This article was downloaded by: [Universite De Paris 1]On: 08 August 2013, At: 05:22Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

European Sport Management QuarterlyPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/resm20

The Attractiveness of National andInternational Football Leagues:Perspectives of Fans of “Star Clubs”and “Underdogs”Joerg Koenigstorfer a , Andrea Groeppel-Klein a & Thilo Kunkel ba Institute for Consumer and Behavioural Research, SaarlandUniversity, Germanyb Department of Tourism, Leisure, Hotel & Sport Management,Griffith University, Southport, AustraliaPublished online: 07 Apr 2010.

To cite this article: Joerg Koenigstorfer , Andrea Groeppel-Klein & Thilo Kunkel (2010)The Attractiveness of National and International Football Leagues: Perspectives of Fans of“Star Clubs” and “Underdogs”, European Sport Management Quarterly, 10:2, 127-163, DOI:10.1080/16184740903563406

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/16184740903563406

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &

Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

ARTICLE

The Attractiveness of National andInternational Football Leagues:

Perspectives of Fans of ‘‘Star Clubs’’and ‘‘Underdogs’’

JOERG KOENIGSTORFER*, ANDREA GROEPPEL-KLEIN* &THILO KUNKEL**

*Institute for Consumer and Behavioural Research, Saarland University, Germany &**Department of Tourism, Leisure, Hotel & Sport Management, Griffith University,

Southport, Australia

ABSTRACT The goal of this study is to determine what factors affect the attractivenessof both national football leagues and the Champions League from the perspective offans, and how these factors are perceived by fans of clubs at the top and bottom of theleague standing. This is of interest as there are differences between the financialresources available to the clubs and leagues. Based on a review of sport consumerbehaviour literature, we propose that four determinants are relevant to a league’sattractiveness: stadium atmosphere, international success of the clubs, uniqueness ofdominating clubs and perceived competitive balance. A total of 1,404 committed fansof 12 selected football teams from the English Premier League and German Bundesligaparticipated in the study. The research model was tested using partial least squares. Theresults show that the determinants significantly predict perceived attractiveness, andthat even fans of financially privileged and successful clubs concede that perceivedcompetitive balance is necessary for attractiveness to be maintained.

Introduction

Researchers have been trying for decades to explain the popularity of football(soccer) in European countries (e.g., Bird, 1982; Forrest & Simmons, 2006;Groot, 2008; Hart, Hutton, & Sharot, 1975; Peel & Thomas, 1992). Footballemotionalizes people and makes them act seemingly irrationally, such as

Correspondence Address: Joerg Koenigstorfer, Institute for Consumer and Behavioural Research,

Saarland University, Campus A5 4, 66123 Saarbruecken, Germany. Fax: �49 (0)681 3 02 43 70; Tel.:

�49 (0)681 30 26 48 61; Email: koenigstorfer@ikv.uni-saarland.de

ISSN 1618-4742 Print/ISSN 1746-031X Online # 2010 European Association for Sport ManagementDOI: 10.1080/16184740903563406

European Sport Management Quarterly,

Vol. 10, No. 2, 127�163, April 2010

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

travelling thousands of miles to watch games, or wearing funny clothes(Derbaix, Decrop, & Cabossart, 2002; Woratschek, Horbel, Popp, & Roth,2007). Football also unifies the otherwise disparate supporters of a particularteam; it makes people volunteer in communities, commit to a club and be asintimate towards the club as they would be in a romantic relationship (Fisher& Wakefield, 1998; Koenigstorfer, Groeppel-Klein, & Schmitt, 2011;Richardson & Turley, 2006).

Penders (2007, p. 25) stated that ‘‘everything starts with the passion forfootball, but without the passion, everything is nothing’’. Devoted indivi-duals are referred to as fans. They not only witness sport events in person orthrough some form of media as spectators, but they have an abiding interestin the sport, teams and/or players (Konigstorfer, 2009; Wann, Melnick,Russell, & Pease, 2001). In the 2008/2009 season, more than 54 millionspectators attended matches in the five most popular professional Europeanfootball leagues in England, France, Germany, Italy and Spain. Thisrepresents the highest number ever and indicates the attractiveness of theseleagues from the spectators’ perspective. Yet, despite growing academicinterest in spectator and fan behaviour, uncertainty remains as to whichfactors contribute to the increasing attractiveness of football leagues fromthe perspective of spectators and fans and to the relevance of these factors. Itis also unclear to what extent fans of different clubs and leagues vary in theirperceptions about what makes football attractive.

Based on a review of publications in the field of sports economics, Borlandand Macdonald (2003) identify five main categories that determine thedemand for sporting event attendance: consumer preferences (e.g., habit,conspicuous consumption, bandwagon effects), economic variables (e.g.,price of admission, opportunity cost), quality of viewing (e.g., quality of thefacilities, weather, timing), sporting contest (e.g., competitive balance, high-quality displays of skills) and supply capacity (e.g., size of the stadium).

Many researchers argue that ‘‘competitive balance’’, which falls under thecategory of sporting contest, is a key factor for the attractiveness of sportleagues as it guarantees uncertainty of the outcome of games (Knowles,Sherony, & Haupert, 1992; Marques, 2002; Rottenberg, 1956). They haveattempted to quantify objective measures for competitive balance withinfootball leagues, such as the idealized standard deviation of winningpercentages (e.g., Cain & Haddock, 2006), the CR5 concentration ratio(e.g., Koning, 2000) and the Herfindahl-Index (e.g., Michie & Oughton,2004).1

However, there is a lack of research questioning how fans of different clubsand leagues actually perceive the competitive balance within football leaguesand how this factor influences a league’s attractiveness. This is especiallyrelevant because clubs’ incomes depend on the country in which they are basedand the position they hold in the league standing (Woratschek, Schafmeister,& Strobel, 2006). The financial benefits of playing in a specific league aretherefore unequal. Fans may take this into account when evaluating theattractiveness of national leagues and international competitions.

128 Joerg Koenigstorfer et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

This article investigates the English Premier League and the GermanBundesliga. The English Premier League generates the highest revenues ofany football league in the world, around t2.5 billion in the 2008/2009 season(Ernst & Young, 2008). It contains four of the top eight clubs in Europe asregards revenues, three of which have reached the semi-finals and at least oneof which has reached the final in the Champions League in each of the lastthree seasons. In terms of objective competitive balance, the Premier Leagueis also the most imbalanced of the five big European professional footballleagues (Brandes & Franck, 2007; Ernst & Young, 2009; Groot, 2008).

The German Bundesliga generated only around 60% of the revenues ofthe Premier League in the last three seasons, including t1.5 billion in the2008/2009 season (Deloitte, 2007, 2008a; Ernst & Young, 2008). TheBundesliga is a more competitively balanced league than the Premier League,as revealed by Brandes and Franck (2007), Groot (2008) and Ernst & Young(2009). Yet none of the teams in the Bundesliga has reached the semi-finalsof the Champions League since 2001/2002.

In both the Premier League and the Bundesliga, there are a number of topclubs that have performed well in their respective national leagues as well asin other national and international competitions, such as FC Chelsea and FCBayern Munich. Also, there are a number of clubs that performed poorly anddid not participate in international championships, such as FC Fulham andArminia Bielefeld. A recent study by Groot (2008) shows that the competitiveimbalance and hence the distance between the two types of clubs has beenincreasing over time in these leagues. Ernst and Young (2008, 2009) describethis as a vicious circle, because successful clubs get richer, and richness in turncontributes to success due to the effective use of financial resources.

The goal of the present study is to determine to what degree team andleague ‘‘privileges’’*teams’ positions in the league standing, their financialresources and hence their potential for future sporting success*affect therelationships between different determinants and the perceived attractive-ness of national football leagues from the perspective of fans. Determiningfactors are identified based on the findings of sport consumer behaviourresearch. The four factors considered here are stadium atmosphere,perceived international success of national clubs, perceived uniqueness of adominating club and a perceived competitive balance. A further goal of thestudy is to analyse the importance of competitive balance for the perceivedattractiveness of the UEFA Champions League, in which English andGerman top teams compete against each other.

Attractiveness of Professional Football Leagues

This study of attractiveness of football leagues is inherently concerned withthe specification of factors that may influence the attractiveness of footballleagues. Based on findings from the literature on sport consumer behaviour,four determinants are proposed which, it is argued, hold for both the EnglishPremier League and the German Bundesliga. Below, theoretical argumentsare presented for each of the variables and hypotheses generated concerning

The Attractiveness of National and International Football Leagues 129

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

the relationship between the determining variables and the perceivedattractiveness of football leagues.

Stadium Atmosphere

Stadium atmosphere, or the ‘‘place’’ of the live consumption of footballmatches, is defined as the entirety of emotionally affective stimuli in asport stadium causing certain sensations and emotional reactions inindividuals (Charleston, 2008; Uhrich, 2008; Uhrich & Koenigstorfer,2009). A number of sport environment models have been developed inorder to explain the impact of the physical surroundings of sport settingson the psychological and behavioural responses of spectators and fans.These models mostly draw from general concepts, such as Bitner’s (1992)‘‘servicescape’’ framework and Baker’s (1987) categorization of thecomponents of the service environment, adapting them to sports facilities(e.g., Hightower, Brady, & Baker, 2002; Wakefield & Blodgett, 1994,1996, 1999; Wakefield, Blodgett, & Sloan, 1996; Wakefield & Sloan,1995). Empirical studies have shown that an appealing stadium atmo-sphere is one of the most important motives for spectators to attend anevent (Bauer, Sauer, & Exler, 2005; Holt, 1995; Waghorn, Downer, &Munby, 2005; Wakefield & Blodgett, 1999; Wann & Wilson, 1999;Wochnowski, 1996). Stadium atmosphere makes a crucial contribution toemotionalizing spectators, while also satisfying hedonistic consumptionneeds (Hirschman & Holbrook, 1982).

Three different types of stimuli are responsible for creating stadiumatmosphere. These stimuli may be described as organizer-, spectator- andgame-induced stimuli (Uhrich & Koenigstorfer, 2009). The characteristics ofthese stimuli may vary for different games by one club (e.g., depending onthe opponent or the outcome of the game) and from club to club (e.g.,depending on the architecture of the stadium). However, the stimuli alwaysshare certain features which means that the experience of fans in the stadiumdisplays a number of set characteristics (e.g., regardless of who theopponents are, whether the game is played at home or away). Thesesimilarities include fan rituals (e.g., the shouting of names when players arepresented before the game starts) and the opportunity to be with other fans(Charleston, 2008). Trujillo and Krizek (1994), on the basis of personalinterviews and observations of fans in baseball stadiums, found that fansexpress similar feelings and emotions publicly irrespective of the stadium orteam in question. The stadium atmosphere as perceived by fans maytherefore contribute to the perceived attractiveness of the league bygeneralizing the emotional experience, one of the most important motivesfor attending sport events. This is captured in Hypothesis 1:

H1: The more positively fans evaluate the atmosphere in the stadium, the more attractivethey will perceive the football league to be.

