Search

Dr Dan Parnell

FOOTBALL, SPORT, SOCIAL CHANGE, POLICY, MANAGEMENT

A feast for wolves China’s richest man is hunting the global sports and entertainment industry

By Simon Chadwick, Paul Widdop and Dan Parnell – originally published here.

From football to movies to Indian cricket, Wang Jianlin’s Wanda Corporation is leading a pack of business interests with the aim of building an entertainment empire stretching from China to Hollywood, Simon Chadwick, Paul Widdop and Dan Parnell write.

Wang Jianlin is China’s richest man, his fortune derived from his ownership of the Wanda Corporation. Wang set up the company in 1988, originally to deal in real estate. Through a process of conglomeration, the business is now also active across the hospitality, retailing, tourism, entertainment and sport industries.

This has enabled Wang to accumulate a personal fortune worth more than US$30 billion, and to build a company currently generating upwards of US$40 billion each year. This is a long way from his origins; Wang started out as a member of the People’s Liberation Army, later becoming an administrator in a local government office in the city of Dalian.

wanda-guanxi-diagram-768x570

Crucially, Dalian had its own football club, which was initially called Dalian Shipyards and later became Dalian FC (when it was taken over by the local government). In 1993, Wang acquired the club, renaming it Dalian Wanda. By the late 1990s, the football club had been sold again, although by this time Wang had already set about creating what has arguably now become the most influential business in world football.

Most people from outside China probably first became aware of Wang in early 2015, when Wanda purchased a 20 per cent stake in Atletico Madrid. At the time, the Chinese businessman talked of his intention to build a global entertainment business that would stretch from China to Hollywood. As the network visualisation below shows, Wang is following through on his intentions.

wanda-guanxi-diagram

We have followed the same procedure here as we did when creating our previous visualisation for Fosun. The outcome of this exercise reveals a network that at one level is very simple: Wanda is heavily invested into activities that can be broadly categorised as ‘cultural industries’. At another level, the network is so complex and diverse that it shows how influential Wang and Wanda have become.

Just like our Fosun analysis, the Wanda network visualisation further demonstrates the importance of guanxi – broadly defined as networks, relationships and connections – in Chinese business. In this network, the right of the diagram depicts an array of predominantly Chinese relationships that underpin Wang’s vision of a global entertainment axis. Whether it is Disney in particular or Hollywood in general, Wanda is already challenging global entertainment’s existing order. Indeed, the ebullient Chinese businessman hasrecently said of Disney that “one tiger is no match for [my] pack of wolves.”

Equally important in Wanda’s network, however, is the role played by both Atlético Madrid and Infront Sports and Media (ISM). Purchasing Atlético cost the Chinese conglomerate US$52 million, and the company has also recently agreed to take-up a naming rights deal on the Madrid club’s new stadium. In recent years, Atlético have been through something of a renaissance, twice reaching the UEFA Champions League Final. Yet the broader network in which Atlético is embedded is possibly more important to Wang’s long-term strategy of building his entertainment empire via sport.

Atlético Madrid are co-owners of Indian Super League football club Atlético de Kolkata. Together, the latter’s group of co-owners is called Kalkata Games and Sports Pvt Limited. The group consists of former India cricket captain Sourav Ganguly, businessmen Harshavardhan Neotia, Sanjiv Goenka, and Utsav Parekh, as well as Atlético Madrid itself.

Many people will recall Ganguly as being one of India’s best ever cricketers as well as one of its most notable national team captains. However, he is now a member of Indian Premier League (IPL) cricket’s governing council as well as being president of the Cricket Association of Bengal. It is worth noting too that Ganguly’s fellow Kolkata group member, Sanjiv Goenka, is also owner of the IPL’s newest team – Rising Pune Supergiants.

IPL cricket is a phenomenon, capturing the attention (and the wallets) of sports fans in one of the world’s most populous nations. Television viewing figures for a round of IPL games are heading towards two hundred million, reinforcing cricket’s position as one of India’s leading forms of entertainment (alongside Bollywood films). And through its investments, partners and connections, Wanda is therefore invested into one of 21st-century sport’s biggest commercial properties.

Wanda paid US$1.2 billion for ISM in February 2015; the Swiss-based sports marketing company manages the marketing and media rights of several of the world’s leading sports organisations. One of ISM’s biggest clients is FIFA, specifically the World Cup, for which it produces television content. This is helpful to Wanda, given its entertainment ambitions, and to the Chinese government and its vision for football. Wanda also serves as a World Cup sponsor, which gives the conglomerate unprecedented access to FIFA’s top decision-makers. This is helpful for a nation intent on one day hosting world football’s biggest tournament.

