womblemaster Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/europe/8709871.stm WIll be interested to see if this actually affects chelsea. AM guessing manu actually generate alot of revenue so wont be affected much?? HOwever the debt mountain, may be covered in these restrictions, the artricle isnt clear on this.? WOuld love to see manu barred from CL tho, imagine fergys face Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 i knew that was coming in but didn't realise the bit near the bottom of the article. The rules will also forbid clubs owing money to their rivals, players and staff or the tax authorities at the end of the season. to me that reads as all transfer fees up front. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
clintdempsey Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 i knew that was coming in but didn't realise the bit near the bottom of the article. The rules will also forbid clubs owing money to their rivals, players and staff or the tax authorities at the end of the season. to me that reads as all transfer fees up front. Transfer fees will have to be payed either up front or in installments and will have to be concluded one year after the purchase. I thought this was something that the Premier League was incorporating for the coming season. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
merlin Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 All of this is long overdue - Football has been living in Financial Cloud Cuckoo Land for years now and it should be a correctly managed and funded business. Nobody who follows NUFC should complain about this fiscal tightening because the clubs with the biggest support bases will be the most successful - they will attract the most inward flow of funds, both from fans and advertising. A business can only succeed if it attracts customers and sells its 'product' - if NUFC has even a modicum of success, the club cannot fail to benefit from the new rules. People like Abramovitch will either have to declare that the funds they have given to their clubs actually belong to the club, or that the funds are loans and that looks very suspect under the rules of solvency. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinmk Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 Aye should of happened 10 years ago at least. Football as a millionaire's plaything is SHITE. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 Great news. Needs to be properly enforced and regulated in every country, which will be the difficult bit. The other thing that needs addressing is the distribution of TV money. The gaps between the Champions League teams and the rest of the Premiership, and between the Premiership and the Championship, are both too great. It makes it very difficult for clubs to plan properly, and it encourages them to take risks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 this will have so many loopholes to get through Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 this will have so many loopholes to get through How would your club stand at the moment? Looking at the latest figures, Arsenal, Blackburn, Tottenham, Manchester United, Hull City and Stoke all tabled profits, so they are fine. Fulham, Everton, Wigan and Wolves made losses of between £5m and £8m before factoring in academy, infrastructure and community spend, so that's OK, covered by the "immaterial losses" clause. Bolton, West Ham and Birmingham made losses of between £13 and £20m, again before the permitted items. Considering the 'benefactor' clause allowing up to 15m Euros per season, they would be pretty much OK as well. Aston Villa, Chelsea, Liverpool, and Manchester City would have some thinking to do as their losses are at a level that would trigger concern at Uefa. It would not, however, suddenly mean they were not allowed to play Champions League or Europa League football at a stroke. The new measure is being added to the regulations as a "monitoring" item, which, if I've got this right, means they would be put under review and given warnings before being hit with the ultimate sanction. Finally, none of this will cut in before the 2012/13 season, although the 2011/2012 financial returns will be the first benchmark for averaging out profit and loss over the next three years. Never has your club needed a creative accountant more urgently - or a talented currency speculator given all this rationale has been worked out in euros. And, as we know, the value of the pound in your pocket can go up as well as down! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 whats going to stop lets say man city's sheikh from using a couple of his companies and sponsoring man city for lets say 120m a season? there are some easy ways round this Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 whats going to stop lets say man city's sheikh from using a couple of his companies and sponsoring man city for lets say 120m a season? there are some easy ways round this They had something on SSN before saying they were going to have something in place which wouldn't allow this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 whats going to stop lets say man city's sheikh from using a couple of his companies and sponsoring man city for lets say 120m a season? there are some easy ways round this They had something on SSN before saying they were going to have something in place which wouldn't allow this. how can they not allow it? if a company wants to sponsor man city for an extremely large amount of cash per season i dont see how they can stop it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 whats going to stop lets say man city's sheikh from using a couple of his companies and sponsoring man city for lets say 120m a season? there are some easy ways round this They had something on SSN before saying they were going to have something in place which wouldn't allow this. how can they not allow it? if a company wants to sponsor man city for an extremely large amount of cash per season i dont see how they can stop it Maybe they can't, but they can stop such a team from participating in European competitions. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 whats going to stop lets say man city's sheikh from using a couple of his companies and sponsoring man city for lets say 120m a season? there are some easy ways round this They had something on SSN before saying they were going to have something in place which wouldn't allow this. how can they not allow it? if a company wants to sponsor man city for an extremely large amount of cash per season i dont see how they can stop it Maybe they can't, but they can stop such a team from participating in European competitions. so are uefa saying theres an upper limit to club sponsorship deals? don't see how they could get away with that tbh Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 whats going to stop lets say man city's sheikh from using a couple of his companies and sponsoring man city for lets say 120m a season? there are some easy ways round this They had something on SSN before saying they were going to have something in place which wouldn't allow this. how can they not allow it? if a company wants to sponsor man city for an extremely large amount of cash per season i dont see how they can stop it Maybe they can't, but they can stop such a team from participating in European competitions. so are uefa saying theres an upper limit to club sponsorship deals? don't see how they could get away with that tbh There's no limit. But attempts to bypass the rules by owners handing out huge sponsorship contracts to their clubs from other companies they own will be checked by an independent watchdog panel appointed by UEFA to ensure they are not paying above the market rate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 This will never work unfortunately. