Como and AC Milan are two foreign-owned clubs pursuing different paths in Italian football. While Milan is looking to expand its infrastructure and commercial revenues, Como, under the ambitious project led by Cesc Fàbregas, is seeking to establish a new model of investment in the game. Their 9-1 victory over Lens has brought the club further into the spotlight.
Both clubs have foreign ownership, but their approaches to sporting and commercial development differ considerably. Those differences are evident in their stadiums, commercial partnerships and transfer policies.
In their most recent derby against Inter, Milan generated more than €8 million in matchday ticket revenue. The recently unveiled plans for the new San Siro, which will be known as Generali Stadium, are expected to create further opportunities for the club to increase its income. The stadium is scheduled to open in 2031 and is expected to deliver significantly greater revenues.
Como, by contrast, currently play at a small but distinctive 12,000-capacity stadium overlooking the lake. There are no plans for a new ground at this stage. Instead, the club is exploring partnerships with hotels and tourism venues to offer visitors experiences that go beyond simply buying a match ticket. The idea is to make football part of a wider tourism proposition.
The two clubs are also taking different approaches to their technical sponsorship arrangements. Como wore Adidas kits last season but intend to take control of producing their own match shirts, training gear and even non-sporting clothing from next season. The club believes this approach will allow it to generate significantly higher revenues.
Milan, meanwhile, have announced that they will return to Adidas in 2028 under a 10-year agreement worth €50 million annually. Adidas currently supplies the Italian national team, Juventus, Roma and several other clubs in the country.
Perhaps the most significant contrast, however, lies in their approach to recruitment. Como have invested millions of euros in bringing players to the club, rather than simply spending money on established names. Under Fàbregas, several of those signings have developed into valuable assets. The sporting progress has also brought financial rewards. After four matches in the Champions League, Como have already generated more than €40 million in revenue.
The club has also faced criticism over the perceived lack of Italian players in its squad. Yet the 9-1 victory over Lens offered a response, with two young Italian players, Liberali and Papaccioli, among those getting on the scoresheet. Italy coach Roberto Mancini had already called up Liberali to the national team, while Cassano, another promising young product of Como’s academy, has also received a national team call-up.
The comparison between Como and Milan is not simply about two clubs with different histories, resources and ambitions. It also reflects two distinct approaches to the changing economics of football. Milan are looking to build on their commercial strength and major infrastructure, while Como are attempting to combine football, tourism and player development into a different kind of business model.
Last related articles
