TNM Super League teams have, in the past 10 years, jointly earned around K840 million from K2.3 billion gross gate revenue, representing 38 percent which clubs have described as meagre while calling for review of the proceeds distribution.
The calculations were based on Super League of Malawi (Sulom) records between 2010 and 2018. The body’s president Tiya Somba-Banda validated the figures.
Under the current arrangement, clubs pocket 25 percent each from a league match, venue owners earn the same while Sulom and Football Association of Malawi (FAM) get 10 percent each while Malawi National Council (MNCS) of Sports receive five percent.
From the gross, funds also go to other stakeholders such as cashiers, supervisors; security and first aid.
In the period under review, ground levy totalled slightly above K418 million while security got about K532 million, representing 19 percent and 24 percent, respectively.
Sulom and FAM each got K163 million representing eight percent while MNCS raked in around K83 million, which is four percent of the total gross revenue.
Reacting to the development, Karonga United general secretary Ramzy Simwaka denounced the gate sharing arrangement as inconsiderate.
He said: “Clubs getting 38 percent out of 100 percent is a total disgrace to our football. We can’t grow in football with this kind of strategy. Each team should get 40 percent from each game and not 25 percent.”
On his part, Nyasa Big Bullets chief administration officer Albert Chigoga called for review of the statutes to give clubs leverage in gate revenue distribution.
He said: “To be frank with you, it’s unfair that a bigger chunk of gate revenue goes to several stakeholders. This must change. Clubs need adequate financial injection to run their operations.
“If gate revenue, which is the main source of income for most of the clubs, is shared this way, then clubs are not appreciated for their contribution in football.”
Silver Strikers chief executive officer Thoko Chimbali said the clubs’ share percentage should push authorities to consider reducing their cut.
He said: “We don’t know why councils get five percent. Most stadiums are owned by government, so the venue share should be enough. I propose that we remove the councils’ allocation.”
Chimbali also asked FAM and Sulom to reduce their 20 percent share.
“We don’t have problems with these two getting something. However, we believe they can do better by reducing their percentage,” he said.
Sulom president Banda branded the teams’ earnings as not good enough. However, he said pressing for reduction of sports institutions could not entirely be the best solution.
“The demand for Sports Council, FAM or Sulom to reduce their shares or completely drop them will not really have much impact on the clubs take home. But it is something that we should also look at,” he said.
He, however, pointed out that clubs can increase their portion through owning stadia and creating violence-free environment as security and ground levy claim significant amounts.
“Violence free stadia will surely reduce the drop in the demand in security; thus, in a way, increasing the teams’ share. This responsibility is on us and the clubs,” he said.
“If teams have their own stadia [either building or leasing] then the 20 percent that goes to the ground owners would then go directly to the club thus increasing their share from 38 percent to 58 percent. This is something that clubs need to seriously consider in the long run as we turn professional.”