Richard Golz: DFL investor entry “makes the Bundesliga less exciting”

Mr. Golz, the DFL member clubs agreed on Monday with a narrow majority to sell the media shares to an investor. Fans have been protesting against the decision for months. Did football die on Monday?
No, we are far from that. As is so often the case, the truth lies in the middle. The clubs have an incredible need for investment and competitive pressure. So you inevitably have to talk about revenue pots. But there are points that the fans understandably point out.

Where, then?
I’m thinking, for example, of ticket prices, which are comparatively humane in Germany. An investor naturally has an interest in increasing the clubs’ income. And that would be possible given the high demand given the ticket revenue and would probably change the mood in the stadium. We have that in England seen where the good atmosphere in the stadiums is now just a myth. So I can understand the concern of the fans who are afraid that German football will become more expensive and the atmosphere becomes a theater piece.

But the ticket prices are not affected by the sale of the TV rights, or are they?
No, but everything is connected to everything else. The bigger and more profitable a club is, the better players it can buy. This increases the attractiveness of the league, which in turn increases media revenue.

Many fan groups have already announced further protests. What should the clubs expect?
The usual: banners, whistles, experts making critical comments. But clubs and DFL now also pose. There is no point in dealing with the topic defensively. That’s why I don’t believe in the fact that the vote was held secretly. We can now see in the case of Hannover 96 how this can become a political issue.

It means, that Hanover President Martin Kind may have ignored the club’s own position and agreed to the deal. And with one less yes vote, the deal would not have gone through.
It probably won’t be clarified, but it puts a strain on the whole issue, including 50 plus 1. I think we need as much transparency as possible, not just now, but that’s exactly why the vote shouldn’t have been held in secret.

Did something permanently disrupted between fans and clubs on Monday?
I do not believe that. It’s still too early for that – the deal hasn’t even been finalized yet. As I said, this process must now be as transparent as possible, also for the fans.

Nevertheless, the question arises as to how bad the clubs must be financially if they get involved in this dispute.
Although you may not believe it, money is chronically tight in football. There are always clubs that, for example, have TV revenue advanced. At the moment I would say that most clubs are doing better again after Corona. So the deal didn’t happen out of sheer necessity.

The necessary majority was not achieved in a first vote in May, but now it is. What was different this time?
The general conditions were completely different back then. Ultimately, after Donata Hopfen’s departure in May, there were no negotiating partners for potential investors. Then many clubs felt taken by surprise because no one knew exactly how much money was involved. Nobody knew exactly how the money would be distributed or how much influence the investor would have. The entire first draft was not good, both in terms of content and communication. Now they have taken a more cautious approach, although they should have communicated more with the fans. But I don’t want to deny the sensitivity of the new DFL leadership. I find, Marc Lenz and Steffen Merkel have so far tried to ensure a good process.

In their statement, Lenz and Merkel The term “red lines” was used a good dozen times for potential investors, which also means that there should be no influence on the DFL’s day-to-day business. Why isn’t this message getting through to fans?
There is a general fear of investors and the sell-out of football. And as I said, this is not unfounded. But we are still very different from England, Spain or France. The 50+1 rule is our greatest asset.

Some say that 50+1 has been dead since Monday. Many clubs are clearly acting against the interests of their own fans.
You have to differentiate between Ultras and the broad range of fans who would like to continue to keep up with Europe. But yes, I can’t completely resolve the contradiction.

The question also arises as to why the new deal – eight percent of the shares in the media rights for 1 billion euros – should be better than the 3 billion euros for twelve percent that the package from May provided for. Calculated down to a percentage point, the deal is significantly worse.
Yes, this question is of course obvious. The only way I can explain this is that the clubs have fewer concerns about inequality. To put it bluntly, one could say: the bigger the package, the more could flow to the big clubs. But the biggest winner is certainly the potential investor.

The other way around, you could also say that no big jumps are possible. The gap to the English Premier League is unlikely to be made up with 1 billion euros – and interest in games between Augsburg and Heidenheim will be limited internationally anyway.
Yes, you have to look at the different investment pots carefully and critically. There are obviously numerous clubs for which internationalization is of secondary importance – even if I consider the basic strategy to be sensible. But pouring money on regionally based Bundesliga teams is of no use to anyone. That’s why, in my opinion, it’s positive that the new package is smaller and more precise.

Why do you bring private equity on board at all? You could have borrowed the billion from the bank.
Yes, private equity is certainly the most expensive financing option overall. But they wanted the network and the resulting synergy effects, which is understandable.

But an investor wants influence, many fans warn. The DFL brushes aside the criticism. Are the fans being taken for fools by the DFL?
No. The DFL will have already thought about it. For me, communication is the problem: just talking about red lines is too simple. You should have clearly argued why you chose this form of financing. This has not been done sufficiently.

Have you ever experienced influence in your career, for example from sponsors?
Not really. TV Spielfilm wanted to get HSV off our chest because we lost a few games in a row and there was a bit of chaos. They actually did this for some time. Otherwise it was always kept away from us players.

There are currently two to three investors still in discussion. The greatest opportunities are given to CVC and EQT. From your perspective, what does the investor need to bring with him?
A certain affinity for football! Possibly already investments in this area. But he has to understand the values ​​of German fan culture. Of course, an investor wants to assert his interests – and yes: he will also move red lines. We also experienced this at Sat 1 in the 80s and 90s, when reporting completely changed. But football has always maintained its identity and I hope it stays that way. I mean that especially in terms of competition.

Keyword competition: Will the current plans make the Bundesliga more exciting again – probably the biggest problem at the moment?
No, that doesn’t change anything. The gap will probably widen even further.

Could a new gaming system help? Similar to the USA, there could be a fixed contingent of traditional teams with the greatest TV reach that are not relegated, plus a second group of sporting qualifiers, and redistribution through central marketing. That would be radical, but even in the capitalist USA it works well.
I lack any imagination for this. We are in Europe and have our own football and competition culture. We should have our own ideas so that sporting competition remains the focus.

Note: This article first appeared on “Capital“.