130 Joerg Koenigstorfer et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

Success in International Competitions

Clubs contribute to the attractiveness of their national league by achievingsuccess in international competitions. This success attracts attention andinterest from spectators, the media (e.g., newspaper, television, the Internet)and sponsors. As far as spectators are concerned, research has shown thatthey tend to ‘‘share in the glory of a successful other with whom they are insome way associated’’ (Cialdini, Borden, Thorne, Walker, Freeman, &Sloan, 1976, p. 366) and their self-esteem is boosted by associating withsuccessful clubs. This tendency to bask in reflected glory also positivelyimpacts their attendance behaviour (Baade & Tiehen, 1990; Becker & Suls,1983, Whitney, 1988; see also Boen, Vanbeselaere, & Feys, 2002, whodiscuss the frequency with which fans visit particular Internet sites). Theglory of internationally successful clubs may positively affect the attractive-ness of the national league in which they play, with fans believing that theirleague is superior to other leagues. Furthermore, it is widely accepted thatclubs that are successful in international championships are those whichhave the best players (compare also fan voting on a league’s best players,e.g., Sportfive, 2007). Hypothesis 2 summarizes these arguments:

H2: The more positively fans evaluate the sporting success of clubs from their leagues ininternational competitions, the more attractive they will perceive the football leagueto be.

Uniqueness of Dominating Clubs

Most European football leagues have one or two clubs that have dominatedthe league for years, in some cases even decades. Examples from the pastfifteen years include FC Bayern Munich in Germany, Manchester United inEngland, Glasgow Rangers and Celtic Glasgow in Scotland, FC Barcelonaand Real Madrid in Spain, and Juventus Turin and Inter and AC Milan inItaly. These clubs have won many national championships and enjoy thegreatest number of fans in their respective countries (Sportfive, 2007).2

Furthermore, they have many outstanding players*so-called ‘‘starplayers’’*who have been shown to attract spectators of team sports (e.g.,Berri, Schmidt, & Brook, 2004; Brandes, Franck, & Nuesch, 2008). InGermany and Italy, dominating clubs are allowed to show their past successes(in particular the number of championships) by wearing gold stars on theirshirts; this indicates their uniqueness compared to less successful teams.

Dominating clubs may contribute to the attractiveness of their nationalfootball leagues by representing the league in question. They can even extendthis attractiveness to an entire nation by competing internationally. InSportfive’s (2007) European Football study, 64% of German respondentsand 70% of English respondents agreed with the statement that they hopedclubs from their own country won in European club matches, even if they didnot like the club in question. In other words, clubs can represent the entire

The Attractiveness of National and International Football Leagues 131

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

nation when they compete in international championships such as the EuropaLeague or the Champions League.

When dominating clubs play against smaller clubs at a national level, theyoffer an area of contact for the fans and players of the smaller clubs. Suchgames can provoke intense emotions, with the smaller club’s fans reallyenjoying the misfortune of their richer opponents if their own team wins (anemotion best captured by the German concept of Schadenfreude). Leach,Spears, Branscombe, and Doosje (2003) show that this tendency is foundparticularly for football fans who are strongly involved in football andperceive their opponents to be highly superior to their own club.3

These arguments are summarized in Hypothesis 3:

H3: The more positively fans evaluate the perceived uniqueness of the dominating club,the more attractive they will perceive their football league to be.

Competitive Balance

Although individual clubs may contribute to an entire league’s attractiveness,research shows that leagues can only exist if clubs are both co-operative andcompetitive with each other. This concept derives from game theory, whereit is known as ‘‘coopetition’’ (Brandenburger & Nalebuff, 1996). More than50 years ago, Rottenberg (1956, p. 246) formulated his Uncertainty ofOutcome Hypothesis: ‘‘Uncertainty of outcome is necessary if the consumeris to be willing to pay admission to the game’’. Hence, establishing competitivebalance should be a main goal for sport organizations. Competitive balancerefers to ‘‘the rational expectations of fans about who will be the winners’’(Szymanski, 2001, p. 69). Leagues with a high competitive balance arecharacterized by an almost equal distribution of ability between teams andhigh uncertainty of the outcomes of games (Szymanski, 2003). Marques(2002, p. 1) stated that ‘‘competitive balance is what makes the sport . . . anattractive event’’. Researchers in the field of sports economics have alsoshown that high competitive balance in sports leagues leads to high levels ofattendance at games (Knowles et al., 1992; Schmidt & Berri, 2001; Vrooman,1995; see Borland & Macdonald, 2003 for a review).

However, the literature shows some inconsistencies in this area. Forexample, some studies show an inverse or even no relationship betweencompetitive balance and football game attendance (e.g., Brandes & Franck,2007). Some research results also indicate that spectators favour leagueswith teams of unequally distributed capabilities (Peel & Thomas, 1992).Woratschek et al. (2007) conclude that it is still unknown as to what degreecompetitive balance should be destabilized in order for a league to be asattractive as possible.

In the case of European football leagues, equal distribution of ability betweenteams would be nearly impossible to achieve. Great discrepancies exist betweenclubs in both national leagues and international competitions, such as theChampions League. These discrepancies result mainly from the varying levels ofrevenue generated from television, radio and new media broadcasting, the

132 Joerg Koenigstorfer et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

diverse levels of sponsorship and private investor engagement, and the differentsystems of financial distribution within national federations.

The present study focuses on competitive balance as subjectively perceivedby fans. It is postulated that, at a national level, both the perceived uniquenessof the dominating club (see Hypothesis 3) and perceived competitive balancelead to increased attractiveness of football leagues. From the fans’ perspective,competitive balance ensures that the outcome of the games is uncertain; fansanticipate positive emotions such as joy and hope when thinking aboutupcoming games against superior or inferior teams. Later on, they experiencethese emotions during or after victories by their team, as shown by Hirt,Zillmann, Erickson, and Kennedy (1992), Wann, Dolan, McGeorge, andAllison (1994), Wann (1996), Jones (2000), Bizman and Yinon (2002) andKerr, Wilson, Nakamura, and Sudo (2005). It is further postulated that thepositive relationship between perceived competitive balance and attractive-ness also applies to international competitions.4 These two hypotheses arestated as follows:

H4a: The more positively fans evaluate the competitive balance within their nationalleague, the more attractive they will perceive their football league to be.

H4b: The more positively fans evaluate the perceived competitive balance in interna-tional competitions, the more attractive they will perceive the internationalchampionship to be.

The more equally income is distributed between clubs, the greater thepossibility of establishing competitive balance in national leagues (e.g., Hall,Szymanski, & Zimbalist, 2002). Football clubs have various sources ofincome, including television broadcasting fees, sponsorship deals, ticketsales, merchandising and the trading of players (Deloitte, 2008b). Of these,only the income from television broadcasting fees can be controlled by thenational federations, and even then only if collective selling of the broad-casting rights takes place (Szymanski & Valletti, 2005). This is the case forboth the Bundesliga and Premier League. Their distribution mechanisms forrevenue from television broadcasting fees guarantee a fixed sum toparticipating clubs. In addition higher payments are made to clubs higherup the league standing. In the 2006/2007 season, the winner of theBundesliga received approximately t26.18 million and the club placed lastreceived around t12.45 million, a ratio of 2.1 to 1. In the Premier League,the top club received approximately £32.05 million and the bottom clubaround £16.72 million, a ratio of 1.9 to 1 (Deloitte, 2007; Ernst & Young,2007).5 Fans may vary in their perception of the fairness of these figures.‘‘Perceived fairness in the distribution of money from television broad-casting fees’’ describes the extent to which fans think that the revenue theclubs get from television broadcasting fees is distributed equitably amongthe clubs.

It is assumed that a positive relationship exists between the degree towhich fans perceive fairness in the distribution of revenue from televisionbroadcasting fees and the perceived competitive balance within football

The Attractiveness of National and International Football Leagues 133

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

leagues. The social psychological findings of van den Bos, Vermunt, andWilke (1997) support this assumption based on fairness heuristic theory.They show that perceived fairness serves as a heuristic that guides theevaluation of subsequent events. In this study, the evaluation concernsperceived competitive balance. It is further assumed that this relationship isvalid for international competitions, because it also affects the prerequisitesfor teams to be able to compete internationally. These two assumptions areexpressed in Hypotheses 5a and 5b:

H5a: The more positively fans evaluate fairness in the distribution of money fromtelevision broadcasting fees between clubs in the national league, the morepositively they will evaluate the competitive balance of the league.

H5b: The more positively fans evaluate fairness in the distribution of money fromtelevision broadcasting fees between clubs of international competitions, the morepositively they will evaluate the competitive balance of the international champion-ship.

Figure 1 summarizes the relationships between the variables proposed inHypotheses 1�5. These relationships operate outside the scope of identifyingany differences in a club’s position in their league standing, or the league inwhich they play. However, we would also expect differing perceptionsdepending on whether the club is at the top or bottom of the league standing,as well as differences between the English Premier League and the GermanBundesliga. These assumptions are discussed below.

Direct and Moderating Effects of the Club’s Position: Star Clubs versusUnderdogs

As discussed above, true competitive balance in football leagues is a Utopia:it can exist only if all clubs have equivalent chances to win the nationalchampionship. The most balanced professional season in a first-divisionEuropean football league was in Romania in 1983/84, where the winnerscored 38 points and the bottom team (out of 16 teams in total) scored28 points out of a possible 60 (Groot, 2008). Today, some clubs are verylikely to appear high up the league standings and qualify for internationalchampionships while others are unlikely to do so*an assumptionsupported by the pre-season betting odds given by bookmakers (e.g.,bwin, 2009). Clubs likely to appear high up in the league standing can beconsidered ‘‘star clubs’’, while those unlikely to do so can be considered‘‘underdogs’’.

Star clubs have higher incomes than underdogs (Woratschek et al., 2006).This mechanism contributes to competitive imbalance and increasingly makessuccessful and rich clubs even more profitable and, hence, more successful(Groot, 2008). The distribution of income from television broadcasts is amajor contributing factor, as more successful teams get more revenue than lesssuccessful teams (see figures above). In addition, star clubs receive revenuefrom participating in international games, a luxury underdogs are not entitled

134 Joerg Koenigstorfer et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

to. If they are aware of this situation, the fans of underdogs may perceive lessfairness in the distribution of money from television broadcasts between clubsin the national league than the fans of star clubs.

Perceived competitive balance may also be subject to negativeinfluences. Although fans of underdogs show an inherent, sometimesunrealistic optimism about their team’s chances of beating star clubs(Jones, 2000), there may come a point where fans realize that their clubmay be stuck at the bottom of the league standings for an entire seasonor even longer. When this happens, fans may lose faith in their club everhaving the chance to participate in international championships. In thisway, fans’ beliefs and attitudes*reflecting their optimism or pessimismabout future success*may impact on their evaluation of competitivebalance.

