PIF, PCP, and RB Sports & Media

[brummie]

Just now, midds said:

Yeah, I get you man

 

I just hate the fat they've created it under the illusion of helping the weak when everyone can see it's the opposite. It's so disingenuous and obvious at the same time. It's infuriating  

 

Football in these terms, it really is fucking nauseating.

 

You know that final scene in The Thick of It, where the 'thought yurt' consultant, Stewart whatever, gives his exit speech, and says he's tried to improve things, but "ultimately, this party is build on a solid base of cunt".

 

It's like that. A solid base of cunt.

[Dokko]

Yet you can still buy a club with it's own money and cripple it for generations or if you fancy, putting it into administration on the same day you bought it. 

 

FFP my fucking hairy arse.

[The College Dropout]

4 hours ago, Turnbull2000 said:

Average wage of nearly 100k seems very high. Surprised at that.

 

Can't say I'm very hopeful for the next few years if we're already hitting a financial ceiling.

 

 

 

Where did you hear ‘average wage of nearly 100k’? 
 

Love that Eales has spoken. Good target of getting European football as well.  

[Nobody]

27 minutes ago, Ben said:

Why not just not let clubs go into debt they cant afford.

Guessing it would be a minefield deciding who can afford what.

FFP is absolutely shite like, but at the same time Im happy there are regulations stopping another PSG, because a) Fuck PSG and everything that loathesum club has done since their takeover and b) I massively doubt these last 18 months would have been anywhere near as good if we went out and splashed out on Mbappe and the likes while in the relegation zone in our first transfer window.

Doing it (somewhat) organically has been so great for us, having Dan Burn scoring in a semi final probably doesn't happen without FFP Tbf. However, now it's getting annoying how much it's crippling us. Like not being allowed to replace Tonali in January because of something he did before coming here feels wrong for us. 

 

[Nobody]

6 hours ago, timeEd32 said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

4 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Where did you hear ‘average wage of nearly 100k’? 
 

Love that Eales has spoken. Good target of getting European football as well.  

 

[The College Dropout]

Just now, Nobody said:

 

Just saw it.  
 

Those wages seem crazy. Does that maybe include coaching staff costs and leadership costs? All that on players just doesn’t make sense 

[Nobody]

1 minute ago, The College Dropout said:

Just saw it.  
 

Those wages seem crazy. Does that maybe include coaching staff costs and leadership costs? All that on players just doesn’t make sense 

Our highest paid director is only on 7k this year apparently (down 99% from last season), so if anything that would being the average down. 

Does sound like an awful lot like, wonder if it includes signing on bonuses perhaps? Last season we paid off a lot of erroneous wages in our books as well.

[Rod]

2 minutes ago, Nobody said:

Guessing it would be a minefield deciding who can afford what.

FFP is absolutely shite like, but at the same time Im happy there are regulations stopping another PSG, because a) Fuck PSG and everything that loathesum club has done since their takeover and b) I massively doubt these last 18 months would have been anywhere near as good if we went out and splashed out on Mbappe and the likes while in the relegation zone in our first transfer window.

Doing it (somewhat) organically has been so great for us, having Dan Burn scoring in a semi final probably doesn't happen without FFP Tbf. However, now it's getting annoying how much it's crippling us. Like not being allowed to replace Tonali in January because of something he did before coming here feels wrong for us. 

 

Bang on.  Let us trade how we want to trade.  If we fail miserably then so be it.  Look, these new rules are purely in place to stop Newcastle United from progressing.  Seriously we need to take the league on.  How fuckin dare they change the rules "willy niilly".  They are a disgrace.  For instance, a daft one, if I win a billion pounds on the lottery and decide to give NUFC 200 million who are they to say that I can't do it.  What the fecks it got to do with them.  You can put that analogy towards the PIF and Amanda.  Let's take them on, sick of them.

[duo]

2 hours ago, midds said:

I still find it remarkable that there are a ridiculous number of rules and regulations that are prohibiting a club from spending money it absolutely has in order to grow and make progress in order to be successful. Doesn't just apply to us but Villa, Everton and West Ham and whoever should absolutely be allowed to spend the money the owners definitely have without any danger of going bust. It's ridiculous the barriers that have been thrown up to stop anyone from challenging.

