Shearergol Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Serious question here but the Fair play etc how does it work with clubs spunking up millions all over the place , is it based on income from attendances,merchandise,sponsorship and Sky money and other revenues ? just read the http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/financial-fair-play-explained.php and tbh its a mine field Loads of loopholes to get around it by the look of things. It seems to come down to wages mainly. You can't increase your wage budget over a certain amount per season, I think it's roughly £4m according to Gold for West Ham. This doesn't affect you if you're a club with a tiny budget, then you can go up to something like a £50m ceiling any time you like (for when you get promoted etc). This means a club can spend any money they like on transfers as long as the wage bill isn't increased significantly. Therefore Real can spaff as much money on buying Bale as is necessary, they just need to make sure they clear space in their wage budget for him. It should work because it effectively limits a club from bringing in a ton of players without losing a few in the proccess. The downside seems to be that it is based on where you stand currently. For instance, we couldn't go out and and match City's wage bill, we're stuck where we are now relative to them. /Disclaimer - That's my undertanding of it at least. Could be bollocks. Spreading transfer fees across a number of years too, hence why Real will be paying about £8m a season for Bale rather than it all up front or something. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biggs Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Serious question here but the Fair play etc how does it work with clubs spunking up millions all over the place , is it based on income from attendances,merchandise,sponsorship and Sky money and other revenues ? just read the http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/financial-fair-play-explained.php and tbh its a mine field Loads of loopholes to get around it by the look of things. It seems to come down to wages mainly. You can't increase your wage budget over a certain amount per season, I think it's roughly £4m according to Gold for West Ham. This doesn't affect you if you're a club with a tiny budget, then you can go up to something like a £50m ceiling any time you like (for when you get promoted etc). This means a club can spend any money they like on transfers as long as the wage bill isn't increased significantly. Therefore Real can spaff as much money on buying Bale as is necessary, they just need to make sure they clear space in their wage budget for him. It should work because it effectively limits a club from bringing in a ton of players without losing a few in the proccess. The downside seems to be that it is based on where you stand currently. For instance, we couldn't go out and and match City's wage bill, we're stuck where we are now relative to them. /Disclaimer - That's my undertanding of it at least. Could be bollocks. Spreading transfer fees across a number of years too, hence why Real will be paying about £8m a season for Bale rather than it all up front or something. I believe we pay upfront dont we and let the buying club pay in installments like the traditional way as its normal too Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Phil K Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Never wish ill of anyone but this bloke......wanting someone to drop dead is not a nice thought to have. I used to get annoyed at the callous wishing of dire things happening to Ashley Until he sacked Hughton, and brought in Pardew. Still didn't wish nasty things to happen to him though That changed when he brought Kinnear in. If I saw him having a hearty in the street, I'd honestly just walk straight past. I'd maybe urinate on the tosser first, (to cool him down of course) get the bus home and say in a very low voice "oh hey this man looks like he needs an ambulance" when I was a few miles away Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
henke Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Will never ever move forward with this chump. Only way is a hope someone would buy us (Not likely at his valuation), or, the fans starve the club of any money until he lets it go to cut his losses. Awful situation to be in, but sometimes you need to go backwards to go forwards. It all comes down to one unified group of the different factions to come together and organize a proper game plan and promote a way of starving Ashley of his investment but as the Labour club meet proved it changed nowt . Yes as a fan base we lack unity and can't agree on collective action. A lot of people believe Ashley did us a massive favour but even if you believe this how long can you continue to bow down to this school of thought and continue to show gratitude when he continually takes the piss? Ashleys taking the piss out of us all. We're putting money in, he's taking it out. Fair enough he'd undoubtedly argue, the club does owe him after all. But how long are we as fans expected to pay our money only to see it dissapear down the borehole. Whichever player steps up this year will go the way of Cabaye next summer, it's a shite state of affairs and it ain't getting better anytime soon. And how's this for a scenario? Everyone assumes Ashley will fuck off as soon as he has his money back, why the hell should he if he can make £20mil a season off of us? Something has to be done, and soon. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledGeordie Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Been here 6 years now. Unbelievable isn't it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole_Toonfan Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Madrid make about 500m a year There is no chance in hell that FFP will effect them, its designed to stop clubs spending money that isn't there's. Like it or not Madrid make so much money a year that every signing they make is from their own income. Plus they have sold about 80m worth already this summer anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Look at Spurs, all the years we were having our “golden period” they were a lot like us now (if you listened to their fans back then) bumbling along showing “lack of ambition” but with a healthy bottom line, they’ve ascended as we’ve descended but it’s taken years and years of them making profits and player trading. You're talking about 2 different periods of Spurs' history as if they were one. 91-01 they were majority owned and run by a top English businessman who made his fortune selling cheap tat to the mass market. He supposedly saved them from their financial troubles (I have no idea if this is actually true or a myth spread by himself) and ran them as a proper business. In Sugar's 10 year run they finished 15, 8, 15, 7, 8, 10, 14, 11, 10, 12 - the very definition of mediocrity (the 10 years prior to Sugar they finished 4, 4, 8, 3, 10, 3, 13, 6, 3, 11). If forums existed then they'd probably have had Sugar apologists telling everyone they should be grateful he saved them, they were doomed before he arrived, how he had sorted out the finances and was running the club on a sound financial footing, etc, but they were going absolutely nowhere on or off the pitch, and we easily out performed them financially. It's only since ENIC & Levy took over that the club actually started to be run with the ambition we once had, which sees them where they are now. Yes they have sold their best players on occasion when they have wanted out - NO club is immune to that - but when they do, they spend all the money they get and more on top to try and keep pushing forward. This obvious ambition is what brings in the supporters, the corporate money and the sponsorship, plus it tends to have a happy side-effect of better football, higher league finishes and the extra cash which that brings in. Now they are on the up and making money they are not looking to pay off the debt, instead they are looking to invest in the infrastructure of the club and build a new £250m stadium to bring in even more revenue. I'm convinced Sugar would never have spent £250m on a new stadium, just as Ashley would never have spent £42m to extend St James - in 6 years, a bore hole, underground heating for the training pitches, and lots and lots of advertising hoardings is the sum of Ashley's investment in the infrastructure of NUFC. Under Ashley we're absolutely nothing like the Levy-run Spurs and never will be until he's gone or has a genuine change of purpose towards the club (but that's just a fantasy IMO). Any short term success like the 5th place season will always be a blip and we will never look to build on it, rather it will be a reason to sit back and run with what we have for another year without having to spend money on improving the squad. Any windfall player sale will not be used to boost the season's transfer kitty, but will be used to fund it entirely for the next few years. The commercial and matchday income we had which set us apart from the second tier of well supported clubs (Everton, Villa, West Ham, Sunderland, etc) was down £23.5m per year from when he bought the club in the last set of accounts. The longer he's here, the closer we get financially to theses clubs, and any advantage we built up under the previous owners will soon disappear. Eventually if they're run half decently they too will start to pull away from us. A quarter of the club's yearly revenue gone and nearly double the debt despite a £35m windfall from a player he inherited, and people say the club is better off financially than when he bought it. Take a fucking bow.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuv Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Excellent post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 UV, bloody hell, there's a triumphant return. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belfast Mags Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Everything UV said Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 UV, bloody hell, there's a triumphant return. Second that. Hope you stick around this time UV! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-more Mag Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 I just can't see that we're anything more to Ashley than just another brand he's bought to add to his collection. He's done well building his business empire that way, but a football club is a business unlike any of the others he owns. Unfortunately for us the success he's had with his other businesses will never translate to the success we're looking for on the pitch and I don't think he has the desire or capacity to alter his way of doing things. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinny Green Balls Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Look at Spurs, all the years we were having our “golden period” they were a lot like us now (if you listened to their fans back then) bumbling along showing “lack of ambition” but with a healthy bottom line, they’ve ascended as we’ve descended but it’s taken years and years of them making profits and player trading. You're talking about 2 different periods of Spurs' history as if they were one. 91-01 they were majority owned and run by a top English businessman who made his fortune selling cheap tat to the mass market. He supposedly saved them from their financial troubles (I have no idea if this is actually true or a myth spread by himself) and ran them as a proper business. In Sugar's 10 year run they finished 15, 8, 15, 7, 8, 10, 14, 11, 10, 12 - the very definition of mediocrity (the 10 years prior to Sugar they finished 4, 4, 8, 3, 10, 3, 13, 6, 3, 11). If forums existed