PIF and RB Sports & Media

[r0cafella]

3 minutes ago, Keegans Export said:

Even worse - it's not even called "Financial Fair Play" any more. At least not in the PL. It's "Profit and Sustainability".

 

Now, what's sustainable about Burnley being bought using money owed to the creditors...from Burnley FC? And a huge chunk of that payable when they get relegated and are at their most vulnerable position financially? What's profitable about Spurs' £700m debt on <£400m revenue? Or Manchester United making a £90m loss and owing over half a billion pounds to its own creditors?

 

It's a flawed system because there's no way that controls spending that doesn't create a closed shop consisting of the teams who got in there before the rules changed (Chelsea and Man City most recently) and there's no way to stop clubs spending beyond their means that doesn't limit/control what the clubs can and can't spend. The problem is, the current rules clearly don't work because clubs are still laden with debt and still incredibly vulnerable to any drop in income eg. via relegation. 

The rules are working as intended. The goal was to reduce future potential competition and that’s exactly what is being achieved. 
 

After all, the League as actually a Cartel. 

[Gaztoon]

Just now, r0cafella said:

The rules are working as intended. The goal was to reduce future potential competition and that’s exactly what is being achieved. 
 

After all, the League as actually a Cartel. 

 

Then I hope likes of us, villa and others with ambition just ignore it with a threat of legal action..

[r0cafella]

1 minute ago, Gaztoon said:

 

Then I hope likes of us, villa and others with ambition just ignore it with a threat of legal action..

That takes time and requires true commitment. After all, it’s likely any punishment would be long since handed out before any legal action could take place. 
 

I mean, Everton are the ones who are currently taking a piss on it, let’s see how that plays out. 

[Gaztoon]

7 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

That takes time and requires true commitment. After all, it’s likely any punishment would be long since handed out before any legal action could take place. 
 

I mean, Everton are the ones who are currently taking a piss on it, let’s see how that plays out. 

 

Supposedly no points deduction..but need to pass all future signings with the prem.

[geordiekris]

Financial fair play should consist of all clubs across the European top leagues being allowed to spend a fixed amount on transfers and a fixed amount on wages each year.  It’s the only fair way in my eyes. 
 

Stronger checks to ensure clubs aren’t fucked over like Burnley with takeovers using the clubs own money. 

[TheBrownBottle]

2 hours ago, Optimistic Nut said:

FFP is shite like. If this had been around from the start of the PL era then Blackburn wouldn’t have happened, the Keegan era wouldn’t have happened, Chelsea & Man City wouldn’t have happened to the extent it did. The champions for the last 30 years would likely have just been Man U, Arsenal & Liverpool. Get to fuck. If an owner wants to pump their own cash in then they should be allowed. It’s the opposite they should be clamping down on, ie, owners taking money out of it.

It is shite, but the KK era would have happened - NUFC‘s relative success in the ‘90s was built around the club’s income, not investment (the Halls and Shepherds put very little in).  Unlike Blackburn, which was mostly down to Jack Walker’s money

 

 

Edited May 25, 2022 by TheBrownBottle

[Gazzaschicken]

9 hours ago, Wilson said:

Sounds like they've went in blind. 

Not really it's ecologists reports are a joke. You pay them £700 and they walk around the site for 10 minutes and give you bunch of generic jargon saying may be this may be that. Abit like a house survey report. You won't pay for bat survey also known as an amphibian survey straight off as if the ecologists report doesn't mention it then what's the point. Invasive species is standard as well. This shouldnt delay it just adds conditions onto the plan before construction starts they should be doing an environmental survey anyway prior to construction starting so that will all wrap into this. 

[Tiresias]

For the record I would happily trade in all our wealth for a league that was run properly under a FFP set that worked where no club has significant financial advantage over the others, noone is paying ridiculous wages and no club is burying itself in debt to sustain success. 

 

There is no question the FFP rules are completely hamstrung by the fact they need to be agreed between clubs who won't vote against their self interest, so we have one that is an obstacle for new clubs to spend a lot of money which isn't an obstacle to currently established clubs who have already massively boosted their own revenue. We are likely going to need to work on and improve our revenue to enable us to spend more, this was always the case. 

 

I don't think the legal action is a helpful route. It will only rebound on us when the other clubs vote more measures targeted at us if we piss everyone off. We need to get the club making more money, there is a lot of low hanging fruit to do so. We don't need to take any shortcuts to the top, we should do it sustainably and carefully anyway. In the long term there is always the possibility of say regime change in Saudi Arabia leading to them changing their investment priorities and suddenly we are for sale again. I would much rather us be in the position of a well run club making a lot of money rather than reliant purely on money being handed down from on high.

 

 

Edited May 25, 2022 by Tiresias

[Jackie Broon]

4 hours ago, Gazzaschicken said:

Not really it's ecologists reports are a joke. You pay them £700 and they walk around the site for 10 minutes and give you bunch of generic jargon saying may be this may be that. Abit like a house survey report. You won't pay for bat survey also known as an amphibian survey straight off as if the ecologists report doesn't mention it then what's the point. Invasive species is standard as well. This shouldnt delay it just adds conditions onto the plan before construction starts they should be doing an environmental survey anyway prior to construction starting so that will all wrap into this. 

 

That's not the case at all. Just about every ecology report I've read, and that's hundreds, includes a summary of reccomendatiins that is clear and easy for people who, like myself, are not ecology specialists to understand.

 

The report very clearly says that further bat surveys are needed.

 

The impression I get is that many developers/architects/agents, just pay for ecology reports etc. think they've ticked that box and either don't even bother to read them or do and submit them hoping the planners won't read them.

 

Any pre-commencement conditions are almost certain to delay the start of works because they require another application for discharge of conditions to be made, which often can take longer than a planning application.

