Manchester City head a worldwide group of 13 partner clubs, while Red Bull own five football teams in Europe and the Americas. Last month, Chelsea acquired a majority stake in French Ligue 1 club Strasbourg to become the latest major team to move into the business of multi-club ownership.
Have you heard of the Pacific Media Group, King Power International, INEOS or Eagle Football Holdings? They are also multi-club ownership groups with teams in all corners of the globe.
While much of fans’ focus understandably centres on transfers, managerial changes and, when the season starts, results on the pitch, the evolution of the game off the pitch is leading to new thinking within the corridors of power.
Earlier this year, UEFA research showed that more than 180 clubs worldwide were part of a multi-club structure — there were fewer than 40 in 2012 — and over 6,500 players were employed by teams connected to such groups. The release prompted UEFA president Aleksander Ceferin to say that rules may need to be altered to allow for multi-club groups to become even more prevalent.
– Stream on ESPN+: LaLiga, Bundesliga, more (U.S.)
“There is more and more interest for this multi-club ownership and we shouldn’t just say no [to] the investments, and for multi-club ownership,” Ceferin said in March. “But we have to see what kind of rules we set in that case, because the rules have to be strict.”
Last week, UEFA’s Club Financial Control Body (CFCB) accepted the admission to European competition in the 2023-24 season of six clubs, despite a potential conflict of interest due to shared ownership models involving Aston Villa and Vitoria Guimaraes, Brighton and Union Saint-Gilloise and AC Milan and Toulouse. If INEOS owner Jim Ratcliffe wins the race to buy Manchester United from the Glazer family, UEFA will have to make another judgement as to whether United can compete in European competition alongside OGC Nice and Lausanne — the two other clubs owned by INEOS.
Similarly, there will be intense scrutiny of any link between United and Qatar-owned Paris Saint-Germain if Sheikh Jassim Bin Hamad Al Thani becomes the new owner at Old Trafford.
But with RB Leipzig and FC Salzburg already cleared to compete in the Champions League by UEFA in June, despite being owned by the same group, multi-club ownership would seem to be here to stay.
There are still many questions surrounding the idea, however. Who benefits, who are the main players and what are the potential pitfalls?
At the end of last season, reports in Belgium said that the owners of EFL Championship champions Burnley were aiming to acquire a stake in Belgian Pro League team KV Kortrijk from the team’s existing owner, Vincent Tan, who also owns another Championship side, Cardiff City. Newcastle are also reportedly in talks with New City Capital and Pacific Media Group to buy Oostende, who were relegated last season and replaced in the top division by Molenbeek, which is itself part of Textor’s Eagle Football Holdings Group.
At the end of last season, eight of the 18 teams in the Belgian Jupiler Pro League had overseas owners: Four were part of groups aligned to English clubs, while the other four were owned by groups from Qatar, Japan, Turkey and the United States. So why are Belgian clubs such an attractive acquisition for English teams, in particular?
“The requirements to get a work permit to play in Belgium are among the lowest in all of Europe, so players who would not get a permit in England could build up their credentials while playing for a Belgian team,” Jhangiani said. “It’s an easy market to operate in for American or British owners because of proximity, but also because of the quality of Belgian players in recent years and how the style of play in Belgium correlates well with the English game.
“France are the biggest exporters of talent in Europe and second only in the world behind Brazil, but if you look at Belgian talent compared to French talent, bearing in mind the relative size of each country, the costs of running a club in Belgium rather than France are much lower and you also have less restrictive permit regulations.”
WHY DID CHELSEA BUY A FRENCH CLUB?
Boehly and Clearlake have a different objective for owning a club outside the Premier League, one that goes beyond merely being an easy access point for players to move to England.
Chelsea have a thriving academy, but the pathway to the first team is blocked by many expensively acquired stars, so Strasbourg gives the club the option of sending their emerging talent to France to gain experience in Ligue 1. It also gives Chelsea a foothold in Europe’s deepest pool of talent and the ability to identify local prospects early. If you offer one of France’s best young players a contract at Strasbourg, you can also dangle the carrot of a move to Chelsea if they live up to their potential.
