Jump to content

PIF, PCP, and RB Sports & Media


Yorkie

Recommended Posts

Just now, OCK said:

That's kinda why FFP is a joke, if you have the lawyers to nitpick at the legal wordings and charges it doesn't matter. 

FFP is obviously an absolute sham and is working exactly as intended. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Abacus said:

 

Still, always interesting how FFP has been subverted from stopping clubs spending recklessly and possibly going bust, to stopping clubs spending money they actually have and want to spend, in case it threatens certain clubs who seemingly make the rules.

 

Thing with that is, Man City are already in the henhouse now and seemingly unstoppable, as were Chelsea before. Ban them both and strip their titles, or let others compete on the same basis. Watching Man City parade to the title doesn't make for a great competition either, which is the PL's main global selling point.

 

I'm actually all for us following FFP using realistic sponsorships etc, because at some point, a reckoning is coming.

 

Yeah that's really a bit sickening.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re the above and FFP, I've never understood why it's allowed for a club to rack up massive debts that count towards FFP that an owner can't pay off due to FFP regs but a takeover allows those debts to be written off and an FFP fresh start.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure if this was posted. Financial models broken down to categories of teams. They mention Newcastle is working toward a balanced approach of Internal vs External financing.

https://theathletic.com/4605375/2023/06/14/premier-league-finances-make-money-how/

 

"

Entirely reliant on external funding — ‘Build me a future’

Examples: Chelsea, Newcastle United

The most talked about examples here would be Newcastle United and Chelsea. Both have low EBITDA (£27million for Chelsea; negative £24m for Newcastle) signifying weak to no internal cash generation.

But both have wealthy owners flushing the clubs with money (pushing financial fair play to the limit) to rapidly strengthen on-pitch performance and create better internal cash engines for tomorrow. "

 

 

"Newcastle United, by contrast, have been relatively measured post the takeover and are seeing steady improvement. The appointment of Eddie Howe was a clever one, and the signings have significantly enhanced the team. Newcastle’s top-four finish also positions them extremely favourably for further investment and growth."

 

 

 

Edited by McDog

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, clintdempsey said:

It does feel a bit odd tbh that our majority owner is now bailing out Chelsea after their crazy spend.

Doesn't really benefit us from my perspective.

 

Developing their own league will be their priority, and probably the ultimate end goal. I don't believe they'll neglect Newcastle but I'd imagine our interests will be secondary when it comes to this sort of thing. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it bizarre that people think they are "helping" Chelsea. They are trying to attract "stars" to Saudi, in order to boost their footballing presence in the country.

 

They are signing players from all over the place. It just turns out that Chelsea have more over paid shite on their books than most.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it weird that they have been so quiet about their long term vision and plan. If this does bite us on the arse at some point, can the over-zealous Ashley boycott lot do me a favour and not get on my case about still going to games despite the owner? Because warning are going decidedly unheeded. 

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...