Tampilkan postingan dengan label France. Tampilkan semua postingan
Tampilkan postingan dengan label France. Tampilkan semua postingan

Rabu, 18 Juli 2012

Paris Saint-Germain - Dream Into Action



So, barring any problems with a medical, Zlatan Ibrahimovic will today sign for Paris-Saint Germain. Many in the football world have been shocked by PSG’s audacious €65 million swoop for the Milan duo of Ibrahimovic and Thiago Silva, but it really should come as no surprise given the club’s massive transfer outlay ever since it was purchased by Qatar Sports Investments (QSI) last summer.

In much the same way as Manchester City did when they signed Robinho after their Abu Dhabi takeover, PSG immediately made a resounding statement of intent when they shattered the French transfer record with the €42 million purchase of Argentine playmaker Javier Pastore from Palermo. They also scooped up the cream of French football, buying Ligue 1 leading scorer Kevin Gameiro and powerful midfielder Blaise Matuidi, while raiding Serie Afor Jérémy Menez (from Roma), Mohamed Sissoko (Juventus) and Salvatore Sirigu (Palermo), and securing the services of the Uruguayan captain Diego Lugano (Fenerbahce).

The spending did not stop there, as new manager Carlo Ancelotti brought in experience in the January transfer window in the shape of Thiago Motta (from Inter), Maxwell (Barcelona) and Alex (Chelsea). This summer, as well as Ibra and Silva, PSG have to date also splashed out €26 million for Napoli’s forward Ezequiel Lavezzi and €12 million for Pescara’s technically gifted young star Marco Verratti. There’s also talk that Kaká might join the French revolution.

QSI, an investment arm of Qatar’s sovereign wealth fund owned by the ruling Al Thani family, bought 70% of PSG from American investment company Colony Capital in May last year, before acquiring the remaining 30% in March in a transaction that placed a €100 million value on the entire club. Right away, they installed Nasser Al-Khelaifi as club president, banking on his sports experience from his role as director of the TV channel Al Jazeera Sports and president of the Qatar Tennis Federation.

"We'll meet again"

Al-Khelaifi spoke of his hopes for this sleeping giant, “It’s a big club with a history and super fans.” Indeed, PSG is only behind Marseille in terms of popularity in France. The year before, their potential had been underlined by no less a person than Arsène Wenger, “PSG is the only club in the world which is based in an area of 10 million inhabitants and doesn’t have any competition (from a rival club).” With spooky prescience, he added, “What needs to be done is to get a group of investors around the table to provide the club with some financial muscle.”

However, there is little doubt that they have been under-achievers since they were founded in 1970 after the merger of Paris FC and Stade Saint-Germain. In fact, they have not won the Ligue 1 title for 18 years, though in fairness they do hold the record for the longest current spell in the competitive French top flight without being relegated.

To an extent, QSI’s investment is nothing new under the sun for PSG. With obvious parallels to the current situation, they were bought in 1991 by TV channel Canal+, who proceeded to invest substantial sums in attracting players of the calibre of David Ginola, George Weah and Rai to Paris, leading to a glorious few years, when they reached a Champions League semi-final, two UEFA Cup semi-finals and two Cup Winners’ Cup finals, winning one of them in 1996 against Rapid Vienna and losing the other in 1997 to Barcelona.

"Ménez - Jérémy spoke in class today"

However, the club ran up huge losses and built up substantial debts, leading to the 2006 sale to Colony Capital (plus minority shareholders Butler Capital Partners, a French investment company, and Morgan Stanley, an American investment bank). On the plus side, this consortium wiped out the club’s debts, but against that they appeared more interested in the property development opportunities at the Parc des Princes stadium and the training centre at Camp des Loges. The supporters’ dissatisfaction with their approach was summed up by a banner unfurled at the ground a couple of years ago: “Colony: a great PSG or get lost.”

Those fans are unlikely to be disgruntled with the ambition shown by QSI, who have promised to spend €100 million a year for the next five or six years in order to build a strong team, before slowing down the investment. Although Al-Khelaifi claimed that this level of expenditure was “normal for a top-ranking club”, only Manchester City have really done anything similar for such an extended period.

The idea is “to invest a lot and immediately” with the objective of joining Europe’s elite. Al-Khelaifi emphasised the European aspirations, “Obviously everyone dreams of winning the league, but our priority right from next season is the Champions League.” As part of their five-year strategy, they hope to compete in the Champions League on a regular basis and be in a position to win the trophy in three years.

"Ancelotti - Hands off, he's mine"

Although PSG’s official statement on the QSI takeover included the usual, bland remarks about looking “to take the club to the next level”, Carlo Ancelotti was in no doubt about the new owners’ targets, “The aim of the club is very clear. They want to build a team to win in the Champions League, not just in France.”

Last season, PSG finished second in Ligue 1, which was enough to qualify them for the Champions League, though it must have been something of a disappointment for QSI, given last summer’s spending spree. Indeed, when PSG were leading the title race before Christmas, Al-Khelaifi said, “Given the league table at present, if PSG are not champions of France at the end of the season, it will be a failure.”

It must have been particularly galling that they lost out to Montpellier, a club whose entire annual budget of €33 million is less than the amount PSG paid for one player (Pastore). It would be small comfort to know that the French league is one of the most unpredictable around, having five different champions in the last five seasons.

Moreover, the club had sacked the unfortunate Antoine Kombouaré to make way for Ancelotti, despite the club stalwart guiding PSG to the top of the table, though his expensive team had just crashed out of the Europa League. The feeling was that Ancelotti was the right man to take the club forward, having won two Champions Leagues and Serie A with Milan plus the Premier League with Chelsea. In addition, his reputation would help PSG attract the calibre of player required to make that big jump in quality, though the high salaries on offer might also help and Paris is not exactly a hardship posting.


Off the pitch, there will be plenty of changes too, as PSG will rack up enormous losses. In fairness, the club has consistently lost money in the past few years, though these will pale into insignificance compared to what is about to hit their books.

In the last published accounts for the 2010/11 season, before the impact of the QSI takeover is considered, they made a tiny loss of €201,000, though this was heavily influenced by exceptional financial items of €27.9 million. These are not explained, though are probably due to movements in provisions, which was the case in 2009/10.

Excluding this adjustment, PSG’s loss would have been €28.1 million, even higher than the €21.9 million the previous season, which was the second highest in Ligue 1. The 2010/11 operating loss was essentially due to €130 million of expenses, including €70 million of wages, being far higher than the €101 million of revenue. Profit on player sales and interest payable were negligible.

