Donald Trump’s trade wars are probably a moment in time, although currently challenging the world order and undermining trust in the superpower that America once was.
When the North American World Cup comes around in 2026, you’d hope we’d have worked through all the casino economics.
That doesn’t mean many people won’t suffer in the short term, it’s just not occurred to me the ramifications of changing the world order will genuinely impact on elite sport, unless certain owners wanted to try and choose to use it as a smokescreen.
A bit like when certain politicians used horrible world events as a ‘good day’ to release news on a policy they knew would be unpopular.
Whether fair or not, Premier League football doesn’t catch the same heat as different industries. It seems to be insulated from world events that challenges others. Even during Covid – and could there be a bigger tariff than the shutdown of commerce – it didn’t really have an impact on football.
Clubs complained about the challenges of paying wages but the status quo prevailed, didn’t it?
When the North American World Cup comes around in 2026, you’d hope we’d have worked through all the casino economics
I am thinking of the Glazers potentially using the uncertainty as an opportunity to explain how little money Manchester United have and why everything for the fans needs a price increase
Call me cynical but have we not just heard the witterings of Jim Ratcliffe about United running out of cash?
History has taught us that the super-wealthy tend to become even wealthier during the world’s greatest crises, and you have to include Premier League owners in that group. Private equity players or nation states, they have assets that are diversified.
The only caveat would be those owners, and I am thinking of the Glazers at Manchester United, potentially using the uncertainty as an opportunity to explain how little money United have and why everything for the fans needs a price increase. Call me cynical but have we not just heard the witterings of Sir Jim Ratcliffe about United running out of cash?
It was noticeable we saw an increase in billionaires during the last global calamity we faced, Covid. The guys who run the top English clubs, valued at hundreds of millions, buy stocks during the dips on Wall Street and wait for the market to correct itself.
Prices dropped during Covid because of the pandemic, not because underlying aspects of the business were flawed and distressed. Markets create an opportunity for those who hold the wealth. This, while man-made (again, likely like Covid), has a similarity in the current shockwaves reverberating post-Trump’s so-called liberation day.
Television rights are classified as services rather than manufacturing, so won’t be affected in the same way by tariffs. And these rights are global, not dependent on the American market. As are the reasons major brands align themselves to the World Cup.
I have heard it argued the currency exchange will impact on borrowing rates of the Glazers. Good job then they have a partner like Sir Jim with deep pockets. Big-hitters, like them or Stan Kroenke or John W Henry, have bigger fish to fry commercially than prioritising the cash they may have to pony up into their football clubs every season.
As for the World Cup, it is 14 months away, by which time the Trump tariff effect is likely to have dissipated and solutions and adjustments made.
Not that I feel particularly sympathetic to FIFA if they are anxious. They were keen to give it to the USA, and Canada and Mexico, primarily because Trump Mark I gave them an assurance it would generate $15billion and certainly not because of his care and concern for the well-being of the world´s biggest sport.
Big-hitters, like Arsenal owner Stan Kroenke (pictured with Super Bowl trophy), have bigger fish to fry commercially than the cash they have to pony up into their football clubs
As for the World Cup, it is 14 months away, by which time the Trump tariff effect is likely to have dissipated. Not that I feel sympathetic to FIFA if they are anxious
FIFA and Gianni Infantino wanted to dance with Trump because of the money. It is their problem if they get less than expected in their coffers
FIFA and Gianni Infantino wanted to dance with Trump because of the money. It is their problem if they get less than expected in their coffers. I don’t think it will play out that way because the world will have returned by then, as Trump’s policy position is an experiment and probably not his end game.
He is just pulling levers to achieve outcomes so I don’t see it impacting on sport unless owners like the Glazers use it for their own advantage.
They’ve spent their time at United – from the moment they bought the club with only a very small amount of money – loading their obligations elsewhere and using the club to enhance their own wealth.
