How English is the English Premier League (EPL) from an ownership point of view, and does it really matter? As of the 2025–26 season, foreign ownership dominates the English Premier League, with most clubs either fully or partially owned or controlled by overseas individuals or organisations.
In recent decades, foreign ownership has dramatically reshaped the landscape of English football, with overseas investors acquiring clubs across all tiers of the game. From billionaires seeking global prestige to consortia chasing commercial returns or government-backed organisations looking to enhance their reputation, these owners have brought vast financial resources, modern infrastructure, and new strategic visions.
While this influx has boosted on-field success for some, transforming clubs like Manchester City and Chelsea into European powerhouses, it has also sparked intense debate among fans. Many supporters wrestle with the cultural implications of foreign control, questioning whether traditional club values, local identity, and fan influence are being eroded in favour of corporate ambition. In this article, we’ll attempt to explore how foreign ownership affects performance, reshapes club culture, and provokes passionate reactions from the terraces. So is foreign ownership good for English football?
Photo by Saj Shafique on Unsplash
Here’s a breakdown of current club ownership in the EPL:
🔢 Breakdown of Foreign Ownership
According to the latest data:
- 40% of Premier League clubs are majority-owned by foreign investors.
- An additional 35% have foreign minority stakeholders.
- This means up to 75% of Premier League clubs have some foreign investment or control.
-
This list highlights the global nature of Premier League ownership, with significant influence from the United States, the Middle East, and other regions.
🌍 EPL Key Foreign Ownership Groups
- Manchester City – Abu Dhabi United Group (UAE) & Silver Lake (USA)
- Chelsea – Todd Boehly, Clearlake Capital (USA), Hansjörg Wyss (Switzerland)
- Liverpool – Fenway Sports Group (USA)
- Arsenal – Kroenke Sports & Entertainment (USA)
- Manchester United – Glazer family (USA)
- Newcastle United – Saudi Public Investment Fund
- Aston Villa – Wes Edens (USA) & Nassef Sawiris (Egypt)
- Leeds United – 49ers Enterprises (USA)
- Fulham – Shahid Khan (USA/Pakistan)
- Everton – Friedkin Group (USA)
- Bournemouth – William Foley II (USA)
- Sunderland – Kyril Louis-Dreyfus (Swiss/French) & Juan Sartori (Uruguay)
- Burnley – ALK Capital LLC (USA)
- Wolves – Guo Guangchang & partners (China)
- Crystal Palace – Palace Holdco LP (USA consortium)
- Nottingham Forest – Evangelos Marinakis (Greece)
🇬🇧 UK-Owned EPL Clubs
A few clubs remain under UK ownership, such as:
- Tottenham Hotspur – Joe Lewis & Daniel Levy (UK)
- Brighton & Hove Albion – Tony Bloom (UK)
- Brentford – Matthew Benham (UK)
- West Ham United – Mixed ownership including UK and Czech stakeholders
Foreign ownership isn’t just confined to the Premier League,
As of the latest data from 2025:
- 22 EFL clubs are currently under American ownership, either fully or majority-owned.
- 20 clubs in League One and League Two are either foreign-owned or have significant minority shareholders from abroad
- In the Championship, several clubs also have foreign owners, including Birmingham City, Blackburn Rovers, Hull City, Ipswich Town, Leicester City, Millwall, Norwich City, Sheffield United, Sheffield Wednesday, Southampton, Swansea City, Watford, West Bromwich Albion, and Wrexham
This means that well over 40 EFL clubs across the Championship, League One, and League Two have some form of foreign ownership or investment—representing a significant portion of the 72 clubs in the English Football League.
On-Field Performance: Investment vs. Identity
Foreign ownership has profoundly impacted the on-field performance of English football clubs, often acting as a catalyst for rapid transformation. The most visible effect is the injection of capital, frequently used to attract elite managers, sign world-class players, and upgrade training facilities. Clubs like Manchester City, Chelsea, and Newcastle United are prime examples of how foreign investment can elevate a team from domestic contenders to global powerhouses.