In the previous five years, PSG’s loss averaged over €14 million a season, while the cumulative losses since 1998 add up to a colossal €300 million. In those 13 years, PSG have not once reported a profit.


In terms of Ligue 1 profitability, PSG were mid-table in 2010/11, but if the exceptional items were ignored, their underlying loss was about the same as Lyon’s €28 million, which was the worst in the league. This was a repeat of the previous season when Lyon (€35 million) and PSG (€22 million) also reported the largest losses.

The only other club that reported a double-digit loss in 2010/11 was Marseille with €15 million, while half of the 20 clubs were profitable. In fact, the total Ligue 1 losses of €46 million were much improved from the previous season’s €114 million, despite a 3% fall in revenue, as expenses were cut and profits from player trading increased – partly due to PSG’s purchases.

That’s all very well, but it will be a whole new ball game under QSI. The club had originally estimated a loss of €40 million for 2011/12, but this has been revised upwards to €100 million following the signing of new players, the hiring of new staff including Ancelotti and Kombouaré’s pay-off.


The plan for next season assumes a deficit of €70 million, based on €130 million revenue and €200 million expenses, comprising €120 million wages (60%), €40 million player amortisation (20%) and €40 million other expenses (€20 million). This is the first time that any French club’s budget has gone above €150 million and would mean combined losses over the next two years of €170 million, though even that may be under-estimated.

This is not a problem for the Direction Nationale du Contrôle de Gestion (DNCG), the organisation responsible for monitoring and overseeing the accounts of professional football clubs in France. In contrast to UEFA’s Financial Fair Play (FFP) regulations, they allow owners to dig into their pockets to cover shortfalls with their own funds and they are satisfied with the bank guarantees provided by PSG’s directors.

The DNCG president, Richard Olivier, explained their view, “The more famous players there are in L1, the more spectators there will be. The Qatari are great. They’re putting in €200 million and with them we can hope to gain the fourth place in UEFA’s coefficients. They’re filling the stadiums and bring money directly and indirectly.”

"Lavezzi - heading to Paris"

Of course, it’s a very different story with UEFA’s FFP, which will ultimately exclude from European competitions (Champions League and Europa League) those clubs that fail to live within their means, i.e. break even. In particular, clubs will not be allowed to make up for losses via handouts from the owners. The first season that UEFA will start monitoring clubs’ financials is 2013/14, but this will take into account losses made in the two preceding years, namely 2011/12 and 2012/13.

They don’t need to be absolutely perfect, as wealthy owners will be allowed to absorb aggregate losses (“acceptable deviations”) of €45 million, initially over two years and then over a three-year monitoring period, as long as they are willing to cover the deficit by making equity contributions. The maximum permitted loss then falls to €30 million from 2015/16 and will be further reduced from 2018/19 (to an unspecified amount).


In addition, UEFA’s break-even analysis allows clubs to exclude “good” costs, such as depreciation on fixed assets and expenditure on youth development and community, while the first year can deduct wages of players signed before June 2010.

That’s a help, but PSG’s projected losses of €170 million are clearly far higher than the €45 million allowance, so it looks like they will have to rely on one of UEFA’s get-out clauses, namely that an improving trend in the annual break-even results “will be viewed… favourably” (Annex XI). In this way, they might manage to avoid the ultimate sanction of being thrown out of the Champions League.

Indeed, while UEFA’s president Michel Platini has said that he is not a fan of clubs that “buy players left, right and centre”, Andrea Traverso, his head of licensing, has been more circumspect, “Before we apply any penalties, we will look at a club’s financial situation in its entirety.”

Nevertheless, Al-Khelaifi is well aware of this issue and has said that it is QSI’s long-term plan to make PSG into a profitable club, “In five years we want to make money.” The idea is to invest massively in new players in the first few years in order to boost the sporting and commercial potential of the club, so that it is self-sufficient by the time that FFP really begins to bite.


The impact of QSI’s arrival on the club’s activity in the transfer market has been dramatic. In the decade before the takeover, PSG’s net spend was just €27 million, but has been a remarkable €199 million since then. The director of football (and former PSG player), Leonardo, has said, “We want to do something long term and not buy ten Messis straight away. That’s not how you build a team”, but he added that the club was “obliged” to spend big sums if it wanted to compete at the highest level.

Evidently, they are following the playbook used by Chelsea and Manchester City, who spent massively in the first two seasons following the arrival of wealthy benefactors. Ancelotti has argued, “We don’t just want to spend for the sake of it”, though others might beg to differ, as the initial policy of buying proven domestic performers seems to have gone by the wayside in favour of international superstars.


This should lead to a significant competitive imbalance in France, as PSG have spent significantly more than the rest of Ligue 1 put together. The “closest” contenders to PSG’s €199 million net transfer spend since the QSI takeover are Rennes and Marseille, with just €16 million and €11 million respectively.


Not only that, but in that period PSG are the biggest spenders in Europe, ahead of Abramovich’s Chelsea (€127 million) and a rejuvenated Juventus (€117 million). No other club has spent more than €100 million in this period. Traditional powerhouses like Bayern Munich and Manchester United have been left in the shade, while the nouveaux riches clubs like Manchester City, Anzi Makhachkala and Malaga are also in PSG’s slipstream.


Up until the last accounts, PSG did a reasonably good job controlling their wage bill with their 2010/11 wages to turnover ratio of 69% being just within UEFA’s recommended upper limit of 70%. In the last five years, wages have grown in line with revenue, as both have risen around €20 million since 2006.


In fact, PSG only had the third highest wage bill in France of €70 million in 2010/11, a long way behind Marseille (€101 million) and Lyon (€100 million), though more than twice as much as Montpellier (€29 million), who went on to become champions the next season.


The gap to the leading European clubs was even more striking before the QSI takeover. The Spanish giants, Barcelona (€241 million) and Real Madrid (€216 million), had wage bills more than three times as much as PSG, while even the notoriously parsimonious Arsenal (€149 million) paid out twice as much. As an example of the impact of major squad investment, Manchester City’s wage bill has doubled in two years to €209 million.

These huge discrepancies help explain why PSG need to spend if they have any chance of breaking into this select group, though this will be even more of a challenge, given the high tax rates in France, which means they have to pay a higher gross salary than their competitors in other countries to ensure that the net salary is at the same level.


This is reflected in the salaries paid to the new recruits, which are as high as €4 million a year, according to a summary published by the Sportunewebsite (based on figures collected from Le Parisien and France Football) for the 2011/12 season. On top of that, Ancelotti is reportedly receiving €6 million a year, an unprecedented figure for a coach in France. The list adds up to €65 million, but that excludes other players, coaching staff, administration staff, social security and bonus payments, so the total wage bill was actually much higher.