 

 

Edited May 25, 2022 by Jackie Broon

[Awaymag]

4 hours ago, Tiresias said:

For the record I would happily trade in all our wealth for a league that was run properly under a FFP set that worked where no club has significant financial advantage over the others, noone is paying ridiculous wages and no club is burying itself in debt to sustain success. 

 

There is no question the FFP rules are completely hamstrung by the fact they need to be agreed between clubs who won't vote against their self interest, so we have one that is an obstacle for new clubs to spend a lot of money which isn't an obstacle to currently established clubs who have already massively boosted their own revenue. We are likely going to need to work on and improve our revenue to enable us to spend more, this was always the case. 

 

I don't think the legal action is a helpful route. It will only rebound on us when the other clubs vote more measures targeted at us if we piss everyone off. We need to get the club making more money, there is a lot of low hanging fruit to do so. We don't need to take any shortcuts to the top, we should do it sustainably and carefully anyway. In the long term there is always the possibility of say regime change in Saudi Arabia leading to them changing their investment priorities and suddenly we are for sale again. I would much rather us be in the position of a well run club making a lot of money rather than reliant purely on money being handed down from on high.

 

 

 

Can we not do that once we have a stadium expansion, new training ground and a City landscape like Dubai.    Then I will happily trade in!

[Kanji]

Fuck trading in anything man. I hope we study the rules and do whatever is needed to stay in compliance as creatively as possible, if there are certain credits for investing into academy, women's team, etc. go ahead and do that to the fullest. Take stock of the bull shit the other clubs do and every single chairman's meeting with the league, ask the hard questions. 

[The Prophet]

 

This is Mrs The Prophet's City/team. I approve.

[FloydianMag]

 

[Mikky]

1 minute ago, FloydianMag said:

 

not that I understand Arabic but I can make out the words Newcastle and Dan Ashworth 

[Manxst]

Just now, Mikky said:

not that I understand Arabic but I can make out the words Newcastle and Dan Ashworth 

Says Ashworth MIGHT be announced this week. 

[FloydianMag]

21 minutes ago, Mikky said:

not that I understand Arabic but I can make out the words Newcastle and Dan Ashworth 

You could click on translate when you view it on twitter

[Wolfcastle]

10 hours ago, TheBrownBottle said:

It is shite, but the KK era would have happened - NUFC‘s relative success in the ‘90s was built around the club’s income, not investment (the Halls and Shepherds put very little in).  Unlike Blackburn, which was mostly down to Jack Walker’s money

 

 

 

Posted this before but we sold something like £7million of shirts in half a year in 1993. The record transfer in the UK at that time was 3.6m. £7m from the Bonds when the UK record transfer was £5m. A net transfer spend in 95 of about 1m that we were running away with the league on.

If anything, and  your'e right, FFP would have benefitted us over clubs that spent more than us without the same resources. Its more why the KK era happened the something that would have prevented it.

 

 

Edited May 25, 2022 by Wolfcastle

[manorpark]

1 hour ago, Manxst said:

Says Ashworth MIGHT be announced this week. 

 

I do hope so.

 

I fully appreciate, and support, our clear intention to show that we will never be taken advantage of financially, but it is not as if paying compensation would set a 'precedent' here, like it would if we paid over the odds for a player.

 

I mean, we are not going to be bringing another Director of Football in the near future are we (hopefully!)

[NE27]

Is it definitely to do with compensation? Or are they trying to keep people happy and attempt to do things the correct way? Or at least the perceived correct way.

 

I know staveley mentioned in her earlier interviews that they were trying to assure other clubs we aren't just going to bulldoze in.

[STM]

Ashworth is more important than any player we sign. The sooner he arrives, the quicker we can start getting players in.

[Dr Jinx]

For timing that would make sense. He’s here to do all the heavy lifting for Howe so all the transfer activity could pick up pace as soon as he’s at his desk.

[Keegans Export]

13 minutes ago, NE27 said:

Is it definitely to do with compensation? Or are they trying to keep people happy and attempt to do things the correct way? Or at least the perceived correct way.

 

I know staveley mentioned in her earlier interviews that they were trying to assure other clubs we aren't just going to bulldoze in.

I think its partly that and partly the fact that his role isn't really going to be that much involved in actual individual transfers. Assuming he has the same sort of role he had at Brighton. 

 

From the Athletic article a few months back they have him down as more of a "big picture" hire, rather than a "there's a really good left back in the Belgian third division we should look at"

 

Put it this way - I don't think our transfer activity this summer will be vastly different whether Ashworth starts in June or not.

 

From the article; 

Broadly speaking, he had an overseeing role covering the men’s first team, the women’s team, the academy, loans, medical and sports science departments.

 

Speaking to The Athletic in February 2020, Ashworth said: “I don’t like hierarchical structures, so I always draw it that the technical director sits in the middle of the wheel and on the outside of the wheel is the head of each department. The job of the technical director is to just keep that wheel spinning."

 

Signing players was not Ashworth’s primary task and there is little concern on the south coast that Newcastle’s approach will have a detrimental effect on Brighton’s transfer plans or way of operating. 

 

 

Edited May 25, 2022 by Keegans Export

[Scotty66]

That alwaleed is proper buddies with wraith and NCSL fwiw. 

 

Hope its true but more than likely bullshit. 

[Stifler]

2 minutes ago, Scotty66 said:

That alwaleed is proper buddies with wraith and NCSL fwiw. 

 

Hope its true but more than likely bullshit. 

100% bullshit.

He’s just another Geordie dentist, where everyone thinks he knows what’s going on because he lives in the country where rumours are coming from. The Geordie dentist largely came to the forefront when BZG were supposed to be interested in buying us.

[Paully]

Absolutely superb this!

 

https://vimeo.com/714011292