 

I get the need to protect clubs and fans from owners spending money they don't have, that's common sense and does make 100% sense. But this current system simply isn't fit for purpose. There has to be a better way of allowing competition whilst simultaneously protecting clubs from bad owners who want to exploit things. The whole thing is backward. Dressing it all up as being 'Fair' is just the spunk on top of the cherry on top of the cake. It's not 'fair', it's fucking 'rigged' 

I am amazed it hasn't been challenged in the courts - at the end of the day football is a business and these rules are stopping clubs being allowed to grow said business.  It doesn't matter what business you are in, you have to speculate to accumulate and football is no different.

[et tu brute]

51 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Just saw it.  
 

Those wages seem crazy. Does that maybe include coaching staff costs and leadership costs? All that on players just doesn’t make sense 

The wages would be everyone I would imagine

[r0cafella]

50 minutes ago, duo said:

I am amazed it hasn't been challenged in the courts - at the end of the day football is a business and these rules are stopping clubs being allowed to grow said business.  It doesn't matter what business you are in, you have to speculate to accumulate and football is no different.

Nobody has had a reason to challenge it until now, also it’s important to remember that all of these members clubs voted for these rules. Obviously now the ownership of the league has evolved and we have some ambitious owners like ours Forest and Villa. A lot of the owners are in it to make money so if they can cap the amount they have to spend they are absolutely over the moon. If they can increase the gap to the champo even better because they I can ride the gravy train and watch the 3 newly promoted clubs to back down. 
 

Ive mentioned before but we really need clarity on what’s the purpose of FFP. Is it to protect clubs from going bust? Or is it to level the play field? Right now; it’s not performing either of these roles, and its function is to protect the established elite. 

[timeEd32]

3 hours ago, The College Dropout said:

Just saw it.  
 

Those wages seem crazy. Does that maybe include coaching staff costs and leadership costs? All that on players just doesn’t make sense 

It includes all staff (except for maybe the directors). Wages in 21/22 were £170.2m. They rose £16.5m to £186.7m.

Social security and pension costs account for approximately £22m of that.

 

The reasons cited for the increase are bonuses for finishing 4th / Champions League for players, coaches, and management, and the addition of 102 employees (410 in total).

[r0cafella]

4 minutes ago, timeEd32 said:

It includes all staff (except for maybe the directors). Wages in 21/22 were £170.2m. They rose £16.5m to £186.7m.

Social security and pension costs account for approximately £22m of that.

 

The reasons cited for the increase are bonuses for finishing 4th / Champions League for players, coaches, and management, and the addition of 102 employees (410 in total).

I think we are in a good place with wiggle room on the wages front considering our increased revenue to come. 
 

it just goes to show what a massive red herring the previous figure of 90% was. People loved beating us with that without engaging the brain. 

[Jaqen]

4 hours ago, Rod said:

Bang on.  Let us trade how we want to trade.  If we fail miserably then so be it.  Look, these new rules are purely in place to stop Newcastle United from progressing.  Seriously we need to take the league on.  How fuckin dare they change the rules "willy niilly".  They are a disgrace.  For instance, a daft one, if I win a billion pounds on the lottery and decide to give NUFC 200 million who are they to say that I can't do it.  What the fecks it got to do with them.  You can put that analogy towards the PIF and Amanda.  Let's take them on, sick of them.

 

Rod pulling upto the FA after a few on the weekend. 

 

[Optimistic Nut]

8 hours ago, TheBrownBottle said:

Man City has sold £350m of players in the last three seasons.  They sell players.  Don’t understand why our support thinks that we’re the only club that shouldn’t. 

 

What was their spend and commercial revenue when they were at the same stage of their takeover, as we are now?

[TheBrownBottle]

6 minutes ago, Optimistic Nut said:

 

What was their spend and commercial revenue when they were at the same stage of their takeover, as we are now?

For 2007/08 turnover was £82m (comm was £25.5m).  (First season was 2008/09 - takeover in Sep 08), running an accounting loss of £32m

 

By 2010/11 it was £152m (comm £65m), running an accounting loss of £195m.

 

Not even close to possible now, of course. 

 

[r0cafella]

28 minutes ago, Optimistic Nut said:

 

What was their spend and commercial revenue when they were at the same stage of their takeover, as we are now?

Yeah no point to compare with them, they got in when it was the Wild West, now it’s a stitch up. 

[Whitley mag]

I’m all for challenging FFP and clearly we have the means to do so if we wish. 
 

It’s clearly a restriction on trade and completely unfair, if you are going to limit what teams spend you do it the American way and apply it across the board as a cap so everyone can spend the same.