Although reported figures for transfer fees and player salaries are notoriously inaccurate, we can still make a reasonable estimate of the increase in costs arising from the new signings since the 2010/11 accounts.

First of all, we need to understand how football clubs account for transfer fees. Instead of expensing these completely in the year of purchase, players are treated as assets, whereby their value is written-off evenly over the length of their contract via player amortisation. As an example, Kevin Gameiro was bought for €11 million on a four-year contract, so the annual amortisation is €2.75 million (€11 million divided by four years).


In this way, the cost of buying players (in accounting terms) is spread over a number of years, but the table above suggests that the incremental amortisation is about €53 million. Additional wages amount to €78 million, including €25 million for Ibrahimovic (gross cost for €14 million net salary), plus social contributions of a further €20 million, so the total increase in costs should be around €151 million. That enormous figure excludes bonus payments, so the actual rise will be even higher.

It also does not take into consideration the super tax proposed by incoming Socialist president, François Hollande, whereby all income above €1 million would be taxed at 75%, a huge jump from the current 41%. There is some doubt over whether that would apply to footballers, but if it did come into force, it would significantly increase the gross costs to a football club when a player’s contract has been agreed on a net basis. In this case, a French tax expert calculated that the total cost of Ibrahimovic’s mega contract to the club, including social security, would be an unbelievable €70 million.

"Come on, Alex, you can do it"

Obviously, some players have left PSG since 2010/11, including Ludovic Giuly, Gregory Coupet and Claude Makélélé (though he has remained at the club as assistant manager), but the impact on wages would be relatively small.

Clearly, there are other costs besides salaries and player amortisation, but these are by far the most important for a football club, so even with the caveats outlined above, the calculated €151 million increase should give us a good idea of the financial challenge facing PSG. If we add that to the underlying 2010/11 loss of €28 million, we get to a projected loss of €179 million for PSG in 2012/13, which is a lot higher than the club’s budgeted loss of €70 million for that season. The only way that could be reduced is by growing revenue; so let’s explore the possibilities there.

QSI’s plans involve growing revenue from the current €101 million to €130 million in 2012/13 and then to €250 million in 2014/15 – a substantial increase by anybody’s standards. They have a four-pronged strategy to turn PSG into a leading global brand: (a) sporting success – reflected in higher TV revenues from Ligue 1 and the Champions League; (b) gate receipts – higher crowds paying higher ticket prices; (c) sponsors – a significant increase in the amounts paid by each sponsor; (d) merchandising – shirt sales off the back of superstars like Pastore and Ibrahimovic.


PSG’s current revenue of €101 million is the third highest in France, though it is a fair way behind Marseille (€151 million) and Lyon (€133 million). On the other hand, it is significantly higher than Lille, the fourth placed club, whose revenue is €34 million lower. It is again striking that the 2011/12 champions Montpellier had revenue of just €37 million.

Interestingly, PSG has the lowest reliance on TV with that category accounting for 44% of the club’s total revenue, though that is partly due to the lack of Champions League. Against that, they had the highest proportion from match day (18%) and second highest from commercial (38%), only behind Monaco.


Although PSG are not mentioned in Deloitte’s annual money league, their revenue would place them 22 nd in the list, just behind Benfica, and about the same level as Aston Villa. Their stated target of €250 million would give them the same revenue level as Arsenal and Chelsea, taking them into the top five, which demonstrates the extent of their ambition – or, alternatively, how difficult it will be to achieve this goal.

The last season that PSG’s revenue grew substantially was 2008/09, when it rose €28 million from €73 million to €101 million, which was because of two main reasons: (a) success on the pitch – higher league place and progress in the UEFA Cup, which resulted in higher TV revenue (aided by a slightly higher new French TV deal) and gate receipts; (b) different accounting for Nike merchandising – previously the club had only reported net royalties, but from 2009 they included gross revenue (around €8 million) with a similar increase in expenses.


Excluding those factors, annual revenue between 2006 and 2010 averaged around €80 million, though 2011 climbed to €101 million, largely due to television revenue, arising from Europa League participation and a higher position in Ligue 1.

The distribution model for French TV money is relatively equitable with 50% allocated as an equal share, while the remainder is distributed based on league performance 30% (25% for the current season, 5% for the last five seasons) and the number of times a team is broadcast 20% (over the last five seasons). This resulted in €43 million for PSG in 2011/12, €4 million higher than 2010/11, essentially due to finishing higher in the league.

There had been concern that the new four-year TV deal starting in 2012/13 would be considerably lower than the current deal, as one of the existing broadcasters, Orange, decided to withdraw from the bidding process, leaving Canal+ as the only game in town. However, Al Jazeera, whose director is the very same Al-Khelaifi that is president of PSG, helpfully stepped into the breach to take some of the packages, while strengthening their position in French football.


Although this has prevented a financial calamity for many French clubs, who are very reliant on TV money, it should be noted that the annual €610 million from the new deal is still lower than the current €668 million, though their president considered this to be “more than satisfactory in the current economic climate.” That said, Al Jazeera also picked up international rights for six years for €192 million, which works out to €32 million a year, nearly 70% higher than the current €19 million – though that is surely still a bargain, given the stars that are being attracted to PSG.

This is in stark contrast to the Premier League, where the new three-year domestic deal has increased by an amazing 70% to €1.3 billion a year, while the overseas rights are currently worth €0.8 billion a year (and likely to increase). The new French deal means that PSG’s revenue growth possibilities here are extremely limited for the next four years, leaving their TV revenue much lower than their competitors abroad.


If we compare PSG’s TV revenue for Ligue 1 of €43 million with the top two clubs in other major leagues, we can see the problem. Real Madrid and Barcelona earn nearly €100 million more a season from their lucrative individual deals, while the Italian clubs generate around twice as much even after their return to a collective deal. The two Manchester clubs receive €30 million more a year, while even the club finishing bottom in last season’s Premier League, Wolverhampton Wanderers, got €6 million more than PSG with €49 million.


Where PSG could grow their revenue is regular participation in the Champions League. Last season the three French clubs earned an average of €22 million (Marseille €27 million, Lille €20 million and Lyon €19 million), compared to PSG’s paltry €2.4 million from the Europa League. The amount earned is partly due to performance and partly an allocation from the TV pool, where half is based on progress in the current season’s Champions League and half on the previous season’s Ligue 1 finishing place (first club 50%, second 35%, third 15%).