Empirical studies of the mood-congruency effect suggest that when peopleare happy, persons and objects are evaluated more positively and incominginformation is processed more superficially; when people are sad, theirsurroundings appear gloomy and they process information more analytically(e.g., Fiedler, 2001; Schwarz & Clore, 1996; Wegener & Petty, 1994). Thismay also be true for the evaluation of competitive balance by fans of star clubsas opposed to fans of underdogs. Hypotheses 6a and 6b summarize thearguments above:

Perceivedattractivenessof the league

Perceivedinternational success

of the teams

Perceivedcompetitive

balance

Perceiveduniqueness of thedominating club

Stadium atmosphere

Perceived fairness in the distribution of money from

TV broadcasting fees

+

+

+

+

+

Figure 1. Proposed influences of the determinants on the attractiveness of football leagues(dashed lines indicate variables considered for international competitions (Champions

League)).

The Attractiveness of National and International Football Leagues 135

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

H6a: Fans of underdogs perceive less fairness in the distribution of money fromtelevision broadcasting fees between clubs in the national league than fans ofstar clubs.

H6b: Fans of underdogs perceive less competitive balance within the national leaguethan fans of star clubs.

As well as these direct effects, it is assumed that a club’s position will have amoderating effect. Hypothesis 7 states that the relationship between perceivedfairness in the distribution of money from television broadcasts and perceivedcompetitive balance will be stronger for fans of underdogs than for fans of starclubs. This assumption is based on a number of arguments. Fans of star clubsmay attribute competitive imbalance, or superiority of their team, to internalsources rather than external sources. This is the case, for example, when fansof star clubs state that the players or the management of their club performbetter than those of other clubs. Research on the attributions of fans afterindividual victories or defeats supports this assumption: Wann and Dolan(1994) and Wann and Schrader (2000) show that fans who identify stronglywith their team, form more internal attributions following a victory (i.e.,attributions to the levels of skills of the players and to the fans) and moreexternal attributions following a defeat (i.e. attributions to the opponents, fateand the referees), compared to fans who identify less strongly with their team.The authors describe this as a ‘‘self-serving bias’’.

Mann (1974) found that fans of losing teams feel that the outcome is moredue to external factors than to internal factors, as compared to fans of winningteams or neutral spectators.6 Fans of underdogs, unlike fans of star clubs,presumably attribute the perception of unequally distributed team qualitiesand resources to a greater extent to causes that are controlled externally, suchas the disproportionate distribution of revenue from television broadcastingfees.This helps them tocope with the poor performanceof their teams (Lazarus& Folkman, 1984), avoid cognitive imbalances (Festinger, 1957) and protecttheir self-esteem (Wann & Dolan, 1994; Wann & Schrader, 2000). Fans ofunderdogs may display such reactions by crediting a star team’s successfulperformance to the financial resources available to them, or to the lack of suchfunds in their own teams. Attribution theory has shown that externalattributions of events with negative consequences lead to negative emotions(Barclay, Skarlicki, & Pugh, 2005; Weiner, 1986). Thus a perception ofunfairness may arise. Hypothesis 7 summarizes these arguments:

H7: The relationship between perceived fairness in the distribution of money fromtelevision broadcasting fees between clubs and perceived competitive balance will bestronger for fans of underdogs than for fans of star clubs.

Direct and Moderating Effects of the League: Premier League versusBundesliga

Financial resources are distributed unequally both within leagues andbetween different leagues. This affects international competitions, since

136 Joerg Koenigstorfer et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

the clubs with the biggest financial resources may have a competitiveadvantage. The English Premier League generates the biggest revenues of anyfootball league in the world: a total of t2.5 billion in the 2007/2008 season,much more than the German Bundesliga’s t1.5 billion (Deloitte, 2008a).The television broadcasting fees generated by the Premier League in the2007/2008 season amounted to t1.33 billion, compared to t0.42 billion forthe Bundesliga (Deloitte, 2008a). The bottom club in the Premier League,which is relegated to the second division, still received more income fromtelevision broadcasting fees than the top club in the Bundesliga. Otherdifferences in total revenues between the Premier League and the Bundesligareflect the involvement of private investors, income from home games,merchandising sales and sponsorship deals (Deloitte, 2008a).

The present study focuses on earnings from television broadcasting fees.As with Hypotheses 6a and 6b, the league in question (Premier Leagueversus Bundesliga)7 is expected to have a direct effect on the perceivedfairness in the distribution of revenue from television broadcasting fees*assuming that fans know about it*and perceived competitive balance. Inthis case, international competitions are examined, and the star clubs of theBundesliga are considered underdogs in light of their inferior financial statuscompared to the star clubs of the Premier League (see also Woratschek et al.,2006).8 Hypotheses 8a and 8b are thus stated as follows:

H8a: Fans of teams in the Bundesliga will perceive less fairness in the distribution ofmoney from television broadcasting fees between leagues than fans of teams in thePremier League.

H8b: Fans of teams in the Bundesliga will perceive less competitive balance ininternational competitions than fans of teams in the Premier League.

Hypothesis 9 extends the arguments that support Hypothesis 7, to fans’perception of international competitions, with respect to the Bundesliga andPremier League. The influence of perceived fairness in the distribution ofmoney from television broadcasting fees on perceived competitive balance isexpected to be stronger for fans of Bundesliga teams than for fans of PremierLeague teams. Thus:

H9: The relationship between the perceived fairness in the distribution of money fromtelevision broadcasting fees and perceived competitive balance is stronger for fansof teams in the Bundesliga than for fans of teams in the Premier League.

Method

Selection of English and German Clubs

The clubs were chosen according to a number of criteria. First, all clubs,including the underdogs, must have been playing for at least three seasons inthe first division league. This ensured that no relegation or promotionaffected the perceptions of the fans, as this variable impacts both psycho-graphic measures of fan loyalty and the evaluation of the stadium

The Attractiveness of National and International Football Leagues 137

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

environment (Koenigstorfer & Uhrich, 2009). Secondly, star clubs onlyqualified if they were among the top 20 European football teams in revenue(Deloitte, 2008b) and had played in international competitions in theprevious three years. This ensured that the star clubs were indeed financiallyprivileged. Teams were considered to be underdogs if they had not played ininternational competitions in the previous three years and were not amongthe top 20 European football teams in revenue (Deloitte, 2008b).

Based on these criteria, 12 football teams were selected for inclusion in thestudy. In England they were Manchester United, FC Chelsea and FCLiverpool (star clubs) and FC Fulham, Aston Villa and FC Middlesbrough(underdogs). In Germany the clubs were FC Bayern Munich, SV WerderBremen and FC Schalke 04 (star clubs) and Eintracht Frankfurt, VfLWolfsburg and Arminia Bielefeld (underdogs). Table 1 shows the positionsof the clubs under consideration in the final league standings in the 2005/2006 and 2006/2007 seasons*the two seasons prior to the point in timewhen the study was conducted*and the teams’ revenues. The three starclubs in each country had held positions ranging from first to fourth place,the underdogs had held positions ranging from eleventh to sixteenth place(out of a total of 20 clubs in England and 18 in Germany).

Measurement Items

Table 2 shows the measurement items for the latent variables: attractivenessof the national leagues and the Champions League, perceived competitivebalance in the national leagues and the Champions League, stadiumatmosphere, perceived uniqueness of the dominating club, perceivedinternational success of the clubs from the respective leagues, and perceivedfairness in the distribution of money from television broadcasting fees(internationally and nationally). The indicators for the latent variables werein part adopted from the literature and in part newly developed. Allvariables were measured on a five-point rating scale (1�strongly disagree;5�strongly agree). The statements were translated and double-checkedfrom English into German and vice versa by German and English nativespeakers. Three researchers then independently checked for the contentvalidity of the German statements. FC Bayern Munich and ManchesterUnited were considered the dominating clubs due to their standing in theirrespective league over the last fifteen years.

Data Analysis

The research model for the attractiveness of national leagues shown inFigure 1 was tested using the partial least squares (PLS) method of structuralequation modelling (smartPLS). PLS utilizes a component-based approach toestimation and it can be used to analyse group differences (Chin, 1998; Chin,Marcolin, & Newsted, 2003). The league (Premier League versus Bunde-sliga) and the position of the teams (star clubs versus underdogs) wereincluded in the model both as variables directly affecting the latent variables

138 Joerg Koenigstorfer et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

Table 1. Final position and revenues of clubs

Underdogs Position* Revenues (tm) Star clubs Position* Revenues (tm)

Football league Germany (Bundesliga) Arminia Bielefeld 13, 12 31 FC Bayern Munich 1, 4 223Eintracht Frankfurt 14, 14 65 SV Werder Bremen 2, 3 97VfL Wolfsburg 15, 15 72 FC Schalke 04 4, 2 114

English (Premier League) FC Middlesbrough 14, 12 73 FC Chelsea 1, 2 283Aston Villa 16, 11 78 Manchester United 2, 1 315FC Fulham 12, 16 59 FC Liverpool 3, 3 199

*Position in the final table during the 2005/2006 and 2006/2007 seasons.

The

Attractiven

essof

Natio

nal

and

Intern

ational

Footb

allL

eagues

139

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

Table 2. Constructs, measurement items and factor loadings

Measure (Cronbach’s a) Items Loadings t-statistics

Self-developed measureAttractiveness of the ChampionsLeague (a�0.842)

I think the Champions League is highly attractive.The Champions League is boring (reversely coded).The Champions League is always a fascinating experience.To me, the Champions League is very exciting.

0.6580.6400.7850.798

19.3616.4927.1029.52

Self-developed measureAttractiveness of the nationalleague (a�0.817)

I think the [league] is highly attractive.The [league] is boring (reversely coded).The [league] is always a fantastic experience.To me, the [league] is very exciting.The [league] is not appealing to me (reversely coded).

0.8200.7680.7490.8410.601

80.3741.8845.2493.3017.29

Reference: In part adopted from Michie and Oughton (2004) and Marques (2002)Perceived competitive balance inthe national league (a�0.818)

To me, the Champions League is a very balanced league.In the Champions League anybody can beat anyone.In the Champions League games you never know which team will win.In the Champions League ‘‘small clubs’’ can beat ‘‘big clubs’’.

0.8400.9790.7390.707

27.7339.2925.0019.39

Reference: In part adopted from Michie and Oughton (2004) and Marques (2002)Perceived competitive balance inthe national league (a�0.777)

To me, the [league] is a very balanced league.In the [league] anybody can beat anyone.In the [league] games you never know which team will win.In the [league] ‘‘small clubs’’ can beat ‘‘big clubs’’.

0.7730.8270.7380.748

66.5174.7844.7236.92

Reference: Adopted from Uhrich (2008)Stadium atmosphere (a�0.891) In the stadium of [SC] you can experience a real thrill.

In the stadium of [SC] there is a frenzy atmosphere.In the stadium of [SC] there is a stirring euphoria.In the stadium of [SC] there is a great atmosphere.

0.7670.9000.8980.905

46.46115.64113.86127.63

140

Joerg

Koen

igstorfer

etal.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

Table 2 (Continued)

Measure (Cronbach’s a) Items Loadings t-statistics

Self-developed measure

Perceived uniqueness of adominating club (a�0.876)

The [league] would lose its appeal if [DC] did not compete.The [league] needs [DC].For the club, playing against [DC] is always a special event.[DC] is the figurehead of the [league].

0.8460.9000.7190.917

56.3590.8526.43

107.91

Reference: In part adopted from Bizman and Yinon (2002)Perceived international successof the national clubs (a�0.734)

There is no need to complain about the international results of the [league] clubs.[League] clubs are internationally successful.[League] clubs are underdogs in international games (reversely coded).

0.8140.9040.689

61.32193.4831.83

Reference: In part adopted from van den Bos et al. (1997) and Barclay et al. (2005)Perceived fairness in thedistribution of money from TVbroadcasting fees among theinternational clubs (a�0.655)

I think it is unfair that clubs in the Premier League have higher income from TVmoney than clubs in the Bundesliga (reversely coded).I think it is fair that clubs in the Premier League have higher profits frombroadcasts than clubs in the Bundesliga.

0.845

0.729

9.12

4.37

Reference: In part adopted from van den Bos et al. (1997) and Barclay et al. (2005)Perceived fairness in thedistribution of money fromTV broadcasting amongthe national clubs (a�0.762)

I think it is unfair that clubs at the top of the league table get more TV money thanclubs at the bottom of the table (reversely coded).TV money is distributed fairly in the [league].I think it is right that clubs that have a successful season get more TV money than clubsthat were less successful.

0.806

0.7630.892

37.86

29.0692.50

[SC], sports club (one of the twelve clubs); [league], Premier League or Bundesliga; [DC], dominating club (either Manchester United or FC BayernMunich).

The

Attractiven

essof

Natio

nal

and

Intern

ational

Footb

allL

eagues

141

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

under consideration and as moderating variables (either strengthening orweakening the relationship between two latent variables; see Chin et al.,2003).

For the attractiveness of the Champions League, a second structuralequation model was tested including the relationships between perceivedfairness in the distribution of money from television broadcasting fees,perceived competitive balance and attractiveness from the fans’ perspectiveof the three star clubs in the Premier League and the three star clubs in theBundesliga (see Hypotheses 4b, 5b, 8a, 8b and 9).

Participants and Procedures

The study was conducted in the winter of 2007/2008. During the period inwhich the study took place, there were no Bundesliga games and five matchdays in the Premier League.9 Participants were recruited via the Internet sitesof the teams and fan communities using an on-line questionnaire.10 This fanbase represents a substantial proportion of committed fans in the twocountries. In the first division of the Bundesliga, there are around 10,000 fancommunities with more than 400,000 club memberships (DFL, 2009). In thefirst division of the Premier League, the possibility for club membership isnot provided by all clubs. Even so, a large part of the fans come into contactwith their club via community activities, as revealed by the Premier Leaguefan survey (F.A. Premier League, 2008). A total of 2,516 subjects submittedthe on-line questionnaire, but 44.2% of responses were either incomplete orlacked formal and content consistency. The final sample size was therefore1,404.

The use of on-line questionnaires brings a number of advantages,including easy access to participants in geographically diverse areas,immediate feedback, low cost and verifiable delivery (Kaye & Johnson,1999; Riva, Teruzzi, & Anolli, 2003). Such methods have been used inprevious sport consumer behaviour research (e.g., Bauer et al., 2005). Also,focusing on committed fans of selected teams minimizes the variance thatoccurs between different spectator segments and so improves the explana-tory power of the findings (Hunt, Bristol, & Bashaw, 1999).

A total of 405 fans from England and 999 fans from Germany took part inthe study. The sample includes fans of Manchester United (n�40), FCChelsea (n�26), FC Liverpool (n�213), FC Bayern Munich (n�202), SVWerder Bremen (n�377), FC Schalke 04 (n�54), FC Fulham (n�82),Aston Villa (n�27), FC Middlesbrough (n�17), Eintracht Frankfurt (n�196), VfL Wolfsburg (n�60) and Arminia Bielefeld (n�110).11 The fans ofthe first three English clubs form the group ‘‘English fans of star clubs’’ or ES(nES�279). The fans of the first three German clubs form the group‘‘German fans of star clubs’’ or GS (nGS�633). The other groups are‘‘English fans of underdogs’’ or EU (nEU�126), and ‘German fans ofunderdogs’ or GU (nGU�366). The participants were committed fans oftheir respective clubs as revealed by their behavioural loyalty measures (see

142 Joerg Koenigstorfer et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

below), their engagement in the communities and their purchase behaviourof merchandise.12

The fans had supported their teams on average since 1991 (99.0 years).This variable differs between the four groups, as shown by analysis ofvariance (ANOVA) results (F(1,1400)�42.63, pB0.001) and post hoc tests:German fans of underdogs (MGU�1994) had supported their teams for asignificantly shorter period of time than the other groups (MGS�1992;MEU�1990; MES�1987). English fans of star clubs had supported theirteams for a longer time than both German fan groups. 60.7% of the Englishfans and 28.4% of the German fans were members of their club (x2(1)�128.04, pB0.001). In total, 22.9% of the participants were season ticketholders; there was a trend towards a statistically significant differencebetween England (25.9%) and Germany (21.7%; x2(1)�2.88, p�0.09) forthis variable. For all participants, the percentage of males was 90.7% andthe mean age was 25.8 (98.1) years; these variables did not differ betweenthe groups.

The demographic structure of the sample is not surprising: youngerpeople use the Internet more frequently than older people, football ispredominantly favoured by men rather than women, and young fansconsider themselves more enthusiastic about football than older fans(Eurostat, 2009; Sportfive, 2007). However, the sample is not represen-tative according to Sportfive’s (2007) survey results for Germany, inwhich 42% of the males and 18% of the females said they were veryinterested in football in general. In the Sportfive survey, around 52% ofthe German male fans claimed that football played an important role intheir lives, compared to 23% of the German female fans; agreeing withthis statement were 45% of respondents aged up to 29, 38% aged 30 to49, and 36% aged over 50. In Sportfive’s survey for England, 40% of themales and 25% of the females were very interested in football. Of thefans, 53% of the males and 36% of the females agreed that footballplayed an important role in their lives; agreeing with this statement were49% of respondents aged up to 29 years, 47% aged 30 to 49, and 40%aged over 50. These figures are estimates based on quote samplingtechniques.13 Although the sample in the present study may be youngerthan the total fan population, and men may be over-represented, we canstill believe that it serves the purpose of the study adequately.

Results

Assumption Check

Before testing the hypotheses, we checked to see if fans did indeed differ intheir perception of their club’s chances of future success in the league.Participants were asked the following question: ‘‘If you had to bet 10% ofyour monthly income on the position of your club in the league standing,what position would you bet on (final standing at the end of this season)?’’Fans differed significantly in their indications (F(1,1400)�8,440.07, pB

The Attractiveness of National and International Football Leagues 143

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

0.001): English fans of star clubs (MES�2.58 (91.00)) and German fans ofstar clubs (MGS�1.62 (90.78)) would on average bet on positions thatwould qualify their teams for the Champions League, whereas fans ofunderdogs would on average bet on positions lower down the table for theirteams (MEU�14.13 (93.86), MGU�11.03 (92.38)). A second measureaddressed the perceived national success of the teams. This factor wascaptured by a compute variable including the following items: ‘‘My clubunderperformed in the last couple of seasons’’ (reversely coded), ‘‘my club isa nationally successful club’’ and ‘‘I can’t complain about my club’s resultsduring the last couple of seasons’’. ANOVA results show that fans of starclubs evaluate the national success of their teams more positively than fansof underdogs with respect to their teams (MES�3.61 (90.70), MGS�3.83(90.69), MEU�2.32 (90.80), MGU�2.74 (90.72), F(1,1400)�725.63,pB0.001). This provides statistical evidence that fans of star clubs do indeedperceive their teams to have a good chance of being successful and a placinghigher on the ladder, while fans of underdogs think their teams have lesschance of success and finish lower in the overall standings.

It was also necessary to control for differences in how fans perceived thedistribution of money from television broadcasting fees from national leaguegames, since such differences may affect fans’ perceptions of fairness and sohave an additional influence on the dependent variables. The followingquestions were used for this purpose: ‘‘Please estimate the earnings fromtelevision broadcasting-money: How many million euros [pounds] does thewinner of the [league] get? How many million euros [pounds] does the lastof the [league] get?’’ After estimating, participants were told the actualfigures of the previous season and how the distribution mechanism works.Next, participants were asked to estimate how much the Premier League andthe Bundesliga receive in total from television broadcasting fees, and werethen told the actual figures. Only after participants had been told the actualfigures and had performed a distraction task did they respond to statementsabout their perception of fairness in the distribution of money. Theparticipants’ estimates are shown in Table 3.

The results show that fans’ estimates of what was earned by the teamsfinishing at the top and bottom of the league during the previous season arewell above the actual figures for all groups. This may result from the factthat star clubs have additional revenue from sources other than televisionbroadcasting fees (e.g., sponsorship deals, home game attendances, stockmarket investments, private investors). With respect to the ratios betweenthe revenue of the Premier League and the Bundesliga, fans’ estimates areclose to the actual ratio of 2.0 to 1 (see Table 3).

The present study attempted to avoid the bias of large-scale unequalperceptions of earnings from television broadcasts between individuals andfan groups by first telling them the actual figures, then having them performa distraction task, and only then asking them about their perceptions offairness. This approach gave fans a solid basis on which to estimate theirperceptions of fairness.

144 Joerg Koenigstorfer et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

Table 3. Participants’ perception of the total amount and distribution of earnings from television broadcasting fees

Earnings of the topclub (million)

Earnings of thebottom club

(million)Ratio (first:

last)*Earnings of the Premier

League (million)

Earnings of theBundesliga(million)

Ratio(PremierLeague:

Bundesliga)*

Germany star clubs t73.1 t12.9 5.7: 1** t637.1 t269.5 2.4: 1**underdogs t88.4 t16.7 5.3: 1** t576.7 t267.0 2.2: 1**

Actual figures(Germany)

t26.2 t12.5 2.1: 1 t839.0 t420.0 2.0: 1

England star clubs £85.2 £25.9 3.3: 1** £553.8 £314.8 1.8: 1**underdogs £81.1 £41.0 2.0: 1** £477.3 £222.2 2.2: 1**

Actual figures(England)

£32.1 £16.7 1.9: 1 £592.0 £296.4 2.0: 1

*Ratios of the average earnings of the top club to those of the bottom club.**Significant differences in the ratios estimated between German and English fans; no differences were found between the fans of star clubs andunderdogs within leagues.

