Multi-Club Ownership in European Football: Challenging the Rules of the Game

BSLB
Mar 21
4 min read

In recent years, the world of European football has been reshaped by an intriguing phenomenon: multi-club ownership (MCO). This model, where a single entity owns stakes in multiple football clubs, has shifted the dynamics of competition, talent development, and financial strategy within the sport. While it’s opening new doors for growth and innovation, it’s also raising questions about fairness, competition, and the future of the sport itself. MCO is a trend that is accelerating, especially due to American and Middle Eastern investors and it is mainly characterized by the globalization of football. The latter has changed a lot in the last few decades: it has evolved from being a sport played by people of all ages, into an option for companies’ investments and marketing solutions. This sort of “evolution” has been driven by a radical shift in club ownership and management. It relies on the sharing of common elements and philosophies in player development, facilitating the movement of players between teams which are owned by the same organizations.

Two paradigmatic examples of this phenomenon include the City Football Group (CFG), which owns Manchester City and several other clubs worldwide, and Red Bull. These groups optimize scouting and commercial revenue streams leveraging synergies in their network. Red Bull, a brand known worldwide for its success in Formula 1, was one of the first to exploit this field, notably acquiring several football clubs like Red Bull Salzburg and RB Leipzig. Today it operates four teams with an advanced and highly efficient scouting system. Furthermore, City Football Group, which began its development in 2008 with the acquisition of Manchester City football team, is a powerful club overseeing twelve teams across different continents, featuring prominent players in the global football scene. Like most of issues, this phenomenon has both positive and negative aspects that can be illustrated and discussed. First, an advantage is undoubtedly represented by the players’ development and mobility, thanks to the fact that MCO creates networks in which exchanges are easy to be made, because they are more freely. It is also a matter of economic efficiency, just because this mechanism reduces costs related to administrative systems, but especially related to scouting. However, someone could argue that controversies and criticisms can obviously be noticed in the exploitation of smaller clubs, but also in the loss of independence, because sometimes teams subjected to MCO may be not sufficiently incentivized to maintain their coherent club’s identity.

Moreover, ethical considerations can be considered: it could happen (and it really happens) that clubs under common ownership might face each other in European tournaments, raising questions about fairness. UEFA rules currently prohibit such conflicts, but if ownership networks grow, enforcement will be increasingly complex to deal with.

In conclusion, the phenomenon of multi-club ownership (MCO) has undoubtedly introduced profound shifts in the landscape of European football, transforming both the business and sporting aspects of the game. The increasing adoption of this model, particularly by wealthy investors from America and the Middle East, signals a deeper trend toward the globalization and commercialization of football. By enabling ownership groups like the City Football Group and Red Bull to leverage synergies across a network of clubs, MCO has created new pathways for talent development, scouting efficiency, and financial growth. The sharing of resources, expertise, and player development philosophies within these ownership structures has led to more fluid player mobility between clubs, optimizing both on-field performance and economic returns.

However, the benefits of MCO must be viewed alongside the challenges and ethical questions it raises. One significant concern is the potential for the exploitation of smaller clubs, which may lose their independence or struggle to maintain a distinct identity under the control of larger, wealthier entities. The homogenization of club philosophies and objectives may erode the unique characteristics that have long defined football clubs across Europe. Furthermore, the growing prevalence of multi-club ownership raises critical questions about the fairness and integrity of competition. While UEFA currently enforces regulations to prevent conflicts of interest when clubs under the same ownership face each other in continental competitions, the expansion of MCO networks poses an increasing challenge for enforcement. As more clubs are brought under the umbrella of a single ownership group, the potential for conflicts of interest to undermine the spirit of fair play in European football grows, calling into question the sustainability of current regulatory frameworks.

Moreover, the global reach and financial power of MCO groups can have unintended consequences for traditional football markets, potentially creating an uneven playing field where smaller, independent clubs are unable to compete with the vast resources of multi-club entities. This growing economic divide may exacerbate disparities in competitiveness, leading to a concentration of power among a few well-funded entities, while undermining the financial viability of smaller clubs that lack the same commercial backing. The continued expansion of MCO, while fostering innovation, could ultimately result in a more closed and unequal competitive environment.

As MCO continues to shape the future of European football, the sport finds itself at a crossroads. On the one hand, the model offers the promise of efficiency, growth, and internationalization, with the potential to redefine how clubs operate and interact on the global stage. On the other hand, it poses significant challenges to the values of fairness, competition, and the preservation of football’s cultural heritage: the future of European football will depend on how these tensions between innovation and tradition are navigated, with an emphasis on maintaining the competitive balance that has long been at the heart of the game.

CC: Virginia Gangemi, Georgescu Matei, Gabriele Pagliuca