SWANSEA CITY; IN THE RED?
Here we go again! But how far up the table will Boro end this season? The Telegraph envisages the top of the table looking like this in May, based on the odds bookies are offering:
That implies we’ll have to battle the Blades for the chance to beat Luton at Wembley, but the table doesn’t show the huge financial disadvantage Boro, and Coventry, have to overcome first.
Most EFL clubs, get ‘Solidarity Payments’ from the Premier League (Championship clubs get £5.2m, League One £780,000,League Two £520,000). Burnley, Luton and Sheffield will get a cut of the PL’s broadcast income instead; 55% of the minimum amount each PL club is guaranteed in 24/25, and 45% in 25/6 if they don’t bounce back. As Leeds were in the Premier League for more than one season before relegation, they’ll get 45% this season (on top of the 55% they received last season) and a further 20% in 25/6.
Those guaranteed payments for 22/23 amounted to over £86m, so Leeds will receive around £39m; over seven times what Boro receives, with the three newly relegated clubs given £47m each. (Boro’s entire turnover for 22/23, including its Solidarity Payment, was just £28.6m).
"Research suggests that over the last five years, clubs who receive parachute payments are three times more likely to earn promotion than those who don't, so that tells you all you need to know about the impact on the competitiveness and fairness in the division,"
Former Millwall chief executive Steve Kavanagh
Liverpool University’s Football Finance expert Kieran Maguire agrees: "It could be argued we have a 24 or 25-club Premier League and some of them are just taking a holiday in the Championship… It's partly due to the way money is distributed in the Premier League itself ; the' big six' in the Premier League earn on average three times the revenue of the other 14. The other 14 clubs in the Premier League earn roughly three times the revenue of clubs who get parachute payments. The clubs who get parachute payments get three times the revenue, on average, of the other clubs in the Championship. The other Championship clubs get approximately three times the revenue of the clubs in League One."
The EFL has called for reform: “Increasingly, the lack of fair competitive balance between parachute and non-parachute clubs is leading to what might be considered irrational financial behaviour by the latter group, whose owners often overspend in a bid to remain competitive on the pitch. In reality, they have little choice but to continue to spend these sums in order to standstill, or they face the consequences of relegation to League One.” (Or in the case of, e.g.,Derby and Reading, overspending and relegation.)
Then PL can certainly afford to support the pyramid it sits atop. As the EFL stated in evidence to Parliament; “Thirty years ago, when the Premier League was in its infancy, the EFL’s revenues were 75% of the top-flight’s…. Today they are just 6%, and the gap which three decades ago was just £11m is now £3bn.”
Last season the PL paid around £125m in Solidarity Payments to 66 EFL clubs, but well over £2bn to 26 member and eligible Championship clubs. Those clubs then pay higher wages; the PL’s aggregate wagebill is now over £2bn more than the average of the leagues in Spain, Germany, Italy, and France. Last season PL clubs paid £410m to players’ agents; £285m more than the entire amount paid in‘solidarity’ to EFL clubs.
When the last Government drafted their Football Governance Bill it specifically excluded control of Parachute Payments from theIndependent Regulator. Labour proposed an amendment to enable the Regulator to govern Parachute Payments, but with the Conservatives holding a majority it was voted down.
Potentially the most significant transfers of the close season were Rishi Sunak’s to the opposition benches and Keir Starmer’s to Number 10. One of the bills ditched by Rishi in his dash for the door was the proposed Football Governance Act. With Labour now in charge they can not only push the bill into law but also improve it. Allowing the proposed Regulator to oversee Parachute and Solidarity payments looks like the political equivalent of an open goal. Hopefully Stephanie Peacock, the new Minister for Sport, will smash it into the back of the net for the clubs that desperately need it.
If you want your MP to give the proposed regulator the chance to improve the stability of the football pyramid and the fairness of the race tothe top of it, let them know:
UTB!
Mike Kelly
Taken from Fmttm Issue v Swansea City - We have since lobbied Middlesbrough MP Andy McDonald who will this week be attending a special presentation by the EFL and FSA to make the case for parachute payments being part of a far stronger remit for the independent regulator.
