r0cafella

Because they’ve doubled dipped, they’ve sold the hotel for that sweet sweet FFP boost but kept the revenue stream by giving the club the management contract. It’s just another demonstration of the rules being utterly broken.

To add on, PSGs losses (inclusive of related party inflated sponsors) total 600m euro over the last 3 years. Being in the club is fantastic.

Basically we can’t spend anything under the new rules we would have to sell unless we can increase our revenue.

Thanks for sharing this, your absolutely right a very rare 13 mins well spent with talk sport. no wonder they just keep spending with abandon though, especially if they are just going to flip none football assets to the owners to cover any shortfall. FFP for you but not for me.

Kelly and Tosin are no brainers.

Mgw would be stupid expensive.

He was exceptional in what should have been an extremely difficult game for him, massive performance.

Hopefully not, we can’t be spending so much of our budget on players and loaning them out, we need him up to speed and contributing

Hard to say, against teams which aren’t totally mental he won’t get half as much space as he was afforded against Kamikaze ange.

The actually funniest thing about this is the media reporting about how cheap wage wise these signings were, wage bill

Massive win that, all credit in the world to the lads and the Gaffa in particular, made them look average. Also, it's glorious to watch such a high risk game plan be punished so brutally.

This ref can get fucked blatant yellow.

I could be wrong here but the only reason we would need to move on a temporary basis would be either a total rebuild or renovation on a massive scale? With those factors considered I wouldn’t spend too much time thinking about playing at the SOL

Froggy, your sir Jim basically tried to make us look like mugs with his relentlessly stupid public statements, I get it though, he’s your savour so your impression will differ. Now, our demands are set by us, what we gave Brighton have no bearing on anything, ultimately your clubs past behaviour has and how you’ve handled this affair means we should give you absolutely no leeway and he can sit in his garden until January.

Aye, I’ve just had a satisfying lunch here in Singapore as well. But ditto on the time of the day having no bearing on my assessments. and again, just to be clear I’d like nothing more than to be totally wrong

Good morning to you Mr Hopium.

Absolutely Cuba, I don’t think anyone is in denial are they? I think what most are saying is don’t entertain giving those arrogant fucks any form or discount and let him wait until January.

Anyways, as we are both seemingly questioning the stated goals, what do you think they really are? Ride the valuation up and wait for the correct moment to exit? More of a traditional investment?

Personally no, but it was accepted as it’s always been the way the little woods family jack walker general franco etc.

I thought I was going mad, glad I wasn’t the only one who noticed this. on a practical level, I don’t see how we can challenge rules our owners have voted for either.

I take issue with said definitions personally, why was so called financial doping ok for Chelsea, City, PSG etc but isn’t now. In modern investing it’s quite common to see companies make big losses during a growth period, it’s happened countless times Amazon obviously being the poster child for such practices. I think linking sustainably to profit and loss only makes sense up to a point, if owners are willing to under write losses it’s fine after all it’s competition at the end of the day.

You stand where I do; but I do have some sympathy also, as let’s be honest a lot of things need to be done for us to be successful simply are palatable to our fans. Also, I can’t help but wonder. Basically the teams ambitions stated by the ownership don’t seem at all realistic under these rules. If we aren’t going do a man city (it seems we aren’t on the face of it) then we are looking at say the Arsenal/spurs models and evidently we are miles behind them with absolutely huge investment needed to catch them.

So basically: we are in excess of this figure by a mile on salary alone, without considering amortisation which will be high for us throughout any growth stage and agent fees which will also be high for the same reason. I wonder how the league will handle those clubs which are in European competition but are at say 85% basically in line with the rules if they didn’t qualify for Europe. It’s laughable how they’ve actually made the rules worst.

Rage inducing id imagine.

No information officially, but as far as I’m aware Uefa don’t make such allowances and the new rules are based on Uefas (not the punishments though seemingly).