Handily for PSG (and other French clubs), the amount paid to screen the Champions League in France has doubled for the three years from 2012/13, largely thanks to the intervention of (yes, you guessed it) Al Jazeera, who paid €180 million for that majority of the rights with Canal+ picking up the rest. This should mean that TV pool money will double from next season, so PSG can expect to collect around €28 million (and more if they progress beyond the group stage).


There is also plenty of room for growth in match day income. Although PSG’s €18 million is not too bad for France, it is miles behind Europe’s finest, e.g. Real Madrid, Manchester United, Barcelona and Arsenal all generate more than €100 million. PSG will be looking at many ways to (partially) close the gap: boost attendances, raise ticket prices and a better revenue mix (i.e. more premium customers, executive boxes, etc).


The new administration has already made much progress in attracting more crowds, with the average attendance rising an impressive 50% last season from 29,300 to 43,000 and many games being sold out. Admittedly, the previous season had seen a large decline from 35,100 due to former president Robin Leproux’s anti-hooliganism crackdown, following a number of incidents culminating in a death of a PSG supporter. This move towards a “broad family-based audience” initially saw a reduction in the number of attendees, but has now paid off, though the crowd is more gentrified these days. QSI’s ambitious target is to increase the number of season tickets to 40,000 from the current level of around 20,000.


At the same time, PSG will look to increase ticket prices (20% for the 2012/13 season), even though an analysis of the 2010/11 figures suggests that they are already the highest in France. There is a limit to how much the average fan is willing to pay, even when the football on offer is improving, so it will be imperative for PSG to find clever ways to maximise revenue from their premium customers. This can contribute a disproportionate amount of revenue, e.g. Arsenal make 35% of their match day revenue from just 9,000 premium seats at the Emirates stadium.

PSG currently play in the 48,000 capacity Parc des Princes, owned by the council, though they will have to play two seasons (2013/14 and 2014/15) at the nearby 81,000 Stade de France, as their current stadium needs to be renovated for Euro 2016. Although the local authorities have stated that PSG will return to the Parc des Princes for the long-term, there is a belief that PSG would prefer to build a new stadium, maybe on the same site, in a bid to emulate the revenue success of clubs like Bayern Munich and Arsenal, though that would be a longer-term project.


If PSG are going to have any chance of reaching their €250 million revenue target by 2014/15, they are going to have to get most of it from commercial activities. Although their current revenue of €38 million is again pretty good for a French club, it is a lot lower than Europe’s leading clubs with Bayern Munich (€178 million) and Real Madrid (€172 million) earning nearly five times as much as PSG.

They have hired Jean-Claude Blanc, former club president at Juventus, as chief operating officer in order to boost commercial revenue. As a first step, they have terminated the ten-year contract with sports marketing agency Sportfive, so that they can handle negotiations in-house. The strategy will essentially be to have fewer partners, who will pay more.

Long-term shirt sponsor Emirates pays €3.5 million a year in a deal extended to 2014, while Nike reportedly pays €6 million a season. PSG will look to increase each of these to €15-20 million per annum when they are up for renewal, which would be in line with the money earned by the big hitters, e.g. Manchester United receive €25 million from Aon’s shirt sponsorship and €32 million from Nike’s kit supplier deal.


In a sign of things to come, PSG dropped Winamax, as they do not pay enough, while they have signed up Qatar National Bank, who are reportedly paying €2-3 million a season just for a branding presence in the stadium. Some have speculated that his may be paving the way to them becoming main shirt sponsors, as their two-year deal ends at the same time as the Emirates’ contract finishes

Merchandising revenue should also significantly grow, particularly from shirt sales following the influx of top talent. Indeed, Al-Khelaifi said that shirt sales increased by 180% last year. That said, the amount of money earned per shirt is relatively small, so they will have to sell an awful lot to make a meaningful difference on their revenue. According to Nike and Adidas, the top selling clubs are Real Madrid and Manchester United – and even they “only” sell 1.2-1.5 million shirts a year.

Amusingly, the club’s commercial income actually includes a public subsidy. Although this has been cut from €2.3 million in 2008 to €1.25 million in 2012, many are unhappy that mega-rich PSG should continue to benefit from this funding.

"Gameiro - we need to talk about Kevin"

One possibility for PSG would be a mega sponsorship deal, similar to the one Manchester City signed with Etihad for a reported €50 million a year, which included stadium naming rights (even though City do not actually own their stadium). Here, PSG would have to be careful not to fall foul of UEFA’s FFP regulations, which specifically outlaw outrageous deals from “related parties”, so if QSI paid €100 million a season for a super-VIP executive box, this would be adjusted down to “fair value”.

PSG are also likely to make more money from player sales (only €2 million in 2010/11), as they will have to move on players that have lost their place following the new arrivals with candidates including the likes of Mamadou Sakho, Nenê and Clément Chantôme.

Now that we have reviewed PSG’s revenues and costs in detail, we can try to project PSG’s loss for 2012/13. Bearing in mind all the usual health warnings about forecasts never being 100% accurate, this should give us an indication of whether they are close to their target.


Taking the negligible 2010/11 loss as a starting point, we make an adjustment to remove the exceptional financial items, giving a “real” loss of €28 million. As calculated above, the new signings increase costs by €151 million for wages (including social security) and player amortisation.  This would be offset by some departures, though given the relatively low salaries paid before the takeover, this would be a small amount, say a €10 million reduction. We should include a nominal €10 million for additional bonus payments, though this might be on the low side.

For revenue, let’s make a few extravagant assumptions. First, PSG will win Ligue 1, so their revenue will rise to €46 million, which is €7 million more than they received in 2010/11. They will also reach the quarter-finals of the Champions League, as Marseille did last year, so will receive €38 million (after the increase in TV rights), which is €34 million more than the €4 million they received from the Europa League in 2010/11.

Following the growth in attendances and higher ticket prices plus more attractive Champions League matches, we’ll go for a gutsy 100% increase in match day revenue, producing an additional €18 million. Similarly, we’ll assume a 50% increase in commercial income, worth an extra €19 million. In the long-term, PSG should earn considerably more here, but they are constrained in the short-term by existing contracts. For good measure, we’ll assume that they can make €10 million more profit on player sales.

"A whole Motta love"

All of that gives us a projected loss of €92 million, which is not too far away from PSG’s budgeted €70 million, but this estimate does include some fairly aggressive assumptions regarding revenue growth. In any case, it is clear that PSG will have to be very persuasive in their FFP discussions with UEFA about how their “project” will ultimately deliver more revenue and help them towards the elusive break-even point.

