This is perhaps the question on everyone’s lips as we look forward to this week’s conference in the same name at Everton’s corporate headquarters in Liverpool’s iconic Liver Buildings. The event this will hear from business leaders, media executives, former player Trevor Steven, and Rick Parry, once CEO at Liverpool FC, the founding CEO of the Premier League, and now Chairman of the EFL.
Football has changed dramatically over the past 20 years. FFP and PSR are now shaping the game. Astronomical wages and transfer fees are the norm, and academy talent pipelines are profit centres. But with its unmatched global reach, sizeable broadcast revenues, and with an increasingly foreign ownership, the league has become more than just an English football competition – it’s now a global entertainment juggernaut.
With fans from Juneau to Johannesburg tuning in, the priorities are shifting from local tradition to global scalability. In conversation with a leading EPL director, she explained how her club had been laser-focused on providing the ultimate experience for the 52,000 people who were in the stands every other Saturday until it was pointed out the club had more official supporters’ club members in Jakarta alone but no plan to engage and monetize those fans.
That globalization of the game is bringing big changes.
In 2023, I spent a year in Riyadh with Saudi Pro League shaping its communications and marketing operations. Whilst their league had been around since the 1950’s, the new organization charged with turning it into a global product had a few choices to make. Unfettered by out-dated tradition or an administration resistant to change, they didn’t simply pick an existing league model and replicate it, they wisely looked to see what the options were and what worked for them.
Club ownership was to be privatized, they decided, but a handful of clubs were given state funding to give them the resources to compete in the global marketplace for talent – Ronaldo, Sadio Mane, Karim Benzema and Neymar were signed and attracted much global attention and brand recognition for the new league. Like the NFL, talent development and scouting was to be a centralized league operation to give clubs the best support in data analytics and contract negotiating to identify and secure players who would strengthen the clubs and the league. And, of course, centralized streaming and media rights deals in the Kingdom, the region, and with international broadcasters were delivered to build audiences, connect with fans and expand reach. But another more fundamental question was also asked: whether to have an open or closed league?
The Premier League, as it continues to evolve into a global commercial colossus, now faces the same question: Should it abandon “open” with its traditional promotion and relegation jeopardy and instead adopt a “closed” licensed or franchise league model with greater predictability and sustainability?
There are arguments for and against both systems.
Promotion and relegation are sacred tenets of English football. They embody meritocracy, drama, and the romantic possibility of a small-town club rising to the top. After all, the Wrexham story – one of football’s biggest marketing successes – is only possible with the relegation/promotion system.
Traditionalists argue the system fuels competition across all tiers and keeps fans emotionally invested, but in the age of private equity and global branding, is it a tradition increasingly at odds with the commercial imperatives and the realities of running a football club?
More business-minded voices will point out that as romantic as the rise through the leagues sounds, it requires heaps of cash and investment to achieve. The huge investments made in Wrexham and more recently Birmingham City are perhaps the truth behind their phoenix-like rises. It will also be pointed out that much of that investment was with American money.
American Money and English Football?
This season, half of the 20 Premier League clubs are US-controlled. Arsenal, Villa, Bournemouth, Burnley, Chelsea, Palace, Everton, Fulham, Leeds, Liverpool all have US owners. Additionally, City and Newcastle are owned by overseas Sovereign Wealth Funds while Wolves, Sunderland and Forest are owned by international entities. And while West Ham are owned by a UK-based team, they are significantly funded by US investment while the Glazer family retain 25% of Manchester United. Only Spurs and Brighton have no significant US investment currently.
Of course, that level of dollar investment doesn’t come without its own demands. The influx of U.S. capital brings not just deep pockets, but a distinctly American sports philosophy – one that favors stability, franchise licenses, and long-term asset growth. One which also frowns on the jeopardy of relegation.
For Americans, the concept of relegation is not just foreign – it’s financially perilous. They understand the concept but laugh at the idea you would invest billions in something with such a precarious shelf-life.
U.S. investors see the Premier League not just as a passion project, but as a portfolio asset. Relegation threatens the asset’s value, disrupts player and sponsorships deals, and complicates media rights opportunities. A closed league would eliminate these risks, allowing clubs to operate with predictable cash flows and scalable growth.
In the U.S., major sports leagues like the NFL, NBA, and MLB operate as closed systems.
Teams are guaranteed participation regardless of performance – I’m a grateful NY Jets fan – allowing owners to plan investments without the existential threat of being dropped to a lower tier.
