Arsene Wenger believes the Premier League’s new £5.136 billion deal for UK live broadcasting rights will help English clubs attract the world’s best talent and could lead to an era of domination in Europe.
It was announced on Tuesday that the seven live packages, five of 28 matches and two of 14 matches, totalling 168 matches per season, were awarded for the three seasons from 2016/17 to Sky and BT at a 70% increase on the previous £3 billion deal.
Reflecting on the impending influx of cash, Wenger told his pre-Boro press conference that the added financial muscle could prove a turning point for Premier League clubs contesting the Champions League.
“It makes the clubs in a bigger, stronger financial position all over Europe,” he said. “It will contribute to get the best players all over the world to come to England. The movement of the players is always linked with the economical and financial power in the countries.
“When I was a coach in Monaco we bought the English players because we were the first to have the television money. Today the biggest financial power is in England and the best players come to England.
“I believe [English clubs could dominate in Europe] and today the difference is so big that the English clubs have a power to attract who they want. Will that last? That’s another question.
“The television [companies] have to decide if it is worth it. The only thing I can say is that it’s an impressive number and as well that it shows the popularity of the English game.
“Maybe we don’t realise it enough but if football is so popular all over the world, the television [companies] in England have contributed to it a lot. The way the games are filmed, the way they promote it has contributed a lot to our success.
“On top of that, they have to pay heavy money now but they must have calculated. It looks to me a very impressive number. It looks to be more of a calculation of ‘we cannot lose this’ than ‘we want absolutely to grow and get bigger’. They are at the stage where the television [companies] first in their calculations don’t want to lose the Premier League.”
Given all 20 Premier League clubs were recently listed by Deloitte in the top 40 richest in Europe, you don’t have to stretch your imagination too far to see even ‘smaller’ clubs in England luring the best talent from traditionally bigger rivals on the continent.
The £5 billion deal isn’t the end of the incoming cash. The sale of international live broadcasting rights, which in 2013 brought in over £2 billion for the three seasons up to summer 2016, are also due for renewal and could well tip the current bounty over the £8 billion mark.
As nice as it would be to think that hige figure might spark a drop in ticket prices, it’s realistic to suggest the only people getting richer will be those within the game.
Will change the balance between the leagues in Europe with most being feeder leagues to the Premiership.
But get used to even more highly paid footballers living in a different world to us fans.
Well all signs point to this being the case. Maybe your Barcas, Reals and Bayerns would still be able to compete (or an oil funded club like PSG), but expect every team in the EPL to hoover up all the young European talent (kinky) and then loan them back out. So essentially you’ll have B teams and C teams across Europe. And yes players will soon be earning £1 million a week.
No, they won’t. It’s a very long way from £300k a week to £1M a week. That is 3 times what the highest player in England earns now. At that rate player salaries will grow Twice as fast as the tv revenue. The clubs are not stupid
So we’re signing ronaldo and messi then?
Right after we sign Neuer, Pogba and Hummels.
Which one is Baby Spice?
No no. We can afford much more expensive players than Messi and Ronaldo. Burnley are signing “Mes” and “Ron”.
Do the journalists at the press conference ever ask about the potential this has on reducing ticket prices? I know Wenger knows deep down it’s blatantly the right thing to do… Thus I’d like to see his response to that question…
I’d like to hear Tim Stillman’s thoughts on this new deal.
I’d like to hear about a living wage.
definitely. way, way overdue.
Vote Labour!
immediately after i sign up to play the arsenal lotto the first lotto ive ever played and im 26 now, i see a post with moneybags Arsene, typical.
Lotto = a tax on stupidity.
You are giving them your money with a minute chance of getting any back, I would advise not to.
Im aware of the odds, and the money i had was spare after bills, everybody has the same chance of winning and somebody has to, so yes the odds are tremendously low, but on the other hand in my bank the chances are it’d of gone on takeaways anyway, you never know.
No problem at all, your choice.
Giving it to charity, a random person in the street or buying a homeless person some food would make you happier. Arsenal’s players (where this will ultimately go) have enough, especially now.
Unsure how this painful tangent has come about. This is far too deep a topic.
Apologies, I know a reasonable amount about mathematics (eg probability), money and happiness. The first needs to be looked at carefully when the second is involved. And the second of those doesn’t bring the third, as much as anyone would expect.
Let’s get back to the game Sunday – COYR.
pedant the life coach, buy a lotto ticket if you want, its your money.
As I said:
No problem at all, your choice.
clue is in the name I spose…
Lotto: A tax on people too stupid to understand arithmetic?
I’d rather have a “minute” chance of winning than ZERO chance
Or a big chance by properly investing your money?
