A rational look at Aston Villa's £40m Betano sponsorship

Aston Villa have agreed a new record sponsorship for the club with the signing of a two-year deal to place betting firm Betano on the front of claret & blue shirts.

This £40 million contract will be Villa's final front-of-shirt gambling sponsor as it runs until the end of the 25/26 season, after which the Premier League enacts its ban on betting partners as main shirt sponsors.

The money on offer from Betano represents a massive increase on the 3-year deal locked in with BK8 just last year, which was worth £8 million per season. A figure now dwarfed by the £20 million per season that will land in the Villa's coffers until the end of the 25/26 season.

This will represent a booming success commercially for the club. As much as the matchday revenue conversation has dominated discussions, Villa still flagged behind others in commercial income.

To the club's credit, that has increased year-on-year, and 2023 was a record year for commercial income at the club - but it still fell behind relegated Leicester City's 2022 commercial income, as well as Leeds (who would be relegated) and Everton (who were fighting relegation).

You can see below in the graph from the excellent Swiss Ramble - an incredible football finance expert - that Villa's commercial revenue remained in the chasing pack in 22/23.

In 24/25, Betano will make up nearly 50% of the £41m 22/23 sponsorship figure alone.

And there's also the below on shirt sponsorship deals - based on Villa's deal with Cazoo that expired in 2023 to be replaced by BK8.

That controversial BK8 deal would top up Villa's shirt sponsorship income by a reported £1m a season, so £8m for 23/24.

Without considering other teams and their new sponsorships, Betano's £20m a season would place Villa 7th in the below graph based on 22/23 figures.

For more from The Swiss Ramble, I implore you read their full piece on Villa's 2023 accounts 👇

As you saw, Betano's impact on Villa's accounts will be immense. They blow previous shirt sponsorship deals out of the water and will add jet fuel to Villa's total commercial income.

Add on top of that the potential for a new sleeve/secondary sponsor as well as an incoming deal with Adidas to replace Castore as kit sponsor/supplier that will be a substantial increase on the £3m seasonal payment offered by the outgoing supplier.

But it's still Betano that will carry the main weight of Villa's commercial revenue until the gambling ban is introduced, and as a gambling company, its addition to the front of Villa shirts will continue to attract scrutiny.

I've already written at length on my thoughts about gambling sponsorships. You can read those thoughts below - they haven't changed since the BK8 sponsorship was agreed.

For the TL;DR, I think they are bad and harmful - but two truths do exist harmoniously with sports betting sponsorships.

• 1 - Most people won't care/be affected by gambling sponsorships
• 2 - Within football fanbases - nearly exclusively - are a specific section of the public who are at higher risk to problem gambling than the general public at large

This is known data, and yet Premier League clubs have still chased the gambling sponsorship money as, sadly, it is usually the best value on offer. At any rate, you can read more as to the 'why' gambling sponsorships are bad by clicking above or here - but the bottom line is that the Premier League have already taken measures to remove gambling sponsorships from shirts, and Villa's new blockbuster deal runs up to that point.

What I will say about BK8 is that I don't think Villa could've dealt with a seedier company, and all of those thoughts, again, are in my prior newsletter. As it goes though, Villa should've thought WAY better than associating with a firm whose UK licensees were found guilty of anti-money laundering (AML) and social responsibility failures over a two-year period.

For those that couldn't understand that last time (surprisingly a lot who somehow thought AML failures were actually good to have), it was a failure to prove prevention of money laundering on the platform IE: the lack of assessing the risk of money laundering and financing of terrorism on platform. It's shoddy, and no matter the money, you really shouldn't be associating with brands who cannot do very basic things when it comes to proving the legitimacy and legality of their operations.

In hindsight, Villa's deal with BK8 now makes a lot of sense if you examine what we have learned since it was agreed.