Here we go again! But how far up the table will Boro end this season? The Telegraph envisages the top of the table looking like this in May, based on the odds bookies are offering:
| Chance of Promotion For: | % |
| Leeds United | 48% |
| Burnley | 31% |
| Luton Town | 22% |
| Middlesbrough | 20% |
| Sheffield United | 20% |
| Coventry City | 18% |
That implies we’ll have to battle the Blades for the chance to beat Luton at Wembley, but the table doesn’t show the huge financial disadvantage Boro, and Coventry, have to overcome first.
Most EFL clubs, get ‘Solidarity Payments’ from the Premier League (Championship clubs get £5.2m, League One £780,000,League Two £520,000). Burnley, Luton and Sheffield will get a cut of the PL’s broadcast income instead; 55% of the minimum amount each PL club is guaranteed in 24/25, and 45% in 25/6 if they don’t bounce back. As Leeds were in the Premier League for more than one season before relegation, they’ll get 45% this season (on top of the 55% they received last season) and a further 20% in 25/6.
Those guaranteed payments for 22/23 amounted to over £86m, so Leeds will receive around £39m; over seven times what Boro receives, with the three newly relegated clubs given £47m each. (Boro’s entire turnover for 22/23, including its Solidarity Payment, was just £28.6m).
"Research suggests that over the last five years, clubs who receive parachute payments are three times more likely to earn promotion than those who don't, so that tells you all you need to know about the impact on the competitiveness and fairness in the division,"
Former Millwall chief executive Steve Kavanagh
Liverpool University’s Football Finance expert Kieran Maguire agrees: "It could be argued we have a 24 or 25-club Premier League and some of them are just taking a holiday in the Championship… It's partly due to the way money is distributed in the Premier League itself ; the' big six' in the Premier League earn on average three times the revenue of the other 14. The other 14 clubs in the Premier League earn roughly three times the revenue of clubs who get parachute payments. The clubs who get parachute payments get three times the revenue, on average, of the other clubs in the Championship. The other Championship clubs get approximately three times the revenue of the clubs in League One."
The EFL has called for reform: “Increasingly, the lack of fair competitive balance between parachute and non-parachute clubs is leading to what might be considered irrational financial behaviour by the latter group, whose owners often overspend in a bid to remain competitive on the pitch. In reality, they have little choice but to continue to spend these sums in order to standstill, or they face the consequences of relegation to League One.” (Or in the case of, e.g.,Derby and Reading, overspending and relegation.)
Then PL can certainly afford to support the pyramid it sits atop. As the EFL stated in evidence to Parliament; “Thirty years ago, when the Premier League was in its infancy, the EFL’s revenues were 75% of the top-flight’s…. Today they are just 6%, and the gap which three decades ago was just £11m is now £3bn.”
Last season the PL paid around £125m in Solidarity Payments to 66 EFL clubs, but well over £2bn to 26 member and eligible Championship clubs. Those clubs then pay higher wages; the PL’s aggregate wagebill is now over £2bn more than the average of the leagues in Spain, Germany, Italy, and France. Last season PL clubs paid £410m to players’ agents; £285m more than the entire amount paid in‘solidarity’ to EFL clubs.
When the last Government drafted their Football Governance Bill it specifically excluded control of Parachute Payments from theIndependent Regulator. Labour proposed an amendment to enable the Regulator to govern Parachute Payments, but with the Conservatives holding a majority it was voted down.
Potentially the most significant transfers of the close season were Rishi Sunak’s to the opposition benches and Keir Starmer’s to Number 10. One of the bills ditched by Rishi in his dash for the door was the proposed Football Governance Act. With Labour now in charge they can not only push the bill into law but also improve it. Allowing the proposed Regulator to oversee Parachute and Solidarity payments looks like the political equivalent of an open goal. Hopefully Stephanie Peacock, the new Minister for Sport, will smash it into the back of the net for the clubs that desperately need it.
If you want your MP to give the proposed regulator the chance to improve the stability of the football pyramid and the fairness of the race tothe top of it, let them know:
- andy.mcdonald.2nd@parliament.uk (Middlesbrough & Thornaby)
- luke.myer.mp@parliament.uk (Middlesbrough South)
- anna.turley.mp@parliament.uk (Redcar)
- chris.mcdonald.mp@parliament.uk (Stockton North)
- matt.vickers.mp@parliament.uk (Stockton West)
UTB!
Mike Kelly
Taken from Fmttm Issue v Swansea City - We have since lobbied Middlesbrough MP Andy McDonald who will this week be attending a special presentation by the EFL and FSA to make the case for parachute payments being part of a far stronger remit for the independent regulator.