They would do well to emphasise their investment in PSG’s academy with so much of France’s football talent coming from the Paris area. Historically, this has been under-exploited by PSG, but there have been encouraging signs at both under-19 and under-17 level in recent seasons.

Of course, QSI’s acquisition of PSG is part of a broader strategy for Qatar to use the riches accrued from their vast reserves of natural gas to gain more influence on the global stage. Sport is the ultimate instrument for gaining “soft” power, especially football clubs. Thus, another Qatari investor has bought the Spanish club Malaga, while the Qatar Foundation paid a hefty €170 million to be Barcelona’s first ever shirt sponsor.

"Sirigu - back of the net"

There are also strong trading links between France and Qatar, so it was not exactly out of the ordinary for former president Nicolas Sarkozy to host a dinner with a member of the ruling Al Thani family, nor to invite Michel Platini, given the Qatari’s interest in sport, but the aftermath was positive for all involved, as Platini surprisingly voted for Qatar to host the 2022 World Cup, while PSG secured their much needed investment. Sarkozy, a well-known PSG fan, was described by French newspaper Libération as “the Qatari team’s 12th man”. Incidentally, Platini’s son now works for QSI.

PSG’s plans are very bold, as confirmed by Ancelotti, “I know PSG are not yet at the top level, but our objective is to reach the level of Chelsea, Manchester United, Barcelona and Real Madrid.” There is no doubt that PSG have become what Milan president Silvio Berlusconi described as “ a strong economic force”, but that is not a guarantee of immediate success. As an example, QSI need look no further than Manchester City, who took four years to win the Premier League following their Abu Dhabi takeover.

On a cautionary note, we should remember the old comment from opposing fans that PSG stands for Pas Sûr de Gagner. The club can indeed not be sure of winning, not least financially where it has little room for error in the FFP era, but, if nothing else, this will certainly be an exciting ride with the new signings bringing some much needed glamour to French football.

Selasa, 10 Mei 2011

Lille's French Revolution


Although Lille’s faltering form in recent weeks has caused a few to doubt their ability to sustain their sparkling challenge in Ligue 1, this weekend’s victory over Nancy restored a four point lead at the top of the table. With just four games remaining until the end of the season, Les Dogues are well on course to win their first French title since 1954.

Even though this should not be too unexpected, given that Lille finished last season in fourth place (and were the league’s leading scorers), it is still somewhat of a surprise to see a small provincial side ahead of traditional powerhouses like Marseille and Lyon. Indeed, Lille are actually chasing a domestic double, as they face Paris Saint-Germain in the French Cup Final next Saturday at the Stade de France.

Their success has been built on an impressive attacking style of play, which once again has the Northern side leading the scoring charts, with the African combination of the powerful Moussa Sow and the pacy Gervinho netting 35 goals between them so far this season. The splendidly dreadlocked Gervinho made a distinct impression for the Ivory Coast at the World Cup in South Africa, but the Senegalese Sow has been transformed since arriving on a free transfer from Rennes last summer.

The hub of Lille’s progressive formation is comprised of a trio of diminutive midfielders, like a less lauded version of Barcelona, featuring French internationals, Rio Mavuba (the club captain) and Yohan Cabaye, plus the experienced Florent Balmont.

"Gervinho - more than a haircut"

However, the undoubted star of the show is the young Belgian winger Eden Hazard, who has been named Ligue 1’s most exciting young player in each of the last two seasons, and is being chased by virtually all of Europe’s leading clubs, as well as most French defences. This young man, as Ray Wilkins would inevitably describe him, has got the lot: speed, dribbling skills, a powerful shot and the ability to create chances. One of Lille’s youth coaches did not want to go overboard in his praise, but could not resist a stirring comparison: “You have to keep perspective, as he is still very young, but he is like Lionel Messi.”

Lille’s development in the last couple of seasons is all the more remarkable, as it follows the departure of the inspirational Claude Puel, the coach who had transformed them into a truly competitive team, twice guiding unfashionable Lille to qualification for the Champions League during his six-year tenure. When Puel, a protégé of Arsène Wenger, left for champions Lyon in 2008, this could have been a hammer blow to Lille’s prospects, but instead the relatively inexperienced Rudi Garcia, recruited from Le Mans, has maintained the progress.

Famed for his ability to get results on a limited budget, Garcia has added an extra dimension to Puel’s pragmatic, hard-working side, as he let loose the attacking instincts of Les Dogues of war, resulting in Lille twice qualifying for the Europa League and potentially going one step better this season.

"Give yourself a round of applause, Michel"

Nevertheless, the principal driving force behind Lille’s ascent to the top is president Michel Seydoux, a French businessman and film producer, who became the club’s majority shareholder in 2004. Although Lille attained a startling second place in his first full season as president in 2004/05, Seydoux’s approach is the polar opposite of those owners who demand short-term success. He has not been a benefactor in the traditional football club sense of pumping in vast sums of cash and demanding instant results, but has followed the sound business principles of establishing a strategy (“to challenge Lyon in 2012”) with achievable objectives, bringing in good people to support the plan and delivering steadily improving results.

The club has adopted a long-term view, first developing a state-of-the-art training facility at the Domaine de Luchin and then working with the local authority to build a magnificent new 50,000 stadium at the Grand Stade Lille Métropole, reinforced by admirable continuity in the management team. In fact, Lille have only had two managers (Puel and Garcia) in the last nine years, a rare statistic in the uncompromising world of football.

Since Seydoux has taken control of Lille Olympique Sporting Club, often shortened to LOSC, this unheralded side has featured twice in Europe’s flagship competition, the Champions League. They qualified for the first time ever in 2005, repeating the feat the following season, when they reached the knockout stages, before being eliminated by Manchester United in controversial circumstances, as Ryan Giggs scored from a quickly taken free-kick.

Competing at such rarified levels is heady stuff for a club with a budget as relatively low as Lille. Although on the face of it, they have little to complain about, as they sit in fifth place in the French money league with a turnover of €55 million, this is considerably less than Lyon, Marseille, Bordeaux and Paris Saint-Germain. In fact, the first two have budgets nearly three times as high (Lyon €146 million, Marseille €143 million), while Bordeaux’s revenue is twice as much. Granted, this sizeable disparity owes a lot to the Champions League money those three clubs received last year, but gate receipts and commercial income are also significantly higher than LOSC.

Given that money usually does buy success in football, as the teams with the highest turnover (and consequently wages) are most likely to win, this only makes the fact that Lille currently lead the league even more praiseworthy. To place that into context, Lens, who have almost exactly the same turnover as Lille with €52 million, are currently struggling in second to last place in the table.