Since the BK8 deal, Aston Villa have also installed two GA+ services at the club with the Terrace View and The Lower Grounds coming into the fold. The Terrace View offers a bespoke concourse (with regular season ticket holders losing Ramsay's bar and concourse to make way for it) and the buffet service of The Lower Grounds (with regular season ticket holders losing the Holte Suite to make way for it). The Terrace View attracted £1,560 fees for new season ticket holders to secure a Holte End seat, as well as an exclusive concourse area. At £82 a game over 19 League games, with inflated prices to retain those seats during cup & Conference League fixtures, it's a considerable boost to Villa's matchday revenue.

BK8, TTV and TLG were quick decisions implemented at broadly the same time, and with Villa's account showing a pre-tax loss of nearly £120m in the 22/23 reporting period, the biggest recorded loss amongst UEFA clubs up to this point this season, show a need to make a quick buck without denting a squad that was pushing for Champions League football. All three decisions alongside the rise of ticket prices and season ticket prices were quick, easy and actionable data points that could help curb such losses in the eyes of financial fair play. In essence, between the three it was selling out, selling now and to prevent or guard against competitive sanctions. It was, from the outside looking in, a rushed job.

Betano's deal with Villa really does change a lot of that. It's in one swoop dwarfing prior commercial income & matchday revenue (18.1m in 2023 prior to the introduction of TTV/TLG that is). It is a huge single influx of cash, in relative terms. It's the type of cash worth selling out for. It doesn't curb a single one of my concerns about gambling's frontline in football - but who else is offering that money to Villa? Betano - of the Kaizen Gaming Group (previously known as Stoiximan) don't come with the baggage of BK8, and they certainly come with more cash in a truly difference-making quantity.

My more tangible concerns now remain on what Villa will do when it comes to general admission fan tickets and season tickets, because they have the opportunity now to essentially subsidise them with a minimal - or so it seems - impact on their bottom line.

To put it bluntly, Villa have rocketed upwards with incoming revenues (despite a hefty wage bill at the club), just look at this:

• 15%-ish increase on many tickets at Villa Park in 23/24 against 22/23
• The Terrace View and Lower Grounds doubling - in pockets - per fan spend on admission
• 150% increase in annual shirt sponsorship income + new shirt supplier deal
• A strong UEFA Conference League run that will bring additional prize money, gate income and TV revenue - potentially £20m if they bring the trophy home
• Champions League or Europa League revenue on offer next season - big increase on Conference League income either way
• Potential for strong player sales/squad renewal in the summer

I believe there will be another general increase on ticket prices - but my hope is that the club are now in a position to A) consider other options, and B) limit the increase. The feeling I got during last season's increases was that the mission was to increase the ticket prices to the maximum acceptable limit, rather than the goal being to keep increases to the minimum. In the coming months, that has changed now - and feebly trying to raise an extra £1.6m - £3m by gouging pressed fans shouldn't really be acceptable for a club that has seen every single revenue stream explode upwards in exponential ways. Things like getting a stadium sponsor (not currently at Villa), working with richer sponsors, increasing hospitality options - in a general sense, these should lessen the 'need' to turn the heat up on 'normal fans' over ticket prices, but it doesn't. Everything everywhere just goes up all at once.

For instance, if it was me - and Villa Park was sponsored by a brand, and Betano were pumping cash in, and we were in the Champions League, and TTV/TLG were gaining cash - I'd probably think 'is there a need to increase ticket costs by anything more than 5%'. At least that's my view. Maybe If I was in charge, the club would be run badly and all the tickets I dole out would relegate us. We'll never know.

But I still think that Villa can ease up in some ways. If that isn't the case, when are Aston Villa going to consider fan culture and wellbeing as one of their priorities? It's a very easy job!

However, with the gambling sponsorship ban on the horizon, Villa will need to find a way to increase their exposure to more acceptable and profitable partners come 2026.

Otherwise, things might get a bit more costly. Again.

Villa are showing signs of being a serious player, but will they act any differently to the others?