PIF’s Football Web: When State Ownership Turns Rivals Into Business Partners

When reports surfaced this week that Al Hilal has made Liverpool striker Darwin Núñez a priority target, the transfer story seemed simple at first glance. A big offer could hand Liverpool a sizable fee to reinvest this summer, partially on the $93 million already spent on Eintracht Frankfurt striker Hugo Ekitike, and partially to fund their reportedly mind-boggling $198 million in pursuit of Alexander Isak. Following the ownership trail, it quickly becomes something else entirely: Al Hilal is majority-owned by the same fund that owns Newcastle United, Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund. A sale that funds Liverpool could also pave the way for Newcastle to lose Isak to the same Liverpool side, all with PIF money exchanging hands in the background. It is a scenario that shows how a sovereign wealth fund can influence multiple clubs at once through cash flow.

This is no longer a straightforward competition between clubs. When one ownership group controls multiple teams, transfers that look like rival businesses on paper are actually part of a broader network. Deals that appear to hurt one team can strengthen another linked by the same fund, because the money never actually leaves the system. Instead of merit-based market dynamics, there is a circular economy that links teams who would otherwise be competing against each other. That is what makes this form of ownership so different from a standard multi-club model.

This isn’t the first time the reach of state-backed ownership has become clear. In the past year, Saudi Pro League clubs have acquired players from Premier League teams, such as Chelsea and Aston Villa, who were deemed surplus to their respective clubs. These deals have helped those clubs navigate domestic and continental financial rules, all while strengthening PIF’s footprint in football. Furthermore, these links stretch far beyond England. Ahead of the expanded 2025 Club World Cup, PIF bought a 10 percent stake in broadcaster DAZN just months before FIFA awarded DAZN a $1 billion global broadcast deal for the tournament. Not long after, FIFA announced a $1 billion prize pool. Chelsea, who went on to win the tournament, collected a massive payout from a prize structure built on the back of that DAZN deal. The fact that PIF helped make this structure possible demonstrates how state-backed influence can bring financial rewards for clubs far beyond the reach of their ownership group.

This is how state ownership typically works in the modern day. The money flows in circles, and rivalries get blurred in the process. Newcastle fans can celebrate a Carabao Cup win and a Champions League return, but every time Al Hilal or another PIF-controlled club does business, the consequences ripple back in Tyneside. It is tempting to shrug at all this. The scale of state influence in football can feel too big to fight, and to an extent, that is true. Suppose we truly want to protect meritocracy and traditional sporting dynamics in this era of state ownership. In that case, it is imperative to recognize and speak about how these deals are changing the game. Transfers that once came down to merit, budgets, and scouting are now shaped by the long reach of a single fund, and in the process, yesterday’s rivals are becoming today’s business partners, whether they like it or not.

Hooman Afzal

Hooman Afzal is a rising second-year law student at Northwestern and a UCLA graduate. He writes about soccer and European football with a focus on the game’s bigger picture as well as its day-to-day storylines. His work combines a lifelong passion for sports with an analytical approach shaped by his academic background.

Previous
Previous

Arthur Smith Getting Creative: Steelers Tight End Could Be Secret Weapon

Next
Next

Should the Knicks Move Josh Hart to the Bench?