If fresh evidence were needed of the market's disillusionment with football stocks, it came last month when only one analyst turned up at the presentation of Tottenham Hotspur's annual results.

The miserable turnout was not a reflection of the quality of the north London club's figures, but of the football sector as a whole.

When interest in the business of soccer was at its height two or three years ago, up to a dozen stockbrokers' analysts covered football shares. Today, those who regularly follow the 20 quoted clubs can be counted on the fingers of one hand.

This indifference is rooted in the fact that the investment case for buying football shares has lost virtually all merit.

In the mid-1990s, when professional investors first started taking notice of football, the argument for buying into the sport was straightforward.

Amid an unprecedented football boom, it was expected that the money clubs could generate from television rights, ticket sales, merchandising, sponsorship and other commercial activities would turn them into profitable businesses that could generate decent returns for investors via dividends and capital growth.

Although football revenues did grow as analysts had predicted, profits stubbornly failed to follow suit, and for one reason only: the clubs have singularly failed to keep costs under control.

"Most people underestimated the greed of the players and their agents and the lack of will power among clubs to restrict growth in wages," says Mr Paul Wedge, football industry analyst at Collins Stewart, the stockbroker.

Last year, Premier League revenues grew a healthy 23 per cent, but player wage costs soared 37 per cent, the third successive year wage bills had risen by more than 33 per cent.

The inability of clubs consistently to increase profits has restricted their ability to pay dividends. Of the 20 stock market quoted clubs, only seven have paid regular dividends in recent years. Of those, Tottenham has decided to stop paying them and another premiership club is considering following suit.

Investors have also been put off by the poor quality of business management in football.

In recent years clubs like Newcastle United, Leicester City, Sheffield United and Nottingham Forest have suffered from boardroom rows and management unrest that have earned them, and the sector in general, a bad reputation for corporate governance.

A lack of liquidity in club shares has been another deterrent. Only a small number of clubs are widely owned in terms of their institutional or retail shareholder base.

"With the exception of the clubs like Manchester United and Celtic, there is a minimal amount of secondary dealing going on in the market," says Mr Nick Batram, analyst at Greig Middleton.

He cites Leeds Sporting as an example, noting that since the company sold a near 10 per cent holding to British Sky Broadcasting its shares have still traded at a substantial discount to the price of that deal.

"BSkyB did the deal at 30p and the shares are now trading at 23p. It is indicative of the institutional malaise about football," he says.

While there are few signs of institutions getting out of football, there is little enthusiasm for new investment. The recent sale in the market of sizeable stakes in Celtic and Manchester United was encouraging, but the two clubs are regarded as special cases because of their wide appeal.

With these rare exceptions, investors are giving football shares a wide berth. The manager of one venture capital fund which invests in sports businesses recently received scores of approaches from British and continental European clubs eager to sell him equity.

But he decided that football clubs, with their unreliable profits record and finances subject to the unpredictable twists and turns of results on the field, were not worth the trouble. Consequently, he turned down all 53 clubs which approached him.

The last remaining hope for investors holding football shares is takeovers. But predictions that broadcasting companies would rush to snap up clubs to gain ownership of valuable media content have proved unfounded, not least because of regulatory hostility to such potentially anti-competitive deals. A few media groups have bought small stakes in some clubs, but beyond these, takeover interest has all but died.

Since January, the shares of only five of the 20 quoted clubs have registered gains, and just three have outperformed the broader market.

With City interest in football at an extremely low ebb, it is unlikely that dreadful record will improve soon.