# Stadium funding (Rented, owned, taxpayer funded, etc).



## weava (Sep 8, 2007)

I didn't know what other thread to put this in so I figured I'd start a new one. 

How common is it that teams rent stadiums or taxpayers fund the stadiums outside of the US? With teams free to move around in the US and the leagues having set league membership, the cities fight to get the teams with many paying for a large part of the stadiums or giving them cheap rent.

Does this happen in any other country? It seems most stadiums are funded by the teams unless they play in a national stadium like wembley. When a country hosts the world cup or similar event, who pays for all those stadiums? Are those typically private or publicly owned stadiums?

Also, does this lead to the US having fancier stadiums as the team owners aren't having to foot the bill for the mega sized scoreboards, suites, etc.?


----------



## alexandru.mircea (May 18, 2011)

[sweeping generalisation] Save for Britain, in Europe it is common for stadiums and sports area to be public investments. [/sweeping generalisation]. In Romania for example, in a quarter of a century since communism, the only private investment in a stadium / arena were a 15k football stadium in Cluj that was redeveloped to UEFA CL standards and an even smaller stadium that is currently being built. Meanwhile public funds have made possible the new 55k capacity National Stadium, a 30k athletic & football stadium in the main provincial city, and several smaller football stadiums (new or redevelopments) and sports arena, plus a few major project currently in planning.

In France you get a whole array of options from completely public funded venues to (much more rarely) completely private investments like for the new football stadium in Lyon or the new rugby stadium / indoor arena in La Dèfense. Often it's a public-private partnership where the private consortium comes with the complete financing upfront, while the municipality, the regional entity and the tenant repay in time the sum with interest; usually the sports club pays the smallest share.


----------



## en1044 (May 4, 2008)

Ooooh this is a good thread. 👍


----------



## Bobby3 (Jun 26, 2007)

I know big screens at Bank of America Stadium were paid for by tax money last year, the Panthers own the stadium though. It made a lot of people pretty angry too.

So taxes certainly help add some of the frills, it is easier to spend someone else's money after all.


----------



## Rev Stickleback (Jun 23, 2009)

where grounds are publicly funded (in Europe) they are often of a poorer standard, or are rather outdated, but that's often because they were built a long time ago.

Even in the UK though, you can sometimes get local councils on board with ground redevelopments, offering part funding, but it tends to be with smaller projects. Councils tend to be much smaller bodies than the US style city councils though, so they just don't have the funds to build new stadiums, even if they wanted to.

Often, especially in the UK, they can be incredibly obstructive towards teams moving/redeveloping.



What you certainly don't get is cities being bribed/blackmailed into building stadiums through club owners making threats/promises about a a team playing in their city. I'm not sure which countries in europe (if any) have anything like citywide sales taxes.


----------



## Gavrosh (Apr 15, 2011)

Well it comes down to the football leagues in Europe not being an entire franchise system. Because the NFL and the like have the monopoly over who can play in the NFL, the 20-odd teams can hold cities to ransom over locating there. That would be absolutely impossible in most countries in Europe as the football leagues here are largely administrative bodies and potentially any team can rise to the top division. 

I guess in all of Europe perhaps Spain has the closest link between the teams and the province, which goes back to the fact that there is still significant provincial pride, and so sweet deals for the likes of Madrid and Barcelona are fine for Castilla and Catalonia respectively, though that has become much harder these days as other major clubs would be keen to refer any sweet deal to the european competition commission. 

There is also the issue of when a public body builds or upgrades a stadium, see Manchester City's Etihad or the upcoming Olympic Stadium reconfiguration. However because teams are so competitive, and because there is massive public anger about taxpayer money being spent on something that benefits a private enterprise, these deals are typically quite transparent. 

There is also the point that clubs cant leave their historical areas, by and large. Theres been one example in England and that was met with huge unrest and derision. Its simply untenable for a major club to leave their home city. 

This is all a massive generalisation of course but I think it comes down to the point that sports in the US are in a way monopolised by the leagues and so the teams can be moved around geographically to gain profit whereas in Europe the leagues are not monopolised and teams are by nature rooted to their historic areas.


