In the book, "How Soccer Explains the World," Foer addresses the role of oligarchs in the game, yet he does not include arguably the most prominent, but discreet oligarch in the game. Roman Abramovich is the owner of Chelsea FC, a team which has recently found monumental success from world class players brought in on Abramovich's dime. Abramovich rose to prominence during the liberalization of Russian industry during the reign of Boris Yeltsin. He seized control of aluminum and oil companies, and held a significant amount of shares in Gazprom, a multi-national corporation. Gazprom is a very well known sponsor of UEFA and FIFA, and arguably contributed to the bribes to bring the World Cup to Russia in 2018. While much of this happened after Foer published his book, the influence of corporations and oligarchs extends far beyond the simplicity of buying referees and smashing transfer records. The rise of rich foreign investors in soccer to protect their funds has increased a marketization of the game, and sponsorships which now have a tremendous amount of influence upon the beautiful game.
Mr. Abramovich started a wave of foreign investment in large European teams, since his arrival in the English game, many more have followed. The Abu Dhabi United Group has brought Manchester City back to prominence, the Qatar Investment Authority has made Paris St. Germain a continental force, and Dmitrii Rybolovlev splashed cash at AS Monaco. All of these oligarchs were seeking a way to protect their money, and to legitimatize it. When Abramovich bought Chelsea, it was during a time in Russia when Putin was cutting the oligarchs down, men like Boris Berezovskii were seeking asylum, and Abramovich had to ensure that he was not next. By funneling money through Chelsea and Gazprom endorsement deals, Abramovich secured his financial and political future. Since his purchase of Chelsea, Putin has taken Abramovich as a close advisor and even helped him secure political office. These oligarchs have established a very effective system for protecting their own capital through soccer clubs in Europe, and because of this, capitalism has spread through the game. Teams are seeking large endorsements, Manchester United have a sponsor for just about every possible item. Take a look, http://www.manutd.com/en/General-Footer-Section/Sponsors.aspx it truly gets ridiculous at times. These teams are now driven by the profit rather than the glory.
More recently, the corruption of FIFA is well known, and most notably of Sepp Blatter. He secured another term of office, but soon after corporations such as Coca-Cola and McDonalds reneged their sponsorship deals, two of the largest deals for FIFA. A few days later, Blatter announced he would resign. The influence of money and these corporations cannot be understated in FIFA and the game as a whole. While Foer does touch on the power of money within the game, the rise of corporations and their power he did not predict. While he does talk about the Agnelli family and their corruption using Fiat, the scale of which corporations have taken control could not have been predicted.
I really do recommend everyone to take a look at Manchester's endorsement deals, for example, they range all the way from primary sponsor to, Official Integrated Telecommunications partner of Manchester United for Bahrain and Kuwait.
ReplyDeleteFrank,
ReplyDeleteI think that many people would classify what has happened with Chelsea, Manchester City, and Paris St. Germain (oligarchs taking over struggling clubs and turning them into powers) and what has happened with Manchester United (the search for sponsorship in a capitalist market) as different sorts phenomena. Why do you think these are example of the same thing and what might that thing be?
P.S. Abramovich bought Chelsea in the summer of 2003 after Foer had done all fo his research for the book. Would have been a fascinating chapter though.
Professor, regarding your first point I think the connection between these two events is the desire to make and secure money. Abramovich and the Glazers know that these clubs are massive commercial bases where they can cement their wealth and make more of it. Secondly, this represents the commercialization of the game as these investors are going in initially for the money. While I believe that Abramovich has actually developed a true love for the club, some would still argue that it is purely money driving the relationship. All the examples I mentioned in the post have used soccer as a way to make more money and to protect their own funds.
DeleteFrank,
ReplyDeleteWhat an interesting topic! Upon seeing your blog post, I took it to myself to do more research on Roman Abramovich. He had such a quick rise to power, and not surprisingly, was involved in many scandals on his way up to the top.
I enjoyed this post because it confirmed growing suspicions that in today’s fervently growing capitalistic society, the concern is no longer about the logistics of the team winning, but rather, if the team’s brand is making money (such as you explain with soccer). This is quite disheartening, especially for long-time devoted fans, who have to see their players give up ethical practices in lieu of lucrative ones. Players in these commercialized soccer teams aren’t playing for the love of the game, but rather, for the simple incentive of money. Not to mention, sometimes players will purposely “throw a game” or not play up to their full potential because they have received a monetary bribe to do so. I wonder what future prospects of globalization will do (or if they will have any effect at all) on the future of commercialized soccer.
Elana, I have spent hours reading about Abramovich, his court case with Boris Berezovskii is incredibly interesting! It is sad to see how money has led to the corruption of the game in more ways than buying referees. The World Cup has recently been in a world of scandal regarding bribery driving where it would be, notably in Germany, Russia, and Qatar. It will certainly be interesting to see how it develops!
DeleteElana, I agree that it is a shame that some soccer players put money before the true "love" of the sport. Soccer has become more of a commercialized sport rather than a legitimate sport ,which is truly saddening. Frank, while I myself am a huge fan of Manchester United, I do agree that at times the amount of endorsements they have for pretty much anything they own/control is pretty silly. Most teams now are looking for who can sponsor or endorse them, so that they can rise up in terms of power. It is a shame that Globalization has made soccer seem like a fight over monetary value rather than skills.
DeleteFrank this is a very interesting article which I did not know much about other than the reading we have done in class. The relationship between the economy and globalization is one that cannot be missed and also one that is well illustrated by the game of soccer in the world. To play the devils advocate for a minute, as you briefly do yourself, have clubs and players ever really been in it for the glory? Granted, winning a title is nice, but even then, with title comes more money, so is it money again that wins out as the driving factor?
ReplyDeleteThis is something to think about as it applies to globalization and the economy as the questions I asked could be applied there too. What is the real goal of globalization? I argue that it is mostly likely the economic profit that comes as a result of new markets. And in turn, that is likely the reason for why so many nations are primarily focused on their world economic standing.
These cases of corruption in soccer are very eye opening. I wonder to what extent the purchase of referees has influenced the outcome of games. While I do not see excessive sponsorship as an issue, I do deplore the use of clubs as a financial safeguard for oligarchs. It seems that many oligarchs become owners to protect their personal bank accounts. In my mind, this distracts the club from its true purpose, competing to win games.
ReplyDelete