If not quite at death and taxes levels of certainty, there has been a marked predictability about the volume of spending indulged in by Premier League clubs during every close season.
Each summer for the last eight years, the total amount spent on new players during the transfer window by Englands top-division clubs has reached new heights – sometimes, as in 2017, increasing by hundreds of millions of pounds; on other occasions only by a few percentage points.
This year, however – barring an unprecedented splurge in the final days before the deadline – an odd thing is happening: the worlds richest football league is on course to see a lower outlay than 12 months previously.
Read more: Trevor Steven: Mourinho needs to change his ways – not his squad
By the start of August, Premier League clubs had racked up a collective gross spend of around £900m, Deloitte reported yesterday, and further moves in the hours since have taken that sum to around £920m.
Those numbers are broadly in line with the level of spending at this time last year. But while on that occasion there was still another month of wheeling and dealing to go, this time – following a decision by clubs to bring the deadline forward – there is little more than a week.
It makes the chances of another landmark total spend appear slim. Or as Deloittes Sport Business Group analysts put it in their update: “Premier League clubs need to spend over £530m in order to break last summers record.”
The timing is intriguing in that it coincides not only with the rescheduled transfer deadline but also with a slowdown in growth of clubs main source of income – domestic broadcast revenues – and a new era of profitability for the top teams.
Chelsea have signed midfielder Jorginho from Napoli, but still have a lot of business to do (Source: Getty)
The earlier deadline for deals was intended to make life easier for clubs, removing the distraction of lingering transfer speculation and the related danger of unsettled players during the opening weeks of the new season.
Yet because clubs in the rest of Europe did not follow suit and largely remain free to trade until the end of August, it has left English sides under greater pressure to close deals early this month – a predicament not helped by the occurrence of a World Cup.
This naturally puts their continental counterparts in a stronger bargaining position – Real Madrid, for one, have shown they have the whip hand in their pursuit of Chelsea pair Thibaut Courtois and Eden Hazard.
The Blues, mired in uncertainty, have signed just one player, £57m midfielder Jorginho from Napoli.
Manchester United and Manchester City have also only made modest investments, of around £73m and £63m respectively, in a window that has been notable for a shortage of big signings from the leagues traditional Big Six – Liverpool excepted.
Indeed, the less financially equipped likes of Southampton, Leicester, Brighton and newly promoted Fulham have spent similar amounts to City and Chelsea so far this summer.
United and Chelsea may yet spend a good deal more – both have been heavily linked with major signings – and Deloittes Tim Bridge said he expected “significant further expenditure” from the league as a whole before the window closes, but the early deadline doesnt appear to be making life easier for clubs currently.
Broadcast revenues
Another factor in the likely drop-off in spending could be the halting growth in the value of the rights to broadcast Premier League to a domestic audience.
Sky, which secured most of the packages sold by the league, will pay £9.3m per game for the 2019-22 cycle, down £1.5m from its current rate, following an auction that fell well short of the usual double-digit growth.
There has been a halting in the growth of domestic broadcasting rights (Source: Getty)
Perhaps, then, clubs are becoming more prudent in anticipation of leaner times to come.
On the other hand, the Premier League broadcast rights bubble has not burst. The value of overseas rights – once small beer – is growing at the rate that the domestic rights once did, so teams have little obvious reason to cut back.
This all does, however, fit with a wider trend of the top flight becoming more rational businesses. In 2016-17 all 20 Premier League teams were profitable, while the aggregate wages-to-turnover ratio – a key measurement of financial health – dropped to 55 per cent, the lowest level for more than a decade.
Last years record spend
A final consideration should be the huge jumps in spending witnessed in the last two summers. The 2016 window saw a year-on-year increase on £295m to £1.16bn, and it rocketed £265m to £1.43bn in 2017.
Even for Premier League teams, those numbers are hard to sustain. The growth in spend tends to most pronounced in the summer before a new set of broadcast deals kick in, as was the case in 2016.
Increases in the final year of a broadcast rights cycle tend to be more modest: £25m in 2015 and £5m in 2012, while summer 2009 saw the last fall in total expenditure, from £500m to £450m.
While a fall in spending this summer would not be unprecedented, then, the evidence points to it being a blip before another big rise next year.