Similarly, Lille are resolutely mid-table in terms of profits and losses, having reported small losses in each of the last two seasons: €1.1 million in 2009/10 and €0.3 million in 2008/09. This stability is not too bad, when you consider that the number of clubs making losses doubled from seven to fourteen last year with aggregate losses in Ligue 1 significantly rising from €24 million to €108 million, though to be fair over half of that came from just two clubs: Lyon €35 million, a big reversal from the previous year’s profit, despite reaching the semi-finals of the Champions League, and Paris Saint-Germain €22 million, continuing their series of poor financial results.

One point that stands out from the P&L league table is that Lille made more profit on player sales (€23 million) than any other French club last year, which is doubly striking, as total profits from player sales in France fell by more than 40% (€90 million) compared to 2008/09. This has been a recurring feature of Lille’s business model with the club making around €80 million from such player trading in the last four seasons. There are two ways of looking at this from a financial perspective. On the one hand, it’s a vindication of Lille’s ability to make money from developing players; on the other hand, it underlines that the club has needed to sell its prize assets in order to compensate for large operating deficits, which average €23 million over the last three seasons.

That said, the DNCG, the organisation responsible for monitoring and overseeing the accounts of football clubs in France, has stated that Lille enjoy a “healthy financial situation” despite the recurring losses at an operating level. Indeed, Lille actually reported profits three years in a row before the last two periods’ small losses (2006 €6.9 million, 2007 €5.1 million and 2008 €6.6 million), though the first two of these seasons were boosted by revenue from the Champions League.

This explains why Lille’s revenue has actually declined since its peak of €68 million in 2006 to €55 million in 2010, as the Europa League is far less lucrative than the Champions League. Like all French clubs, Lille are hugely dependent on television money and actually had the third highest reliance in France last season at 69%, only behind Auxerre and Lorient. At less than €5 million a season, gate receipts are miserably low in comparison to leading clubs in other European leagues, but that’s pretty much the norm in France with only four clubs earning more than €7 million a year, namely the usual suspects: Lyon, Marseille, Bordeaux and PSG.

Lille have done much better with TV revenue, earning €38 million, the fourth highest in Ligue 1 last season, comprising €35 million from domestic deals and €3 million from their run in the Europa League.

The domestic TV money is allocated among clubs as a mixture of fixed and variable components. The fixed element comprises 50% of the total media rights and is distributed equally among all Ligue 1 clubs, worth around €12.5 million a season, while the remainder is distributed based on league performance 30% (25% for the current season and 5% for performance over the last five seasons) and the number of times a team is broadcast 20% (15% for the current season and 5% for the last five seasons).

Although this structure is reasonably egalitarian, it does tend to favour the leading clubs, especially the broadcast element. Let’s see how this worked out for Lille last season: their fourth place was worth €11.8 million, compared to the €17.9 million received by champions Marseille. However, because clubs like Marseille and Lyon are shown on television more frequently than the provincials, Lille lose out on the notoriété with Marseille earning more than twice as much: €17.4 million compared to €7.6 million. So, in summary, last year Lille finished just three places behind Marseille in Ligue 1, but received €16.7 million less TV revenue.

However, there is a darker cloud on the horizon. The current television deal, which is worth €668 million a season, runs from 2008 to 2012, but is soon up for re-negotiation. The indications are that it will be renewed for a lower sum, as one of the existing broadcasters, Orange, has decided to withdraw from the bidding process, leaving Canal+ as the only game in town. This is potentially extremely bad news for French clubs, as only Serie A among major European leagues is more reliant on TV revenue, with Reuters estimating that the reduction may be as much as €200 million.

The French deal is currently the third most valuable in Europe, only behind the Premier League €1.2 billion and Serie A €0.9 billion, but ahead of the Bundesliga €412 million (La Liga has individual club deals). Most of the shortfall compared to the Premier League is due to overseas rights, which the English have managed to sell for an incredible 20 times as much as Ligue 1’s €30 million. Indeed, one of the suggestions made by Michel Seydoux, who has been commissioned by his peers to examine the TV issue, is for the league to spread matches over the weekend, including lunchtime kick-offs, to produce higher ratings in the emerging Asian market and address this weakness.

Of course, French clubs can boost their income by participating in the Champions League, which is what helped Lille produce what they described as “exceptional” financial results in 2006 and 2007, when they earned €21 million and €22 million respectively, not including any uplifts in sponsorships. In the latter year, this was split £18 million central TV distributions from UEFA and £4 million gate receipts. Of course, this can be a double-edged sword, as the year afterwards in 2008, Lille’s revenue plunged €24 million (or 38%).

Last year’s tournament was even more rewarding for the French representatives, who each earned an average of €25 million: Bordeaux €30 million, Lyon €29 million and Marseille €17 million. The more observant among you will have noticed that Bordeaux received more money than Lyon, even though they only reached the quarter-finals compared to Les Gones’ semi-final. This is because, as well as participation and performance payments, the clubs receive a share of the TV market pool, which is partly dependent on where a team finished the previous season in its domestic league. Therefore, apart from the natural pride at winning the championship, from the financial angle it would be better for Lille to qualify for the Champions League as winners rather than runners-up.

The Europa League is nowhere near as lucrative as its big brother with Lille €3.1 million and Toulouse €2.2 million earning peanuts (relatively speaking) for their efforts last season. Indeed, if a club battles its way through the seemingly endless series of matches to win the damn thing, it only receives the paltry sum of €6.4 million. Better than a smack in the head, but less than a club earns for simply reaching the group stages of the Champions League, even if it loses all six games.

"Moussa Sow celebrates yet another goal"

As we saw earlier, gate receipts of €4.9 million are incredibly low compared to Lille’s counterparts overseas. For example, Manchester United, the club leading the Premier League, earned €122 million match day revenue last season, which is an amazing 25 times as much as Lille. Another way of looking at this is that United generate €3.6 million a match, so they earn more in just two matches than Lille do in an entire season. Even Hamburg, from a land which is well known for its low ticket prices, earned €49 million – ten times as much.

Of course, Lille are far from unique in France in facing a tough financial challenge with their gate receipts, as amply demonstrated by another statistic: there is not a single French club in the Deloitte Money League top 20 clubs for match day revenue. The nearest are Lyon and Marseille, who both earn around €25 million, but this is still less than clubs like Valencia (19th position) and Werder Bremen (20th position), who earn about €28 million. Gate receipts in Ligue 1 have been on the low side for a while, as stadiums tend to be old, in need of renovation and have limited earnings potential, but worryingly they fell by 8% last season, though that was partly due to the impact of the recession.