With the 2022 Winter Olympics due to be held in Beijing, and with China intent onbuilding a winter sport economy, it is helpful too that ISM also represents all seven Olympic winter sport federations, and manages media rights for the International Ski Federation’s World Cup events. This part of Wanda’s network of influence intensifies even further, as China Media Capital (CMC) and Shanghai Media Group (SMG) also have stakes in ISM. This links Wanda into the Abu Dhabi United Group, the China International Trust and Investment Corporation (CITIC), and the City Football Group (which owns a 13 per cent stake in Manchester City).

Beyond these important nodes in Wanda’s network lies a multitude of further, intriguing relationships. For example, there are links to controversial businessman Li Ruigang, who was president of SMG until 2011, a position he now holds at CMC. In another case, Wanda’s ownership of the AMC cinema chain extends the company’s network into the National Basketball Association (NBA) through an AMC board member who co-owns the Philadelphia 76ers.

If, as Wang has stated, his businesses are wolves, then he is without doubt leader of the pack. Indeed, as a voracious hunter who has accumulated massive corporate influence through his knowledge and understanding of guanxi, it seems likely that Wanda will not stop at hunting down Disney. Several of global sport’s leading properties, as well as some of Hollywood’s biggest assets (like Dick Clark Productions, which runs the Golden Globes) have already been gobbled-up. Expect the feast to continue for the foreseeable future.

Is austerity the biggest threat to sport of our time?

This article was originally published on Connect Sport here.

This is a short research note prepared by Dr Dan Parnell and Dr Peter Millward, of ConnectSport, which offers an insight into a recent special issue on sport management in an era of austerity, published in the European Sport Management Quarterly journal.

The research note is based on a special issue edited by Dr Dan Parnell, Professor Karl Spracklen and Dr Peter Millward, which can be found here: Parnell, D., Spracklen, K., & Millward, P. (2016). Special Issue Introduction: Sport management issues in an era of austerity. European Sport Management Quarterly.

What is austerity?

Following Blyth’s (2013, p.2) description, we see austerity as: ‘a form of voluntary deflation in which the economy adjusts through the reduction of wages, prices and public spending to restore competitiveness which is [supposedly] best achieved by cutting the state’s budget, debts and deficits’.

Why is this an issue for sport?

The impact of the economic crisis which has engulfed Europe since 2008 and the subsequent ‘austerity measures’ which have reduced local and national spending on many public services focused on the practices of sport management, has received only scant scholarly attention.

A previous ConnectSport article sheds some light on how austerity can impact sport. There is no doubt public, private and third sector organisations, from grassroots to elite levels have faced challenges as a result of austerity (Parnell, Widdop and King, 2015).

Reduced finances and significant changes to public funding has meant many within sport are being challenged to deliver more, with limited resources and evidence their successes. Indeed, the search (and scrutiny) for value for money is definitely on! As a result, the special issue is very timely for sport practitioners and policy-makers.

What does the special issue cover?

This special issue provides insights on the impacts of policy in an era of austerity utilising case studies from two sporting organisations in two different European countries.

The first paper, ‘Implications of austerity measures on National Sport Federations: The case of Greece’ by Chrysostomos Giannoulakis, Dimitra Papadimitriou, Konstantinos Alexandris and Shea Brgoch discusses the consequences of forced austerity measures, and the implications of having to cut jobs in order to help their heavily indebted economies.

In the second article, by Catherine Walker and John Hayton overview the situation of a third sector disability sport organisation in the United Kingdom (UK), describing how this organisation has navigated austerity by adjusting management practices.

The issues raised in these two contributions present a wide range of challenges and questions for those who research in, and on the impact of austerity in sport management.

The biggest threat of our time?

Some might reasonably argue that austerity-driven policy measures offer the key challenge to the sport disciplinary area so far in the 21st century – and yet, thus far, a clear gap in research around the issue exists.  Our scholarly and intellectual aim in collating this special issue is to trigger ideas, debate and interest with a view to filling this space.

How do we in community sport and research move forward?