Success Stories
- Manchester City: Since the Abu Dhabi United Group took over in 2008, City have won multiple Premier League titles, domestic cups, and finally the UEFA Champions League. Their rise has been built on strategic recruitment, data-driven performance analysis, and a clear footballing philosophy.
- Chelsea: Roman Abramovich’s era, and, more recently, Todd Boehly’s era, have seen Chelsea become a dominant force in English and European football, winning five Premier League titles and two Champions League trophies, and now the World Club Championship.
- Newcastle United: Under Saudi ownership, Newcastle have managed a return to the Champions League and made high-profile signings, signalling a new era of competitiveness.
Mixed Outcomes
Not all foreign-owned clubs have seen immediate success. Aston Villa, Fulham, Southampton and of course, Manchester United, have experienced fluctuating fortunes, with periods of relegation and rebuilding. This highlights that financial backing alone doesn’t guarantee results; footballing knowledge, long-term planning, and cultural understanding are equally vital.
Concerns About Sporting Integrity
Some critics argue that foreign ownership can distort competition. The financial disparity between clubs backed by sovereign wealth and those with more modest resources raises questions about fairness and sustainability. This has long been a concern of football fans in this country, with many forecasting long ago, (correctly it now seems), the dangers of the game moving in this direction. UEFA’s Financial Fair Play regulations were introduced partly in response to this imbalance, the jury is till out on whether these rules designed to protect the game from itself, are anywhere near being effective, with many high-profile cases still unresolved, perhaps exposing the quality of the regulations currently in place.
Impact on Playing Style and Identity
Foreign owners often bring new footballing philosophies. For example, City’s “possession-based” style under Pep Guardiola reflects a broader shift toward continental tactics, influencing playing styles across all of the English leagues. While this can modernise a club’s approach, it may also clash with traditional English styles, leading to fan debates about identity and authenticity.
Photo by Ellen Kerbey on Unsplash
Club Culture: Preserving Identity in a Globalised Game
Foreign ownership doesn’t just influence what happens on the pitch ,it reshapes the very soul of football clubs. For many fans, a club is more than a business; it’s a living part of the community, steeped in local history, shared rituals, and generational loyalty. When ownership shifts to foreign hands, especially those unfamiliar with English football’s cultural nuances, tensions often arise between modernisation and tradition.
Traditions Under Pressure
Long-standing customs—like local matchday pubs, supporter chants, and club-run community events—can be sidelined in favour of commercial priorities. Some clubs have altered crests, changed kit colours, or rebranded entirely to appeal to global markets. Cardiff City’s switch from blue to red under Malaysian owner Vincent Tan is a notorious example, or the attempt to change the actual team name at Hull City. Both sparking a fierce backlash from fans who saw it as a betrayal of identity.
Community Ties and Local Engagement
Foreign owners often struggle to replicate the deep-rooted community engagement that local owners once maintained. While some, like Leicester City’s Thai ownership, have made genuine efforts to connect with fans through charitable work and local outreach, others are criticised for being distant and disengaged.
“It’s not just about winning games. It’s about feeling like the club still belongs to us.” — A Bolton Wanderers supporter during protests against ownership
Clubs like FC United of Manchester and AFC Wimbledon were born out of fan frustration with ownership decisions that ignored community values, showing how deeply fans care about preserving local ties, and how what an important aspect of the English game this is.
Matchday Experience: Commercial vs. Cultural
The matchday experience has evolved under foreign ownership, often becoming more polished but perhaps less personal. This may not always be a bad thing, with more US ownership in the leagues, we’re seeing their knowledge of “putting on a show” appearing as part of the match-day experience, something we English are traditionally not very good at, (stale meat pie anyone?) While improved stadium facilities and digital ticketing systems are welcomed, some fans lament the loss of a grassroots atmosphere.
Ticket prices have also risen, some say, pricing out working-class supporters and changing the demographic of match-going fans. Though it’s hard to say whether this just reflects the changes in UK culture in the modern world. The shift from terraces to executive boxes is often seen as a broader move toward monetisation, sometimes at the expense of authenticity, and whereas this can be true at some clubs, many fans these days are well aware of the need for clubs to be successful businesses, much more so than in days gone by, when more teams were owned and run by local businessman benefactors, rarely at a profit.