And broadcast rights, global ones especially, bring massive investment into sport.
The Premier League’s global broadcasting rights are now worth a staggering $5billion per season. International rights alone have surged to nearly $3billion, outpacing domestic deals. In just one market, the U.S., NBC Sports holds exclusive rights through 2028, with its six-year contract valued at $2.7billion. Massive as these numbers are, they are plateauing – the latest deal is for four years not three, and there are more tv games per season.
But not all games are equal. If broadcasters are to continue to invest those billions they want marquee matchups. A closed league ensures that Manchester United vs. Liverpool remains on the calendar, rather than clashes between newly promoted sides with limited global appeal. The economics of sport favour predictability, and predictability favours closed leagues.
For global context, the Premier League with the greatest international reach of any sport, is valued at around $12billion with Manchester City its most valuable asset at $1billion. That is twice the value of La Liga and the Bundesliga combined though Real and Bayern are valued at $1.5billion each. But when you look at the $228billion valuation for NFL and $140billion for NBA – it’s clear there is a potential premium for closed leagues.
This huge media revenue has created a paradox. On one hand, the Premier League’s equitable distribution model ensures even the lowest-ranked club earns more than $120 million annually. On the other, the threat of relegation means a single poor season could vaporize that income stream, destabilizing clubs and deterring long-term investment. For owners, the jeopardy of relegation is a risk factor—one that clashes with the logic of billion-dollar deals.
So, what next?
The soul of football lies in its unpredictability. The magic of Leicester City’s 2016 title win and subsequent relegation is born from the very jeopardy that a closed league would extinguish. The question therefore is not just when, but whether the Premier League could reconcile its commercial ambitions with the spirit of the sport.
But it isn’t operating in a vacuum. The Premier League is not only looking to improve its business, it is also wary of the expansion of FIFA and UEFA’s competitions capturing the attention of their members clubs. This summer’s FIFA Club World Cup has already spurred talk of creating a bi-annual version and including more of the world’s top teams.
The failed European Super League (ESL) attempt in 2021 may also return. Though initially met with a fierce backlash, it revealed a desire among the elite clubs to secure their status and revenue streams. While the ESL collapsed under public pressure, its underlying motivations – financial stability, control over scheduling, and guaranteed participation -remain alive and well.
The transition to a closed Premier League won’t happen overnight.
The cultural resistance is still immense, and as Rick Parry will undoubtedly articulate this week, the lower-tier clubs and fans remain staunch defenders of the current system. But the pressure is mounting and as U.S. ownership deepens and media revenues climb, the incentives to reshape the league grow stronger.
Remember, the Premier League only needs 14 members – the clubs – to support any changes to the rules and governance of the league. They may already have the numbers.
For me, it will happen, but a plausible timeline for change will be within the next decade. I imagine it will coincide with the expiry of the current media rights deals so they can be renegotiated in sync. I think we may see a few incremental changes first – perhaps a new playoff system to determine relegation and promotion – that ‘billion-dollar match’ has its attraction still – and maybe a reduction in the number of clubs which can be relegated. These would serve as transitional steps toward a more stable structure.
Full closure may take longer, but it is coming.
My predicted likely outcome is to expand the Premier League by creating a 2nd division from whom promotion and relegation will still occur. This also doubles the number of franchises or licenses for the Premier League, but keeps some of the excitement and opportunity that traditional relegation and promotion offers.
Attention will also be paid to Rugby League’s experiment with a closed league. There, IMG – a global sports strategy advisory – have created a Grading System that also includes off field activities to warrant inclusion in the Super League – Fandom (attendance, digital engagement, TV viewership), On-field performance (last 3 seasons), Finance (profitability, revenue diversity), Stadium quality and Community impact are the metrics.
While that seems a big leap forward for football, this may not be as far-fetched as it may first appear. The new Independent Football Regulator (IFR) has Financial Stability, Financial Resilience and Football Heritage as its key responsibilities. The IFR will also operate a licensing system where all clubs will require a ‘license to operate’ and they will have the power to apply and enforce requirements related to financial regulation, fan engagement, and protection of club heritage, as well as improving governance standards by publishing a corporate governance code for clubs to report against. Change is already coming.
For now, the promotion-relegation model endures.
But in the boardrooms of billionaires and the studios of global broadcasters – as well as from the slate of tremendous speakers at the upcoming Business of Football conference -the conversation is already underway.
And as history has shown, in football – as in business – money talks.
