When selecting the cases it was decided to use the information orientation approach as outlined by Flyvbjerg (2006), rather than a random sample which can return an inadequate group of case clubs (Seawright & Gerring, 2008). For example, foreign takeovers have occurred at Birmingham, Liverpool, and Blackburn since 2009. By selecting one of these cases, the secondary data
generated would be deficient due to the short-time frame that the new owners have been in charge and would not provide the richness of detail that could be generated from other clubs even though it might be argued that a random sample could improve generalizability (Flyvbjerg, 2006). In terms of dealing with the case selection, Table 5.9 has a breakdown of all clubs that have competed in the Premier League from 1992 to 2011.
Table 5.9 Breakdown of Clubs who have competed in the Premier League 1992-2011
Number of Seasons Clubs Total
Twenty Manchester United, Arsenal, Chelsea, Tottenham,
Liverpool, Aston Villa, Everton 7
Nineteen 0
Eighteen Newcastle United, Blackburn 2
Seventeen 0
Sixteen West Ham, 1
Fifteen 0
Fourteen Middlesbrough, Manchester City, 2
Thirteen Bolton, Southampton, 2
Twelve Leeds, 1
Eleven Sunderland, Fulham 2
Ten 0
Nine Coventry 1
Eight Leicester, Charlton, Wimbledon, Sheffield Wed, 4
Seven Wigan, Derby, Birmingham, Portsmouth, 4
Six W.B.A, 1
Five Q.P.R, Ipswich, Norwich, Nottm Forest, 4
Four Stoke, Wolves, Crystal Palace, 3
Three Sheffield United, 1
Two Oldham, Bradford, Watford, Reading, Hull, 5
One Swindon, Barnsley, Burnley, Blackpool, Swansea 5
As the case studies selected were to be from clubs with some form of foreign ownership, a number of clubs had to be discounted as potential case study targets as they have been
controlled by domestic investors. The next stage was to eliminate those clubs which at the time of the research were under foreign control but not competing in the Premier League. This ruled out several clubs including Birmingham City, Sheffield Wednesday, and Hull City. All of these clubs were foreign owned, but at the time of the research they were competing in divisions outside of the Premier League. For clubs outside of the Premier League, the data which is available on both club performance and takeover motives is more limited. For example, the Deloitte annual review of football finance only covers the top two divisions (Premier League and Championship). It does not cover those clubs like Sheffield Wednesday, who at the time of this study, were playing in League One. The amount of coverage given to Premier League clubs in the national press and media is far greater than those in lower divisions. In the Premier League the analysis of the data is more straightforward as the increased availability of secondary data created a greater level of depth and richness to the analysis. This is a critical part of the qualitative research process (Chetty, 1996).
The sample was reduced, therefore, to ten clubs which were Arsenal, Aston Villa, Blackburn, Chelsea, Fulham, Liverpool, Manchester City, Manchester United, Queens Park Rangers, and Sunderland. All of these clubs have a form of foreign ownership and were current Premier League clubs as of 2011/2012. The details of these clubs are shown in Table 5.10:
Table 5.10 Foreign Owned EPL clubs in 2011/2012
Club Ownership Date FDI from Investment
Arsenal Part April 2007-April
2011 U.S.A/Russia Share Purchase only
Aston Villa Full August 2006 U.S.A Extensive
Blackburn Full November 2010 India Limited
Chelsea Full July 2003 Russia Extensive
Fulham Full May 1997 Egypt Extensive
Liverpool Full October 2010 U.S.A Moderate
Manchester City Full September 2008 Abu Dhabi Extensive
Manchester Utd Full July 2005 U.S.A Limited
Q.P.R Full August 2011 Malaysia Moderate
Sunderland Full May 2009 U.S.A Extensive
(Liverpool, Manchester City, Q.P.R, and Sunderland have all had more than one foreign takeover). (Source: Author compilation)
From this list of clubs, three were chosen as case studies. The maximum variation approach outlined by Flyvbjerg (2006) was used to select the case studies. In the football context, this approach highlighted the need for clubs of different sizes, with different investment levels and league positions to be selected as the chosen cases. The three clubs that finished in the
Champions League places would not represent maximum variation. Another factor is that some clubs have been taken over by more than one foreign investor. This has occurred at four clubs, and the first case selection was a club that fitted this criterion. Queens Park Rangers were rejected as a case club on the basis that the acquisition of the club by Tony Fernandes did not take place until after the case study process had started, and this recent acquisition has produced little published data available to support a detailed analysis. Previously, Queens Park Rangers were part-foreign owned, but the club had also spent several seasons in the third tier of English football, which further impacts on the availability of data. Liverpool has been owned by two groups of North American investors from 2007 onwards, but the most recent takeover only took place in the autumn of 2010. At the time of research, there was little published data
available on this second takeover. Hence this would not have been a good choice to consider the
of Sunderland because it provided an example of a case study where a club has received extremely significant investment from a benefactor (Dobson & Goddard, 2011). More data is also available on the effects of the takeovers at Manchester City when compared with Sunderland.