then they'd probably have had Sugar apologists telling everyone they should be grateful he saved them, they were doomed before he arrived, how he had sorted out the finances and was running the club on a sound financial footing, etc, but they were going absolutely nowhere on or off the pitch, and we easily out performed them financially. It's only since ENIC & Levy took over that the club actually started to be run with the ambition we once had, which sees them where they are now. Yes they have sold their best players on occasion when they have wanted out - NO club is immune to that - but when they do, they spend all the money they get and more on top to try and keep pushing forward. This obvious ambition is what brings in the supporters, the corporate money and the sponsorship, plus it tends to have a happy side-effect of better football, higher league finishes and the extra cash which that brings in. Now they are on the up and making money they are not looking to pay off the debt, instead they are looking to invest in the infrastructure of the club and build a new £250m stadium to bring in even more revenue. I'm convinced Sugar would never have spent £250m on a new stadium, just as Ashley would never have spent £42m to extend St James - in 6 years, a bore hole, underground heating for the training pitches, and lots and lots of advertising hoardings is the sum of Ashley's investment in the infrastructure of NUFC. Under Ashley we're absolutely nothing like the Levy-run Spurs and never will be until he's gone or has a genuine change of purpose towards the club (but that's just a fantasy IMO). Any short term success like the 5th place season will always be a blip and we will never look to build on it, rather it will be a reason to sit back and run with what we have for another year without having to spend money on improving the squad. Any windfall player sale will not be used to boost the season's transfer kitty, but will be used to fund it entirely for the next few years. The commercial and matchday income we had which set us apart from the second tier of well supported clubs (Everton, Villa, West Ham, Sunderland, etc) was down £23.5m per year from when he bought the club in the last set of accounts. The longer he's here, the closer we get financially to theses clubs, and any advantage we built up under the previous owners will soon disappear. Eventually if they're run half decently they too will start to pull away from us. A quarter of the club's yearly revenue gone and nearly double the debt despite a £35m windfall from a player he inherited, and people say the club is better off financially than when he bought it. ridiculously good post. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuv Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 His first post in 18 months man Unreal Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheHoob Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Ashamed to say I honestly never knew Alan Sugar owned Spurs at one point, thought he was just another famous fan. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Ashamed to say I honestly never knew Alan Sugar owned Spurs at one point, thought he was just another famous fan. only discovered it a few years ago myself in my defense I was young at the time he did own it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belfast Mags Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Jesus Christ lads, really? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bimpy474 Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 What in the feck Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheHoob Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 FWIW I would have only been 10 when he sold up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Jesus Christ lads, really? oh come on it was the late 90's I was young and didn't give half a shit about who owned clubs and probably didn't have a clue who Alan Sugar was anyway Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belfast Mags Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Feel old now Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 Feel old now These lads probably don't even know he used to be called 'Sir Alan'. Kids these days. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hakka Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 Feel old now Me too, I thought it was quite common knowledge. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lotus Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 Look at Spurs, all the years we were having our “golden period” they were a lot like us now (if you listened to their fans back then) bumbling along showing “lack of ambition” but with a healthy bottom line, they’ve ascended as we’ve descended but it’s taken years and years of them making profits and player trading. You're talking about 2 different periods of Spurs' history as if they were one. 91-01 they were majority owned and run by a top English businessman who made his fortune selling cheap tat to the mass market. He supposedly saved them from their financial troubles (I have no idea if this is actually true or a myth spread by himself) and ran them as a proper business. In Sugar's 10 year run they finished 15, 8, 15, 7, 8, 10, 14, 11, 10, 12 - the very definition of mediocrity (the 10 years prior to Sugar they finished 4, 4, 8, 3, 10, 3, 13, 6, 3, 11). If forums existed then they'd probably have had Sugar apologists telling everyone they should be grateful he saved them, they were doomed before he arrived, how he had sorted out the finances and was running the club on a sound financial footing, etc, but they were going absolutely nowhere on or off the pitch, and we easily out performed them financially. It's only since ENIC & Levy took over that the club actually started to be run with the ambition we once had, which sees them where they are now. Yes