Reporter: The reform of Chinese football shares is a false proposition. As soon as the local leaders leave, they will lose the following

Live broadcast on August 29 News after investors from three towns in Wuhan were about to stop investing, Ma Dexing, a reporter from Sports Weekly, issued a comment that the so-called “share reform” in Chinese football was actually a pseudo proposition, most of the Chinese Super League clubs have more or less encountered troubles in promoting the share reform, either stopped or declared that the share reform failed. Since 2022, under the requirements of relevant parties, the Chinese Football Association has clearly put forward the requirement of share reform, that is, to change the current situation that Chinese professional football clubs rely on an enterprise, let more enterprises, especially local State-owned enterprises, participate in the reform of “shareholding system. In 1996, at the beginning of the professionalization of Chinese football, the Chinese Football Association once convened a meeting in Beijing for the heads and general managers of various first a clubs in China, during which it proposed that all teams could develop towards corporatization, especially the form of joint-stock system. Because most of the domestic clubs at that time were the form of cooperation between the local sports committee and an enterprise, this form can solve the fund problem of the team in a short period of time. However, after one or two years of cooperation, due to the inconsistency in funding, personnel and other issues, conflicts of one kind or another arose, and finally the gang was separated, so that the club often presents the situation of “city head changing King Flag. After 26 years, when the so-called “share reform” issue was raised again by Chinese professional football clubs, it certainly returned to the starting point as mentioned earlier. However, after more than 20 years of development, the Chinese professional football club and the professional football club at the beginning of the previous career league in more than 20 years are completely two different concepts, because more than 20 years ago, the local Sports Committee (now the local sports bureau) still has a certain right to speak in the club. Now there is no right to speak in the professional club. The management is large, and the players are employed, of course, they only obey the management. Therefore, the so-called “share reform” has become a pseudo proposition to some extent, because in the current social and economic environment, it is difficult for state-owned enterprises to be compatible with private enterprises, what’s more, professional football itself is a money-burning sport. Before China’s professional football has yet to form an effective business model and become a real “industry”, after private enterprises burn up money, let state-owned enterprises continue to burn money, which is intolerable to all kinds of current systems and regulations of state-owned enterprises. In fact, when the stock reform was proposed at the beginning of last year, some clubs soon had new actions, which had nothing to do with the relevant leaders of the local government. However, once the leaders left or changed, there was no following. Many Super League club share reform is difficult to continue, precisely because of the change of local leaders. Therefore, the hope of stock reform of Chinese professional football clubs cannot be pinned on local leaders, but should be a kind of system construction, that is, the need for higher levels to formulate and issue relevant unified regulations, institutionalize and systematize it. (Derison)