TheBrownBottle Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 2 minutes ago, FloydianMag said: Could there be other reasons? Like challenging FMV for related party sponsorships, after all it didn’t exist until our takeover. It wouldn’t prevent related party sponsorships if they’re not overboard (can’t remember if the limit is £1m or £500k where FMV doesn’t apply, also). How much does it cost to be Man Utd’s official tractor partner? Then knock 75-80% off that Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 3 minutes ago, Unbelievable said: The clue is in the bolded bit. We have a fairly new team of people trying to raise interest in associating with a brand that for the past decade and a half has been associated with toxic mediocrity. Like everything else the commercial side’s growth of the club will be gradual but certain under these owners. They’re not that new in fairness. A year and a half is plenty of time to get some deals in. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 6 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said: It wouldn’t prevent related party sponsorships if they’re not overboard (can’t remember if the limit is £1m or £500k where FMV doesn’t apply, also). How much does it cost to be Man Utd’s official tractor partner? Then knock 75-80% off that That’s the point of FMV though, its’s designed to prevent us from having the same levels of sponsorship as the rest of the top 6. The related party shite is anti competitive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 Just now, FloydianMag said: That’s the point of FMV though, its’s designed to prevent us from having the same levels of sponsorship as the rest of the top 6. The related party shite is anti competitive. FMV is the dodgiest part of the ‘FFP’ shite for me. Other clubs deciding what another club should be able to bring in. We know this would be thrown out in any adjudication - it’s lunacy by the PL clubs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 2 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said: FMV is the dodgiest part of the ‘FFP’ shite for me. Other clubs deciding what another club should be able to bring in. We know this would be thrown out in any adjudication - it’s lunacy by the PL clubs. When the PL first introduced FMV in 2021 I’m sure Amanda did tell the meeting that what they were doing was a breach of Competition Law, then they attempted to make it more onerous last November and failed. There is also the fact that the other top 6 clubs believe their sponsorship deals should be higher due to history, heritage and coefficients is also a load of bollocks. The whole lot needs to be swept away so there is a level playing field, including FFP. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gallowgate Toon Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 21 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said: They’re not that new in fairness. A year and a half is plenty of time to get some deals in. Word on the street is that Silverstone is a bit frustrated at the team he has at his disposal currently but we are incrementally improving that side of the club. On the flipside, the club (and industry) doesn't pay that well compared to alternatives so it's kind of their own fault Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 PSG have just opened up a club store in Toronto, they opened up one in London last year, as well as ones in New York, Miami etc. They also have a dozen dotted about in Japan, and South Korea. I wonder how long it will be until we get to be like that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 (edited) 1 hour ago, Gallowgate Toon said: Word on the street is that Silverstone is a bit frustrated at the team he has at his disposal currently but we are incrementally improving that side of the club. On the flipside, the club (and industry) doesn't pay that well compared to alternatives so it's kind of their own fault That wouldn’t surprise me - especially in terms of inheritance! It also should be an amber flag - back of house staff costs are not hobbled by FFP - we could hire the best in the business with zero impact to FFP, if we’re serious about it. See also: training facilities. edit: should have read ‘wouldn’t’. As if Ashley had a commercial team … Edited January 2 by TheBrownBottle Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 2 hours ago, FloydianMag said: That’s the point of FMV though, its’s designed to prevent us from having the same levels of sponsorship as the rest of the top 6. The related party shite is anti competitive. And then there's Chelsea with their £40m per year shirt sponsorship with a Company their owners have links with and a turnover of £15m per year. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 1 hour ago, FloydianMag said: When the PL first introduced FMV in 2021 I’m sure Amanda did tell the meeting that what they were doing was a breach of Competition Law, then they attempted to make it more onerous last November and failed. There is also the fact that the other top 6 clubs believe their sponsorship deals should be higher due to history, heritage and coefficients is also a load of bollocks. The whole lot needs to be swept away so there is a level playing field, including FFP. Independent regulation would be what I would want to see. She might be a Tory, but I thought Tracey Crouch was right on a lot of this stuff. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 Just now, madras said: And then there's Chelsea with their £40m per year shirt sponsorship with a Company their owners have links with and a turnover of £15m per year. Their argument would be that they could get that money off another company in the market. Not saying that the rules are ok, but they wouldn’t run afoul of what’s in place Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DahnSahf Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 1 hour ago, Stifler said: PSG have just opened up a club store in Toronto, they opened up one in London last year, as well as ones in New York, Miami etc. They also have a dozen dotted about in Japan, and South Korea. I wonder how long it will be until we get to be like that. Kinda funny that pushing SD into the Asian market was Fat Mike's reason for buying the club. ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 24 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said: Their argument would be that they could get that money off another company in the market. Not saying that the rules are ok, but they wouldn’t run afoul of what’s in place Then they should be told to do it then. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 1 minute ago, madras said: Then they should be told to do it then. I agree; it highlights who made these rules up and why. But under the present regs Chelsea are not in conflict with them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitley mag Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 According to Kieran Maguire in the Times FFP is about to bite a few more clubs on the arse, with Forrest and a 2nd charge levelled at Everton mooted. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUPERTOON Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 2 minutes ago, Whitley mag said: According to Kieran Maguire in the Times FFP is about to bite a few more clubs on the arse, with Forrest and a 2nd charge levelled at Everton mooted. Yet people still say just fuck ffp and spend Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 7 minutes ago, SUPERTOON said: Yet people still say just fuck ffp and spend The way to fuck FFP is to challenge it’s legality. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoot Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 Just now, FloydianMag said: The way to fuck FFP is to challenge it’s legality. Was just going to say, it's needs challenging. Obviously whilst the rules are in place we must obide by them, but surely we should be looking at challenging them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 2 minutes ago, Scoot said: Was just going to say, it's needs challenging. Obviously whilst the rules are in place we must obide by them, but surely we should be looking at challenging them. Obviously the club have their reasons why they haven’t……..yet. I hope that they are building a case against FFP and FMV. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 1 hour ago, Scoot said: Was just going to say, it's needs challenging. Obviously whilst the rules are in place we must obide by them, but surely we should be looking at challenging them. The KSA govt challenging these rules in a UK Court could well be a political problem. They’re far more likely to wait for a stalking horse. Everton, you would have thought, would have been an obvious candidate. Interesting that to date they haven’t. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KetsbaiaIsBald Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 12 hours ago, Whitley mag said: According to Kieran Maguire in the Times FFP is about to bite a few more clubs on the arse, with Forrest and a 2nd charge levelled at Everton mooted. The forest one could be interesting. If I read it correctly they held off selling a player until the end of the window and got 15-20 million extra. This put the transaction in the next reporting window. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezzle Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 13 hours ago, TheBrownBottle said: Their argument would be that they could get that money off another company in the market. Not saying that the rules are ok, but they wouldn’t run afoul of what’s in place They had all of preseason and 8 games in this without a sponsor though til a dodgy as fuck company finally gave them the money they wanted. Few media reports that they were working all summer without any success so that tells me they really couldnt get that deal off anyone else Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Icarus Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 12 hours ago, SUPERTOON said: Yet people still say just fuck ffp and spend If Man City and Chelsea end up getting away with it, you can understand why tbf. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 Interesting article from Samuel’s https://x.com/mrroddygraham/status/1742469444184478122?s=46&t=RaLdCRuzyWBbm603Y3eUgg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 5 minutes ago, FloydianMag said: Interesting article from Samuel’s https://x.com/mrroddygraham/status/1742469444184478122?s=46&t=RaLdCRuzyWBbm603Y3eUgg So odd how he’s changed his tune. 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