Of particular interest, a non-exhaustive list of research ideas in this area might include:

   – Further empirical research on the impacts of austerity measures on sport policy cuts: There is a shortfall of quantitative and qualitative research that explores the physical impacts of austerity cuts to sport policy budgets across Europe.  The Continent has various levels of quality data which exist on this, but in countries such as England seemingly robust data of this nature exists in the Active People Survey.  Data of this nature needs to be utilised and mined to draw up a localised picture of whether or not – or to what extent – sport policy cuts have reduced sport participation at a grassroots level.

   – The impact of sport policy cuts on ‘hard-to-reach’ populations: Some sectors of European societies are well recognised to be ‘hard to reach’ with respect to facilitating physical activity, particularly including sport participation.  The evidence base that exists about those who have suffered through austerity measures might suggest there is overlap amongst the two groups.  Some state-resourced sport and leisure facilities have closed or had opening hours reduced as a result of reduced state resource, particularly if they are ‘committee-serving’ rather than ‘profit-making’.  We hope this special issue may support future research in listening to, and analysing the narratives of those who used those sports facilities that have closed as a result of budgetary cuts, especially if those populations are part of the ‘hard-to-reach’ populations.

   – Managerial dilemmas faced by decision-makers: The processes of gaining ‘more’ (or at least the same) for less presents real challenges for senior and middle managers of state sport facilities on all geographical levels across Europe. Yet their voices – as concerns and/or challenges – have so far not been heard.  A potential research avenue which could spring from this special issue might be to empirically and theoretically understand such dilemmas.

   – Opportunities for public-private partnerships: The reduction in public spending in areas such as sport facilities is assumed to be negative.  Yet such changes in the nature of budgets may open up possibilities for new public-private partnerships, which throw up a host of new questions for sport management scholars.  We hope this special issue might spur on future research in this area.

   – Challenges for elite sport provisions and future achievements: So far, the suggestions for further research have veered toward amateur sport participation.  Yet this is but one (sizeable) part of the web of sport in Europe.  How might budgetary cuts and changes affect elite sport provisions and impact of future achievements?  The voices of coaches and athletes need to be heard to understand this complex set of management issues.

   – Increased accountability of public resources on sport/sport-related projects: The public’s awareness of austerity measures has increased media scrutiny on the use of ever-scarcer state resources spent on sport and sport-related projects.  There have been widespread calls for ‘accountability’ of how such resources are spent.  What does this mean for those in sport management positions? Are new ‘surveillance’ measures put in place, are they helpful (and to who they are helpful/unhelpful?) and how are they managed by key stakeholders in the sport management process?

   – University and Third Sector partnerships: We suggest that this period of ‘super-austerity’ (2015–2020) (Parnell et al., 2016) could provide an opportunity or the platform for sport management to heavily influence the Third Sector sport industry. Academic institutes, particularly those in higher education, are facing their own respective challenges regarding reduced research funding and heightened need for impact. As such, universities may take opportunities to develop meaningful applied research activities and partnerships with Third Sector sport organisations (Parnell et al., 2015); developing university and Third Sector partnerships may help organisations respond to the economic downturn and in turn develop research outputs and tangible impact within the industry .

Summary

Our hope for the special issue is to trigger ideas and interest for a number of potential research contexts to develop and extend our understanding. Ultimately, we feel this important debate has just started and there is much more to add.

To do this, universities have a real opportunity to develop meaningful, collaborative, research-based partnerships that have a high probability of impact in sport-based organisations which need strategic and operational support (Parnell et al., 2015).

Finally, we challenge researchers to extend this preliminary list of ideas and take up the challenge to address this gap in academic and policy understanding.

Forthcoming conference: Readers, whether researchers, policy-makers or practitioners may be interested in the forthcoming Sport and Politics Study Group Annual Conference at FC United, hosted by Manchester Metropolitan University: Sport Policy and Politics: The Inequality Gap. Sport and Politics Study Group Annual Conference, Thursday 16 and Friday 17 March 2017 at FC United. To find out more – click here.

This research note is based on the following article: Parnell, D., Spracklen, K., & Millward, P. (2016). Special Issue Introduction: Sport management issues in an era of austerity. European Sport Management Quarterly – found here (open access is here).

Dr Dan Parnell is an active researcher and senior lecturer in Business Management at Manchester Metropolitan University. His research interests cover the sport and leisure sectors within the UK and he works globally on a number of projects, in particular the social role of sport. Contactd.parnell@mmu.ac.uk or follow @parnell_daniel on Twitter or access his research here.