This then leaves six clubs from which to choose the remaining two case studies. Blackburn was rejected on the basis of data availability. Blackburn had only been under foreign control from the autumn of 2010 and this represents too short a time period in which to analyse the effects of the takeover. Also at the time of the case study selection, no full season data was available to support the analysis. Of the remaining clubs, Arsenal was also rejected on the basis on data availability, and the recent period in which share acquisitions have taken place. The latest significant acquisition of shares in Arsenal only took place during April 2011, so there is a
shortage of data on financial performance etc. Additionally, Arsenal is not fully controlled by one single investor, and the effects of this investment are more difficult to ascertain. Of the
remaining four clubs, Manchester United and Fulham were then selected as case study clubs.
This was motivated by several factors. Firstly, access was granted to the supporter trusts of both clubs, while no qualitative data was available for Aston Villa and Chelsea. Hence this gives a greater depth and richness for Fulham and Manchester United over the other two clubs.
Secondly, the selection of Manchester United also gives an example of a large market club that had been taken control through the use of a leveraged buyout (Nauright & Ramfjord, 2010). As only two clubs have been taken over using this strategy (Liverpool are the second club), selecting both clubs would potentially bias the sample. Manchester United also provides evidence of a club owner seemingly motivated more by profit than sporting performance (Nauright &
Ramfjord, 2010). This again helps to provide a different context to the other clubs selected.
Fulham provides an example of a smaller club taken over by a foreign investor (who has
provided significant support to improve the standing of the club). Aston Villa and Chelsea are considered to be larger clubs than Fulham, so selecting Fulham will fit in with the maximum variation strategy. A further advantage of both Manchester City and Fulham is that they have been controlled by foreign investors for a significant period of time. Hence this means that additional secondary data is available to support the analysis.
Fulham have been controlled by Mohamed Al-Fayed from 1997 onwards. They provide evidence of one of the early foreign takeovers in English football, and there is a large amount of data available on Fulham as a result. With a large amount of data, the motives and consequences of the takeover can be analysed in detail, and this should also further limit conclusions being created by chance (Eisenhardt, 1989).
For the second case study, Manchester United has been foreign controlled since 2005, so the ownership period has been more medium term. One of the benefits of Manchester United’s size is that there is a large amount of secondary data available which discusses the performance of the club and the drivers behind the takeover. Articles, such as that by Szymanski (1998), which discuss the performance of the club under domestic ownership, allow comparisons to be drawn between foreign and domestic ownership at the club. The use of a leveraged buyout is not common in English football club acquisitions, so using the Manchester United takeover as a case study can also show elements of an atypical takeover. Manchester City has been foreign owned since 2007, and the current owners, the Abu Dhabi United Group have been in control since 2008. This is a shorter-term period than the other two clubs selected so this generates another benefit when considering the maximum variation of the cases, while still being able to access the required level of data. As both foreign takeovers at Manchester City were high profile, there is a range of secondary data available to provide sufficient evidence for the case study. This should
provide a contrast to the other cases and will fulfil the requirements for maximum variation (Flyvbjerg, 2006).