A good illustration of the limited thinking mentioned above. It isn’t a choice between takeaways, lotto or nothing! You can make lots of money with far smaller risks. I’ll stay with my description of the lotto.
I actually play the National Lottery as I don’t gamble, and i look at it differently- I’m happy in the knowledge that I’ll probably never win, but it’s a bit of fun and if my money goes to helping someone win every week then great!
Don’t really understand. Even before this deal, the others have been earning peanuts in comparison (well, my not-very-attentive view from Australia, anyway) but it’s not as though the English game has completely dominated world football?
Potentially it’s that the style of play in England (i.e. traditionally more gung-ho, less tactical) is less suited to continental football, and hence has stopped the English clubs from really cementing their place as the dominating power? Dunno \_(o.O)_/
And considering that there’s still an attitude of two-footing someone if they try to be too smart or technical, it isn’t likely to end too soon.
Unless the referees in the EL improve (and fast), the Premiership will become a joke internationally.
One of the main reasons we don’t dominate Europe is the domestic schedule. We have more very competitive games than any other league. So we tend to play the ‘1st’ 11 much more than elsewhere and that results in much more injuries and fatigue. We rarely have our best players available when it comes to the Q/finals.
Add into this the poor standard of our refs….
It just becomes more likely that it will be an English club that will win the CL.
Spanish and Germans are the only others capable, and we will see them being less likely with more money in the English game. European super league becomes ever closer…
Only if we have the best managers, coaches and players. Sounds obvious, but money doesn’t always buy these things. Bags of money, swag, doesn’t always ensure success or a win. There are other elements to consider.
Yes, money does always win, or nearly anyway. It’s just, when the options are several clubs who spend big, obviously only one of them can win. But money still wins in that case. When was the last time a team that didn’t have “bags of money” won the Champions League? Even Bayern, who are pretty fiscally responsible compared to the Chelseas of the world, spend tons of money.
We’ve already got a spare £100,000,000 available for tranfers and around $80,000,000 of operating profit for the next 4 years already secured, we can just add this extra money to the rest of the money we don’t like spending.
Come on man cheer up, we’ve bought özil and Alexis in the past two summers. I think there has been a shift in our spending, last summer defenders were nowhere to be found. Barcelona bought an injured Vermaelen who hasn’t played in almost a year now. [LMAO]
Off topic,anyone know what channel the match is on sunday?
BT Sport.
Your last comment is the telling one. This looks like being yet another bonanza for gobby players and shady ‘Agents’. Any increase in ticket prices for the duration of this deal would be a scandal and an outrage. In fact if the Club care about the fan base – If !! ??? – they should sit down and look at how they can offer a variety of pricing for low key Prem’ games – like the one we’ve just had against Leicester – and FA Cup matches. There should also be a real effort by the Prem’ to ensure that… Read more »
Of course this benefits English teams but I wouldn’t be hailing a new era of European dominance just yet, Bayern, Real and Barca are still posting incredible commercial numbers and they are a massive draw for players the world over.. It’s always a bit cyclical, English, Spanish, German and Italian teams tend to have good periods of reaching finals and winning the big one. It certainly raises the level of competition in the league both for places and players transferring into the league, 10M a game or something close to that for Sky..boggles the mind a bit…would love to know… Read more »
TV money can help Arsenal conquer Europe. Chelsea and City will find their way around FFP.
Man manny, i was just about to say this really is an insult to FFP. I mean the European Clubs wont be able to compete financially with the top English teams
All FFP means is that the rich consolidate their position as they have more revenue, so can pay higher wages and get the best players. If FFP remains the top sides in 10 years’ time will be the same as they are now. And 20 years, etc.
The top teams now are the same as they were 50 years ago.
Good point, though there was more variability in the teams. Tottenham finished above Arsenal, which is a very rare event recently.
However, to illustrate, in 1964-5 Leeds came second. They were promoted in 1963-4. This will never happen again (and Leeds are not a top team now and never will be, this will be the current top 6 or 7, no other team).
Arsenal have historically finished above Spurs, 13 titles to 1, is evidence of this, with there title win coming over 50 years ago! The Leeds example is a valid one but is a one off case of severe financial impropriety. They could still one day get back up there, they have the support, but the journey to the top is a lot slower than the journey down. What you also have to bear in mind is the financial power clubs will have over their European and worldwide counterparts. Even lower placed premier league teams will now be able to dangle… Read more »
The TV deal is for Premiership teams. Leeds aren’t ever coming back unless they get an Abramovich.
Only read the headline but T V Cash sounds a quality player. Is he related to H McCringleberry?
