeking another miracle
The Premier League was a 'ridiculous ambition' for the Tigers, who now face tricky decisions to secure survival

When this column reported in September that Hull City's financial accounts for the year to July 2008 were significantly overdue, the club, run by its then chairman, Paul Duffen, responded with a statement on its website claiming that the article "contained a number of inaccuracies". Neither Duffen nor anybody else at the club specified what these inaccuracies were supposed to have been and, since he resigned shortly after the accounts finally came out at the end of last month, Duffen has not returned calls to discuss them.

The financial reports came eventually wrapped in an apparently alarming warning about the state of the club, and the romantic tale of the Tigers, promoted to the top flight for the first time in their history in 2008, has been replaced with agonies over their future. Duffen himself maintained until he left that the club were not in financial difficulties, and said the delay in filing the accounts for all four Hull City-related companies – two responsible for the club, two for the KC Stadium – was due to caution being shown by the auditors, Deloitte. They had to consider whether the club have enough cash to "continue as a going concern", and like all clubs, if relegated from the golden Premier League to the earth of the Championship, City would rely on selling players to balance the books.


Duffen said he was discussing the wording of the accounts with Deloitte, who he said were wary about accepting that sufficient money could be made from selling players, and, as it turned out, the auditors did insert a grim warning. They noted that in July 2007, just after the former chairman Adam Pearson sold the club to the Essex property investor Russell Bartlett, City had no loans or overdraft from any bank. A year later, the club had borrowings of £22m, and City faced: "The requirement to make full repayment of the current bank loans by July 2010."

That produced the stark view that even if City survive in the Premier League, they need to make a £16m surplus through "player trading, match day and commercial income and/or through additional finance raising". If the club are relegated, they need to make a daunting £23m surplus.

The accounts did include the doom-laden assessment Duffen had been keen to avoid, that the unpredictability of how much can be made from selling players, and whether City would be able to raise extra finance: "Represent a material uncertainty that may cast significant doubt over the company's ability to continue as a going concern."

Duffen argued that it would paint an unduly severe picture of a club which will report a £2m profit for the year to 31 July 2009, and neither he nor Bartlett said Duffen's resignation had anything to do with the club's financial position. Pointing to his part in City having achieved the "ridiculous ambition" of promotion to the Premier League, Duffen acknowledged that the team, with the signings made this summer, were struggling on the pitch and so he had to: "Take ultimate responsibility for the disappointments of 2009."

Pearson returning last week to the club whose rise he oversaw from administration and the bottom division in 2001, to the KC Stadium and the Championship, immediately instructed accountants to itemise City's current financial situation. They found the club's bank borrowings had been reduced to £9m, which supported Duffen's case that the finances were not running out of control. Pearson, though, has expressed alarm at the weight of an annual wage bill, for 41 players, which he says has grown to £36m, with a further £2m payable in appearances and bonuses, and £5.3m committed to be paid in agents' fees.

Pearson has acknowledged emphatically that the club are not facing collapse, but said they are struggling to meet day-to-day commitments; Bartlett, he said, has put in additional money, the payments to agents and the club's cash–flow need to be rescheduled and players will inevitably be sold in January.

"It is solvable and manageable, but it is a challenge," Pearson said. "We need to get the wage bill down, and a large part of my job is also to attract additional investment to the club."

Pearson added that Bartlett, who has kept a low profile since taking over, "continues to privately fund the club".

Bartlett and Duffen met when both were looking to buy West Ham before Bjorgolfur Gudmundsson, then a billionaire, now ruined, bought the London side – and they teamed up to acquire Hull City instead. The accounts show Bartlett provided £4m for the club to spend, in return for preference shares, after he took over, an investment which bore fruit when City won promotion.

A complicated series of loans then took place in the year to 31 July 2008 which suggests that, overall, some money went back to Bartlett. Personally, and via one of his companies, R3 Investment Group, he loaned £1.6m to Superstadium Holdings Limited, one of the KC Stadium management companies. That company in turn lent £2m to Tiger Holdings, the club's parent, which lent £2m back to Bartlett's company, R3. Those transactions make it appear that around £400,000 more was loaned out of the club than loaned in. Pearson said he could not confirm whether that is an accurate reading of the accounts, but he emphasised that Bartlett is "a very good owner", who has put his own money into the club and continues to do so.

