Details of the European Super League contracts signed by all 12 rebel clubs have been posted online and include some surprising details about the riches on offer.
The German broadcaster Der Spiegel published a few pages of the document before the controversial announcement last week, which the “Big Six” of the Premier League as well as three clubs from Italy and three from Spain have approved.
These include Barcelona and Real Madrid, each receiving € 60m more than their rivals, the right of each club to exclusively broadcast a series of matches and a £ 130m fee for those who wish to withdraw from the competition.
The German outlet Der Spiegel has published some pages of the European Super League contracts
Barcelona and Real Madrid would have both received an additional £ 52million in two installments
This week there was an angry backlash from fans, players, managers, politicians and even royalty after plans were announced by 12 European elite clubs to start their own competition on Sunday evening.
But the program was in tatters on Tuesday night and its founder, Juventus chairman Andrea Agnelli, announced that it couldn’t go on after the ‘Big Six’ Premier League clubs all pulled out by Wednesday morning.
On Friday morning, the American investment bank JP Morgan appeared to be putting the final nail in the coffin after supporting the Super League with £ 3.5 billion.
It was later announced that the 12 clubs involved would not receive sporting punishment for playing in the program following a meeting of the UEFA Executive Committee.
However, leaked details of the 23-year contracts signed by the 12 clubs have provided some insight into some aspects of the competition and the financial rewards those involved should receive.
The “Dirty Dozen” of the European Super League will not be punished by UEFA, it was announced on Friday
The team would also have the right to broadcast some of its games exclusively on internal channels
It now seems clear why Real Madrid and Barcelona have still not officially withdrawn from the Super League because they should be earning significantly more than their rivals.
One area of the contract is entitled “Additional compensation for the first two seasons of the Super League competition”.
It continues: “Barcelona and Real Madrid will receive the additional fixed amount of EUR 60m (£ 52m) each, to be paid in two equal installments.
“To this end, they will each receive 30 million euros at the end of the first Super League season and at the end of the second Super League season.”
Barcelona face enormous financial debt and will have to bring in every penny to cover it. Newly elected President Joan Laporta says the runaway competition is “absolutely necessary” on Thursday evening.
Another part of the contract states that Super League clubs have the right to show four of their regular season games “exclusively” on “core club platforms” such as their website, club mobile application and TV channel live per season .
The owners of Manchester United and Liverpool have been beaten up since the news broadcast
It became clear in the leaked contracts that those clubs that withdrew would have to pay a fee of £ 130 million
This would ensure additional revenue from the clubs’ internal media channels and allow them to generate additional revenue from subscribing to these packages.
One side shows that of the 15 founding clubs – that is, the original 12 plus Paris Saint-Germain, Bayern Munich and Borussia Dortmund, which should all be invited – AC Milan, Atletico Madrid, Dortmund and Inter Milan would receive a smaller share of the initial “infrastructure grant amount”.
Arsenal, Bayern, Chelsea, Barcelona, Juventus, Liverpool, Manchester City, Man United, PSG, Real Madrid and Tottenham should earn 7.7 percent of the original payment to the founding members.
The other four teams should only bring in 3.8 percent of that number.
Perhaps the most important number leaked in the contracts, however, is the “termination fee” which could come into play now if the majority of the founding clubs have withdrawn.
It is said that clubs eliminated from the Super League face a £ 130 million penalty fee, which would be a heavy blow to the six Premier League clubs and others who have withdrawn their support.
Super League clubs received a boost on Friday when UEFA decided not to give them athletic penalties for their role in the runaways.
JP Morgan has withdrawn from its £ 3.5 billion support for the proposed European Super League
UEFA President Aleksander Ceferin chaired a meeting of the UEFA Executive Committee on Friday which decided not to impose sporting punishments on the 12 clubs
A meeting of the UEFA Executive Committee was held and possible sanctions were discussed for the “dirty dozen” willing to break up and form their own continental competition.
However, the UEFA bosses have decided not to exclude any of the participants from this season’s Champions League and Europa League competitions or to ban next year’s tournaments.
Barcelona and Real Madrid’s confidence in the league suffered another setback on Friday when backers JP Morgan called on their £ 3.5bn support.