Dr Peter Millward is Reader in Sociology at Liverpool John Moores University.  Many of his research interests relate to sport and he has published widely in this area.  Contactp.millward@ljmu.ac.uk or follow @PeteMillward79 on Twitter or access his research here.

Opinion: Can council-funded sport survive austerity?

Please go to the full article on the Sports Management website here.
But here is my contribution:
Local authority sport and leisure services continue to be at the sharp end of funding cuts and it has never been more important to consider how organisations navigate these constrained fiscal times.

Local government is in a phase transition and operating within a period of super-austerity. Recently we explored the management strategies of non-profit sport facilities in this era of austerity.

The headline findings highlighted two major challenges – reduced local authority services (ie, funding for maintenance, repairs or parks teams) and increased site operating costs. The management strategies adopted by facility managers to successfully navigate austerity included flexible pricing strategies, strong partnership working and income diversification.

In summarising the protective management strategies utilised by organisations and facility managers to navigate austerity, three characteristics should be viewed as favourable. These are: diversifying income streams; a link-up with a larger, established community organisation to share management functions and access to participants; and being well-networked, with links across other similar local and regional organisations and community stakeholders.

Ultimately, participation in sport is based on the user experience. The challenges associated with austerity cuts are reducing the quality of these experiences. To strategically move forward, more platforms are required to allow large-, medium- and small-sized organisations and facilities to network, share, inform and support and to assist in the development of collective strategic capabilities.

“More platforms are required to enable organisations and facility managers to develop collective strategic capabilities”

A networked view of the international mobility of minors in football

Originally published on The Football Collective here.

By Alex Bond, Paul Widdop and Dan Parnell

The recent CIES Football Observatory Monthly Report investigated the international mobility of minors in football. The findings suggest a trading or mobility network of under 18yr old male athletes. However, they do not necessarily interrogate and unpick this network, which might show how it is structured globally and locally. This short blog post aims to extend their findings and explore the structure of the trade network regarding minors within football. Indeed, there are many ethical, moral, economic and, of course, legal debates to be had on the matter (the latter two can be read further in FIFA’s regulations on the transfer of players and KEA’s and CDES’ report).

There is a long history of academic research focussing on the labour market within professional association football – especially in Europe. Walters and Rossi (2009) edited series of research papers investigating the issues and challenges of Labour Market Migration in European Football – focusing on concepts such as, muscle drain, feet drain and feet exchange. On top of this, Frick (2007) empirically inspected the major European leagues’ labour market. Other research has focussed on Africa’s role within the European labour market, such as – Poli (2007) who provides specific insight into Africa’s status in the European Football Labour Market; and Darby (2000; 2007) who looks at African football labour migration to Europe and African labour migration to Portugal respectively. More recently, Bullough, Moore & Goldsmith (2016) examined UEFA’s home-grown rule and player’s migration and opportunity, and Rossi, Semens & Brocard (2016) book which explored the role of sport agents within football’s labour market. Other useful books on the topic, consist of Maguire’s (2010) Sport and Migration: Borders, Boundaries and Crossings, Elliot & Harris’ (2014) Football and Migration: Perspectives, Places, Players and Tiesler & Coelho (2008) Globalised Football: Nations and Migration, the City and the Dream.

The recent CIES Football Observatory Monthly Report highlights a very controversial issue within the European Football Labour Market – namely the migration of minors. Of course, this raises moral and ethical implications, that will stir a range of opinions. Darragh McGee seems to be at the forefront of minor migration within sport, so readers are directed to his 2012 book Displacing Childhood: labour exploitation and child trafficking in sport, or his conversation article last year What the next FIFA president could do to tackle child trafficking in football. Additionally readers may find Brackenridge et al. (2013) Child Exploitation and the FIFA World Cup: A review of risks and protective interventions useful. Nevertheless, the purpose of this blog post is to further interrogate the network of minor migration presented by CIES, without providing judgement on the topic or its implications.

The CIES report that within the top 5 major European leagues (Premier League, Liga, Ligue 1, Bundesliga and Serie A), the percentage of players migrating increased from 24.1% to 55.2% from 2009 to 2015. Additionally, over the same period the average age dropped from 23.2 to 21.1 respectively, which is attributed to the increase in minor migration figures, which in 1995 was 51 and in 2015 was 184, most of which the final destination was England. The report goes further to include a section on the ‘Networks’, and provides useful information regarding the relational direction, and flow of minor’s migration in football. Within this section they include information on minor’s migration across Europe in October 2016, but they don’t locate the work in a social network analysis framework, so therefore cannot show how the network is configured. Here we use the information in the report and place it with an SNA. The below figure shows the data held in the report in network form.

networks

This is a small-scale network based on the information provided in the CIES report, relating to the movement of minors as of October 2016. So whilst it offers an insight into the migration flow, it doesn’t explain net migration and is only a snapshot in time.