The accounts for Bartlett's own main company, Fortis Property Investment, which he runs from his office in Shenfield, Essex, show that, as for all investors, these are not the best of economic times. The company's properties had been valued down slightly to £36.2m, and its bank borrowings were £28.6m, repayable by the end of next month. Bartlett has said his business is standing up well in the recession, although clearly he will not want to pour money in indefinitely to service Hull City's millionaire footballers' wage bills.

In January Bartlett and Pearson will have tricky decisions to make: how many of the club's 41 players need to be sold to ease the financial pressure, balanced against how many can be spared, from a struggling squad, to still leave City with the best chance of Premier League survival. An equally tight calculation hangs over Phil Brown – sacking a manager is football's ingrained too-easy option; there would be compensation to pay which would further burden these stretched finances, and no certainty that any replacement would fare better.

Hence Pearson's statement that he is working to support Brown in turning the team's fortunes round: "We genuinely want Phil to succeed and for him to be here for many years."

Negotiating the financial chasm between England's two separate professional leagues is a headache both ways. After promotion, clubs need to spend some of the television windfall on players who can compete in the top flight, but not so extravagantly that they risk collapse if they are relegated. Eighteen months after Hull City's finest hour, the club's late accounts for that 2007-08 season of glory have laid that dilemma bare. Guardian

-
Guardian/Matt Scott

Notts County on brink of winding-up proceedings• Club's parent company owes six-figure tax debt• High court bankruptcy division to hear case next week

Notts County's parent company will be wound up next week unless a six-figure tax debt is paid. The League Two club are the subject of an order scheduled to be heard at the bankruptcy division of the high court on 18 November. Despite the notice being served on 25 September on the club's UK parent company, Blenheim 1862, the debt has still not been settled.

There remain four days in which to make a settlement to prevent the case going before the courts. Notts County yesterday refused to comment.

"A Petition to wind up the above-named Company of Meadow Lane Stadium, Meadow Lane, Nottingham NG2 3HJ, presented on 25 September 2009 by the Commissioners for HM Revenue and Customs, claiming to be creditors of the Company, will be heard at the Royal Courts of Justice, 18 November 2009," read a statement published on 5 November 2009 in the insolvency-notices journal of record, the London Gazette.

The development is said to have come as a shock to those involved in the transaction to hand over the club in June to Qadbak, the British Virgin Islands-registered company. As part of that deal the supporters' trust wrote off almost £400,000 in shares and loans it held in Blenheim 1862. Qadbak owns County via another BVI vehicle, Munto Finance, which in turn holds the shares in Blenheim 1862.

It is understood that at the time of the transaction there was an assurance that the tax debts, believed to be approaching £400,000 and which threatened the existence of the club, would be quickly paid. A source close to the club claims sufficient funds are being held in an escrow account ready for release to HM Revenue and Customs once the matter has been heard by the courts.

The source added that the debts relate to PAYE and VAT submissions dating back more than two years. But it was the assurance of swift payment, along with claims of vast funds available to the club under Qadbak, that led to the trust handing over the shares to the BVI companies for free.

This is not the first evidence of Notts County being unable to deliver on expectations since the takeover by Qadbak. Sol Campbell, whom the director of football, Sven-Goran Eriksson, persuaded to join the club, quit only five weeks into a five-year contract at Meadow Lane. "Perhaps things are not happening as quickly as he thought they might," said the club's executive chairman, Peter Trembling, on Campbell's departure in September.

Blenheim 1862's sole directors are Glenn Rolley, who still serves as the supporters' trust's chairman, and Trembling. If County fail to settle and HMRC succeeds in winding up Blenheim 1862, Rolley or Trembling will be ordered to hand over the company's books and to explain why the business failed.

That will lead to an investigation by HMRC and, if there is any evidence that tax payments were deliberately withheld, a further inquiry, led by Lord Mandelson's Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, might follow. Under HMRC's insolvency rules: "This could result in the directors being disqualified from running a company for a period of between two and 15 years." Guardian



BBC Update - Notts head off winding-up threat

Notts County's owners Munto Finance, have moved to head off a winding-up petition issued by the High Court, reports BBC Radio Nottingham.