----------



## JimB (Apr 7, 2005)

Gavrosh said:


> There is also the issue of when a public body builds or upgrades a stadium, see Manchester City's Etihad or the upcoming Olympic Stadium reconfiguration. *However because teams are so competitive, and because there is massive public anger about taxpayer money being spent on something that benefits a private enterprise, these deals are typically quite transparent*.


There has yet to be any transparency with regard to the exact deal that West Ham signed for the Olympic stadium.

We only have a very vague idea of the terms. At every turn, there appears to be subterfuge or avoidance of disclosure.


----------



## Suburbanist (Dec 25, 2009)

In Italy, many city governments actually oppose the construction of new private grounds because they collect hefty rent and use fees from teams. Many of the venues used on Serie A are public, though the trend is moving towards private stadia as local governments are cash-strapped and Italy has slide behind other big European countries in terms of quality of (football) stadia.


----------



## RobH (Mar 9, 2007)

Well, Juve has shown what can be done and there's a lot of envious eyes being cast over their new stadium. I hope Italy will see a fart of new stadiums in the next decade or so because of this.


----------



## JimB (Apr 7, 2005)

RobH said:


> Well, Juve has shown what can be done and there's a lot of envious eyes being cast over their new stadium. I hope Italy will see a *fart* of new stadiums in the next decade or so because of this.


:lol:

A fart of new stadiums?

Is that a collective noun........like a crash of rhinos or a murder of crows?


----------



## RMB2007 (Apr 1, 2007)

Football clubs in the UK can also receive various grants to help finance stadium improvements. One example would be the FSIF:



> The Football Stadia Improvement Fund (FSIF) provides financial support to football clubs towards their ground improvement projects.
> 
> Funded by the Premier League with an annual budget of £6m, the FSIF awards capital grants to clubs from the Football League down to the lower levels of the National League System to improve safety at their stadia and to enable them to satisfy The FA’s ground grading requirements.
> 
> ...


http://www.fsif.co.uk/

How this new stand at Boreham Wood was financed:

Football Stadia Improvement Fund grant = £241,000

Boreham Wood FC = £164,000 

Hertsmere Borough Council = £70,000

Personal contribution from the club chairman = £60,000

Arsenal FC = £15,000


----------



## weava (Sep 8, 2007)

Rev Stickleback said:


> I'm not sure which countries in europe (if any) have anything like citywide sales taxes.


This must be a big part it. In the US sales taxes are printed right on your reciet anytime you buy something, but the "VAT" is hidden in the prices in Europe and is only collected by the national government right? US cities are fighting their own suburbs for teams sometimes so they can collect all the sales taxes the team would generate. With no economic incentive like sales taxes, would European cities even want a team in their city as they would have to deal with the traffic, crime, etc that would come with large crowds?


----------



## RMB2007 (Apr 1, 2007)

Another example of the FSIF grant scheme helping a club to build a new stand is this:

*Maidenhead United*

£160,000 from the club, plus £160,000 via a FSIF grant, so the total cost was £320,000.


----------



## SteveCourty (Mar 14, 2013)

Manchester city's ground is public owned. It was built for the commonwealth games and then part private part council was converted into a football stadium. They now have a long term lease. I guess the recent developments are paid for by the owners though.

West Ham who are moving into the Olympic stadium are in the same boat paying some costs towards the redevelopment into a football only stadium. They will also hold a lease.

My local clubs ground is owned by the council and despite several attempts to move and countless times of trying to buy it the council have blocked everything. It's a bad situation to be in and has severely limited the club as the stadium is very outdated. They are on a month to month lease now though and talks of investment would mean again trying to leave or buy the ground


----------



## Gavrosh (Apr 15, 2011)

Qatar is currently farting stadiums like you wouldn't believe.


----------



## crazydude (Aug 4, 2009)

In South Africa almost all of the stadiums are owned by the municipalities (city councils).