Obviously, much of this network could have been deducted through Figure 7 in the CIES report. Including that England is the clear end destination. But SNA allows us to look a bit more critically at the structure.  In network terms England has the highest in-degree and betweeness values within the network – which is a characteristic of a star topology seen here – suggesting that the England node (represented as a circle) has the most connections going into it or in this case, the majority of minor migrants from other countries migrating to England. However, England has the smallest (or none to be exact) out-degree, meaning no minor football players migrate abroad. It is Belgium who has the largest out-degree value, as they have the largest number of minors migrating, primarily to The Netherlands, and secondarily France and England. Again, deductible from the report.

What is not so deductible from the report is the structure of the network, so if we look a little closer, and apply K-core (clique of countries) (this establishes a core of nodes, or countries in this case, which are interlinked – this is a relaxed clique in that not every country (node) in the core is linked symmetrically), we find a number of countries (nodes) which were fundamental to the international transfer of minors across Europe as of October 2016. Therefore, we can depict that England, Belgium, The Netherlands, France, Germany and the Republic of Ireland, are all embedded to the mobility of minor footballers within Europe. Thus, research is needed to track this network historically, and continuously to investigate net-migration of players over time – and account for the impact of huge political changes across Europe, such a Brexit and the right populist movement. Considering the centralised structure of the network, then political shifts affecting the (K-)core, such as Brexit, could have detrimental implications on the network robustness. Finally, research of this nature could aid policy decisions, by providing evidence of whether we need tighter interventions to control the movement of minors within football across Europe.

Manchester: a global centre for sport

Conference film content from our ESRC Festival of Social Science event, here are the contributions:

Making a difference off the pitch the social and community contribution of sport in Manchester

The economic and commercial contribution of sport to Manchester, the region, Britain and beyond

Introductions to The Football Collective

The Football Collective held its first conference on Wednesday 30 November. Check out some of the insight films from members of the collective who give their take on things. 

Go to our YouTube channel here.

Screen Shot 2016-12-07 at 16.21.48.png

Sport management issues in an era of austerity

Very pleased to present a recent research article, which introduces our special issue for the European Sport Management Quarterly. Together, with Karl Spracklen and Peter Millward we offer an insight to sport management issues in an era of austerity and an introduction to our special issue.

Read the article here and access it on academiaedu here.

presentation1

The guanxi of football

From British railways to Hollywood A-listers, a world of connections lies beneath Chinese football investments

Originally published in the Asia & the Pacific Policy Society Post here and the South China Morning Post here.
SIMON CHADWICK, PAUL WIDDOP & DANIEL PARNELL

The purchase of a second-tier English football club by a Chinese conglomerate provides a window into a business culture of relationships and reciprocity, Simon Chadwick, Paul Widdop and Dan Parnell write.

When Chinese conglomerate Fosun International Limited acquired English second-tier football club Wolverhampton Wanderers (commonly referred to as Wolves), many of the club’s fans anticipated a cash windfall and some high profile player signings. Neither happened; indeed, the team’s performances were so unsatisfactory early on in the season that the team’s manager was sacked.

Fosun were clearly unhappy, as languishing in the lower reaches of second-tier English football neither cast the company in a positive light nor added significant value to China’s current football revolution. Even so, Fosun is unlikely to see its first foray into European club ownership as a disaster.

Football alone was never likely to be the only reason why Fosun bought Wolves. As a conglomerate, this might seem an obvious thing to say, as this type of organisation owns multiple businesses across a number of often-unrelated industrial sectors. At one level, Wolves could be just another investment in a broad portfolio of Fosun properties.

However, at another level, acquiring assets in football brings a much broader range of potential benefits. Fosun owns a 20 per cent stake in Gestifute, football super-agent Jorge Mendes’ player representation agency. Together, Gestifute and Wolverhampton have opened up a network to Fosun that is ultimately intended to be of much greater value to the company.

