Evaluation of the Relationship between Financial Performance and Sport Success in European Football
Bibliographic record
Abstract
(ProQuest: ... denotes formulae omitted.)IntroductionFootball is not only a sports game anymore. It is a key part of the global sports industry. Football clubs have turned the game into a billion dollar business by the commercialization of the game itself, their players and all products related to game such as names, stadiums, jerseys, and etc. Moreover, football clubs started to integrate their trademarks into various services, such as telephone services, credit cards with club advantages, using sponsorship agreements while naming their sports team or their stadiums.There is a very intense competition among football clubs in the European football arena. The meaning of success in sports and in finance is two different concepts. When the top performers of the European football clubs were reviewed, it is relatively easy to determine that success in the European football arena requires big budgets. The analysis of football clubs' performance could provide some insights to this matter.Generally football clubs have been established as associations due to tax benefits and other legal advantages of the status. Associations are a form of non-profit organizational structure and success is not generally an important goal for them. However, after the game had turned into a billion dollar business the understanding of football club management has changed. Finding funds to establish a strong football team with a top coach who is goal oriented, winning championship cups on a national and international level became a critical issue.The UEFA Executive Committee accepted the need for a new set of rules and regulations to provide financial fair play for the European football industry in 2009. The main aim is the long term viability of the European club football. The new rules imposed more discipline on club football finances. Football clubs are encouraged to invest in the infrastructure and the youth sector on one hand, and to compete with their revenues without external funds coming in and to settle their liabilities in a timely manner on the other hand (UEFA, 2015). The Club Financial Control Body (CFCB) was created as a new unit consisting of independent legal and experts who will be monitoring the implementation of new rules (Franck, 2014). These regulations imply the existence of an implicit relationship between the health and sporting success at least for the whole European football industry in the long run. Generally the performance of companies is related to success in their line of business. Therefore, it is quite normal to expect such a positive relation between the two criteria in the European football industry. There are however, other factors which could create a negative impact on the performance side. Sports club presidents and managers are generally ready to take risks to reach sports success, such as national or international championships. Football club presidents are generally chosen among wealthy businessmen as a result of increasing financing pressure on football clubs.. However, this situation might cause the exploitation of football clubs and personal interests could surpass the interest of the clubs. This point and its possible effects could be analyzed with the help of the principal-agent model framework. Therefore, one might argue that there could be a negative relationship between sports success and results in the short run.Corporate governance is the most suitable model answering the needs of football clubs. Football clubs whose shares are publicly traded in Italy, Canada and England must obey the corporate governance rules. In other words, corporate governance is a prerequisite for going public (Sonmez and Toksoy, 2011). In conclusion, clubs using corporate governance successfully have a better chance in finding funds from the capital markets, reducing the cost of capital, and reaching a better liquidity position (Ozturk and Demirgunes, 2008). …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".