In the Premier Soccer League:

Ajax rents Cape Town Stadium
Amazulu rents Moses Mabhida Stadium
Bidvest Wits owns Bidvest Stadium
Bloemfontein Celtic rents Free State Stadium
Chippa United rents Nelson Mandela Bay Stadium
Free State Stars rent Goble Park
Kaizer Chiefs rents Soccer City
Mamelodi Sundowns rents Loftus Versfeld
Maritzberg United rents Harry Gwala Stadium
Moroka Swallows rents Dobsonville Stadium
Mpumalanga Black Aces rents Mbombela Stadium
Orlando Pirates rents Orlando Stadium
Platinum Stars own Royal Bafokeng Sports Palace
Polokwane City rents Peter Mokaba Stadium
SuperSport United rents Lucas Moripe Staium
University or Pretoria owns Tuks Stadium

3 own stadiums while 13 rent


----------



## JimB (Apr 7, 2005)

SteveCourty said:


> Manchester city's ground is public owned. It was built for the commonwealth games and then part private part council was converted into a football stadium. They now have a long term lease. I guess the recent developments are paid for by the owners though.
> 
> West Ham who are moving into the Olympic stadium are in the same boat paying some costs towards the redevelopment into a football only stadium. They will also hold a lease.
> 
> My local clubs ground is owned by the council and despite several attempts to move and countless times of trying to buy it the council have blocked everything. It's a bad situation to be in and has severely limited the club as the stadium is very outdated. They are on a month to month lease now though and talks of investment would mean again trying to leave or buy the ground


There are some big differences in the deals signed by Man City and West Ham.

In exchange for moving to the COMS stadium, Man City gave Manchester council their old Maine Road stadium for development into housing. Man City also paid for the great majority of the conversion costs.

By contrast, West Ham sold their stadium to pay off their own debts and they will contribute only a tiny proportion of the Olympic stadium's conversion costs. They will also, by the way, benefit from many further billions of public money spent on local infrastructure. Unlike Man City.

Both clubs pay / will pay rent - though rumoured figures for West Ham's deal suggest that they will pay considerably less than Man City per annum. Which, at first glance, seems rather ridiculous given the respective costs of the two stadiums and the respective financial contributions of both clubs. However, while Man City receive the majority of the naming rights revenues from the Etihad, it is rumoured that West Ham will only receive a minority of the Olympic stadium's naming rights income (it will be interesting to see just how big a percentage that really means). Furthermore, West Ham will not earn any income from the Olympic stadium's catering concessions.

The other main downsides for West Ham are that the stadium will always have an athletics track and they will also have to share the stadium with other tenants. But even that is somewhat mitigated by the fact that the entire £200-250m conversion is being directed by West Ham's needs and wants.

Overall, I'd say that West Ham have got a far better bargain than Man City.


----------



## RobH (Mar 9, 2007)

JimB said:


> :lol:
> 
> A fart of new stadiums?
> 
> Is that a collective noun........like a crash of rhinos or a murder of crows?


Funnily enough, my spell check didn't pick up on that one. Not surprised you did though - pedantic sod. :lol:

If the board wants that to be the collective noun for stadiums I'm happy for it to be adopted. You're all very welcome.


----------



## Gavrosh (Apr 15, 2011)

JimB said:


> Overall, I'd say that West Ham have got a far better bargain than Man City.


We simply cant know that until the deal is made public, which even the people behind it are getting frustrated with now. There seems to be a hold up going on behind the scenes, with the stadium operator, which should have been announced in October, yet to be appointed. Even then, the stadium sponsorship deal may be subject to further confidentiality. I have an inkling that the reason that the LED wrap has not yet been put into planning is that the cost for it may be a bargaining chip with the stadium sponsor, with the LLDC attempting to get money upfront for it. 

As it is, I believe that Man City pay a net amount of about £2 million to Manchester Council whereas the full deal (rent, matchday revenues and sponsorship split) between West Ham and E20 LLC (LLDC + Newham) is rumoured to be around £10 million. That would of course help to mitigate the relatively low level of initial investment by West Ham into the stadium.


