(BU) Earlier this year, the Basketball Champions League has announced a new strategic partnership with a US entity called GCBH Limited Partnership. According to the explanation there, this partnership should bring BCL to the next level. Not just BCL, but the landscape of European club competitions. From what I understand, this firm is newly-established to work with BCL. Could you tell us more about this partnership? What are its impacts on club competitions?
This is good and a very important question. From the outset of the Basketball Champions League when we started back in 2016, we had a clear long-term strategy that included specific steps. The first step was to establish competition. To present the BCL as a credible alternative in which the clubs would take pride and pleasure to participate. That was the first three years.
It was clear that after three years, we would seek a third-party investor. We needed that support to accelerate our growth. The support I’m talking about is not just financial. FIBA is the world’s governing body. It’s not all about money. It is about know-how, expertise, good practices that will allow us to grow further. GCBH has specifically been established for this. ‘B’ in GCBH stands for basketball. It is a company created by a consortium of American investors. Then, it went on and partnered with FIBA in creating a company called FIBA ClubCo, which is majority-owned by FIBA. GCBH investment plays a significant part, as well.
FIBA ClubCo allows significant investments to be made in club competitions. As you know, we have recently launched BCL Americas. We have upgraded the FIBA Intercontinental Cup. FIBA is taking a very important step ahead for club competitions.
“I think we have a significant difference from our colleagues at ECA”
All of this is a part of a greater strategy identified and approved by FIBA to develop and support club competitions. What we’re looking at specifically here in Europe with the new investment group is to strengthen the club competition environment. This does not only mean the Basketball Champions League; this means the leagues, domestic competitions, overall development of the sport. All of this falls under one pyramid. You cannot have a successful top-tier competition if the leagues aren’t successful.
I think we have a significant difference from our colleagues at ECA. We believe very much that we need strong domestic leagues. If we have a strong Turkish League, it means that more clubs will grow; more clubs will be competitive; more clubs will be able to have a competitive European season. For us, this remains fundamental. All we’re doing is to strengthen the leagues across Europe.
Basketball in Europe is not played by a handful of clubs; basketball in Europe played by hundreds of clubs. We cannot look at the interests of 10-11-12 clubs and forget the interests of 800 other clubs. As you know, participation in BCL is linked exclusively to the success in domestic competitions. If a team knows it’s in a position to participate, it will fight harder to reach that spot. This is common sense. We feel confident that this is the only way to develop the sport.
The Need for Organic Growth
I always keep referring to the need for organic growth. It means that basketball has to generate revenue. It cannot rely on the money from the football club; it cannot rely on the money from the government sponsor; it cannot rely on the money from the crazy Greek owner that suddenly wants to spend millions. This is not organic. The moment the “crazy owner” decides to stop, what happens to the club? In basketball, we have seen tons of examples. When Mr. Benetton decided to leave Treviso, Treviso disappeared. We don’t want to see this. We want clubs to create their value. To do this, they need to be strong, week in week out, in the domestic competition. This is where the fans, the sponsors, the local identity of the club are generated.
(BU) Thank you. I have one more question regarding the partnerships. Right now, you have a new partner in GCBH, but apart from this, FIBA – so BCL – is working with Infront, as well as with FIBA Media, a company shared between FIBA and DAZN Group. For all these partnerships, will the executives come together to work on common goals? Or are BCL executive working separately with those partners?
You identified the partners here. Infront is a commercial partner. Infront is the one helping us commercialize our inventory when it comes to sponsorships. DAZN and FIBA Media are our media partners. They are the ones helping us commercialize and promote our TV agreements. This is something that goes hand-in-hand with the growth of the Basketball Champions League. The collaboration at the decision-making level between FIBA, BCL, and our American investors finds the strategy to grow this competition. As we take vital decisions regarding the competition, we hope that our strategic partners – Infront and DAZN – can convince the market that this is a competition worth investing.
(BU) Is BCL looking for a name partner? Is this on your agenda?
From the outset of the establishment of BCL, we did not want to have a name partner. I think this was essential for us to establish the name of the Basketball Champions League. As a new competition, priority has to be given to what we call the brand identity. We needed the people and the environment to appreciate what BCL stands for without another commercial entity. That has been very important for us from the outset. Now, we’re in a position to examine such opportunities. It’s not a priority. But if we find a partnership that makes sense to both sides, and adds brand value to BCL, then we would be open to examining it as well.
(KRO) I understand from your last answer that as an organization, you’re planning to build a model like UEFA Champions League. Now, that is a brand. They don’t need another brand as a name sponsor. Is it fair to say for you?
That’s a very good observation. UEFA has the luxury of not needing a name partner to continue its growth. It has developed a product that generates such high demand. UEFA can find the balance between 6-8 sponsors without establishing one of them higher than the others. This is also quite important for commercial evaluation. All the partners are created equally. That’s a model that has worked very well. A lot of what I shared with you today and explained in the past is not different from what UEFA has done since 1992 in establishing UEFA Champions League as a top commercial property. I think there is an interesting comparison here.
“What is basketball doing wrong?”
We all can acknowledge that UEFA Champions League is up here, no question. Its commercial value is also up here. UCL generates close to 4 billion euros a year. Their prominence is up here, and it’s also visible on the commercial value. The paradox taking place in basketball is that the popularity is up here. There is significant interest. It’s not as high as UEFA’s, but it’s fair enough. But it is, without a question, the #2 sport. The popularity is high, but this is what we find paradoxical: As high as the popularity, the commercial value does not even fit on the screen. That begs the question: How can a sport be so popular, yet its commercial value to be about 55 million across Europe? That is %1 of what football generates. That begs another question: What is basketball doing wrong?
This is where we come in with a concrete model that talks about organic growth. We believe the mechanisms to increase the pie. This is what we advocate. We firmly believe that our model is in the right direction, just because we managed to include the champions of Poland, Belgium, the Netherlands, and other countries where basketball is not necessarily popular in the last few years. We are in a position to explore opportunities beyond 4-5 markets that are currently subsidizing the entire industry.
(KRO) BCL’s competition system for the 2020-21 season is undetermined to us, as there is a Final Eight to be played. Will there be a change?
No. First of all, I’m a firm believer in two principles. The first one is that competition should not change its format very often. Then, we would not allow fans to understand what’s going on. Any proposals for change should be discussed internally and then applied for the following season. We will never do such thing two months before the season.
(KRO) We’ve gone through a global pandemic by which many economies are negatively affected. Are there going to be any changes in the contracts for the broadcasting rights of BCL?
We have to negotiate our TV rights almost every year. We are doing this conscientiously because we acknowledge that BCL is in a growing momentum. Therefore, we need to allow this growth to be taken into consideration to develop our competition. Right now, we will be going out to the market and negotiate the agreements. If a broadcaster is willing to partner with us in the long-run, we are equally happy to do so. But what we’ve seen the last couple of years is BCL is the sort of property everyone is excited to see grow. Therefore, we are happy to renew our appointments on an annual basis. That said, it is important to maintain stability. So, it depends much on the environment in the countries.