If someone wants to throw some money at our stadium naming rights though...
This week we've seen the seemingly inevitable news that the Swans are attracting, or have been looking to attract, investment from external big-money sources. The Evening Post (link) have stated that investors from the US, Russia & Asia have all been involved in discussions with the club, and the reaction we've seen to the news from fans online has been, unsurprisingly, very mixed.
There are those who welcome new money. The logic behind this is that, until now, our exponential growth has been enough to continue propelling the club upwards. Competing in the Premier League, however, throws up new challenges. If there are six or so spots at the top of the league which are unobtainable barring some major injection of finance, then that's the next logical step.
I can't say I agree with that. I find myself firmly in the other, more partisan camp. It's worth pointing out that the club have made pains to point out that at this stage, there has been no talk of a takeover bid and it seems we're very much exploring our options. Depending on the level of investment, and the return investors get for their cash, then I'm sure it could mean very good things for Swansea City. However, I strongly feel that any deal which saw a percentage of the club transferred into "foreign" hands would ultimately be to the detriment of the club.
There are plenty of ways we can attract external investment without giving up shares. Sponsorship is the big one - this is something we're catching up on and Huw has been perfectly candid when discussing our current level of operations. It's his view (and who are we to argue) that we are far behind our Premier League counterparts, and it's something we're working on addressing. Just what's been discussed with potential investors we can't say, but I'd be very surprised if things discussed didn't involve stadium naming rights, sponsorship of any expanded section of the Liberty, sponsorship of training grounds/kits, and any other manner of "stick your name on it and give us some money" style tie-ins.
The main one which springs to mind, to me anyway, is stadium naming rights. We currently receive around £0.67million a year for the naming rights to the stadium, which ranks us firmly in mid-table in terms of monies received, but the difference in revenue you see amongst clubs who can rely on Champions League revenue is drastic. These teams mostly receive around £6million a season - quite a staggering amount of money just to have a name on your stadium and even if we can only double or triple the amount we currently receive in this area it'll be money gratefully received.
The problem with the "we need investment" argument is that, to me, you could have applied the same argument at any point during our rise to prominence. Ok, we spent some money with Jackett in charge to get out of the lower leagues - but that didn't ultimately get us to where we needed to be. What did get us where we are is a slow, considered, methodical approach that almost ignores what everyone else is doing, so that we can concentrate exclusively on doing things the best way we can for our club. The Swansea Way.
Sure, there's a massive rift in competitivity in the Premier League, but who's to say that be continued plodding development we can't get to where we need to be? In fact, who's to say we aren't already where we need to be? Let's look at it without our Swansea City rose-tinted glasses on for a second - are we honestly expecting to be competing financially with some of the biggest clubs in the world less than a couple of decades after almost going out of the professional league system entirely? That seems a big ask for me, especially if you're trying to justify it as a business model.
We've seen on countless occasions what happens when clubs reach for the stars. They rarely succeed. The reason for this is if you have a big-money investor who plows money in, two things are guaranteed to happen. One, they'll expect a return on their investment, and two, the club will (very likely) outgrow it's natural fanbase, leaving the club in a very sticky situation if the external revenue dries up.
Look at Germany for an example. There's a great article here on the Guardian site (link) where they've spoken with the Bundesliga Chief Executive, who says there'd "be a huge shitstorm" if German clubs charged what their British equivalents do for tickets. What's more, they limit the amount of season tickets available so that fans from all walks of life can regularly get tickets to see their local team.
That may sound strange at first, but it's something British football could learn from - especially "smaller" clubs like the Swans. At present our fanbase is a lot smaller than most other teams in the Premiership, and while we're looking to expand our stadium expanding our fanbase is just as important, in order that, going forward, we can fill our bigger stadium. If in the interim our new shiny two-tier stand is only filled with people who want to see marquee signings, and who don't really care about the history of the club, where would that leave us if the money goes elsewhere?
My point in referencing Germany though is that if you look at the average attendance of the Bundesliga last season (43,500 - almost 9,000 more than the Premier League) it's clear that these are clubs who have, over time, built their fanbases out of the local community. That is the way forward. Not hurried expansion where extra money is brought in to bridge a gap created by immoral and irresponsible spending by the elite. If you build with the community the club will always be able to maintain it's stature. Outstrip the natural financial clout of the club through third-party finance and there's no such guarantee.
We are Swansea City, and we do things our way. I'm sure there are no serious talks going on regarding anything approaching a takeover attempt, but I do worry that external investment would dilute the integrity with which the club has been run over the last decade or so. For so long our attitude has been "we'll do things our way, and if you want to spend silly money you go for it", so for that to change, to me, makes no sense at all.
There's a reason our club is held up as a blueprint to follow for clubs looking to recover from, generally, poor management which involved an element of "chasing the dream". That reason is punching above our weight on the field while behaving responsibly off it, and it's very hard to see how, sponsorship aside, investment in the club wouldn't come at a price.
For me, if it's investment in the form of sponsorship that's fine. Giving up a percentage of the club though is to me, completely unthinkable. We've got such a good setup in place that barring something catastrophic which forces change upon us, I can't see the sense in tinkering with anything.
What do you think about potential third-party investment in Swansea City? Would you welcome it with open arms or do you have your reservations? Get in touch using the comment section below!