 

Of course the top 6 won’t do that because they don’t want competition or a level playing field. What other clubs should at the very least be pushing for in the name of fairness is a Baseball style approach, which allows teams to go over limit, but pay a tax relief to other teams when they do. This would give the other clubs a financial boost I’m sure they wouldn’t object to and may curb the top clubs wanting to making payments to everyone else, when they breach limit.

 

 

Edited January 12 by Whitley mag

[Tiresias]

There argument against challenging it in the courts is if we piss the league off won't a hundred more punitive rules thinly veiled targeted at us get passed out of vindictiveness and even if they don't stand up in court will take years to challenge them.

 

Hopefully this has highlighted the deep flaw in ffp which i have defended the original intent of (but the implementation does seem to just be protect the top six at all costs in reality).

 

I still think with patience we will get there and it was always going to be a gradual building process which has always been the language our owners have used.

[Groundhog63]

2 hours ago, Jaqen said:

 

Rod pulling upto the FA after a few on the weekend. 

 

 

Rod aka Big Vern

[FloydianMag]

19 minutes ago, Tiresias said:

There argument against challenging it in the courts is if we piss the league off won't a hundred more punitive rules thinly veiled targeted at us get passed out of vindictiveness and even if they don't stand up in court will take years to challenge them.

 

Hopefully this has highlighted the deep flaw in ffp which i have defended the original intent of (but the implementation does seem to just be protect the top six at all costs in reality).

 

I still think with patience we will get there and it was always going to be a gradual building process which has always been the language our owners have used.

It didn’t take the players agents years to challenge the implementation of FIFA’s cap on fees etc worldwide. A Court in Germany and the UK ruled that it was against competition law and the gist of the ruling was that governing bodies should not involve themselves in the commercial activities of the agents.

 

Other clubs should either change the rules or instigate legal action to either get rid of FFP and FMV or change how FFP is implemented. As for pissing of other clubs, well the other clubs hate us because of our takeover, fuck them, give them something to really hate us for.

 

 

Edited January 12 by FloydianMag

[r0cafella]

16 minutes ago, Tiresias said:

There argument against challenging it in the courts is if we piss the league off won't a hundred more punitive rules thinly veiled targeted at us get passed out of vindictiveness and even if they don't stand up in court will take years to challenge them.

 

Hopefully this has highlighted the deep flaw in ffp which i have defended the original intent of (but the implementation does seem to just be protect the top six at all costs in reality).

 

I still think with patience we will get there and it was always going to be a gradual building process which has always been the language our owners have used.

I’m not saying we should be the ones to challenge it as it’s a really bad look for us to be the ones imho. 
 

that being said, if it were challenged and over turned then the league couldn’t just keep putting in place anti competitive rules as they would suffer exactly the safe fate. 
 

We will get there as long as the owners are onboard long enough for us to do so, we need them to either challenge it or dig in for the long haul because ultimately it our competitive advantage is being state owned and the ability to leverage this to get sponsors we wouldn’t otherwise be able to. We have a very significant gap to bridge and in order to do so full commitment is required from all of them. 

[r0cafella]

1 minute ago, FloydianMag said:

It didn’t take the players agents years to challenge the implementation of FIFA’s cap on fees etc worldwide. A Court in Germany and the UK ruled that it was against competition law and the gist of the ruling was that governing bodies should not involve themselves in the commercial activities of the agents.

 

Other clubs should either change the rules or instigate legal action to either get rid of FFP and FMV or change how FFP is implemented.

I don’t think most members want to get rid of FFP or FMV let’s remember they are the ones who actually came up with these rules and implemented them. Our best hope is someone like Everton gets punished heavily and challenges the whole thing whilst we wait on the sidelines. 
 

I think levelling the flaying field is good, but that’s what it has to be. If Chelsea are allowed to spend 1b so should everyone. 

[Groundhog63]

I haven't watched the full interview but Easles uses, as an example, selling a player for £50m

Could he have accidentally let the cat out the bag in that is the price of the player they've discussed selling? 

Leaves Botman, Bruno and Isak in the clear, no? 

Might be Hendrick?? 

[Nucasol]

35 minutes ago, Groundhog63 said:

I haven't watched the full interview but Easles uses, as an example, selling a player for £50m

Could he have accidentally let the cat out the bag in that is the price of the player they've discussed selling? 

Leaves Botman, Bruno and Isak in the clear, no? 

Might be Hendrick?? 

Screams Javier Manquillo to me.