The

Attractiven

essof

Natio

nal

and

Intern

ational

Footb

allL

eagues

145

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

Table 4. Correlations between the latent variables*attractiveness of national leagues

Compositereliability AVE a ATTN STAT UNDC INSN CBAN FDMN

Attractiveness of the national league 0.872 0.579 0.817 0.761

Stadium atmosphere 0.925 0.756 0.891 0.216 0.870Perceived uniqueness of the dominating club 0.911 0.721 0.876 0.000 �0.229 0.849Perceived international success of the national clubs 0.847 0.651 0.734 0.264 0.140 �0.334 0.807

Perceived competitive balance in the national league 0.855 0.596 0.777 0.428 0.076 0.143 �0.192 0.772Perceived fairness in the distribution of money between(national) clubs

0.862 0.677 0.762 0.097 �0.067 0.225 �0.069 0.122 0.823

The bold numbers along the diagonal are the square root of the variance shared between the latent variables and their measures. Numbers notalong the diagonal are the correlations between latent variables. For discriminant validity, the numbers along the diagonal should be higher thanthose not along the diagonal (Chin, 1998). AVE, average variance extracted; a, Cronbach’s alpha; ATTN, attractiveness of the national league;STAT, stadium atmosphere; UNDC, perceived uniqueness of the dominating club; INSN, perceived international success of the national clubs;CBAN, perceived competitive balance in the national league; FDMN, perceived fairness in the distribution of money between (national) clubs.

146

Joerg

Koen

igstorfer

etal.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

Measurement Model Assessment

The factor loadings of the measurement items are shown in Table 2, whileTable 4 shows the composite reliability, average variance extracted (AVE),Cronbach’s a and square root of the AVE, as well as the correlationsbetween the constructs for the model of the attractiveness of nationalfootball leagues. The composite reliability values of all of the constructswere above the recommended level of 0.70, indicating adequate internalconsistency (Bagozzi & Yi, 1988). All scale reliabilities (Cronbach’s a) wereabove 0.70 as recommended by Nunally (1978). Convergent validity isdemonstrated as the AVE values for all constructs were higher than thesuggested threshold value of 0.50 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Comparing thesquare root of the AVE (bold numbers along the diagonal in Table 4) withthe correlations between the constructs indicates that each construct is moreclosely related to its own measures than to those of other constructs;discriminant validity is therefore supported (Chin, 1998).

Table 5 shows the composite reliability, AVE, Cronbach’s a, the squareroots of the AVE and the correlations between the constructs for the modelof the attractiveness of the Champions League. The figures meet allsuggested threshold values except Cronbach’s a for the perceived fairnessin the distribution of money between clubs competing internationally (a�0.655; see Table 5 and references above).

Results of the Structural Model Assessment

The results of the PLS analysis for the attractiveness of national leaguesshow that the model in Figure 1 explains 31.8% of variance in theattractiveness of national football leagues. The explanatory power of themodel is comparable to other attitude models frequently used in socialsciences, such as the theory of reasoned action or the theory of plannedbehaviour (e.g., Armitage & Conner, 2001; Hale, Householder, & Green,2003).14

Table 6 reports the path coefficients between the latent variables and theirlevel of statistical significance. Stadium atmosphere is a relevant determinantfor the attractiveness of both the Premier League (b�0.277, pB0.001) andthe Bundesliga (b�0.104, pB0.001). Hypothesis 1 is therefore upheld. Theleague moderates this relationship: stadium atmosphere has a greaterinfluence on the attractiveness of the Premier League than on the attractive-ness of the Bundesliga (t�3.80, pB0.001). Furthermore, we found a directeffect in the interaction between the position of the club and the league on theperception of stadium atmosphere (b��0.333, pB0.001): fans of Germanunderdogs rate stadium atmosphere higher than fans of German star clubs,while the opposite is true for fans of English clubs. This finding was nothypothesized and is discussed in the discussion section below.15

The degree of international success of national clubs as perceived by fanshas a positive influence on the attractiveness of the league for German fans(b�0.259, pB0.001), but not for English fans (b�0.101, p�0.10). Thus,

The Attractiveness of National and International Football Leagues 147

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

Table 5. Correlations between the latent variables*attractiveness of the Champions League

Composite reliability AVE a ATTC CBAC FDMI

Attractiveness of the Champions League 0.814 0.524 0.842 0.724Perceived competitive balance in the Champions league 0.892 0.677 0.818 0.394 0.823

Perceived fairness in the distribution of money between (international) clubs 0.964 0.933 0.655 �0.111 �0.058 0.966

The bold numbers along the diagonal are the square root of the variance shared between the latent variables and their measures. Numbers notalong the diagonal are the correlations between latent variables. For discriminant validity, the numbers along the diagonal should be higher thanthose not along the diagonal (Chin, 1998). AVE, average variance extracted; a, Cronbach’s alpha; ATTC, attractiveness of the ChampionsLeague; CBAC, perceived competitive balance in the Champions League; FDMI, perceived fairness in the distribution of money between(international) clubs.

148

Joerg

Koen

igstorfer

etal.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

Table 6. Paths of the structural equation model*attractiveness of national leagues

Bundesliga Premier LeagueHypothesis

Significanceof the

difference H7H Paths of the structural equation model ß p ß p confirmed? in ß confirmed?

H1 Stadium atmosphere 0 attractiveness 0.104 *** 0.277 *** ª t�3.80*** no hyp.H2 Perceived international success of the national clubs 0

attractiveness0.259 *** 0.101 n.s. (ª) t�1.62 n.s. no hyp.

H3 Perceived uniqueness of the dominating teams 0attractiveness

0.025 n.s. 0.139 ** (ª) t�1.93 n.s. no hyp.

H4a Perceived competitive balance 0 attractiveness 0.399 *** 0.443 *** ª t�0.87 n.s. no hyp.H5a Perceived fairness in the distribution of money 0

perceived competitive balance0.061 n.s. 0.204 *** (ª) t�2.33* ª

ª hypothesis confirmed, (ª) hypothesis partially confirmed, hypothesis rejected.*pB0.05, **pB0.01, ***pB0.001.

The

Attractiven

essof

Natio

nal

and

Intern

ational

Footb

allL

eagues

149

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

Hypothesis 2 is upheld only for fans of the Bundesliga. By contrast, theperceived international success of the national clubs is evaluated morepositively by English fans than by their German counterparts (a direct effect,not shown in Table 6; b�0.656, pB0.001). This finding can be explainedby the recent successes of the Premier League clubs in the ChampionsLeague.

The perceived uniqueness of Manchester United has a positive effect onthe attractiveness of the Premier League (b�0.139, pB0.01), whereas theperceived uniqueness of FC Bayern Munich does not affect the attractivenessof the Bundesliga. Hypothesis 3 is therefore only upheld for the PremierLeague and not for the Bundesliga. However, as in the case of theinternational success of the national clubs, the perceived uniqueness of thedominating club differs between the leagues: FC Bayern Munich’s unique-ness in the Bundesliga is evaluated more positively than Manchester United’suniqueness in the Premier League (b��0.293, pB0.001).

Perceived competitive balance is the most important factor influencing theperceived attractiveness of football leagues in both countries (see Table 6).The path coefficients are 0.443 (pB0.001) for the Premier League and 0.399(pB0.001) for the Bundesliga. Perceived competitive balance is positivelyaffected by the perceived fairness in the distribution of money fromtelevision broadcasting fees in the Premier League (b�0.204, pB0.001),but not in the Bundesliga (b�0.061, p�0.10). Thus, there is full support forHypothesis 4a, whereas Hypothesis 5a is only partially confirmed. There arealso some direct and moderating effects on these latent variables. First, theclubs’ position in the league standings directly affects fans’ perception ofwhether money from television broadcasting fees is distributed fairly or not:fans of underdogs perceive less fairness than fans of star clubs (b��0.317,pB0.001), confirming Hypothesis 6a. Secondly, the league has direct effectson the perceived fairness in the distribution of money from televisionbroadcasting fees (b��0.062, pB0.001) and on the perceived competitivebalance (b��0.342, pB0.001): there is less perceived fairness andcompetitive balance in the Premier League than in the Bundesliga. Thirdly,the relationship between the perceived fairness in the distribution of moneyfrom television broadcasting fees and the perceived competitive balancetends to be moderated by both the club’s position (b�0.058, pB0.10) andthe league (b�0.072, pB0.05). As stated in Hypothesis 7, the relationshiptends to be stronger for fans of underdogs than for fans of star clubs.Furthermore, the relationship between these latent variables is stronger forfans of the Premier League than for fans of the Bundesliga.

Finally, the results indicate that English fans evaluate the attractiveness ofthe Premier League more positively than German fans appraise theBundesliga (b�0.083, pB0.05). In addition, there is an interaction effecton the perceived attractiveness of football leagues: fans of English star clubsevaluate the attractiveness of their national league more positively than fansof underdogs, whereas the opposite is true of German fans (b�0.071, pB0.05). We did not hypothesize this; however, the findings are examined ingreater detail in the discussion.

150 Joerg Koenigstorfer et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

Table 7. Paths of the structural equation model*attractiveness of the Champions League

Bundesliga Premier LeagueHypothesis

Significanceof the

difference H9H Paths of the structural equation model ß p ß p confirmed? in ß confirmed?

H4b Perceived competitive balance 0 attractiveness 0.366 *** 0.488 *** ª t�0.23 n.s. no hyp.H5b Perceived fairness in the distribution of money 0

attractiveness�0.182 n.s. �0.036 n.s. t�1.10 n.s.

ª hypothesis confirmed, (ª) hypothesis partially confirmed, hypothesis rejected.*pB0.05, **pB0.01, ***pB0.001.

The

Attractiven

essof

Natio

nal

and

Intern

ational

Footb

allL

eagues

151

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

The results of the structural equation modelling for the attractiveness ofthe Champions League are shown in Table 7. Only fans of star clubs wereconsidered, since it may be assumed that those fans are highly involved inChampions League games. The analysis reveals that perceived competitivebalance has a positive influence on the attractiveness of the ChampionsLeague for fans of both English star clubs (b�0.488, pB0.001) andGerman star clubs (b�0.366, pB0.001); Hypothesis 4b is therefore upheld.The perceived fairness in the distribution of money from television broad-casting fees has no significant effect on the perceived competitive balance ineither country (see Table 7), thus Hypothesis 5b is rejected. Furthermore, theleague does not have a moderating effect on this relationship (t�1.10, n.s.)and Hypothesis 9 is therefore also rejected. However, the league does have adirect effect on the perceived fairness in the distribution of money fromtelevision broadcasting fees (b�0.077, pB0.05) and perceived competitivebalance (b�0.182, pB0.001): fans of English star clubs evaluate theselatent variables more positively than their German counterparts. Hypotheses8a and 8b are thus upheld.

Discussion

This study examined the attractiveness of first-division football leagues inEngland and Germany from two perspectives: that of fans of teamsconsidered underdogs, and that of fans considered star clubs. The resultsshowed that of the variables studied, perceived competitive balance is themost important determinant of the attractiveness of national football leaguesfor all fan groups. Thus, even fans of financially privileged and successfulclubs concede that perceived competitive balance is necessary to maintainthe attractiveness of national and international leagues.

The second most important determinant for fans of the Premier League isstadium atmosphere. This factor also contributes to perceived attractivenessfor fans of the Bundesliga, but this variable is more important for the sampleof English fans. In addition German fans perceive international success ofnational clubs as a highly relevant factor for the attractiveness of theBundesliga; in England, the influence of this factor is not statisticallysignificant. Finally, in England the perceived attractiveness of the league isaffected by the perceived uniqueness of Manchester United.

