r0cafella

The loans don’t count as income and thus don’t help with PSR in terms of allowing us to spend more.

Absolutely this is one approach they can take without a doubt, as I’ve mentioned in Brightons case they can also do nothing the loan will remain interest free it’s just a rate of interest will be applied for PSR purposes but if you have headroom it doesn’t matter at all. In terms of Arsenal, the 10m per year they would need to find isn’t much. And hey, an easy workaround ie for the owners to just sponsor the equivalent amount as the fair market will have to be proven by the league. I personally don’t see how this ruling fundamentally changed any of the entrenched positions and without that change then I don’t expect anything particularly beneficial to come out of this where we are concerned. Basically back to the status quo before the obnoxious burden of proof rules were brought in.

Apart of the leadership team according to Waugh.

It’s a paper write off though, as long as Brighton continues to appreciate its fine. And in Brighton’s case they don’t need to do anything. They have plenty of FFP headroom and will continue to do so as they are a gravy train club who are happy to be here.

Yeah, they will convene next week and work it out. It’s important to remember the cartel only needs 14 votes to change rules as long as said rules are lawful we are all left sucking our thumbs. I think too much water has passed under the bridge for these clubs to all work together as they used to come to a solution which works for everyone, we will likely sell the cartel get together horse trade with gravy train riders and continue along the path of gate keeping. Also, I don’t see a world whereby the interest being captured on ownerships loans have a negative impact on anyone as they can just write them off or tank them depending on PSR position. Brightons PSR position is still probably good and selling players is what they do so no worries at all. Arsenal are fully owned by Kronke so he can write off the loans to himself no issue.

They aren’t included in PSR calculations. The owner allowance just increases the FFP spending cap. Certain owners want their clubs to be “self sustaining” that’s true where as others couldn’t care less I guess it’s the schism within the owners. I’m not sure football could be purely asset based either nor should hey be billionaires playthings but the horse bolted long ago.

Under the current rules owners can top up the FFP allowance by capital injection. The 110m figure you often hear is the amount of allowable losses inclusive of owners capital injection. I can’t remember how much the allowable losses are minus the owner injection though.

Yes they can. The change related to the loans being interest free owners can continue to lend money to the clubs they own however for FFP purposes an interest rate will be calculated.

The easiest and most palatable change would be too accept the findings ie shareholder loans need to be calculated with interest and then increase the allowable loses all clubs are allowed. The problem comes again though because of the new squad cost rules which obviously change all of these calculations. The historic issue of these loans not being included seem like a disaster waiting to happen though but to me one thing is clear. If they want to survive and keep riding the massive gravy train, the cartel behaviour from those big clubs has to stop and they have to get back to finding broad consensus before changing the rules.

I’m sure they will just write them off, it doesn’t cost them anything to do so. The clubs are worth the same regardless.

Yes, they did. The entire structure of football is set up to protect the incumbents, it’s funny because we spend a lot of time thinking about it on a per match basis but the real game is being played by the rule markers who keep tipping the scales on behalf of the big clubs.

Rules are not changing so no. Back to square one with zero chance of the members (the clubs) changing the rules.

Yeah this reads as if city win the argument but it doesn’t remove or change the existing rules much. Theyve given the clubs a bloody nose though, but the fix is just to write off the loans on the clubs balance sheets.

I agree but we had before this ruling is a lot of clubs who made money when football was totally unregulated putting up rule after rule which prevents anyone competing with them. that is worst than having a free for all.

No, what’s terrible is rules being created mid season on the hoof to reduce the competitiveness of both rival clubs and the league as a whole. we wouldn’t have been furious during Ashley times as we were beaten down and utterly irrelevant. We were rancid space wasters who only existed to the ride the gravy train. in not far totally un regulated spending but let’s at least make rules which are fair and give everyone equal opportunity to succeed

I love this, so they created rules to stop ourselves and Man city and the net outcome of said action is harder financial rules for themselves.

This is key, 14 votes needed for any rules and as we can see a nice cosy cartel of 8 love these restrictions.

Aye it’s not at all shocking. It’s why I didn’t go to bed it’s to be expected due to how they are set up too mind, they have 3 players who id call defensively minded, that’s it.

Always baffled by Ange I must say. You need Barca under pep level of players to get away with his mad system. Sadly for him Bentacour isn’t busquets.

Hahaahhaa

Mitoma is so good.

I think he’s really talented but he seems quite forward thinking and both him and the young lad playing next to him push high and leaves lots of space in front of the defence.

High line + slow defenders + keeper rooted to his line. Us last season or Brighton this?