Networks in Chinese culture are so fundamental to doing business that China even has a name for it: guanxi. The literal translation of guanxi is often difficult to pin down but is sometimes defined simply as ‘relationships and connections’. Guanxi is rather more profound than Westerners might imagine, based upon their own notion of ‘connections’. It is a form of reciprocation – what Westerners may call ‘a favour for a favour’. That is, Chinese business people will often give something to someone in return for, at a later date, being able to ask that person to give something back or to exert influence on their behalf.

This is intended to enable Chinese businesses to create connections, relationships, and networks that help them bypass normal governance systems or conventional business practices. An important aspect of this is the social ties between individuals, which are intended to provide direct or exclusive access to insider information, business contracts or scarce resources.

In this context, it seems that Fosun’s acquisition of Wolverhampton Wanderers is a classic case of guanxi. Owning a successful football club in itself is good guanxi; with President Xi and senior members of his government having committed to a Chinese sports revolution, being part of the global football network makes good sense for Fosun.

Yet even if Wanderers do little more than play out the coming seasons in mid-table mediocrity, Fosun may not be too concerned. After all, guanxi dictates that there’s more to the Wolves deal than meets the eye. Indeed, having undertaken a social network analysis (which was derived from media sources) of Wolves and its new owner Fosun, it appears that the club is simply a hub in a much more significant collection of relationships and connections.

The diagram below gives some idea of what this network looks like:

widdop

Wolverhampton Wanderers’ owner Fosun is owned by Chinese billionaire Guo Guangchang. Guo is widely acknowledged as being one of China’s richest men, with a net worth of around US$5.9 billion. Guo has built a corporation with interests in everything from mining to pharmaceuticals to real estate. In many ways this is Guo’s guanxi, his network extending way beyond second-tier English football.
More significantly, in football terms, Fosun also set-up Foyo Culture and Entertainment Co Ltd. It is this company which in turn owns a minority stake in Mendes’ Gestifute. This provides agency services to football players through a subsidiary company, Polaris Sports. Among Polaris’ clients are Real Madrid players Cristiano Ronaldo and James Rodriguez. Polaris also works with current Manchester United manager Jose Mourinho, who has long-standing links with Jorge Mendes (his agent for many years).
Together, Gestifute and Polaris partner with American company CAA Sport (a global sports and entertainment agency), which has numerous clients across football including FC Barcelona and Chelsea. The agency is itself part of a larger company – CAA (Creative Artists Agency), which represents a number of Hollywood ‘A-List’ celebrities. Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt are two of CAA’s clients.
Cruise and Pitt may not appear to have too much in common with a post-industrial town in the middle of England, and are unlikely to be turning out on a Saturday afternoon in Wolves’ famed gold kit, yet our map of Wanderers’ guanxi network shows there is a road that stretches from Hollywood to Wolverhampton. This begs the questions: why, and what is the return on investment for Fosun?
In recent years, the Chinese conglomerate has diversified into films and television, via its production company Fosun Pictures. The network connections to Cruise/Pitt/CAA therefore make a lot of sense, especially if one looks ahead to a Fosun-produced Hollywood blockbuster at some stage in the future.
This still seems a long way, though, from Wolverhampton. However, the town’s location in England’s West Midlands conurbation (home to Birmingham – England’s ‘second city’) may hold some clues. Rumours are currently circulating that British terrestrial television broadcaster Channel 4 is about to relocate from London, with Birmingham thought to be its favoured location. It is also rumoured the move may be part of the development of a much bigger media and entertainment complex in the city.
A corporation like Fosun, already investing heavily into the sector, would therefore appear to be ideally placed to bid for contracts that might emerge out of such a development. At the same time, there are major plans for Britain’s HS2 rail link to pass through the West Midlands, which would generate further business opportunities. Fosun recently became the first private Chinese company to own a bigger stake (US$ 6.9 billion) than the government in a high-speed railway project. The company is therefore ideally placed to bid for HS2 work.
And this is how guanxi works: when Fosun bought Wolves, the conglomerate was not simply just buying a football club. It was buying into a network of relationships and connections that Guo no doubt knew would have much broader, deeper and financially lucrative implications for the conglomerate. While it seems unlikely that Brad Pitt will become a regular spectator at Wolves’ home games, the fact he forms part of the club’s wider network reveals a great deal about both guanxi and how Chinese business works.

Making a difference off the pitch the social and community contribution of sport in Manchester

As part of our ESRC Festival of Social Science event: Manchester: a global centre for sport, we delivered a session on Making a difference off the pitch the social and community contribution of sport in Manchester with colleagues from industry and academia. Below is our session, but the rest of the videos can be found here.

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