The petition relates to a six-figure debt accrued before Munto Finance took control of the Meadow Lane club.

Notts have lodged the money with the Bankruptcy Division of the High Court, where a winding-up petition is due to be heard next week.

However Notts say they are confident the petition will be withdrawn

-
The Times/ Patrick Barclay

November 09, 2009
Debate: Would you be happy to have your club’s stadium renamed?

Stadium naming rights are not something we should always froth about. If Arsenal want to move to a new and improved stadium, and, to help with costs, call it the Emirates Stadium rather than New Highbury, well and good. If, on the other hand, Mike Ashley uses naming rights as just another way of tormenting the supporters of Newcastle United, that’s not so good. It depends on the stadium and the people involved.

The announcement that St James’ Park will be renamed the "sportsdirect.com@St James’ Park Stadium” until the end of this season, when an auction will be held in the hope of raising £5 million a year from a company appending its name or slogan to the ground’s time-honoured title, is probably the worst of all the awful things that have befallen Newcastle since Kevin Keegan left in 1997 (the only really good thing was the Indian summer of Sir Bobby Robson). Worse, even, than Ashley’s takeover and the installation of Dennis Wise alongside an unwilling Keegan in his second spell as manager.

St James’ Park is St James’ Park and should be so until the fans say otherwise. Anything else is bad business, quite apart from the insult it delivers to the sensibilities of those who give not just the stadium but the city in which it is near-centrally situated a rare and wonderful form of footballing life. And for the Football League to stand by and say nothing — just as, to be fair, the Premier League would probably have done had Newcastle not been relegated last season — is yet another illustration of how loosely the game is regulated, for all the improvements to which both Leagues justifiably point.

The name of a ground really does matter, as Chelsea and Tottenham Hotspur will discover when they tap this source of revenue with which to pay bloated salaries. Chelsea hope to raise at least £10 million a year, which would keep John Terry at the club but not leave enough over to satisfy Salomon Kalou, let alone Didier Drogba. It should, however, be the concern of Chelsea’s supporters, just as it would be a matter for Manchester United supporters if the Glazers decided to rename Old Trafford the AIG Arena or something even more dubious. In San Francisco there is a stadium called Candlestick Park. Nearly 20 years ago I went to the city for a holiday and, because the name was so evocative (“candlestick birds”, a kind of curlew, inhabit that part of the Bay), visited Candlestick Park, barely knowing whether the game would be of baseball or gridiron (it turned out to be the former).

Later the stadium was renamed “3Com Park”. Not only would this put off tourists such as me; the locals scorned it, too, and became even more irritated when it turned into “Monster Park” in honour of Monster Cables, a company that marketed the leads that protrude from electronic equipment. A bylaw was passed to the effect that it reverted to Candlestick Park when the deal expired last year.

If the popular will is good enough for the Americans, it is good enough for English football. The Leagues should react to the news from Newcastle and Chelsea by regulating that any change of a stadium’s name must be endorsed by its users, by means of a poll supervised by trusted experts.

I suspect that, were such a rule in force, Arsenal would have been able to persuade their season ticketholders, many of whom formed a waiting list at Highbury — but that Newcastle’s latest idea would be rejected out of hand.

As I keep saying, football should behave less like a business and more like a sport, because then it would do better business.

Debate: Would you be happy to have your club’s stadium renamed to bring in extra income? The Times

-
AP - German hooligans attack train; no one injured

FRANKFURT (AP) — About 30 masked hooligans attacked a train carrying football fans when it stopped at a train station in Germany, police said Monday.
The hooligans carried baseball bats, iron bars and other weapons and hurled stones when the train stopped Saturday evening in Weddel, near Braunschweig. Police officers accompanying the traveling Hannover fans prevented the two groups from clashing and no one was injured.

One carriage and the train station suffered substantial damage. The assailants, believed to be rival Eintracht Braunschweig supporters, fled in the darkness.

The train was carrying Hannover fans who were returning from Potsdam where the reserve team had played a game.