Attendances have continued to fall at many clubs this season, though Lille have unsurprisingly bucked the trend following the surge towards the title with their average crowds rising an impressive 9% from 14,940 to 16,286, which represents more than 90% of the capacity of their current temporary ground, the Stadium Lille Métropole, where they moved a few years ago in anticipation of redeveloping their permanent stadium, the Stade Grimonprez-Jooris.

Instead, they have opted for the spectacular new 50,000 capacity Grande Stade Lille Métropole, which will have the highest possible 5 star UEFA rating. Featuring a retractable roof that will allow the ground to be easily converted into an indoor arena that can be used for concerts, exhibitions and other sporting events, this stadium is central to Seydoux’s ambitious plans.

The cost to Lille is limited, as the stadium is being built by the local authority, who will rent it out to the football club. However, all the revenue generated will go into Lille’s coffers, including ancillary activities such as food and beverages, merchandising and other commercial opportunities. Importantly, there will be 7,000 places for corporate hospitality, which the English clubs have demonstrated deliver significantly more bang for your buck.

"Green light for the new stadium"

Like all major investments, there is clearly an element of risk in this project, but the DNCG have no doubts that this is the way forward: “The arrival of a new stadium in 2012 will allow the club to cover its structural operating deficit and so meet its ambitious objective of balancing its books without taking into account transfers.” Assuming no Champions League revenue, that would imply an increase in revenue of €20 million, which would indeed be ambitious, but is not completely unrealistic.

There must be some concern that a leap from an 18,000 ground to a 50,000 stadium will be over-kill, but Lille would be encouraged by achieving near sell-outs in the 80,000 Stade de France, when they have moved home games there in the past, both against Lyon in Ligue 1 and for some Champions League encounters. General Manager Frédéric Paquet said, “We know it won't be easy, but we're expecting gates to average between 37,000 and 40,000,” though he recognised that this was in part dependent on Lille continuing to be successful on the pitch.

The hope for French football is that Euro 2016 will have a similarly beneficial impact on its stadiums as the 2006 World Cup had on grounds in Germany. Numerous clubs, such as Le Mans, Lyon and Le Havre, have initiated new stadium projects, while others like Marseille are looking to refurbish and redevelop their existing grounds.

Lille are also fair to middling when it comes to commercial income with their total of €12 million leaving them eighth highest in Ligue 1, though there is definitely room for improvement. As you might expect, Marseille €46 million and Lyon €43 million once again lead the way, but Bordeaux and PSG also do fairly well here, both earning around €35 million.

Even though the value of shirt sponsorship has significantly increased in France, thanks to the decision to finally allow gambling websites to advertise, the top clubs in Europe are still a long way ahead of French clubs in terms of commercial revenue with Bayern Munich €173 million and the Spanish giants, Real Madrid €151 million and Barcelona €122 million, setting the pace.

Lille’s commercial income actually fell last year from €13.8 million to €12.3 million, presumably due to the harsh economic climate, but things should improve in the future, as they announced two major deals last spring. Key shareholder Isidore Partouche’s casino operator Groupe Partouche, who have been the club’s shirt sponsor since 2003, extended their deal by five years to 2015; while Umbro replaced Canterbury, who went into administration, as the club’s kit supplier in a six-year deal.

Like most football clubs, Lille have struggled to contain their costs, even though they emphasised the importance of doing so in both the 2006 and 2007 accounts. The fact is that expenses were only just higher than revenue five years ago, but shot up as soon as the club qualified for the Champions League and have been rising ever since, even though revenue has not been growing at the same rate. In this way, while revenue rose by a respectable 55% since 2005, costs have significantly outpaced this with 160% growth.

As is always the case, the wage bill is the most important element in Lille’s costs at €49 million, which has resulted in a wages to turnover ratio of 88%, far higher than UEFA’s recommended maximum limit of 70%. Wages have been rapidly growing in the last couple of seasons from €35 million in 2008, though the revenue growth has kept the wages to turnover ratio at the same level, albeit a concerning level.

Traditionally, Lille are a low paying club, which is evidenced to some extent by the fact that they do not have one player in the list of top 20 best paid players in France, which is dominated by Lyon 7, Marseille 5, PSG 4 and Bordeaux 2. Almost unbelievably, at least to this observer, Gabriel Heinze is apparently the best paid player, followed by Yohann Gourcuff and Lucho Gonzalez.

However, Lille now find themselves in an awkward spot. As they are fifth highest in last year’s wages league, they are ahead of most other French clubs, but they are a long way behind Lyon €112 million and Marseille €92 million. In order to catch up with these behemoths and compete on a consistent basis, they will almost certainly need to spend more. As LOSC CFO Reynald Berghe put it, “The huge investment by big clubs forces small clubs to over-spend.” This is indeed what is starting to happen at Lille with the coach Rudi Garcia and five players extending contracts, including Hazard, Mavuba, defenders Mathieu Debuchy and Franck Béria, and goalkeeper Mickaël Landreau, the last of these reportedly doubling his salary.

The tax situation in France does not help either. As the tax rate is very aggressive, football clubs have to pay a higher gross salary than their competitors in other countries to ensure that the net salary is at the same level. That’s bad enough, but recently the government abolished the rule on collective image rights that had previously allowed clubs to claim an exemption on some social charges.

Another factor that potentially could adversely impact Lille is higher bonus charges, the so-called price of success, which cost Marseille €5 million last season, though general manager Paquet has claimed that the club is well equipped to handle this (whatever that means).

What is not beyond dispute is Lille’s ability to make money from player trading. Over the last decade, the club has registered net sales proceeds of €55 million, including €45 million in the last four years alone, which has been absolutely integral to their financial stability. At times, Seydoux has acted with an icy objectivity, for example in 2007 he sold all three of the previous season’s top scorers: Peter Odemwingie, Kader Keita and Mathieu Bodmer.

In many ways, they have a lot in common with Arsenal. First, the club has rarely splashed out large sums, but likes to act astutely in the transfer market. As Paquet explained, “What's important to us in signing players is not the figure, but whether it's the right price. We try to buy well and sell well. Today the biggest transfer fee we have ever paid was for Gervinho, who cost €6 million.” In addition, many players sold for big money leave their best days behind them in northern France, examples being Jean II Makoun, Keita and Bodmer, as is also the case for the north London club (Overmars, Petit, Henry, Vieira, Kolo Toure, etc).

