Dutch football faces major crisis: €70 million lost following ban on gambling sponsors

The Dutch football landscape is about to be shaken up by a radical measure: from July 2025, all forms of sponsorship related to gambling will be strictly prohibited. Well-known names such as TOTO, Unibet or 711 will disappear not only from players’ jerseys but also from stadiums and advertising boards. This decision, motivated by the fight against gambling addiction and a lack of public support, could have devastating financial consequences for the country’s football clubs.

A decision with major consequences

Professional clubs, already weakened by the pandemic, are seeing an essential source of income evaporate.

“The direct loss is estimated at 40 million euros, accompanied by 30 million euros in indirect losses.”

Bas Raemakers, representative of Eredivisie CV

Since the opening of the online gambling market in 2021, partnerships between football clubs and casino and sports betting platforms have exploded. Companies like Circus.nl or Unibet were willing to invest two to four times more than traditional sponsors. This financial windfall allowed clubs like PEC Zwolle to conclude record contracts, worth €1.5 million per year.

However, this prosperity is now under threat. In 2023, the first advertising restrictions have already slowed down the arrival of new players. The complete removal of gambling sponsors promises to shake the Dutch football economy.

The reasons behind the ban

The skyrocketing gambling addictions have sparked a wave of criticism. According to the Kansspelautoriteit, the monthly spending of Dutch players almost doubled from €61.8 million to €115.8 million between 2021 and 2023. In addition, addiction cases treated in clinics increased by 24% in one year.

Michiel van Nispen, SP MP in the Second Chamber, played a crucial role in the adoption of this ban. “I understand that this deprives clubs of an important source of income, but it was unsustainable that the sport was so dependent on gambling. We were warned of the risks, but no one listened.” Michiel van Nispen

A policy deemed inconsistent

Football clubs denounce a lack of dialogue. According to Raemakers, the sports organizations had prepared a plan to regulate partnerships with gambling themselves. This plan included strict restrictions on advertising campaigns and awareness-raising measures against match manipulation and addiction. However, the political decision was made before a compromise could even be discussed.

“This type of erratic policy seriously harms professional football. How can we remain competitive against the big European leagues under these conditions?”

Bas Raemakers

Uneven impact on clubs

Economist Thomas Peeters predicts that medium-sized clubs and first division teams will be the most affected. 

“Big teams like Ajax, PSV or Feyenoord have other sources of income, but smaller clubs, dependent on these sponsors, will see their survival threatened.”

Thomas Peeters

In addition, inequalities between clubs are likely to increase.

“The dominance of the big clubs could spread even further. A fairer redistribution of media revenues could compensate for some of the losses, but it will not be enough to close the gap.”

A similar scenario in Belgium

Belgium has also taken similar decisions to limit sports sponsorship by gambling companies. Strict rules came into force on 1 January 2025 to better protect vulnerable groups, particularly young people, from the risks of addiction.

• No more logos on the front of jerseys;
• Size of logos limited to 75 cm²;
• No logos on the equipment of players under 21;
• Removal of advertising in and around stadiums;
• Removal of logos from club websites and social media.

These measures are valid until 31 December 2027, after which sponsorship by gambling companies will be completely banned. These measures pose a real financial challenge to Belgian clubs. Belgian football, already fragile, will have to find new sources of income to compensate for this loss.

An European solution?

Although some voices are calling for a ban on sponsorship by gambling companies at European level, the idea is divisive. Michiel van Nispen prefers national regulation: “If we give this power to the European Union, it could reverse this ban, even if a majority in Holland is against it”.

In the meantime, the financial future of Dutch football is more uncertain than ever. Clubs must quickly find alternative solutions to compensate for this loss of income.