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 If the club is being 'sponsored' by one of the owner's companies, then that's a subsidy, not sponsorship. I suspect that a far more difficult loophole to close would be players' salaries. All sorts could go into different bank accounts that might be hard to trace. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 whats going to stop lets say man city's sheikh from using a couple of his companies and sponsoring man city for lets say 120m a season? there are some easy ways round this They had something on SSN before saying they were going to have something in place which wouldn't allow this. how can they not allow it? if a company wants to sponsor man city for an extremely large amount of cash per season i dont see how they can stop it Maybe they can't, but they can stop such a team from participating in European competitions. so are uefa saying theres an upper limit to club sponsorship deals? don't see how they could get away with that tbh There's no limit. But attempts to bypass the rules by owners handing out huge sponsorship contracts to their clubs from other companies they own will be checked by an independent watchdog panel appointed by UEFA to ensure they are not paying above the market rate. then that begs the question what is market rate? who determines what market rate is? I can see these regulations getting challenged in court if man city or some other team in a similar position is not allowed into cl thanks to these Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 If the club is being 'sponsored' by one of the owner's companies, then that's a subsidy, not sponsorship. I suspect that a far more difficult loophole to close would be players' salaries. All sorts could go into different bank accounts that might be hard to trace. There's been brown envelopes in the game for decades....not sure how they stop this having an effect though. I think it's pretty weak if it still allows a £20m loss every season and doesn't account for total debt...but if it stops Man City or Chelsea signing £100m of players 5 years on the trot and pricing everyone else out of the market (which I think it will) then it's done one good thing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 whats going to stop lets say man city's sheikh from using a couple of his companies and sponsoring man city for lets say 120m a season? there are some easy ways round this They had something on SSN before saying they were going to have something in place which wouldn't allow this. how can they not allow it? if a company wants to sponsor man city for an extremely large amount of cash per season i dont see how they can stop it Maybe they can't, but they can stop such a team from participating in European competitions. so are uefa saying theres an upper limit to club sponsorship deals? don't see how they could get away with that tbh There's no limit. But attempts to bypass the rules by owners handing out huge sponsorship contracts to their clubs from other companies they own will be checked by an independent watchdog panel appointed by UEFA to ensure they are not paying above the market rate. then that begs the question what is market rate? who determines what market rate is? I can see these regulations getting challenged in court if man city or some other team in a similar position is not allowed into cl thanks to these Sponsors decide the market rate. I can't see an owner trying to bend the rules by pumping funds into the club via another of their companies then wanting that kind of thing scrutinised in detail in court. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 Just shown a table on SSN, only 5 clubs made profit last year. Blackpool had the least "debt" of just £500k. Damn that Charlie Adam. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wacko Posted June 7, 2010 Share Posted June 7, 2010 If the club is being 'sponsored' by one of the owner's companies, then that's a subsidy, not sponsorship. I suspect that a far more difficult loophole to close would be players' salaries. All sorts could go into different bank accounts that might be hard to trace. It all show up on the books ultimately, though. whats going to stop lets say man city's sheikh from using a couple of his companies and sponsoring man city for lets say 120m a season? there are some easy ways round this They had something on SSN before saying they were going to have something in place which wouldn't allow this. how can they not allow it? if a company wants to sponsor man city for an extremely large amount of cash per season i dont see how they can stop it Maybe they can't, but they can stop such a team from participating in European competitions. so are uefa saying theres an upper limit to club sponsorship deals? don't see how they could get away with that tbh There's no limit. But attempts to bypass the rules by owners handing out huge sponsorship contracts to their clubs from other companies they own will be checked by an independent watchdog panel appointed by UEFA to ensure they are not paying above the market rate. then that begs the question what is market rate? who determines what market rate is? I can see these regulations getting challenged in court if man city or some other team in a similar position is not allowed into cl thanks to these Sponsors decide the market rate. I can't see an owner trying to bend the rules by pumping funds into the club via another of their companies then wanting that kind of thing scrutinised in detail in court. They'll find a way, though. Say, like the Real deal, where their worthless training ground was bought for several times its actual value. In fact, Real should really be the most hard-hit club of the lot, if they actually follow through. Which they won't, because it's Real Madrid. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
womblemaster Posted June 7, 2010 Share Posted June 7, 2010 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/10237268.stm Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedro111 Posted June 7, 2010 Share Posted June 7, 2010 Its Premier LEAGUE mannnnnn. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wacko Posted June 7, 2010 Share Posted June 7, 2010 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/10237268.stm £1.1bn??? That makes me feel much better. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now