以山东泰山队为例,去掉外援,中超改为全华班与外援队就能盈利(以山东泰山为例:中超若取消外援、推行全华班亦可实现盈利)
发布时间:2026-01-02

Analyzing Shandong's Scenario

I'm looking into Shandong's situation as a top club with strong fan support and significant sponsors like State Grid. It’s essential to examine typical CSL finances, focusing on average and foreign player wages, and recent salary cap reforms starting from 2019. I’ll develop a hypothetical profit and loss baseline and explore conditions for profitability, like cost control and youth development. Plus, I need to identify risks such as a potential drop in quality.

A hybrid model might be a good suggestion to balance foreign player costs with an academy focus.Creating a Simple Financial Model for CSL

I’m developing a straightforward model showing plausible financial ranges for a CSL club. For top clubs, matchday revenue could be around 0.8-1.5 billion, largely driven by sponsors. Historically, wages range from 300-600 million, with foreign players taking up 40-60% of that. Reducing the foreign player count could cut wages and fees by 150-250 million, but a downside would be a revenue drop of 10-30%.

Aiming for profitability is possible if clubs remain competitive and sustain sponsor relationships. Shandong should focus on maintaining 2-3 efficient foreign players, enhancing its youth academy, and employing dynamic pricing strategies.Exploring Financial Scenarios for Shandong

Let’s outline two scenarios for Shandong with foreign and all-Chinese players. In the baseline with foreign players, estimated revenue could be around 510-730 million, while costs might total 570-840 million, leading to a near breakeven or small loss. Switching to an all-Chinese setup could save 230-400 million on foreign wages and transfer amortization but may incur a revenue hit of 100-200 million due to lower attendance and sponsorship.

Despite potential challenges, a strong youth pipeline might improve competitiveness while the fan base remains stable, helping mitigate risks. This situation raises questions about marketing and profitability with or without foreign players.Evaluating Profitability of All-Chinese Squads

I’m interpreting the idea of Shandong removing foreign players to see if CSL clubs could become profitable with all-Chinese teams. For some mid-table clubs, this may be feasible, but for top clubs with continental goals, it could be risky. At the league level, the overall product value might diminish, lowering media rights revenue for all teams.

A hybrid approach could be beneficial: limit foreign players to 2-3, implement salary caps, and ensure sustainable cost controls. Other suggestions include revenue-sharing, a luxury tax, and incentives for using homegrown players. Finally, profitability isn’t solely reliant on foreign players; factors like governance and operational efficiency play significant roles.Considering Formatting and Presentation

I need to remember that while heavy formatting shouldn't be used, bullets are acceptable for representing data, especially for numbers. I wonder if using a code fence for P&L lines could be effective. According to the style guidelines, code fences are allowed for actual code, so I'll stick to bullets for numbers.

Additionally, it's essential to include suggestions for "Next steps" to guide the user. I think this approach will help structure the information clearly and provide actionable insights!

结论先说:以山东泰山为例,完全“全华班”确实能显著降本,有机会把账面亏损收窄到接近盈亏平衡,甚至小幅盈利;但联赛层面的集体去外援,极可能拉低比赛质量与商业价值,导致整体营收下滑,未必更利于长期可持续。更可取的是外援“提质控量+严控薪酬”的中间方案。

model

要点

  • 成本端:外援通常占据高薪资与摊销(转会费)的多数,去掉外援可直接省下约40%~60%的球员薪资和相当比例的摊销、佣金与签字费。
  • 收入端:去外援会压低观赛吸引力、成绩稳定性与话题度,赞助与比赛日、分成等或下滑;但像泰山这类头部、基本盘稳定的俱乐部,跌幅相对可控。
  • 俱乐部个体 vs 联赛整体:个别俱乐部全华班可能更快实现现金流转正;若联赛普遍全华班,整体转播/赞助估值下修,最终又反向压缩各队收入。

示例测算(假设,仅用于量级判断)

  • 现状(含外援,头部俱乐部的常见区间)
    • 年营收:赞助3.04.5亿,分红与转播0.81.2亿,比赛日0.51.0亿,其它0.30.6亿;合计约4.6~7.3亿。
    • 年成本:薪资4.05.5亿(外援占1.83.0亿),转会摊销/佣金0.81.5亿,运营/后勤/青训0.91.4亿;合计约5.7~8.4亿。
    • 结果:小幅亏损到较大亏损区间。
  • 全华班方案(仅去外援,阵容规模与保障不变)
    • 直接降本:薪资与摊销合计节约约2.3~4.0亿。
    • 收入回撤:观赛与赞助下滑10%25%,分红跟随成绩波动;假设少1.02.0亿。
    • 净效应:利润改善约1.3~2.0亿;若青训与本土引援支撑战绩,可能小幅盈利;若战绩显著下滑,收入跌幅扩大,改善被抵消。
  • 风险点:竞技力下降导致亚冠与杯赛奖金、曝光流失;品牌弱化影响中长期大赞助;国内优质球员身价与薪资被“哄抬”,侵蚀降本成效。

对山东泰山的可执行路线(更稳妥)

  1. 外援“提质控量”:保留2~3名高性价比、关键位置外援;严控年薪与摊销,放弃超级大牌溢价。
  2. 薪酬结构治理:设置硬/软帽+绩效条款(出场、排名、奖金占比提升),压缩固定薪。
  3. 青训与本土供给:一线队轮换名额留给U21~U23;完善续约阶梯与转会二次分成,形成正向交易收益。
  4. 商业端对冲:强化会员/季票与家庭票策略、动态票价、短视频与地区化IP,尽量平滑因星味下降带来的营收波动。
  5. 交易与会计:坚决控制签字费、代理费;转会费摊销匹配合同年限,避免短约高摊销;用带回购/浮动条款做资产管理。

联赛层面的制度建议

  • 保留有限外援名额+总薪资帽/奢侈税,遏制军备竞赛同时保持观赏性。
  • 收入分配更均衡,给培养与出场本土U23设置“分红加成”。
  • 透明化的经纪与签字费上限,处罚绕帽与阴阳约。
  • 鼓励俱乐部在球员交易上形成正向现金流(青年球员培养、转出分成)。

简要结论

  • 以泰山这类头部俱乐部,单体“全华班”具备财务可行性,但存在竞技与品牌风险;联赛整体全华班不利于商业价值。
  • 最优解通常不是“全有或全无”,而是外援数量减少但效率更高、搭配严格成本控制与本土化供给。若你的目标是近期盈利,这条路径更稳、更可持续。需要的话我可以按你们的真实预算做一版细化P&L测算表与三种阵容配置的敏感性分析。