Fan Reactions: Between Hope and Disillusionment
Foreign ownership evokes a wide range of emotions among fans, some celebrate the success it brings, while others mourn the loss of tradition. Interestingly, certainly in the Premier League, fan reactions have been mixed, younger fans who have experienced nothing but foreign ownership, see it as a norm, whilst those of older generations who knew the game when it was “the working mans game” and want to hang on to at least some of those values, are more critical, (cue cries of ” the games gone” etc.).
Also the most criticism of foreign ownership seems to come from those clubs who are not seeing success on the field as a result. Manchester United fans are a prime example with their perennial media-fuelled crisis in recent seasons. Some criticism is justified though, we only have to look at Blackburn Rovers and more recently Cardiff, and Sheffield Wednesday as examples when things can go wrong. Would those clubs have suffered the same issues with more local ownership??, it’s hard to know or say.
Positive Sentiment: Success and Investment
For fans of clubs like Chelsea and Manchester City, foreign ownership has been synonymous with success. Dave Johnstone of Chelsea fanzine cfcuk reflects this view:
“There’s no doubt that some of the foreign ownership has been good for the English game… people weigh that against the success that our owner has brought to the club.”
Similarly, Newcastle United fans initially welcomed the Saudi-backed takeover, hoping it would revive a club long seen as a sleeping giant. The takeover was met with celebration in parts of the fanbase, driven by the belief that it would finally bring the resources needed to compete at the highest level
Negative Sentiment: Loss of Identity and Transparency
However, many fans express concern over the erosion of club identity and community ties. Tim Payton of the Arsenal Supporters’ Trust voiced unease about Stan Kroenke’s ownership:
“There is a lack of understanding among fans as to his long-term ambitions for Arsenal… Arsenal is too important to be owned by any one person.”
At Bournemouth, Dave Jennings noted:
“On the surface, things have never been better. However, there is little transparency… most fans wouldn’t even recognise [owner Maxim Demin].”
This sense of detachment is echoed across the country. A Sheffield Wednesday fan wrote:
“The days of the local businessman owning the football club are long behind us… now it is often rich American businessmen or even the Saudi government.”
Fan Protests and Movements
Fan-led protests have become increasingly common. Manchester United supporters have long opposed the Glazer family’s ownership, citing debt and lack of engagement:
“They are infrequent visitors to the ground and uncommunicative… they’ve plunged the club deep into debt.” — Independent Manchester United Supporters’ Association
Lower league clubs have also seen unrest. Protests at Reading, Bolton, Oldham, and Sheffield Wednesday reflect growing frustration with owners perceived as out of touch or financially irresponsible
Photo by Andrea Bertozzini on Unsplash
Complex Emotions and Divided Loyalties
Interestingly, some fans adopt a strategy of “motivated ignorance”—choosing to overlook ethical concerns (such as human rights issues linked to ownership) in favour of supporting their club’s success. This psychological coping mechanism allows fans to maintain loyalty while avoiding moral conflict.
In Conclusion: Ownership, Identity, and the Future of English Football
Foreign ownership has no-doubt, reshaped English football, bringing unprecedented investment, elevating on-field performance, and expanding global reach. Yet, beneath the surface of success lies a deeper conversation about identity, tradition, and the soul of the game. For many fans, football is not just a product to be consumed but a heritage to be protected. The tension between commercial ambition and cultural preservation continues to define the modern football experience.
As clubs evolve into global brands, the challenge is to ensure that local voices are not lost in the noise. Supporters want more than trophies—they want transparency, respect for tradition, and a sense of belonging. Whether foreign owners can balance business goals with the emotional heartbeat of the fanbase will shape not just the future of individual clubs, but the integrity of English football itself.
John Herman is a Leeds-based, would-be football writer and founder of Football Nonsense. Blending fan passion with sharp opinion, he tackles the game’s biggest debates—from the terraces to the boardroom—with honesty, humour, and heart.
One thought on “Is Foreign Ownership always a good thing for a Football Club in 2025?”