In truth, they are sufficiently wealthy to trade their different portfolios to make as much money in distressed times as they would in good. But the opportunity is there to exploit the eroding of global trust created by Trump to play possum with their fan base and cite it as a reason not to invest.
Although trust and the Glazers are not bedfellows that the United fans will recognise anyway!
How Chelsea played PSR cards right
Timing is everything and while Manchester City await the result of 115 alleged financial breaches, Chelsea are set to drive a coach and horses through the value of Profit and Sustainability Rules (PSR).
They have sold their women’s team to another part of their business for something akin to the entire income of the world’s 20 biggest women’s teams.
While the cases aren’t identical, the motivations perhaps are, both driven by an ability to spend and compete at the highest level.
Chelsea have sold their women’s team to another part of their business for something akin to the entire income of the world’s 20 biggest women’s teams
They benefited from Roman Abramovich taking over in 2003 when there were no restrictions on investment and he could do what he wanted
Chelsea owner Todd Boehly was at the White House this week to celebrate his LA Dodgers team winning last year’s World Series
City have been accused in part of disguising equity investment as commercial deals that never happened or were massively over-valued. Chelsea have been open about how and why they valued their women’s team for £200million. Their auditors cleared it so I’ll be fascinated to see if the Premier League meaningfully disapprove.
Where Chelsea have been luckier – twice – is WHEN their changes in ownership occurred.
They benefited from Roman Abramovich taking over in 2003 when there were no restrictions on investment and he could do what he wanted. By Sheik Mansour’s time in 2008, the authorities were adamant – for reasons the big five clubs may explain even better (note sarcasm) – they didn’t want the industry to fall prey to another Abramovich who had set the system on fire with his spending.
Hence, Manchester City found they were in an industry being policed more robustly, but without them having the visibility of how FFP and PSR would actually work. If they’d realised what was in the offing, they would perhaps have bought City via a structure that had a whole load of assets to dispose of within the wider group.
When Todd Boehly and Clearlake Capital bought Chelsea in 2022, they had the benefit of seeing what had happened to City and prepared outcomes to fit rules while still investing heavily.
They have been able to hide in plain sight, offering what they consider a fair market value for their women’s team when there has previously been no benchmark for the asset’s worth.
I spoke to several investors 18 months ago who felt buying a woman’s football club, stripping it away from an existing framework (ie men’s football) and giving it separate management and ownership, would be a significant opportunity.
Why? Because women’s football can be acquired at an economic price and will increase in value with bigger attendances, revenue streams and interest from broadcasters.
Women’s football can be acquired at an economic price and will increase in value with bigger attendances, revenue streams and interest from broadcasters
The fact Chelsea can pick up a valuation of their women’s team and use it to overcome what governance is supposed to be shows how ridiculous it is
That wasn’t the thinking behind the aforementioned Chelseanomics model inflating the marketplace!
I don’t look at Chelsea as liberty-takers. I look at the overall ideals behind financial governance of football and say it’s a joke. The fact Chelsea can pick up a valuation of their women’s team and use it to overcome what governance is supposed to be shows how ridiculous it is.
City’s regret as they await their potential punishment is that they didn’t know then what is clear now.
My favourite ground? Wherever I could get out quick!
I wouldn’t have been much of a travel companion. As Crystal Palace chairman, I had one favourite stadium – Selhurst Park – and didn’t like any of the others or their fans
Congratulations to Oliver Holt, my Padel partner in Qatar, for visiting all 92 league grounds.
I wouldn’t have been much of a travel companion. As Crystal Palace chairman, I had one favourite stadium – Selhurst Park – and didn’t like any of the others or their fans.
I’d turn up at five-to-three, get called a ‘w*****’ by the away supporters and leave as quickly as possible at full time, preferably with three points.
If pushed, I’d have to acknowledge Elland Road had an impressive atmosphere but it wasn’t state-of-the art, and I didn’t much like their chairman at the time, Ken Bates, either! Despite him pinching my cheek and saying we were alike, much to my chagrin.