Most of these relationships have not been tested empirically from the fans’perspective before. Although competitive balance is a well-researchedconstruct in the literature on sports management and economics, mostauthors have used objective measures (for a review, see Borland &Macdonald, 2003; Groot, 2008) rather than focusing on the individualperceptions of football fans. Yet, if we compare the subjective measures asperceived by fans in the present study with the objective measures providedby Groot (2008) and Brandes and Franck (2007) in the Premier League andBundesliga 2005/2006 season, we find support for why fans of the PremierLeague evaluated competitive balance more negatively than fans of theBundesliga: the static competitive balance as measured by the surprise index

152 Joerg Koenigstorfer et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

(Groot, 2008) and competitive balance as measured by the idealizedstandard deviation of winning percentages (Brandes & Franck, 2007) arelower in the Premier League than in the Bundesliga. Ernst and Young’s(2009) recent analysis of the top five European football leagues supportsthese findings. In their study, the English Premier League received the lowestscore for competitive balance and Germany was ranked middle.16

In previous studies, most researchers have considered behaviouralmeasures to be outcome variables of competitive balance (e.g., the numberof spectators at a game or during a season). Forrest and Simmons (2006) andBrandes and Franck (2007) conclude that competitive balance, measuredobjectively, does not play an important role in football fans’ attendance on aseasonal level. Other authors find positive correlations between competitivebalance and attendance behaviour (e.g., Knowles et al., 1992; Schmidt &Berri, 2001; Vrooman, 1995).

In the present study a psychographic measure was regarded as a dependentvariable*perceived attractiveness*a factor that may in turn have beha-vioural consequences, such as influencing the buying behaviour of fansregarding single game or season tickets, media, merchandise and so on. Anadvantage of this approach is that the findings can be used for makingmarketing decisions as part of a customer-orientated brand managementstrategy (e.g., Bauer et al., 2005; Gladden & Funk, 2001). Customerorientation means taking a customer perspective. In this case, the customersare groups of fans of different leagues whose members*the clubs*have toboth co-operate and compete in order to make products and services asattractive as possible (Brandenburger & Nalebuff, 1996).

The study reported here revealed that fans of English star clubs evaluatethe atmosphere in stadiums and the attractiveness of the league morepositively than fans of underdogs. In Germany, the opposite is true. Thisfinding suggests differences in the perceptions of fans of star clubs andunderdogs between the two countries. With regard to stadium atmospherethe results are somewhat surprising, because two of the three star clubs inGermany (FC Bayern Munich and FC Schalke 04) have recently built newstadiums and the capacity utilization levels of the stadiums in the 2006/2007season were close to 100%. The utilization of the stadiums of the Germanunderdogs averaged 84% (Kicker, 2007). Nevertheless, the fans of theunderdogs evaluated stadium atmosphere more positively than the fans ofthe star clubs. This finding indicates that star clubs potentially attractmore spectators who attend the games due to the ‘‘bandwagon effect’’ thanthe underdogs (e.g., Borland & Macdonald, 2003). The utilization levels aresimilar for the clubs in the Premier League: star clubs’ stadium utilizationwas close to 100%, while it averaged 82% for underdogs in the 2006/2007season (Kicker, 2007).

With regard to the overall attractiveness of the leagues, the study foundthat the football league with the highest revenue in the world, the EnglishPremier League, is indeed perceived as more attractive by its fan groups thanthe German Bundesliga is (by its fan groups). However, in the PremierLeague, where both subjective and objective measures of competitive

The Attractiveness of National and International Football Leagues 153

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

balance are lower than in the Bundesliga, fans of underdogs evaluated theattractiveness of the league less positively than fans of star clubs. Thistendency was not observed for Germany, where fans of underdogs evaluatedthe attractiveness of the league even more positively than fans of star clubs.

This study also indicates that fans may adapt their expectation andsatisfaction levels according to their club’s position in the league standings.Since teams considered underdogs in national leagues have less chances ofplacing high in the ladder and do not compete in international champion-ships, factors unrelated to sporting success become more important for theirfans. One such factor is stadium atmosphere, as shown by the study for theGerman fans of underdogs compared to fans of star clubs. This finding issupported by Fisher and Wakefield (1998), who show that the levels of fans’identification with an unsuccessful team are influenced to a greater extent bytheir involvement in the sport in general and to a lesser extent by theperformance of their team, as is the case for fans of successful clubs.

When comparing the magnitude of the path coefficients of the attractive-ness model of national leagues to the reduced model of the ChampionsLeague, it emerges that competitive balance is highly relevant for bothcompetitions from the fans’ perspective. However, from the perspective ofthe fans, the distribution of money from television broadcasting fees doesnot appear to be an important variable for establishing competitive balanceon an international level and on a national level in the Bundesliga, whereas itis relevant for the Premier League.

Limitations and Future Research

This study has several limitations. The selection of determinants for theattractiveness of football leagues does not cover all the possible reasons whyfans might evaluate a league as being highly attractive. Factors notconsidered here include the involvement in football or the tradition andhistory of individual sport clubs. Additionally, Woratschek et al. (2007), in aqualitative video graphic study, found that belonging to a community andthe perception of match games as social venues contribute to fan loyalty andthe willingness of fans to travel long distances to attend away games.However, such factors are very case-specific, depending on the club and fanclub or community under consideration. They can hardly be assessed solelyby following positivistic approaches, as symbolic meanings and subjectiveexperiences are involved (e.g., Holt, 1995; Jones, 2000). Also, they may notbe independent of the stadium atmosphere, because features of the stadiumsuch as proximity to the pitch or the sightline are embedded in socialcontexts, as shown by Charleston (2008).

Another shortcoming of the present study is that it was conducted withcommitted fans who were involved in communities and had access to theInternet. The sample is, therefore, not representative of the entire German andEnglish fan population. Furthermore, the sample size for some clubs was small.

Future research should examine how the determinants affect the attrac-tiveness of football leagues for other groups of spectators and fans. To date,

154 Joerg Koenigstorfer et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

the Premier League has received the most attention of any of the professionalfootball leagues. European football leagues and their fans differ; thus, morecross-cultural research is needed (Hargreaves & McDonald, 2000). Ofparticular interest are European countries that are even more affected byfinancial imbalances than the German Bundesliga.

Additional research is also needed to reveal fans’ views of the mechanismthat ‘‘wins make [clubs] rich, and the rich [clubs] win’’ (von Petersdorff,2008, p. 36). Groot (2008, p. 131) supports this view, writing that,

the decline of dynamic CB [competitive balance] is entirely a post-World War IIphenomenon: it has been considerable in the last three decades, almost frightening inthe very last decade. The higher the positive correlation of the rank correlation coefficient,the more we can say that success (in one season) breeds success (in the following season)and that failure breeds failure. We are moving to a state of affairs where this is increasinglythe case.

Finally, the present study outlines a model that may also be applicable toother sports organized in league systems, which opens possibilities forsimilar research in other fields than professional football.

Implications for Managers of Sports Clubs and Associations

The findings of this study can help managers of sports clubs andassociations*at both the league and club level*to keep their products andservices as attractive as possible from the perspective of different customergroups. Today, sports leagues represent a significant part of the recreation andentertainment sector of the economy, and their impact often is global (Mason,1999). This study focuses on fans, as this group is very important to sportingleagues and clubs through the purchase of tickets, merchandise, sponsorshipsor television broadcasting fees. Taylor (1992, p. 188) supports this view,stating that, ‘‘the crowd is the supreme authority without which the goldencore of the game has no currency’’. Other customer segments for sportsleagues and teams include the media (e.g., television, print, the Internet),corporations (e.g., sponsors, consultants, sellers of television broadcastingrights) and the cities where the teams are located (Mason, 1999).

The most important factor in keeping a league attractive from theperspective of fans is guaranteeing competitive balance. Thus sports leaguesshould be structured to foster the perception of competitiveness and rivalrybetween the clubs. Selling television broadcasting rights collectively anddistributing the income fairly between clubs appears to be advantageous,since it guarantees income to less privileged teams or underdogs (see alsoWoratschek et al., 2006). The Italian Seria A, for example, decided todistribute their income from media rights collectively between the clubs from2010 onwards. To date, television rights have been sold on a club-by-clubbasis, which is still the case for the Spanish Primera Division.

However, the competitive balance of a league on a national level maynegatively affect the prerequisites for teams to be able to compete in

The Attractiveness of National and International Football Leagues 155

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

international championships where they may face financially privilegedclubs from other leagues, such as the Primera Division, where Real Madridor FC Barcelona generate high income from selling media rights. Our resultsindicate that competitive balance between the leagues is important too.Therefore, institutions such as UEFA and FIFA, as well as the nationalinstitutions and clubs, should aim to establish competitive balance on aninternational level.

To conclude on the relevance of competitive balance for keeping a leagueattractive, we can state that equal distribution of ability between teams iscrucial from the perspective of all fan groups. However, the uniqueness ofdominant clubs can also contribute to the attractiveness of the footballleague. Utilization levels of stadiums when dominant clubs compete in awaygames support this notion. For example, during the 2006/2007 season, allthe away games of Manchester United and FC Bayern Munich were sold out(Kicker, 2007). Thus, sport managers face a trade off between aiming atmaximizing competitive balance and allowing teams financial privileges thatmay increase their uniqueness and sporting success, both nationally andinternationally. As competitive imbalance has been increasing over time,both managers and representatives of institutions should focus on slowingthis trend. An equal distribution of income from selling media rights, and aninternationally approved licensing system that guarantees fair financialpractices are two examples.

Today’s professional sports leagues compete with one another forspectators and fans, both between different sports and between countries.They have also ‘‘delocalized’’ over time, as the global marketplace has madethem less attached to specific locations (Mason, 1999). Marketers, therefore,have to make decisions with global impact*both on a team and league level.Yet, ‘‘all authority must ultimately reside in the league as a whole, inorder to avoid conflicting relationships with sponsors, networks, and otherstakeholders’’ (Mason, 1999, p. 406). Thus, there is a need for sports leaguesto implement branding strategies that are orientated towards their custo-mers. Strengthening competitive balance on an international level withoutdenying the uniqueness of figurehead clubs in national leagues would be oneof many challenging strategies. This may satisfy both the needs of fans ofunderdogs and star clubs and therefore guarantee the long-term attractive-ness of the league.

Managers should also try to influence the atmosphere at stadiums by usinga variety of methods and stimuli (Uhrich, 2008; Uhrich & Koenigstorfer,2009). This contributes to the attractiveness of the event, especially if teamsare less successful. Since the spectators and fans themselves contribute to theatmosphere, clubs should focus on those individuals that actively participatein generating the special atmosphere at stadiums. Past research has shownthat these are highly committed fans, often organized in fan clubs orcommunities (Uhrich, 2008; Woratschek et al., 2007). The team offers somesymbolic capital to them (Richardson, 2004) and they remain loyal to theirteam even if it faces a crisis in terms of performance, such as poor seasonresults or relegation to a lower division (Koenigstorfer et al., 2011;

156 Joerg Koenigstorfer et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

Koenigstorfer & Uhrich, 2009). Marketers can address this group of fans byrewarding their contribution to the excellent atmosphere in the stadium, forexample by offering them certain benefits that allow them to stand out fromthe crowd and express their intimacy with the club. The architecture of thestadium (e.g., proximity to the pitch, acoustics) and the perceived quality ofthe stadium announcer can also contribute to stadium atmosphere (Char-leston, 2008; Uhrich, 2008; Uhrich & Koenigstorfer, 2009; Wakefield &Sloan, 1995).