This new TV deal will just make things worse. Why? 1. There will be a huge increase in the income gap between the biggest and lowest earners in the PL, making sure that the smaller clubs have absolutely no chance of challenging for the title or a top-four place. 2. The players and their agents will just get much richer – for doing the same job. Motivating a fringe player on 100k a week is gonna be tough, even for Wenger. 3. More parasites like the Glazers and Kroenkes will descend on our clubs, looking for profits while not being… Read more »
Agree apart from 4. FFP will stop this, unless the owners are exceptionally reckless.
Remember the only difference with professional football is the crowd/fans. If we weren’t there it would be 22 men chasing after a ball on some grass.
Actually, the Premier League is pretty good with the gap between the top and bottom teams, both in terms of tv revenue and squad quality, the difference isn’t that big. Just compare it to Spain with Real and Barca, France with P$G, Germany with Bayern, etc.
No. 4 just doesn’t make any sense.
Here are the exact figures:
https://i.imgur.com/DdVAomI.jpg
For 2013/14 the top earning in the PL earned about 1.5 times the bottom earner. The next best is Germany, where Bayern earned twice what Braunschweig did. At the other end is Spain, where Real Madrid and Barca take 37% of the total revenue, and nearly 8 times the bottom clubs.
If you think Leicester has no chance of winning the league, what chance do you think Granada have?
This is essentially bollocks:
1) Very few teams outside the top few have ever won the league, if they have it’s always been an anomaly.
2) Correct but that’s been the case when every new TV deal has been signed
3) Again this isn’t anything new and has been the case since football has been played professionally, in fact it was worse when there used to be a maximum wage, as the rich owners took home a larger portion of the clubs income.
4) There’s nothing to support this claim
In fact for point 3, I would guess it’s never been LESS profitable to own a premier league football club
Er, no, John, it’s not bollocks. Here’s why: 1. Derby, Notts Forest, Leeds, Aston Villa and Blackburn have all won the top division since 1970. And teams like Watford, West Ham and Southampton used to reguarlly finish in the top four until the advent of the PL in 1992. 2. We agree, but that doesn’t make it right. 3. The owners used to be local businessmen who were fans first and moneymen second; the current crop of PL owners probably couldn’t tell David Beckham from Victoria Beckham. At Arsenal we know all about an owner who puts profits before success,… Read more »
It is 1) You used 5 clubs over a 45 year period in which the majority of titles were won by Arsenal, Liverpool and Man Utd. Southampton are currently 5th and Blackburn won the premier league doing the same thing that Chelsea and City are doing now, just when it was cheaper. There’s no difference in my mind to what they did, so nothing has changed in that respect. 2) We agree 3) The owners might have been local but the only thing that’s changed is the size of the numbers. Our local businessman owners David Dein and Co. sold… Read more »
Number 1 is completely backwards. The revenues are shared equally enough that this is going to do a tremendous amount to narrow the gap, not widen it. Yes, the top teams get 1.5x what the bottom teams do. But the top teams also make 10x as much from other revenue sources. So the big dollop of TV cash actually increases parity. I.e. you go from one team with 10 million in revenue and another with 100 million to one with 60 million and one with 150 million.
I think the suggested breakdown was that the team that finished 17th in the PL would earn more from the TV deal than Barca or Madrid do from their individually negotiated TV deals. Though the Spanish league is really odd, if you look at the gates, unless one of the big two are in town or it’s a fierce local derby, attendances are mostly pretty low. So it’s hard to argue that there should be a fairer distribution of the TV deal (which would hurt the big two) when the reality is that almost all the people who want to… Read more »
Expect big rises in the cost of sky sports and the end of bt sport being “free” with their broadband. As always the fans will foot the bill.
Regarding ticket prices, more money is coming to all the Premier League clubs, so we’ll still be competing against mega-rich clubs like Chel$ki and Man $ity that are able to out-spend us. Don’t hold your breath.
If only AFC wasn’t run by a bunch of ultra-conservative, unimaginative ex-public schoolboy pensioners.
But, I suppose, better this than the Glazers.
Does Wenger realise that someone has slipped him dollars?.
League has changed. Wenger faced a squeeze from both above and below during the period of austerity where we were building the stadium. Where we were once ridiculed for being a foreign team, even the lowest PL clubs these days can afford foreign players and many of them now have foreign managers. This puts a squeeze on bottom end of overseas market. At the same time, the entry of a couple of mega rich clubs with outside funding meant the top end of the talent spectrum underwent a squeeze too. Wenger reverse the trend when City and Chelsea sullied their… Read more »
Yeah!!! We’re going to make it rain in the transfer market!!!