they have sold their best players on occasion when they have wanted out - NO club is immune to that - but when they do, they spend all the money they get and more on top to try and keep pushing forward. This obvious ambition is what brings in the supporters, the corporate money and the sponsorship, plus it tends to have a happy side-effect of better football, higher league finishes and the extra cash which that brings in. Now they are on the up and making money they are not looking to pay off the debt, instead they are looking to invest in the infrastructure of the club and build a new £250m stadium to bring in even more revenue. I'm convinced Sugar would never have spent £250m on a new stadium, just as Ashley would never have spent £42m to extend St James - in 6 years, a bore hole, underground heating for the training pitches, and lots and lots of advertising hoardings is the sum of Ashley's investment in the infrastructure of NUFC. Under Ashley we're absolutely nothing like the Levy-run Spurs and never will be until he's gone or has a genuine change of purpose towards the club (but that's just a fantasy IMO). Any short term success like the 5th place season will always be a blip and we will never look to build on it, rather it will be a reason to sit back and run with what we have for another year without having to spend money on improving the squad. Any windfall player sale will not be used to boost the season's transfer kitty, but will be used to fund it entirely for the next few years. The commercial and matchday income we had which set us apart from the second tier of well supported clubs (Everton, Villa, West Ham, Sunderland, etc) was down £23.5m per year from when he bought the club in the last set of accounts. The longer he's here, the closer we get financially to theses clubs, and any advantage we built up under the previous owners will soon disappear. Eventually if they're run half decently they too will start to pull away from us. A quarter of the club's yearly revenue gone and nearly double the debt despite a £35m windfall from a player he inherited, and people say the club is better off financially than when he bought it. ridiculously good post. No response from Toonpack? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 Look at Spurs, all the years we were having our “golden period” they were a lot like us now (if you listened to their fans back then) bumbling along showing “lack of ambition” but with a healthy bottom line, they’ve ascended as we’ve descended but it’s taken years and years of them making profits and player trading. You're talking about 2 different periods of Spurs' history as if they were one. 91-01 they were majority owned and run by a top English businessman who made his fortune selling cheap tat to the mass market. He supposedly saved them from their financial troubles (I have no idea if this is actually true or a myth spread by himself) and ran them as a proper business. In Sugar's 10 year run they finished 15, 8, 15, 7, 8, 10, 14, 11, 10, 12 - the very definition of mediocrity (the 10 years prior to Sugar they finished 4, 4, 8, 3, 10, 3, 13, 6, 3, 11). If forums existed then they'd probably have had Sugar apologists telling everyone they should be grateful he saved them, they were doomed before he arrived, how he had sorted out the finances and was running the club on a sound financial footing, etc, but they were going absolutely nowhere on or off the pitch, and we easily out performed them financially. It's only since ENIC & Levy took over that the club actually started to be run with the ambition we once had, which sees them where they are now. Yes they have sold their best players on occasion when they have wanted out - NO club is immune to that - but when they do, they spend all the money they get and more on top to try and keep pushing forward. This obvious ambition is what brings in the supporters, the corporate money and the sponsorship, plus it tends to have a happy side-effect of better football, higher league finishes and the extra cash which that brings in. Now they are on the up and making money they are not looking to pay off the debt, instead they are looking to invest in the infrastructure of the club and build a new £250m stadium to bring in even more revenue. I'm convinced Sugar would never have spent £250m on a new stadium, just as Ashley would never have spent £42m to extend St James - in 6 years, a bore hole, underground heating for the training pitches, and lots and lots of advertising hoardings is the sum of Ashley's investment in the infrastructure of NUFC. Under Ashley we're absolutely nothing like the Levy-run Spurs and never will be until he's gone or has a genuine change of purpose towards the club (but that's just a fantasy IMO). Any short term success like the 5th place season will always be a blip and we will never look to build on it, rather it will be a reason to sit back and run with what we have for another year without having to spend money on improving the squad. Any windfall player sale will not be used to boost the season's transfer kitty, but will be used to fund it entirely for the next few years. The commercial and matchday income we had which set us apart from the second tier of well supported clubs (Everton, Villa, West Ham, Sunderland, etc) was down £23.5m per year from when he bought the club in the last set of accounts. The longer he's here, the closer we get financially to theses clubs, and any advantage we built up under the previous owners will soon disappear. Eventually if they're run half decently they too will start to pull away from us. A quarter of the club's yearly revenue gone and nearly double the debt despite a £35m windfall from a player he inherited, and people say the club is better off financially than when he bought it. Totally sunk his battleship Well said sir. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts