A 70 Billion Won PR Effect? What Is the True Public Value of Pro Football?

At a National Assembly Culture, Sports and Tourism Committee hearing on July 30, when concerns were raised that municipal and provincial football clubs rely heavily on taxpayer money, Kim Byung-ji, CEO of Gangwon FC, responded as follows.

[Kim Byung-ji / CEO of Gangwon FC: "Municipal and provincial clubs do not simply show football matches. I believe they are essential public goods that exist for local residents."]

Later, CEO Kim wrote on his personal social media that Gangwon FC generated 70 billion won worth of public relations value for the local government last year alone. However, he did not disclose how that figure was calculated, and football fans reacted coldly.

When asked about the source of this 70 billion won promotional effect, the Korea Professional Football League (K League) answered, "Every year, we commission an external agency to analyze sponsorship effects for each club and deliver the results to each club at the end of the year." The league explained that media exposure of clubs across television, new media, and print is converted into advertising value, weighted by factors such as size on screen, placement, and exposure duration. According to this explanation, the basis for the 70 billion won figure ultimately comes down to the K League's own calculation.

However, there is no way to examine the details of that calculation. While the K League revealed what factors it considers, it did not disclose how much weight is assigned to each element or how exposure time is priced in terms of advertising value—even though the outcome can vary significantly depending on how weights are set. The league stated, "Club reports are for internal club review and are difficult to share externally," while Gangwon FC also declined to disclose the data, saying, "We only receive the material from the league."

On October 17, SBS reported that subsidies received by 14 municipal and provincial clubs—excluding newly established clubs—totaled 140.1 billion won last year, accounting for 64% of their total revenue. That amounts to an average of about 10 billion won per club. Only three clubs—Gangwon, Incheon, and Daegu—were relatively healthy with self-generated revenue exceeding subsidies, and newer clubs showed higher levels of dependency.

Even so, the number of municipal and provincial clubs continues to increase. The count grew from 11 in 2021 to 17 this year, making up more than half of the league, and total subsidies across the league rose from 98.2 billion won in 2021 to surpass 140 billion won last year. For heads of local governments who serve as club owners, municipal and provincial clubs are attractive promotional tools allowing them to meet thousands of residents at stadiums, while offering stable jobs to football insiders. This is cited as the reason why there are many who want to create municipal and provincial clubs, but no one to stop them.

Of course, not all municipal and provincial clubs are a "waste of tax money." Residents can watch professional matches close to home, and players developed by their hometown teams—such as Gangwon youth product Yang Min-hyuk—can even advance to prestigious overseas leagues. Gangwon FC, which earned 16.2 billion won on its own last year and reduced its subsidy reliance to 42.5%, can also be seen as an example showing that a club can balance its role as a public good with self-sustainability.

The K League also emphasizes the "public good function" of municipal and provincial clubs, arguing that they enhance city brand value, stimulate local economies, and provide leisure opportunities for citizens. Through financial sustainability regulations introduced three years ago, the league caps player labor costs within 70% of revenue and manages deficits and capital impairment. The league also stated that it is considering introducing a salary cap to limit total player payroll and a roster limit system to restrict team size. 

[Cho Yeon-sang / Secretary General of the K League: "Rather than viewing local government support solely as covering professional football club operating expenses, if we also examine how clubs contribute to their local communities, the league believes there is room to resolve the misunderstanding that these are 'clubs funded only by tax money.'"]

However, claiming public value should not excuse a structure where tax dollars are poured in indiscriminately. There must be a specific examination of how much public money should be spent on that public value. While some aspects of public value, such as the promotional effect cited by CEO Kim, are being measured, there is no objective evaluation of what actual benefits they bring to society. Jung Do-jin, a professor of business administration at Chung-Ang University, said, "The scale and dependency are too high to judge public value merely abstractly or emotionally," pointing out that several tools already exist to measure social value, such as Social Return on Investment (SROI).

Even if citizens try to examine the clubs' finances themselves, they are blocked right from the account books. In this reporting as well, verifying subsidy amounts was far from a simple matter of looking at a single ledger. It required investigating whether financial statements were submitted to the Financial Supervisory Service or the National Tax Service, and which accounting categories subsidies were recorded under. Some clubs did not disclose their financial records at all, requiring gaps to be filled using audit reports obtained through the office of Representative Kim Seung-soo of the People Power Party. Although the K League claims to receive income statements in a unified format, these are not disclosed to the public either.

If a professional football club's annual promotional effect truly reaches 70 billion won, why are no corporations stepping forward to run professional football clubs? Since the 2002 World Cup, Seoul E-Land FC is the only corporate club to have entered the K League, and even its founding was 11 years ago. If, as CEO Kim says, municipal and provincial clubs are "public goods that exist for local residents," then their financial books must also be opened before those residents. Only when that 70 billion won figure appears in detail within publicly accessible records—rather than on a social media post—will the claim that "football clubs are public goods" truly carry conviction.

※