It is impossible to discuss Lille’s transfer policy without examining their relationship with Lyon, which is questionable to some, given that Michel Seydoux’s brother Jérôme is a board member at Les Gones. As is often the case, you can look at this positively or negatively. On the one hand, Lyon have to an extent funded Lille’s progress, paying them €64 million over the last seven years for just five players: Michel Bastos €18 million, Keita €16.8 million, Makoun €14 million, Eric Abidal €8.5 million and Bodmer €6.8 million. On the other hand, it seems strange that Lille would effectively act as a feeder club to one of their principal opponents, also of course giving them their successful coach, Claude Puel.

Even in the last two years, when the volume of transfers has been slashed in France, Lille have still managed to produce profits in the transfer market, mainly due to the sale of Bastos, with only Toulouse and Nice showing higher net surpluses. In stark contrast, the traditional big spenders Lyon, Marseille and PSG have continued to splash the cash. For Lille to be ahead of these clubs in the league, given their parsimonious policy, is highly commendable and a sign of excellent management and indeed coaching.

French clubs’ accounts have been badly hit by the downturn in the transfer market, as they have traditionally balanced their books by selling players. The graph below clearly highlights the magnitude of the problem, as net profits in Ligue 1 have gone down very much in line with lower profits from player sales. There’s an almost perfect correlations with net profits of €25 million dropping to a loss of €114 million, a decline of €139 million, while in the same period profits on player sales decreased from €266 million to €125 million, a decline of €141 million.

Interestingly, the vast majority of that reduction (€102 million) came from sales abroad, as Europe’s leading clubs tightened their purse strings, partly as a result of the economic conditions, partly due to the advent of UEFA’s financial fair play rules, which aim to clamp down on big spending.

This provoked the DNCG to talk of French football being in a “serious financial crisis” in their annual report even quoting Winston Churchill, “if you’re going through hell, keep going.” However, the Ligue 1 club presidents have protested that the official document paints too gloomy a picture, in particular underlining the relatively low level of debt in France compared to other European clubs, notably those in England and Spain. Of course, it’s the unrestrained spending in those leagues that has helped fund French clubs in the past, so they should not complain too much.

Any road, they do have a point, as every club in Ligue 1 has reported net assets, as opposed to the debts at clubs abroad. Lille’s balance sheet is particularly strong with no bank debt and hardly any money owed to other football clubs, resulting in total debts of €23 million, compared to assets of €47 million. That gives them a very healthy debt ratio of 48%, one of only three clubs below 50% along with Auxerre and Lyon.

In the past, clubs have used IPOs (Initial Public Offerings) to raise cash, but this seems unlikely (and unnecessary) for Lille, whose CFO Reynald Berghe said, “An IPO could be an option, but not at this point.” It’s not as if Lyon’s 2007 share offering provides an encouraging example for other French clubs, as the stock price has performed disappointingly ever since.

Having said that, the increase in payroll and higher stadium costs will weigh heavily on Lille’s finances, unless they are boosted by Champions League money. Seydoux has estimated an operating deficit of €30 million, which falls to €25 million once the €5 million transfer of Adil Rami to Valencia that was agreed in the winter is deducted, so there might be pressure to compensate in the standard LOSC manner, i.e. by selling more players.

If Hazard were to be sold, for example, his fee would cover the shortfall on its own, while the other members of Lille’s formidable attacking trident, Gervinho and Sow, might bring in another €25 million. At the moment, Lille are playing a straight bat to such questions with Seydoux arguing, “We have an ambitious policy. We see that in the biggest foreign clubs, the turnover of players each season is very light.” He claims that all the long-term deals “show the club’s ambition”, but equally this could just be a device to increase the selling price if push comes to shove.

"Adil Rami - off to Valencia at the end of the season"

Ultimately, it usually comes down to the player’s desire to stay or go. Gervinho has so far refused to sign a new deal and rumour has it that he will head off to the Premier League in the summer. Hazard is a different case, having extended his contract, but Rudi Garcia has admitted that he could still leave, but only if Lille were to receive a “super offer” for the talented young Belgian. Certainly, there would be no shortage of interest if he became available, though Hazard himself has said, “Real Madrid and Arsenal are the clubs I dreamed of joining as a child.”

Even if some of Lille’s stars were to jump ship, this would not necessarily turn out to be a disaster, as the club has proved highly adept at unearthing unpolished gems and taking them to a higher level, as happened with Sow this season. They have also begun to set their sights higher with Saint-Etienne’s French international Dimitri Payet being mentioned in dispatches as a possible replacement if Gervinho departs.

"Rudi can't fail"

However, much of Lille’s success has been built on their youth academy. As Seydoux explained, “We don't recruit the best players, but we help them grow better than others, because of the great care we bring to nurturing our youngsters.” That policy has been further strengthened by the opening four years ago of a wonderful new training ground at a cost of €20 million at Domaine de Luchin, which, according to France Football, is “more impressive than any other in Europe, including those at Arsenal, Manchester United and Barcelona.” To date, Lille have focused on local youngsters, but Paquet has also spoken of looking at working with regional academies in the future.

Lille’s commitment to youth development will stand them in good stead in the era of UEFA’s financial fair play regulations for two reasons: first, costs incurred for such activities are excluded from the break-even calculation; second, they will be able to enhance profits by later earning useful transfer fees on players developed in-house.

In fact, FFP could be beneficial to clubs like Lille, as similar rules have applied in France for 20 years, so they are very accustomed to operating within such constraints. Lille’s CFO Reynald Berghe is quietly enthusiastic about UEFA’s initiative, “It will help bring about more equality at the European level. It could be positive for French clubs.” Of course, it will also benefit those clubs who generate the most revenue, hence the desire to maximise receipts from ticket sales, which is the main driver for Lille to build a spanking new stadium.

"His name is Rio..."

That’s all future music. In the short term, Lille’s fans will understandably be concentrating on whether they can hang on to their lead at the top of one of Europe’s most competitive leagues and win their first title for 57 years. They have a tricky run-in, but proved their mettle by defeating closest challengers Marseille in the intimidating Stade Vélodrome a couple of months ago.

Lille stand on the cusp of an extraordinary achievement, namely to join Europe’s elite on a fraction of their budget. Off the pitch, they have done remarkably well to cope with a structural deficit, thanks to some skillful “wheeling and dealing” in the transfer market. It has been a triumph of long-range planning, as recognised by another football visionary, Lyon President Jean-Michel Aulas, who three years ago warned his fans, “Our next challenger as France’s biggest club will not be Marseille or Bordeaux, but Lille.” Prophetic words.


**********************************************************************************

If you like this article and others on this blog, please could you do me a favour and vote for The Swiss Ramble as Best EPL Blog and Best EPL Blogger in the EPL Talk awards? It will only take a few seconds of your time, but it would make an old man very happy. Thanks.