Jump to content

PIF, PCP, and RB Sports & Media


Yorkie

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, Abacus said:

Yes, share payments are an investment funds flow rather than being income earned through profit.

 

Therefore it's irrelevant to FFP. I.e. even with the cash it doesn't mean we can spend what we like.

 

Sponsorship income is different and would count favourably towards FFP, hence that's the one with the restrictive associated party rules.

 

What can they do if Ittihad FC offer us 500m for Krath in the summer?

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Unbelievable said:

 

What can they do if Ittihad FC offer us 500m for Krath in the summer?

Nothing as far as I’m aware; you can bet your bottom dollar the premier league would be changing the rules to make transfers based on some form of fair value though. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, madras said:

So this single share worth £40mill. Could we do the same with 10shares for £400mill ? Have we just found a very simple way round FFP ?

I'm no expert so I might not have understood this tweet correctly by Kieran Maguire but it looks like you can raise up to £90 million over three years doing it this way.

 

 

Edited by macphisto

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Joey47 said:

 

Have any of the city group clubs or red bull clubs done something along these lines before?

 

Not that I'm aware of, but then they aren't in the same position as us.

 

Man city have trailblazed and everyone is shit scared of the very same thing happening with a second club. Hence all these strange sponsorship caps appearing overnight, and likely more stringent rules going forward.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Unbelievable said:

 

What can they do if Ittihad FC offer us 500m for Krath in the summer?

Normally player trading would count towards your profit or loss.

 

In other words, selling Krafth for £0.5 bn should count to increase what you're able to spend under FFP. It's not an investment like the share issue was.

 

However, I've taken a peek at the PL rules just now. They are quite remarkable, really, and to my reading go way beyond normal companies act definitions, also covering more than just sponsorships, whilst giving the PL wide discretion to pretty much decide whatever they want. 

 

So, I don't think think you could get away with that Krafth deal. Quite how enforceable they are is another matter - I'm guessing that's why we're lawyering up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, xLiaaamx said:

RPT's only counting to sponsorship is a joke. Watford and Udinese manipulate transfers between themselves all the time. Pozzo gets away with it. 

Watford aren't a threat to the selfish six though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They’re going to fight us for a couple of seasons but as soon as they realize we aren’t going anywhere, they’ll just put up with us and let whoever (Tottenham seems most likely) fall out of the “big six” and we’ll replace them and be part of the big boys club. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LRD said:

500m for Krafth would be so blatant a middle finger to the league and the clubs, I actually love the idea. Ronaldo would probably spontaneously combust at the valuation too. :lol:

If 500mill is the first offer , shouldn't we hold out for more ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Jackie Broon said:

 

They can say it's a related party transaction and adjust the amount counted towards the FFP calculation to a fair market value, i.e. 500p.

Do PIF own Ittihad FC ? If not how is it a related party ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, madras said:

Do PIF own Ittihad FC ? If not how is it a related party ?

 

The definition of an associated party in the PL rules is incredibly broad and could potentially be applied to any Saudi business, not just those controlled by PIF. This bit in particular:

 

(b) The Person and the Club are directly or indirectly controlled, jointly controlled, or Materially Influenced by the same government, public or state-funded body or by the same party;

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...