If not quite at death and taxes levels of certainty, there has been a marked predictability about the volume of spending indulged in by Premier League clubs during every close season.
Each summer for the last eight years, the total amount spent on new players during the transfer window by Englands top-division clubs has reached new heights – sometimes, as in 2017, increasing by hundreds of millions of pounds; on other occasions only by a few percentage points.
This year, however – barring an unprecedented splurge in the final days before the deadline – an odd thing is happening: the worlds richest football league is on course to see a lower outlay than 12 months previously.
Read more: Trevor Steven: Mourinho needs to change his ways – not his squad
By the start of August, Premier League clubs had racked up a collective gross spend of around £900m, Deloitte reported yesterday, and further moves in the hours since have taken that sum to around £920m.
Those numbers are broadly in line with the level of spending at this time last year. But while on that occasion there was still another month of wheeling and dealing to go, this time – following a decision by clubs to bring the deadline forward – there is little more than a week.
It makes the chances of another landmark total spend appear slim. Or as Deloittes Sport Business Group analysts put it in their update: “Premier League clubs need to spend over £530m in order to break last summers record.”
The timing is intriguing in that it coincides not only with the rescheduled transfer deadline but also with a slowdown in growth of clubs main source of income – domestic broadcast revenues – and a new era of profitability for the top teams.
Chelsea have signed midfielder Jorginho from Napoli, but still have a lot of business to do (Source: Getty)
The earlier deadline for deals was intended to make life easier for clubs, removing the distraction of lingering transfer speculation and the related danger of unsettled players during the opening weeks of the new season.
Yet because clubs in the rest of Europe did not follow suit and largely remain free to trade until the end of August, it has left English sides under greater pressure to close deals early this month – a predicament not helped by the occurrence of a World Cup.
This naturally puts their continental counterparts in a stronger bargaining position – Real Madrid, for one, have shown they have the whip hand in their pursuit of Chelsea pair Thibaut Courtois and Eden Hazard.
The Blues, mired in uncertainty, have signed just one player, £57m midfielder Jorginho from Napoli.
Manchester United and Manchester City have also only made modest investments, of around £73m and £63m respectively, in a window that has been notable for a shortage of big signings from the leagues traditional Big Six – Liverpool excepted.
Indeed, the less financially equipped likes of Southampton, Leicester, Brighton and newly promoted Fulham have spent similar amounts to City and Chelsea so far this summer.
United and Chelsea may yet spend a good deal more – both have been heavily linked with major signings – and Deloittes Tim Bridge said he expected “significant further expenditure” from the league as a whole before the window closes, but the early deadline doesnt appear to be making life easier for clubs currently.
Broadcast revenues
Another factor in the likely drop-off in spending could be the halting growth in the value of the rights to broadcast Premier League to a domestic audience.
Sky, which secured most of the packages sold by the league, will pay £9.3m per game for the 2019-22 cycle, down £1.5m from its current rate, following an auction that fell well short of the usual double-digit growth.
There has been a halting in the growth of domestic broadcasting rights (Source: Getty)
Perhaps, then, clubs are becoming more prudent in anticipation of leaner times to come.
On the other hand, the Premier League broadcast rights bubble has not burst. The value of overseas rights – once small beer – is growing at the rate that the domestic rights once did, so teams have little obvious reason to cut back.
This all does, however, fit with a wider trend of the top flight becoming more rational businesses. In 2016-17 all 20 Premier League teams were profitable, while the aggregate wages-to-turnover ratio – a key measurement of financial health – dropped to 55 per cent, the lowest level for more than a decade.
Last years record spend
A final consideration should be the huge jumps in spending witnessed in the last two summers. The 2016 window saw a year-on-year increase on £295m to £1.16bn, and it rocketed £265m to £1.43bn in 2017.
Even for Premier League teams, those numbers are hard to sustain. The growth in spend tends to most pronounced in the summer before a new set of broadcast deals kick in, as was the case in 2016.
Increases in the final year of a broadcast rights cycle tend to be more modest: £25m in 2015 and £5m in 2012, while summer 2009 saw the last fall in total expenditure, from £500m to £450m.
While a fall in spending this summer would not be unprecedented, then, the evidence points to it being a blip before another big rise next year.