In a statement, JP Morgan said: “We have clearly misjudged how this deal will be viewed by the wider football community and how it could affect them in the future. We will learn from it. ‘
It was believed that JP Morgan’s financial commitment to the Super League plan was primarily aimed at paying between € 200 million (£ 174 million) and € 300 million (£ 261 million) to each participating side.
Her statement comes just a few days after sustainability rating firm Standard Ethics downgraded the investment bank’s credibility rating from “fair” to “non-compliant” after questions about its integrity were raised following the initial announcement of support for the Super League.
The ECA tweeted that after meeting on Friday they “want to go beyond this week’s event”
A statement by UEFA on Friday merely said: “In addition, the UEFA Executive Committee has been informed of the latest developments regarding the so-called ‘Super League’, including the options available to UEFA and the steps to be taken she is considering. “
The European Club Association tweeted: ‘We want to leave this week’s events behind and encourage and inspire the global football community when the games return this weekend. Clubs can only be successful both on and off the pitch if we work hand in hand. ‘
The anger of Premier League fans has not yet subsided. Manchester United must take extra security measures after disgruntled fans breached security at their Carrington training base before they take on boss Ole Gunnar Solskjaer on Thursday.
The fans protested against the American owners of the club, the Glazer family, for their leading role in the doomed European Super League conspiracy and challenged manager Solskjaer as to why he didn’t speak out against it.
The group of around 20 fans who broke through the premises are among the self-proclaimed “Men in Black” who also attacked United boss Ed Woodward’s home in Cheshire last January.
Pictures of Solskjaer and other staff arriving Friday morning showed a greater security presence at the entrance, with even the manager receiving a full check before being allowed to enter.
He was stopped and forced to take off his sunglasses to show his face to the security team. Technical director Darren Fletcher arrived shortly after and gave the guards a thumbs up as he pulled in.
Anyone who tried to enter the complex was asked for ID.
Ole Gunnar Solskjaer was greeted by security guards at Manchester United’s training ground in Carrington on Friday morning after angry protesters were given access yesterday
The United boss had to take off his sunglasses so the guards could do a full ID check on him
Manchester United fans gathered in protest at the club’s training ground in Carrington
Two of the original Red Knights consortia that tried to oust the Glazer family from power at Manchester United more than a decade ago urged the American owners to give up their controlling stake in the club on Friday.
Lord O’Neill, a former executive at American investment bank Goldman Sachs, and Sir Paul Marshall wrote to United Chairman Joel Glazer after the collapse of the European Super League.
The duo want prominent numbers on the failed £ 1.25 billion acquisition of United in 2010 and want Glaser to reduce their stake from 74.9 percent to no more than 49.9 percent to encourage other investors to buy into the club.
They say the owners’ shares were to be sold for $ 14 each – the share price when United was floated on the New York Stock Exchange in 2012 – as a gesture of goodwill.
They also want to end the club’s dual-tier stock structure so that all shareholders have equal voting rights.
Liverpool fans are also still angry with their owner – Fenway Sports Group – and have called for change.
The prominent Liverpool support group Spion Kop 1906 sent a passionate letter Thursday directly to owner John Henry and his colleagues at FSG, in which they set out the club’s “shame and embarrassment”.
The fan group responsible for the famous flag and mosaic ensembles that adorn the legendary Kop ending on match days has now asked the FSG to sit down with them in a face-to-face meeting and to discuss the appointment of a fan representative for the board, with the power to have a say in matters.
The same fan group was one of the first to put pressure on Liverpool’s owners after they greeted the Super League’s initial announcement with a response to inform the club that they would remove their flags from the stadium.
Liverpool’s FSG owners, including boss John W. Henry (left) and chairman Tom Werner (center), are at the heart of a storm with fans over the failed Super League
Prominent fan group Spion Kop in 1906 wrote a passionate letter to the FSG setting out previous misconduct and demanding that this be the owner’s final “patronizing apology”
Attention is now turning to how to prevent such a situation in the future and serious reform of the way English football is played seems high on the agenda.
The government has announced a fan-led review of the power structures of English clubs, chaired by Tracey Crouch MP.
And one of the ownership models to consider will be the German 50 + 1 rule. It is often cited as an example of how things should be done in football.
But what does that mean and would it work in the Premier League? Sportsmail’s piece about the system can be found here.
More will follow.