Kaynak, Salman, and Tatoglu (2008, p. 337) stated that, ‘‘as fans serve asa crucial means for the process of branding a sport team or club, it is highlyessential for clubs or teams to better understand their fans’’. Gladden andMilne (1999), in their study of the major professional American sportsleagues, and Bauer et al. (2005), in their study of the Bundesliga, showempirically that both sporting success and brand equity independently ofeach other contribute to economic success at the team level in terms of salesof merchandise and attendance figures. Thus, marketers should aim toincrease brand awareness, perceived quality and loyalty of the customerbase, at the same time as inducing strong, favourable and uniquebrand associations from the perspective of their customers, factors thatare relevant for consumer-based brand equity formation (Aaker, 1991). Thefactors proposed in this article, in particular the competitive balance ofsports leagues*the strongest determinant of a league’s attractiveness in thisstudy*may also contribute to this.

Notes

1. For a detailed description of these measures, see Brandes and Franck (2007) and thereferences we provide.

2. Manchester United has won ten national championships between 1993/1994 and 2008/2009, FC Bayern Munich nine, Glasgow Rangers nine, Celtic Glasgow seven (bothScotland), Olympique Lyon seven (France), FC Barcelona and Real Madrid six (Spain),Juventus Turin five, Inter and AC Milan four (Italy).

3. Also see, for example, the discussions of football fans in on-line blogs and chat roomssuch as http://www.premierleagueforum.com and http://www.bundesligaforen.de.

4. A pre-test carried out for the purpose of this study showed that fans are able to evaluatethe competitive balance of international competitions but have difficulty evaluatingother determinants. For example, they can evaluate the competitive balance of aninternational competition if their team faces being knocked out early on. However, inthis case, as international games occur infrequently, they have difficulty evaluating otherfactors such as stadium atmosphere, especially when making a generalized statement atone point in time. For this reason, the present study considers only competitive balanceand perceived fairness in the distribution of income from television broadcasting fees forthe attractiveness of the Champions League (see Figure 1).

5. By comparison, in the 2007/2008 season, the winner of the Bundesliga receivedapproximately t32.05 million and the club placed last received around t16.72 million, aratio of 1.9 to 1. In the Premier League, the winner received approximately £49.85million and the club placed last received around £29.50 million, a ratio of 1.7 to 1(Deloitte, 2008a; Ernst & Young, 2008).

The Attractiveness of National and International Football Leagues 157

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

6. In the present study, the perception of unequally distributed income from televisionbroadcasts regulated by the federation is considered an external factor.

7. This study looks only at England and Germany. Other comparisons within Europewould also be possible, for example between the English Premier League and leaguesthat are even less privileged than the Bundesliga as regards revenue and the potential towin international championships, such as the clubs in the Swiss League.

8. Financial imbalances between clubs competing in international championships may beexacerbated by the system of distributing money between participants. For example, thewinner of the Champions League in 2007 could receive a maximum of t23.7 millionfrom UEFA depending on the outcomes of its group games, while a team losing all itsgroup games received t5.4 million (UEFA, 2007).

9. As revealed by analyses of variance, there were no differences in the perception of thevariables under consideration between the five match days for the subgroups of thesample of respondents from England.

10. The Internet sites used included: http://www.manutdtalk.com, http://www.villatalk.com, http://www.fulhamfc.com, http://www.boroforum.co.uk, http://forums.cfcnet.co.uk, http://www.redandwhitekop.com, http://www.premierleagueforum.com, http://www.soccerfans.de, http://www.fcb-forum.net, http://www.fanlager.de, http://forum.werder.de, http://www.forumaufschalke.de, http://www.dsc4ever.de, http://community.vfl-wolfsburg.de, http://www.eintracht.de and http://www.bundesligaforen.de.

11. Although the sample sizes for some teams were quite small, small groups were noteliminated as non-parametric tests showed that fans’ perceptions in these groups did notdiffer significantly from the fans’ perceptions in larger groups.

12. Besides measuring attitudinal and behavioural loyalty, we asked how much fans hadspent on merchandise during the season so far, to capture the economic dimension oftheir loyalty to the club. On average, English fans claimed to have spent £121.14 andGerman fans t69.98.

13. Other surveys conducted by the Bundesliga (DFL, 2009) and the Premier League (F.A.Premier League, 2008) themselves are not representative of the fan population in therespective countries.

14. In the present study, involvement in football is a variable that could potentially enhancethe explanatory power of the model if it was included as another determinant.However, we would expect the involvement levels to be high for all committed fans inthe sample and would not expect any differences between the fan groups underconsideration (English versus German fans, fans of star clubs versus underdogs). For thisreason, the variable was not included in the attractiveness models.

15. A two-factorial ANOVA confirms this result. The study also found that, overall, fans ofunderdogs evaluate stadium atmosphere more positively than fans of star clubs (b�0.086, pB0.001); this finding is evaluated in greater detail in the discussion.

16. VfL Wolfsburg, a German club classified as ‘‘underdog’’ when the study was conducted,is a good example of the high degree of competitiveness in the German Bundesliga. Inthe 2008/2009 season, this team won the championship and, therefore, based on thedefinitions provided above, it must not be considered underdog any more.

References

Aaker, D.A. (1991). Managing brand equity: Capitalizing on the value of a brand name. New York: The

Free Press.

Armitage, C.J., & Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: A meta-analytic

review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 471�499.

158 Joerg Koenigstorfer et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

Baade, R.A., & Tiehen, L.J. (1990). An analysis of major league baseball attendance. Journal of Sport and

Social Issues, 14, 14�32.

Bagozzi, R.P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy

of Marketing Science, 16, 74�94.

Baker, J. (1987). The role of the environment in marketing services: The consumer perspective. In J.A.

Czepiel, C.A. Congram, & J. Shanahan (Eds.), The service challenge: Integrating for competitive

advantage, Proceedings Series (pp. 79�85). Chicago, IL: American Marketing Association.

Barclay, L.J., Skarlicki, D.P., & Pugh, D.S. (2005). Exploring the role of emotions in injustice perceptions

and retaliation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 629�643.

Bauer, H.H., Sauer, N.E., & Exler, S. (2005). The loyalty of German soccer fans: Does a team’s brand

image matter? International Journal of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship, 7, 14�22.

Becker, M.A., & Suls, J. (1983). Take me out of the ballgame: The effects of objective, social and

temporal performance on attendance at major league baseball games. Journal of Sports Psychology,

5, 302�313.

Berri, D.J., Schmidt, M.B., & Brook, S.L. (2004). Stars at the gate: The impact of star power on NBA gate

revenues. Journal of Sports Economics, 5, 33�50.

Bird, P. (1982). The demand for league football. Applied Economics, 14, 637�649.

Bitner, M.J. (1992). Servicescapes: The impact of physical surroundings on customers and employees.

Journal of Marketing, 56(2), 57�71.

Bizman, A., & Yinon, Y. (2002). Engaging and distancing tactics among sport fans: Effects on self-esteem

and emotional responses. Journal of Social Psychology, 142, 381�392.

Boen, F., Vanbeselaere, N., & Feys, J. (2002). Behavioral consequences of fluctuating group successes: An

Internet study of soccer-team fans. Journal of Social Psychology, 142, 769�781.

Borland, J., & Macdonald, R. (2003). Demand for sport. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 19,

478�502.

Brandenburger, A.M., & Nalebuff, B.J. (1996). Coopetition. New York: Doubleday.

Brandes, L., & Franck, E. (2007). An empirical analysis of competitive balance in European soccer

leagues. Eastern Economic Journal, 33, 379�403.

Brandes, L., Franck, E., & Nuesch, S. (2008). Local heroes and superstars. Journal of Sports Economics,

9, 266�286.

bwin (2009). List of odds. Retrieved August 7, 2009 from https://www.bwin.com/soccer.

Cain, L.P., & Haddock, D.D. (2006). Measuring parity: Tying into the idealized standard deviation.

Journal of Sports Economics, 7, 330�338.

Charleston, S. (2008). Determinants of home atmosphere in English football: A committed supporter

perspective. Journal of Sport Behavior, 31, 312�328.

Chin, W.W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In G.A.

Marcoulides (Ed.), Modern methods for business research (pp. 295�336). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence

Erlbaum Associates.

Chin, W.W., Marcolin, B.L., & Newsted, P.R. (2003). A partial least squares latent variable modeling

approach for measuring interaction effects: Results from a Monte Carlo simulation study and an

electronic-mail emotion/adoption study. Information Systems Research, 14, 189�217.

Cialdini, R.B., Borden, R.J., Thorne, A., Walker, M.R., Freeman, S., & Sloan, L.R. (1976). Basking

in reflected glory � three (football) field studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34,

366�375.

Deloitte (2007). Annual review of football finance. Manchester: Sports Business Group, Deloitte.

Deloitte (2008a). Annual review of football finance. Manchester: Sports Business Group, Deloitte.

Deloitte (2008b). Football money league. Manchester: Sports Business Group, Deloitte.

Derbaix, C., Decrop, A., & Cabossart, O. (2002). Colors and scarves: The symbolic consumption of

material possessions by soccer fans. In S.M. Broniarczyk, & K. Nakamoto (Eds.), Advances in

Consumer Research, 29 (pp. 511�518). Valdosta, GA: Association for Consumer Research.

The Attractiveness of National and International Football Leagues 159

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

DFL (2009). Bundesliga Report 2009. Frankfurt am Main: DFL.

Ernst & Young (2007). Balle, Tore und Finanzen IV [Balls, goals, and finance]. Essen: Ernst & Young.

Ernst & Young (2008). Balle, Tore und Finanzen V [Balls, goals, and finance]. Essen: Ernst & Young.

Ernst & Young (2009). Balle, Tore und Finanzen VI [Balls, goals, and finance]. Essen: Ernst & Young.

Eurostat (2009, February). Statistics on households/individuals and the information society. Retrieved

March 26, 2009 from http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page?_pageid�2973,64549069,

2973_64554066&_dad�portal&_schema�PORTAL.

F.A., Premier League. (2008). National fan survey � 2007/08 season. London: F.A. Premier League.

Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance (1st ed). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Fiedler, K. (2001). Affective influences on social information processing. In J.P. Forgas (Ed.), Handbook

of affect and social cognition (pp. 163�185). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Fisher, R.J., & Wakefield, K. (1998). Factors leading to group identification: A field study of winners and

losers. Psychology & Marketing, 15, 23�40.

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D.F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables

and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39�50.

Forrest, D., & Simmons, R. (2006). Outcome uncertainty and attendance demand in sport: The case of

English soccer. The Statistician, 51, 229�241.

