State Ownership in Football: Unsung Benefits and Loud Criticisms
Nation-state ownership in the world’s game is often associated with sportswashing, corruption and colossal financial injections. Yet the societal and economic benefits are often overlooked, for these nation-state clubs have provided numerous community benefits for their home cities. This article evaluates the role the owners of Manchester City (“City”) have played within the city of Manchester, Paris Saint-Germain’s (“PSG”) transfer market revolution and the unchecked power Newcastle United’s owners wield. Ultimately nation-state ownership affects matters both on and off the pitch.
Manchester City: Opening the Floodgates
City was purchased in 2008 by the Abu Dhabi United Group for £200 million. The rapid success of the club on and off the pitch has been completely attributed to the Emirati investment pumped into the club. Since the takeover, City have won eight Premier Leagues, six League Cups, three FA Cups and one Champions League. Success has not been isolated though, and many overlook the benefits the nation-state takeover brought to Manchester. The Abu Dhabi United Group’s total investment has surpassed £1 billion in property and higher education there as part of a 10-year initiative to redevelop the eastern part of Manchester. It has aimed to construct 6,000 affordable housing units in the area and already delivered almost 1,500 homes for rent. Investment into the club’s infrastructure has excited fans too, with the Etihad Stadium expansion site, a £300 million development project, promising to deliver expanded capacity, a new fan zone and an on-site hotel. It is also worth mentioning City’s community involvement, providing employment opportunities, running physical and mental wellbeing initiatives and offering community outreach programmes for under-privileged youths. The expansions and investments made by City would not be remotely possible if it was not for the Emirati investment, and having met residents in Manchester, they are inclined to agree.
Of course, that is not to say both City and PSG are exemplary members of the football community. Manchester City and PSG have been both subject to much legal scrutiny. UEFA’s Club Financial Control Body (“CFCB”), who administer the Financial Fair Play (“FFP”) rules, have ruled that each club received income that ‘was far in excess of the market value’ from their respective key sponsors. In City’s case, the club secured an extra £20 million a year this way, allowing it to spend more on players while still technically complying with the letter (though maybe not the spirit) of the FFP rules.
Paris Saint-Germain: Revolutionising the Global Transfer Market
PSG was purchased in 2011 by Qatari Sports Investments for a price tag of £59 million, considerably less than City’s in 2008. The most notable action taken by the Qataris was the transfer of Neymar to PSG in 2017, with the Parisian club paying £200 million to have the move completed. To this day, it remains the most expensive transfer fee ever paid. Only a nation-state backed club could afford such an amount. La Liga indicated they wished to have the deal blocked but did not have jurisdiction to do so. Barcelona considered forming a request to UEFA based on the FFP implications of the deal, but the FFP regulations do not grant clubs the right to complain about other clubs’ potential breaches. At the time, UEFA stated: “we are not in a position to stop clubs from buying players, but the clubs would face sanctions if they failed to abide by FFP rules”. This transfer would have been impossible for a club to pull off without the financial backing of an entire state, and this transfer shaped the modern football transfer market.
Like City, PSG commenced an endowment fund, contributing to its social and community responsibility, using football to assist those most vulnerable. The most recent initiative is the “One Team – Onze de Légende” program based in Qatar, which provides football opportunities for autistic and neurotypical children. It is clear the Qatari owners are pursuing charitable means through the football club. However, a larger question of morality remains: is all this just sportswashing to cover other misdemeanours, or is it truly motivated by philanthropic pursuit?
Newcastle United: Turning a Blind Eye?
The most recent nation-state purchase was the Saudi Public Investment Fund’s purchase of Newcastle United for £305 million in 2021. The takeover had only been confirmed once the Premier League had received “legally binding assurances” that the state of Saudi Arabia would not exercise control over Newcastle. In the build-up to the completion of the Fund’s 85% acquisition, reports emerged of Mohammed bin Salman, the crown prince of Saudi Arabia, having been involved extensively in the deal. WhatsApp messages between the former owner, Amanda Staveley, and the prince were leaked, the content of which suggested the purchase relied on approval from the prince. The Premier League declined to open a review, on the basis that they believe control over Newcastle is independent of the Saudi state. Given Saudi Arabia’s human rights record, it enlivens the question of how far can nation-states contravene international law, while still being able to acquire such valuable assets as football clubs.
Conclusion
Any football fan should remain sceptical of sovereign powers taking over football clubs, but it is worth highlighting at least some of the benefits these countries bring to communities and football fans. Alleged human rights violations and financial corruption, the typical media focuses of such acquisitions, are another topic in themselves and clearly worthy of further discussion outside the scope of this article. With football being the world’s most popular sport, it was almost inevitable nation-states would seek ownership over the most valuable assets in the sporting realm.
References:
https://www.mancity.com/news/club/rico-lewis-nico-oreilly-etihad-expansion-63874542
https://www.mancity.com/meta/media/krhpjdjn/citc_annual-report_2024_desktop.pdf
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/soccer-files-fairplay/
https://www.barrons.com/news/premier-league-can-t-say-if-newcastle-ownership-probe-exists-8e0687d1