It’s Not Leaking (Would You Like To See The Study?)
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
I was watching the season finale of 30 Rock last week. Jack takes a job with the Bush administration. He gets to his office on the first day to find an overhead water pipe leaking onto his desk. When he mentions the leaking pipe to his long-serving office-mate, he’s told “No, it’s not [leaking]. We’ve looked into it and it’s not.” When he brings it up again later, he’s told “It’s not leaking. Would you like to see the study?”
This is what popped into my mind when I read this story in the Telegraph about the closing gap between the Big-4 and the rest of the Premier League.
Premier League communications director Dan Johnson said: “The new broadcasting deals are closing the gap, because the biggest increases have been in the overseas contracts which are divided equally between the 20 clubs. Furthermore, the increase in money means a lot more to the smaller clubs because it is a much bigger percentage of their turnover.”
Never mind that the rest of the article points out that Man Utd received £78 million in TV payments, £50 million more than Derby. And that two years ago, the difference between top and bottom was £30 million. Or that Newcastle - superior to Middlesbrough by just one place and one point - received £5 million more than their north-east neighbours.
But don’t worry. The gap is closing - in real terms, on a per-capita basis, allowing for inflation, if you index it against the price of a loaf of bread - according to the Premier League’s study.
–
Oops, it looks like my campaign went negative? Never mind. Together we can make football better. It starts here. You can receive updates by email or RSS. Both are free and spam-free, and you can back-out at any time.
I still think that the increased revenue will even out the playing field eventually. Man U and Chelsea cannot continue running enormous deficits forever. Liverpool are in a perilous short and long-term financial state. Arsenal seem to be in a fishy state as well.
Spurs, Newcastle and Man City are three of the biggest clubs in Europe and should be performing better given their intake.
I object to Sky and Setanta getting to give one club five million quid more than another club, even though their on-field performace is almost identical.
I can see why they would like Newcastle on the telly more than Middlesbrough, but there’s something wrong with the financial system in the Prem if the TV companies are able to influence the on-field success to that extent. To put it in context, that difference pays for Michael Owen’s wages for a year.
Definitely have to disagree with you, Ty. Spurs, Newcastle, and City are nowhere close to being amongst the biggest clubs in Europe. Sure, they may be up there in terms of fan support, but to be a “big club”, you have to actually win something. Spurs won the Carling Cup this year, but when’s the last time any of those three teams won any major trophy?
And Phil, I completely agree. There should be dropoffs between teams in the standings (1st receives more money 2nd, 2nd more than 3rd, 3rd more than 4th, etc), but $10 million is way, way too much. I wasn’t aware two or three points in the standings were worth that much in terms of dollars or pounds; it’s almost as if one point is worth a million pounds and that’s a joke.
@Michael: There is a drop-off in prize money - about half-a-million per place. My rule-of-thumb is that the winner shouldn’t get more than double the worst-place team in any competition. The Premier League complies with that guideline if you look at prize money alone.
But the TV money is a base amount plus approx half-a-million per game shown. Not to pick on Boro and Newcastle, but Newcastle could have finished below Boro in the league but still picked up that extra 5 million because they were shown on TV more times.
Sky/Setanta pick who is on TV, so they get to influence who receives the most money. I don’t blame the TV companies, but rather the way that they TV money is allocated. I’d rather see a higher base amount and a much lower per-game figure (to offset any expenses from hosting the broadcasters).
Oh ok, gotcha, yeah I completely misread your article then, sorry about that.
I continue to be amazed by the arrogance of the fans of the Big Four and their unwillingness to except that the Premier League which essentially is a cartel serving the big clubs (as was the G-14 but at least they admitted it and served all their members) is destroying the English game.
I’ve talked to many English friends who find the lower leagues and even yes MLS more compelling than the PL. It’s only a matter of time before the system implodes. I disagree with Ty, entirely on this. The PL’s version of revenue sharing is to serve the big clubs much like the MLB’s system.
I don’t propose an MLS system where all teams are equal and have to live under a cap, thus the Galaxy by having Donovan and Beckham have a bunch of USL-2 level players (our third division) filling out the squad and thus are among the league’s worst teams. But I do believe the Premier League is as wrong headed in the other direction if not worse.
I cannot wait for Phil’s book. Based on this blog it should be a best seller that exposes what is happening to the people’s game and what can be done to fix it!