Franchise Era in EuroLeague: 13 Clubs Face Historic Change

EuroLeague is standing at a turning point that could reshape the entire structure of European basketball for decades to come. According to information from league internal sources, the EuroLeague Board of Directors is preparing a proposal to convert the current 10-year term-limited participation license model into a permanent franchise model, thereby transforming the 13 existing shareholder clubs into permanent members that cannot be relegated. The proposal is expected to be put to a vote in the coming weeks, marking a systemic change in how the continent's premier basketball league operates. The core of this plan lies in transforming the legal nature of participation rights. Currently, the 13 shareholder clubs of EuroLeague hold 10-year licenses granted in the mid-2010s. As these licenses approach expiration, deadline pressure has forced stakeholders to make a decision about the future of the membership model. Converting from a term-limited license to a permanent franchise is not merely an administrative change but an asset restructuring act with profound economic implications. A permanent membership position significantly reduces investment risk for incumbent clubs, thereby raising the enterprise value of each club. Sports finance experts assess that eliminating the risk of losing participation will create a substantial risk premium reduction, making clubs more attractive to outside investors, including Gulf and United States investment funds. Alongside consolidating the position of the 13 incumbent clubs, EuroLeague is also pursuing expansion by increasing the number of new franchises. However, the specific number of expansion slots, selection criteria, and accompanying financial mechanisms have not been disclosed. This is a significant information gap, as expansion will directly affect revenue-sharing ratios among members. If many new franchises are created without a reasonable compensation mechanism, incumbent clubs could face significant revenue dilution risk. In franchise league practice worldwide, new teams typically pay a one-time entry fee, viewed as compensation to existing owners for dilution. However, whether EuroLeague will adopt a similar model remains an open question. In terms of governance, the decision-making process is unfolding in two clear stages. The EuroLeague Board of Directors is responsible for drafting the final proposal, after which shareholder clubs will vote for approval in the coming weeks. Notably, the clubs holding voting rights are also the clubs directly benefiting from this proposal. This is a form of self-referential governance, where parties design the rules for their own long-term existence. Board control over proposal drafting also means minority clubs may receive only a take-it-or-leave-it final package rather than a choice among multiple options. However, this conversion process poses significant legal and institutional risks. A closed franchise model potentially conflicts with Europe's merit-based sporting tradition, where promotion and relegation are a core part of the pyramid system. The relationship between EuroLeague and FIBA, as well as with domestic leagues, which already has historical tensions, could become more complex if a permanent franchise model is approved without merit-based safeguards. Domestic leagues and FIBA may seek legal or political remedies to oppose a structure deemed closed, threatening the fair competitive nature of European basketball. From a competitive perspective, creating a permanent tier of 13 clubs could lead to a two-speed system in European basketball. Protected clubs may lose short-term competitive incentive, while outside clubs must compete for an increasingly narrow pool of slots through merit or wild cards. In the long term, this could lead to competitive stagnation among the protected group. However, some argue that membership stability could encourage clubs to invest long-term in academies, facilities, and branding, thereby raising the technical floor of the entire league over 5 to 10 years. An important external factor not mentioned in the preliminary information is the NBA's ambition to expand into Europe. The potential NBA presence in Europe is seen as the invisible hand driving the urgency of the franchise conversion process. Incumbent clubs have an incentive to lock in their positions before external pressures can disrupt the current order. Expansion into high commercial value markets such as the Gulf, United Kingdom, or France is also seen as the logical commercial rationale behind the language about increasing new franchises. In media terms, the story of the franchise era in EuroLeague is in an accelerating phase as the decision awaits being made in the coming weeks. Market expectations generally suggest the proposal will pass, but the scale of expansion and specific financial terms remain undetermined. The biggest blind spot in this story is the complete absence of source attribution information, making credibility assessment difficult. The phrase coming weeks is seen as a deliberate expectation-setting device, increasing the likelihood that the vote will be announced within a compressed timeframe. If the vote slips beyond the stated window, a stalled negotiation narrative may emerge. The ripple effects of this conversion will not be limited to EuroLeague. The most heavily affected segment is the EuroCup and the merit-based pathway from domestic leagues, which would be significantly compressed. Conversely, permanent membership stability could support long-term broadcast rights deals by reducing counterparty risk for broadcasters. Emerging markets could benefit from expansion, while excluded traditional markets could suffer losses. Derivative markets, including franchise valuations and club M&A transactions, are forecast to benefit from membership stability. Overall, this is a governance restructuring with enormous strategic significance but procedurally incomplete. The largest risks include conflict with FIBA and domestic leagues, competitive pressure from the NBA, and governance legitimacy. If the franchise model is approved without a merit-based safety valve, legal and political pushback from stakeholders within 12 to 24 months is foreseeable. The franchise era in EuroLeague, if realized, will mark a shift from a semi-open license-based league toward a closed members-only club structure, repositioning the entire European club basketball landscape.