Braunschweig, which plays in the third division, had a home game Saturday. Braunschweig and Hannover have a bitter rivalry." USA Today

-
Observer - Tottenham up the ante with Chelsea over ground naming rights• Tottenham claim new ground will offer more to sponsors
• Executive director says stadium will outstrip rivals

Tottenham have claimed that sponsors would derive more benefit from putting their name to the club's new stadium than to Chelsea's current one, as they responded to Roman Abramovich's plans to sell off the naming rights to Stamford Bridge.

Spurs plan to build a 56,000-capacity ground next to their present home, to be ready for the 2012-13 season, and are seeking sponsors for the venue.

Paul Barber, Tottenham's executive director, said a brand new stadium could be more attractive to commercial interests than one that is more than 100 years old. "I think Chelsea have got some challenges because it is what it is," he said. "It's a good, old-fashioned football stadium, with a great atmosphere in it, but it's not brand new and it's not got all those features we will have.

"Our stadium will be as technologically advanced as any in the world. It's going to be as environmentally advanced as any other. And there will be some brands that want those kind of associations, that want top-class football in a fantastic environment."

Barber's comments in the Telegraph follow Chelsea's announcement of plans to auction naming rights on their Stamford Bridge ground.

Barber also predicted Spurs' new home would outshine Arsenal's. "Our stadium, by the time it's built, is going to be a generation beyond Arsenal, so therefore it is going to be more advanced both technologically and environmentally," he said.
Guardian
-


SUNDAY TIMES - Liverpool plan £250m field of dreams
The Reds are confident of persuading a leading global firm to buy the rights to name the club’s proposed new ground
Jonathan Northcroft

LIVERPOOL will brush off the controversy over England’s top clubs selling naming rights to their stadiums and chase the most expensive naming rights deal in the history of sport. Despite the recession, the Merseyside club’s hierarchy are convinced they can raise a mammoth £250m by persuading a leading global firm to buy the rights to name Liverpool’s proposed ground.

Liverpool’s owners, Tom Hicks and George Gillett, have been buoyed by their record £20m-per-season shirt sponsorship agreement signed recently with Standard Chartered, taking it as proof of the world-wide appeal of the club and the Premier League. These factors have persuaded Hicks and Gillett to revisit stadium-building plans, shelved due to Liverpool’s debts. The two Americans now believe they can underwrite more than 50% of the cost of building a new ground on a site earmarked on Stanley Park through a world-record naming rights sale.

The benchmark they have set Liverpool’s commercial team is the deal signed between the New York Mets baseball franchise and Citigroup. The American financial services giant paid $20m (£12m) a year over 20 years to have a new stadium, Citi Field, opened by the Mets early in 2009. Liverpool believe they can outstrip that. “Naming rights are a global market,” said Hicks. “We likely will partner with someone wanting global branding, unlike the US stadiums, which only worry about TV appeal in the States, similar to why Standard Chartered chose to partner with us on our shirts.”

Despite debts approaching £300m and Liverpool’s onfield worries, Hicks remains bullish about the outlook for his club. He said Rafael Benitez would not be forced to sell star players even if Liverpool fail to qualify for the knockout stages of the Champions League. Hicks and Gillett are seeking new investors, in the hope of raising money to reduce the club’s debt by diluting their shareholding, and spoke of “significant interest”. They are undeterred by protests by Newcastle fans in response to their club’s stadium being renamed sportsdirect.com@St James’ Park Stadium and criticism of Chelsea, who last week announced they were looking to sell off naming rights to Stamford Bridge in the hope of raising £150m.

Liverpool believe their situation is different, because they are building a new stadium rather than renaming an existing one. They regard as a precedent Arsenal, who signed a £100m 15-year deal with Emirates, which also included shirt sponsorship, when they moved from Highbury in 2006. Manchester United are the only Big Four club for whom a naming rights sale does not appear an option. A club source said a rights sale involving Old Trafford is “not on our agenda”. Sir Alex Ferguson said Chelsea’s plans were driven by money. “It is the only reason I can think of. But it does not really concern me. I wouldn’t have thought [it would happen at United].” Sunday Times