The Changing Owners of the Game

A New Era of Ownership

Football clubs started as community institutions, a place where people gathered to play the sport and engage with people from their local community. However through the years the sport and its governance changed dramatically. Today, clubs are global media platforms, branding tools, and geopolitical assets. With the game changing the ownership model changed as well.

Different kinds of owners have entered the game, including:

• Sovereign wealth funds such as Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund (PIF) owning Newcastle United and four teams in the Saudi Arabian League(Saudi Pro League), Qatar Sports Investments (QSI) controlling PSG, and Abu Dhabi’s City Football Group behind Manchester City.
  

• Private equity and venture capital firms like RedBird Capital (AC Milan) and 777 Partners.
  

• Entertainment-linked investors, like Ryan Reynolds and Rob McElhenney at Wrexham, who see clubs as content platforms.

• Multi-club ownership groups, such as Red Bull, which manage several teams across countries to leverage shared resources and talent.

Although these ownership styles are criticised by some, there are a lot of fans that welcome the new trend because it brings financial boost to their club. The owners usually arrive with significant budgets and ambition.

Why Buy a Football Club?

Ownership motives are diverse and the and goals differ:

• Branding and Soft Power: For state-owned clubs like PSG and Manchester City, the club acts as a tool to enhance global image and political influence. With Etihad being Manchester City’s main sponsor and with PSG’s image being associated directly with Qatar.
  

• Investment Potential: Football clubs enjoy diverse revenue streams like broadcasting rights, sponsorships, merchandise, and digital content. They also have a growing global fanbase. Their valuable assets and rising brand appeal make them attractive long-term investments with strong financial upside.
  

• Content and Media Strategy: Football clubs are used as content generators and they have their own place into broader entertainment ecosystems.
  

• Geopolitical Strategy: Saudi Arabia’s PIF also holds stakes in four other Saudi Pro League clubs, signaling a plan to globalise their domestic league through high-profile signings and partnerships.

Many owners don’t view clubs simply as businesses but as platforms for projecting influence. This explains why clubs backed by sovereign wealth funds prioritise long-term soft power over immediate profits, thus these clubs have a competitive advantage against the other clubs. When a team can overspend continuously, it unevens the playing field and changes the competitive landscape.

Do Owners Actually Make Profit?

Most football clubs, especially state-backed ones, operate at a loss, prioritising prestige or political aims rather than profitability. However, long-term valuation growth that is also boosted by global fanbases and media rights, can bring massive returns if the club is sold.

This links to a crucial shift in football economics. The new currency in football is attention and engagement, not just profit. Owners now prioritise brand equity and global fanbase reach. Multi-club ownership models capitalise on this by creating a global network of fans and sponsorships, turning clubs into platforms for continuous commercial growth rather than standalone businesses.

Of course, there is still the traditional model of careful spending and smart management. Brighton & Hove Albion is a prime example because owner Tony Bloom took full control in 2009. Since then the club has focused on developing talent and selling players at a profit. In the 2022–23 season, Brighton posted a record £122.8 million profit(record for an English club). Their valuation has skyrocketed from around £10–15 million in 2009 to an estimated £860 million in 2025 . The data-driven approach that the club is using, shows that with smart management, football clubs can be competitive on the field and financially rewarding.

Comparing Ownership Models

Football’s ownership rules vary widely. England’s Premier League is wide open to everyone. Billionaires, private equity, and ‘states’ are all welcome. On the other hand, Germany enforces the 50+1 rule, where fans must hold a majority stake. This limits outside takeovers and keeps clubs closer to their communities.

Spain’s member-owned giants like Real Madrid preserve tradition but face growing financial strain(and thus we see them trying to change the landscape though various ways). In the U.S., MLS clubs are centrally controlled like franchises, prioritising stability over open competition. France mixes both worlds, with state-backed PSG acting like a bully among locally run clubs.

Risks and Controversies

The new ownership landscape brings challenges:

• Sportswashing: States with poor human rights records use football to improve their global image.
  

• Financial Transparency: Complex offshore structures sometimes hide true ownership and motives.
  

• Competitive Imbalance: State-backed clubs have unlimited resources to spend, raising questions about fairness.
  

• Fan Alienation: Rising ticket prices and shifting identities risk alienating traditional supporters. Examples of fans being priced out or games taking place into unconventional hours is now common.

Where Are Fans in This Model?

In the majority of the leagues, fans have limited say in their clubs’ operation and decision making. While attempts to include fans exist(to make fans feel heard and considered), they are often superficial and with minimal actual value. This contrasts with countries like Germany, where fan ownership ensures stronger community ties and governance participation.

What’s Next?

The future of football ownership is likely to feature more multi-club ownership groups, where one entity controls teams across continents, expanding into global markets and fanbases. Saudi Arabia’s growing investments in both domestic and international football is a catalyst in reshaping the competitive and commercial football landscape.

Regulatory bodies like UEFA and FIFA will face increasing pressure to ensure competitive balance and financial transparency. However there is an increasing concern that they are not here to stop it, but to benefit from it. Not everyone involved has the best intentions for the game. Some use football for personal enrichment, others for geopolitical reasons and soft power. And increasingly, the ‘rules of the game’ seem to shift depending on who’s holding the whistle and his benefits.