There is no doubting Todd Boehly’s credentials in sport and the commercial sector, but it is fair to say that – despite the upturn on the pitch in recent weeks – his time at Chelsea so far has been mixed.
Despite the fact that he himself controls only around 13 per cent of the club’s equity, Boehly became the public face of the new regime following the £2.5bn takeover from Roman Abramovich in May 2022.
Diagram illustrating the ownership of Chelsea, split between factions led by Todd Boehly and Behdad Eghbali
His other sports enterprises, Major League Baseball’s Los Angeles Dodgers and NBA’s LA Lakers, are among the most successful in the United States in both sporting and financial terms.
The Dodgers recently won the World Series, while Forbes have ranked the Lakers as the third most valuable NBA franchise at around £5.6bn. That’s twice what he and Clearlake Capital paid for Chelsea.
New Dodgers owners of Guggenheim Baseball Management, LLC - (from left) Stan Kasten, Mark Walter, Earvin Magic Johnson, Peter Guber, and Todd Boehl...
Photo by Chris Williams/Icon SMI/Corbis/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images
Football, however, is a different ball game.
Unlike American franchise sport, there is intense competition between owners as opposed to a structure in which they work together for mutual financial benefit.
The closed-shop nature of the NBA and MLB also means that Boehly’s franchises in the US are shielded from the financial risks that Chelsea face if they fail to qualify for Europe, for example.
The M.O of the new regime at Stamford Bridge has been to apply many of the same principles as they have done with their US sports enterprises, and green shoots are starting to appear.
Ahead of this afternoon’s clash with Astana in the Europa Conference League, Enzo Maresca’s side are undefeated in eight in all competitions and in 2nd-place in the Premier League.
MORE CHELSEA STORIES
But even the most charitable of supporters would likely concede that there is a long way to go before the new owners can be deemed a categorial success.
For one, issues around Chelsea’s position under Profit and Sustainability Rules (PSR), formerly known as FFP, persist and are not going away any time soon.
Boehly and the other supremos in the Chelsea boardroom insist that they are in alignment with both UEFA and the Premier League’s PSR systems.
But most analysis from leading experts such as Swiss Ramble, Stefan Borson, and Kieran Maguire suggests that it is difficult to see how they can be so confident.
An infographic explaining how PSR (Profit and Sustainability Rules) work in the Premier League and UEFA
Granted, the intra-company sales of two hotels at Stamford Bridge was a PSR boost, but that transaction went through in 2021-22 according to the accounts, meaning it is not part of this season’s calculation.
In any case, intra-company transactions – that is sales between entities controlled by a club’s owner – are recognised by the Premier League for the time being but not under UEFA’s PSR system.
The sale of the women’s team via the same method could register in their 2023-24 calculation, but the club are yet to provide clarity on that.
In the long term, Boehly and Clearlake’s masterplan is to hike commercial income in order to facilitate greater spending under PSR.
But the owners have missed a number of open goals in this department – and a new development this week suggests things could have taken a turn for the worse.
A few weeks ago, Chelsea officially named Todd Kline as their president of commercial operations.
It had been a long time coming, with the American operator and long-time ally of Boehly and Clearlake having handed in his notice at Tottenham back in February.
His biggest task in SW6 is to secure a front-of-shirt sponsor.
Chelsea are still playing with an empty space on their jerseys as we approach the halfway point of the season. What’s more, it is the second season running that this has been the case.
With Chelsea having aimed for £60m-a-year from a shirt deal, this is a major hit to take in terms of annual revenue and one that will have a material impact on PSR.
Infographic showing Chelsea's revenue in recent years and the breakdown between commercial matchday and media income.
In the summer, Chelsea agreed a sleeve sponsorship deal with the events company Fever believed to be worth around £10m for the season.
They had outlined their intentions to hold a press conference on the deal, but that was quietly cancelled, leaving questions about the specific terms of the arrangement.
Now, as relayed by football finance expert Łukasz Bączek, Chelsea have removed Fever from their official list of partners on their website.
Why they would do that is not known, but it has been suggested that the deal could have been terminated early.
That would be a PR blow for Chelsea and would perhaps mean they would have to re-budget ahead of January or, more likely, seasons further down the line.
Today’s match against Astana may come too soon for Chelsea to have removed the brand’s logo from their kit, but the meeting with Brentford on Sunday could give a major clue as to the deal’s status.
Nike, the US sportswear giants, are Chelsea’s primary sponsor in a deal worth a reported £60m per year.
That is not a relationship that the Blues can afford to jeopardise. It’s worth more than 10 per cent of their annual revenue.
However, Nike are believed to be disgruntled by Chelsea’s lack of a sponsor for their shirts, which they believe may have impacted sales.
View of the Nike kit on display ahead of the UEFA Europa League Round of 16 First Leg match between Chelsea and Dynamo Kyiv at Stamford Bridge on M...
Photo by Catherine Ivill/Getty Images
With Chelsea vying with Tottenham for a potentially lucrative collaboration with Nike’s Air Jordan brand, that is not a good sign.
The Air Jordan endorsement has been transformative for Paris Saint-Germain, who have become a lifestyle brand in non-domestic markets and supercharged their commercial income.
Related Posts