----------



## CollegeBoy (May 10, 2014)

If there are any owners from other countries who are reading this thread, I suggest you call Mike Brown (Bengals) and Jeffrey Loria (Marlins). Those two goobers have the best stadium deals an owner could ask for. 

One has been screwing Hamilton County, OH out of money for quite some time and the other managed to con taxpayers into funding that abortion of a baseball stadium to the tune of $2.4 billion dollars through 2049. It's okay though, it's not like the team had a fire sale and put a shitty product on the field. They _used_ to do that, but not anymore. 

If you can afford to purchase and operate a team, why do you need the public's money? Is it to leverage risk?


----------



## Bobby3 (Jun 26, 2007)

CollegeBoy said:


> If you can afford to purchase and operate a team, why do you need the public's money? Is it to leverage risk?


They don't. They just know that someone, somewhere, will give it to them.


----------



## Timkale17 (11 mo ago)

Hi all! I'm doing my university dissertation on whether the taxpayer should pay for Everton FC's stadium (given the £1bn economic boost). I've had to change my title to 'The role of the public in European sport stadia funding'. So, Everton will be my main case study but will use a few more examples from around Europe. I was wondering if you had any pointers for departments/groups/people/websites/literature please. Or if you had your own views / perspective of possible routes I could look into.
Examples of information I'd appreciate is around who owns stadia, the club or local government? Who pays for the stadia developments etc. Any example case studies would be great!
(I'm a final year Commercial Management & Quantity Surveying student at Loughborough University)


----------



## ElvisBC (Feb 21, 2011)

of course nothing, not a single penny!!!


----------



## pesto (Jun 29, 2009)

Timkale17 said:


> Hi all! I'm doing my university dissertation on whether the taxpayer should pay for Everton FC's stadium (given the £1bn economic boost). I've had to change my title to 'The role of the public in European sport stadia funding'. So, Everton will be my main case study but will use a few more examples from around Europe. I was wondering if you had any pointers for departments/groups/people/websites/literature please. Or if you had your own views / perspective of possible routes I could look into.
> Examples of information I'd appreciate is around who owns stadia, the club or local government? Who pays for the stadia developments etc. Any example case studies would be great!
> (I'm a final year Commercial Management & Quantity Surveying student at Loughborough University)


If you don't have a well-placed connection, you will only be given the official funding story given to the general public. This may be a poor reflection of reality. You should make sure your academic sponsor has spent years reviewing this kind of work and how political pressure groups work in your area.


----------



## Ramanaramana (Mar 24, 2021)

Said it in other thread, will repeat here.

Most European stadiums are publicly funded. And a high number of US stadiums are cofinanced by owner and taxpayer.

The recent examples in England are not the norm across Europe.


----------



## alexandru.mircea (May 18, 2011)

Timkale17 said:


> Hi all! I'm doing my university dissertation on whether the taxpayer should pay for Everton FC's stadium (given the £1bn economic boost). I've had to change my title to 'The role of the public in European sport stadia funding'. So, Everton will be my main case study but will use a few more examples from around Europe. I was wondering if you had any pointers for departments/groups/people/websites/literature please. Or if you had your own views / perspective of possible routes I could look into.
> Examples of information I'd appreciate is around who owns stadia, the club or local government? Who pays for the stadia developments etc. Any example case studies would be great!
> (I'm a final year Commercial Management & Quantity Surveying student at Loughborough University)


Do you read French? The French IRS has a public report about the financing of EURO 2016, available to read. It put into balance the public funding of stadium construction (through public-private partnerships), the tax breaks given to UEFA and revenues (direct or indirect) brought by the tournament, and the conclusion is rather negative. 









Documents | Cour des comptes







www.ccomptes.fr


----------



## Timkale17 (11 mo ago)

alexandru.mircea said:


> Do you read French? The French IRS has a public report about the financing of EURO 2016, available to read. It put into balance the public funding of stadium construction (through public-private partnerships), the tax breaks given to UEFA and revenues (direct or indirect) brought by the tournament, and the conclusion is rather negative.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Merci, unfortunately note but i will use 'deepl'


----------

