SHOCKING REVELATION!

MFL says some teams rely on verbal sponsorship pledges

THE Malaysian Football League (MFL) has revealed how some M-League teams have been operating with just verbal pledges from sponsors, and this has led them to ending up in debts and eventually folding up.

Refuting that the M-League is not lucrative enough for its teams, the MFL, under chief executive Kevin Ramalingam, has been working hard to raise the prestige of the league by attracting sponsors to invest in the competition.

Last week, Felcra announced they had to drop out from next year’s M-League despite having won promotion to the Super League. Felcra, like many other failed teams before them over the years, cited financial problems for withdrawing.

However, this year, MFL distributed a total of RM48 million to all 24 teams in the M-League, with teams in the Super League and Premier League receiving RM3 million and RM1.5 million each.

However, some teams, who also have funding from their state government and private companies, still couldn’t operate well by spending over their budgets.

“Football clubs with debts is not an unique issue in Malaysia... it is also a problem outside the country.

“The problem here is that some sponsorship pledges between teams and sponsors are not crystalised on a piece of paper and signed off. Some pledges are based on word of mouth or verbal agreement because teams assume the sponsors (companies or state government) are their friends.

“If teams are offering contracts to players and coaches on the back of just a verbal ‘yes’ or verbal ‘amount’, then they are acting irresponsibly in managing their organisation. We need to weed out this practice... Malaysian football doesn’t have a place for you (teams),” said Kevin.

On the teams who have ceased operations over the years due to financial constraints, Kevin said: “This problem arises when teams rely on a single source for funding.

“We found that teams who are now defunct were single-source funded clubs.

“Single-source funded teams are unsustainable as they are too reliant on one sponsor. We, in the future, may include a funding clause, where a budget from one funder cannot be greater than 50 or 60 per cent of total sponsorship, as a club licensing requirement. This move, of course, needs to be refined further before it can be implemented.

“We are currently studying this with our La Liga partner.

“It is, however, the team’s prerogative on how much to spend in a season. In a period where the M-League is offering better incentives, some teams are still stuck and this is just to show that even if we keep giving them more and more, it will never be enough unless there are restrictions in place.

“Some teams just do not have long-term plans. All their plans are centred on a yearly basis. This is an irresponsible way of managing a team.”

Kevin noted that in order for smaller teams to build their brand and attract sponsors, they first need to have a proper home base.

“Some change venues every season and this does not help. The idea is to put their feet down somewhere permanently and work with the community within to build a fan base and to attract sponsors.

“For instance, in the Bundesliga, Bayern Munich are the most successful team but not all sponsors go to them. Some funders go to smaller teams who are in their vicinity as they want to promote their brand.

“Nomadic teams find it difficult as they are always changing venues. I hope some teams here will have permanent venues for the upcoming seasons,” he added.