Could you imagine if betting companies had to answer to their 'fans' ie customers who lose and donate to them (which should happen in 99% of punters) in business why do 'fans' even have a say in how businesses that they have no ownership % at all think they have a say? The whole thing has always amazed me but post covid the fans have even less say as owners have realised 'old school' fans who attend games don't really make much difference to the modern day business model. It is all tv stream revenue.
I guess it’s twofold.
If Paddy Power piss off a punter they can bet with other bookies. Fans don’t change clubs.
And I suppose it’s a community thing. Clubs make up part of the fabric of our communities and history, more than just a business. No one gives a shit about a bookie.
Comparing apples and pears.
'fans' do change clubs and i would guess the majority of 'fans' who pay the bills via tv don't have a club they are just casual especially outside of the uk where the revenue is really coming from nowadays. If it was all about UK 'lolloyalfan' revenue they would have been on £250k a week when i was a kid. Its the casual non club fans who drive the marginal revenue globally not domestically. Football like all major sports is a global business who don'tt need hardcore fans in the stadium. They don't make them money these types as much as these hard core fans ego think they are important they really aren't in 2021. Covid has shown the owners that the game can easily operate without the 10% hardcore fan whatever these deluded fans think EPL wise with tv money. Outside of the EPL football is fucked without turnstile fans.
LOL
Assuming "hard core" is another expression for fans who attend matches:
Premier big boys need matchday income - Arsenal it's about 25% of turnover
Premier smaller clubs - yes they could budget on TV income. Bottom premier about £100mil TV revenue compared to say Leeds in 18/19 when just £9million
Championship and below (except the parachuters) and all the way down the pyramid are dependant on matchday income.
The Premier League TV deal for 18/19 was split 65% from domestic rights and 35% from international deals.
COVID has obviously screwed up most business models - fans needed in stadiums for most.
Fans in stadiums will always be important for the TV backdrop.
Match day attendance is definitely an integral part of football club finances - but I don't think the fan's outrage has anything to do with the Super League reversal (or basically any decision major clubs make).
My immediate assumption was that the clubs involved got advice or information which confirmed that the various governing bodies definitely could actually kick them out or at least significantly penalise them (particularly the European tournaments and the Premier League).
Football clubs will make decisions based on what's good for them - usually their finances; but it sounds good if they make a statement that it was about the fans particularly if it involved reversing a previous decision.
Hardcore fans are always going to be a reliable source of income, clubs can do what they were always goinig to do all along and if it happens to be what the fans want then they can pretend that it was based on them otherwise they just ride it out until the fans get over it.
Broadly agree with the fan outrage comment but it does play a part.
Bigger consideration for the clubs is threat of government intervention, UEFA hard ball, player/staff reaction, stakeholders, sponsors etc.
If this had gone further down the line almost certainly there would be a drop-off in ST renewals which directly impacts the bottom line.
Fan protests do work sometimes - recent ones involving Liverpool fans forcing u-turns against ticket price hikes, the introduction of furlough and (partially) project big picture. In all 3 cases the owner said he was sorry and would do better. And now he's apologised again!
But ultimately billionaire owners are only interested in the ££££.
Author