Gladden, J.M., & Funk, D.C. (2001). Understanding brand loyalty in professional sport: Examining the

link between brand associations and brand loyalty. International Journal of Sports Marketing and

Sponsorship, 3, 67�94.

Gladden, J.M., & Milne, G.R. (1999). Examining the importance of brand equity in professional sport.

Sport Marketing Quarterly, 8, 21�29.

Groot, L. (2008). Economics, uncertainty and European Football: Trends in competitive balance.

Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

Hale, J.L., Householder, B.J., & Green, K.L. (2003). The theory of reasoned action. In J.P. Dillard, &

M. Pfau (Eds.), The persuasion handbook: Developments in theory and practice (pp. 259�286).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Hall, S., Szymanski, S., & Zimbalist, A.S. (2002). Testing causality between team performance and

payroll. Journal of Sports Economics, 3, 149�168.

Hargreaves, J., & McDonald, I. (2000). Cultural studies and the sociology of sport. In J. Coakley, &

E. Dunning (Eds.), Handbook of sports studies (pp. 48�60). London: Sage Publications.

Hart, R., Hutton, J., & Sharot, T. (1975). A statistical analysis of association football attendances.

Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series C, 24, 17�27.

Hightower, R., Brady, M.K., & Baker, T.L. (2002). Investigating the role of the physical environment in

hedonic service consumption: An exploratory study of sporting events. Journal of Business Research,

55, 697�707.

Hirschman, E.C., & Holbrook, M.B. (1982). Hedonic consumption: Emerging concepts, methods and

propositions. Journal of Marketing, 46(3), 92�101.

Hirt, E.R., Zillmann, D., Erickson, G.A., & Kennedy, C. (1992). Costs and benefits of allegiance:

Changes in fans’ self-ascribed competencies after team victory versus defeat. Journal of Personality

and Social Psychology, 63, 724�738.

Holt, D.B. (1995). How consumers consume: A typology of consumption practices. Journal of Consumer

Research, 22, 1�16.

Hunt, K.A., Bristol, T., & Bashaw, E.R. (1999). A conceptual approach to classifying sports fans. Journal

of Services Marketing, 13, 439�452.

Jones, I. (2000). A model of serious leisure identification: The case of football fandom. Leisure Studies,

19, 283�298.

Kaye, B.K., & Johnson, T.J. (1999). Research methodology: Taming the cyber frontier. Social Science

Computer Review, 17, 323�337.

160 Joerg Koenigstorfer et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

Kaynak, E., Salman, G.G., & Tatoglu, E. (2008). An integrative framework linking brand associations

and brand loyalty in professional sports. Brand Management, 15, 336�357.

Kerr, J.H., Wilson, G.V., Nakamura, I., & Sudo, Y. (2005). Emotional dynamics of soccer fans at

winning and losing games. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 1855�1866.

Kicker (2007). Sonderheft Bundesliga 07/08. Nuremberg: Kicker-Sportmagazin.

Knowles, G., Sherony, K., & Haupert, M. (1992). The demand for major league baseball: A test of the

uncertainty of outcome hypothesis. American Economist, 36, 72�80.

Koenigstorfer, J., Groeppel-Klein, A., & Schmitt, M. (2011). ‘‘You’ll never walk alone’’*How loyal are

football fans to their clubs when they are struggling against relegation? Journal of Sport

Management, 25(1) (Forthcoming).

Koenigstorfer, J., & Uhrich, S. (2009). Riding a rollercoaster: The dynamics of sports fans’ loyalty after

promotion and relegation. Marketing*Journal of Research and Management, 31, 71�83.

Konigstorfer, J. (2009). Getting into the heart of the sport consumer. In H.-D. Horch, C. Breuer,

G. Hovemann, S. Kaiser, & S. Walzel (Eds.), Sport, Medien und Kommunikation: Aktuelle

okonomische und managementbezogene Aspekte [Sport, media and communication: Current

economic and managerial aspects (pp. 131�160). Cologne: German Sports University.

Koning, R.H. (2000). Balance in competition in Dutch soccer. The Statistician, 49, 419�431.

Lazarus, R.S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer.

Leach, C.W., Spears, R., Branscombe, N.R., & Doosje, B. (2003). Malicious pleasure: Schadenfreude at

the suffering of another group. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 932�943.

Mann, L. (1974). On being a sore loser: How fans react to their team’s failure. Australian Journal of

Psychology, 39, 29�38.

Marques, A. (2002). Competitive balance in the Portuguese premier league of professional soccer.

Industrial Organization 0211025, Econ WPA.

Mason, D.S. (1999). What is the sports product and who buys it? The marketing of professional sports

leagues. European Journal of Marketing, 33, 402�418.

Michie, J., & Oughton, C. (2004). Competitive balance in football: Trends and effects. Football

Governance Research Centre, Research Paper No. 2 2004.

Nunally, J.C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Peel, D.A., & Thomas, D.A. (1992). The demand for football: Some evidence on outcome uncertainty.

Empirical Economics, 17, 323�331.

Penders, P. (2007, November 26). Bundesliga Kommentar: Ein Stuck Leben [Comment on the Bundesliga:

A piece of life], Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, p. 25.

Richardson, B. (2004). New consumer and football fandom: The role of social habitus in consumer

behaviour. The Irish Journal of Management, 25, 88�100.

Richardson, B. & Turley, D. (2006). Support your local team: Resistance, subculture, and the desire for

distinction. In C. Pechmann, & L.L. Price (Eds.), Advances in Consumer Research (pp. 175�180),

33. Duluth, MN: Association for Consumer Research.

Riva, G., Teruzzi, T., & Anolli, L. (2003). The use of the Internet in psychological research: Comparison

of online and offline questionnaires. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 6, 73�80.

Rottenberg, S. (1956). The baseball players’ labor market. Journal of Political Economy, 64, 242�258.

Schmidt, M.B., & Berri, D.J. (2001). Competitive balance and attendance � the case of major league

baseball. Journal of Sports Economics, 2, 145�167.

Schwarz, N., & Clore, G.L. (1996). Feelings and phenomenal experiences. In E. Higgins, &

A. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 433�465). New York:

Guilford Press.

Sportfive (2007). European football 2007. Hamburg: Sportfive.

Szymanski, S. (2001). Income equality, competitive balance and the attractiveness of team sports: Some

evidence and a natural experiment from English soccer. The Economic Journal, 111, F69�F84.

Szymanski, S. (2003). The economic design of sporting contests. Journal of Economic Literature, 41,

1137�1187.

The Attractiveness of National and International Football Leagues 161

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

Szymanski, S., & Valletti, T.M. (2005). Promotion and relegation in sporting contests. Rivista di Politica

Economica, 95, 3�39.

Taylor, R. (1992). Football and its fans: Supporters and their relations with the game. Leicester:

University Press.

Trujillo, N., & Krizek, B. (1994). Emotionality in the stands and in the field: Expressing self through

baseball. Journal of Sport & Social Issues, 18, 303�325.

UEFA (2007, November 6). Estimated income up slightly. Retrieved October 11, 2008 from http://

www.uefa.com/uefa/keytopics/kind�16384/newsid�613875.html.

Uhrich, S. (2008). Stadionatmosphare als verhaltenswissenschaftliches Konstrukt im Sportmarketing

[Stadium atmosphere: a latent variable in the field of sports marketing. The perspective from

behavioural science] (Doctoral dissertation, University of Rostock) Wiesbaden: Gabler.

Uhrich, S., & Koenigstorfer, J. (2009). Effects of atmosphere at major sports events*a perspective from

environmental psychology. International Journal of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship, 10, 325�344.

van den Bos, K., Vermunt, R., & Wilke, H.A.M. (1997). Procedural and distributive justice: What is fair

depends more on what comes first than on what comes next. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 72, 95�104.

von Petersdorff, W. (2008, August 5). Geld schießt Tore [Money scores goals]. Frankfurter Allgemeine

Zeitung, p. 36.

Vrooman, J. (1995). A general theory of professional sports leagues. Southern Economic Journal, 61,

971�990.

Waghorn, R., Downer, J., & Munby, R. (2005). The F.A. Premier League national fan survey report

2004/05. London: The F.A. Premier League.

Wakefield, K.L., & Blodgett, J.G. (1994). The importance of servicescapes in leisure service settings. The

Journal of Services Marketing, 8, 66�76.

Wakefield, K.L., & Blodgett, J.G. (1996). The effect of the servicescape on customers’ behavioral

intentions in leisure service settings. The Journal of Services Marketing, 10, 45�61.

Wakefield, K.L., & Blodgett, J.G. (1999). Customer response to intangible and tangible service factors.

Psychology &1 Marketing, 16, 51�68.

Wakefield, K.L., Blodgett, J.G., & Sloan, H.J. (1996). Measurement and management of the servicescape.

Journal of Sport Management, 10, 15�31.

Wakefield, K.L., & Sloan, H.J. (1995). The effects of team loyalty and selected stadium factors on

spectator attendance. Journal of Sport Management, 9, 153�172.

Wann, D.L. (1996). Seasonal changes in spectators’ identification and involvement with and evaluation of

college basketball and football teams. Psychological Record, 46, 201�215.

Wann, D.L., & Dolan, T.J. (1994). Attributions of highly identified sports spectators. The Journal of

Social Psychology, 134, 783�792.

Wann, D.L., Dolan, T.J., McGeorge, K.K., & Allison, J.A. (1994). Relationships between spectator

identification and spectators’ perception of influence, spectators’ emotions, and competition

outcome. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 16, 347�364.

Wann, D.L., Melnick, M.J., Russell, G.W., & Pease, D.G. (2001). Sport fans: The psychology and social

impact of spectators. New York: Routledge.

Wann, D.L., & Schrader, M.P. (2000). Controllability and stability in the self-serving attributions of

sports spectators. Journal of Social Psychology, 140, 160�168.

Wann, D.L., & Wilson, A. (1999). Variables associated with sport fans’ enjoyment of athletic events.

Perceptual and Motor Skills, 89, 419�422.

Wegener, D.T., & Petty, R.E. (1994). Mood management across affective states: The hedonic

contingency hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 1034�1048.

Weiner, B. (1986). An attributional theory of motivation and emotion. New York: Springer.

162 Joerg Koenigstorfer et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3

Whitney, J.D. (1988). Winning games versus winning championships: The economics of fan interest and

team performance. Economic Inquiry, 26, 703�724.

Wochnowski, H. (1996). Veranstaltungsmarketing [Event marketing] (Doctoral dissertation, University

of Hannover) Reihe: Markt und Konsum (vol 3). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

Woratschek, H., Horbel, C., Popp, B., & Roth, S. (2007). A videographic analysis of ‘weird guys’: What

do relationships mean to football fans? Discussion paper 05_07, University of Bayreuth.

Woratschek, H., Schafmeister, G., & Strobel, T. (2006). A new paradigm for sport management in the

German football market. In M. Desbordes (Ed.), Marketing and football: An international

perspective (pp. 163�185). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

The Attractiveness of National and International Football Leagues 163

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ite D

e Pa

ris

1] a

t 05:

22 0

8 A

ugus

t 201

3