FloydianMag Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 12 minutes ago, gbandit said: What the fuck is going on in football governance? Some extremely dodgy stuff happening I’ve said it many many times the only way to halt this shit is to legally challenge the rules. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 1 hour ago, The Prophet said: In isolation this would actually not be too bad, as long as they abolish stuff like the 3 year rolling loss limit and “fair” market value based on the perceived current size and reputation of the club rather than limiting it to not exceed the outright highest non-related party reference. In short, if owners can invest in their club a squad cost/wage cap, which in theory is the same for everybody as long as revenue is not capped, is the way to go. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 1 minute ago, Unbelievable said: In isolation this would actually not be too bad, as long as they abolish stuff like the 3 year rolling loss limit and “fair” market value based on the perceived current size and reputation of the club rather than limiting it to not exceed the outright highest non-related party reference. In short, if owners can invest in their club a squad cost/wage cap, which in theory is the same for everybody as long as revenue is not capped, is the way to go. Yeah, I mean in the scenarios you mentioned it would be ok for us as we just juice our related party sponsors so we can catch up. If they continue with FMV and implement this we are in trouble. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isaksbigrightfoot Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 10 minutes ago, r0cafella said: Yeah, I mean in the scenarios you mentioned it would be ok for us as we just juice our related party sponsors so we can catch up. If they continue with FMV and implement this we are in trouble. Fair market value is fine provided that past deals set the precedent for future ones. And that is really all they should be allowed to do. If we get a stadium sponsor for 50m and it’s legit. Then it’s fair because Other teams have done it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 2 minutes ago, Isaksbigrightfoot said: Fair market value is fine provided that past deals set the precedent for future ones. And that is really all they should be allowed to do. If we get a stadium sponsor for 50m and it’s legit. Then it’s fair because Other teams have done it. Exactly. It can’t (continue to) be: you’re only allowed a stadium sponsor for 20m because your revenue is currently smaller than Manchester United’s, who have a 50m stadium sponsor. That’s a self-sustaining rule. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 Just now, Unbelievable said: Exactly. It can’t (continue to) be: you’re only allowed a stadium sponsor for 20m because your revenue is currently smaller than Manchester United’s, who have a 50m stadium sponsor. That’s a self-sustaining rule. It’s a reinforcement of FFP. Don’t you dare have ambition pleb, the established order isn’t to be disturbed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nufcnick Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 (edited) 23 minutes ago, Unbelievable said: In isolation this would actually not be too bad, as long as they abolish stuff like the 3 year rolling loss limit and “fair” market value based on the perceived current size and reputation of the club rather than limiting it to not exceed the outright highest non-related party reference. In short, if owners can invest in their club a squad cost/wage cap, which in theory is the same for everybody as long as revenue is not capped, is the way to go. It’s bollocks mate and would be an utter disaster, and means no other club except the 6 greedy cunts at the top would try in the league or cup. It would be too much of a risk, going from 85% to %70 is a massive drop. take us for example our turnover is £250m with likely no Europe this season meaning we could spend £212m on wages and amortisation, even if we grew our turnover to £300m(£50m increase on the season before) , qualifying for European competition the season after, would mean we would have to reduce our wages and amortisation by £2m to £210m. It’s a farce and would totally close the shop to everyone except the 6 greedy cunts. Edited January 17 by nufcnick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isaksbigrightfoot Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 1 minute ago, Unbelievable said: Exactly. It can’t (continue to) be: you’re only allowed a stadium sponsor for 20m because your revenue is currently smaller than Manchester United’s, who have a 50m stadium sponsor. That’s a self-sustaining rule. Agreed it’s akin to match fixing. If it’s a commercially viable deal with a willing sponsor then it should not be blocked. I suppose the grey area of if a PIF owned business sponsors our toilet paper for 70m a year then that is open to question. It’s not commercial. If however it was for 2m then they can’t question that. A commercial deal is quite easy to ascertain with simple facts. It can never be “your big as big as a top six club so yours have to be much less”. That would be restrictions of trade and open to legal action. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isaksbigrightfoot Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 5 minutes ago, Unbelievable said: Exactly. It can’t (continue to) be: you’re only allowed a stadium sponsor for 20m because your revenue is currently smaller than Manchester United’s, who have a 50m stadium sponsor. That’s a self-sustaining rule. This is what we were up against last year. Richest owners in the world but because a dummy like Ashley was an idiot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 3 minutes ago, Isaksbigrightfoot said: This is what we were up against last year. Richest owners in the world but because a dummy like Ashley was an idiot. https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/uk/Documents/sports-business-group/deloitte-uk-deloitte-football-money-league-2006.pdf I know it's not broken down into shirt sponsors, but that file has the commercial revenues in 2006 just before Ashley came in. Newcastle: £23.9m Spurs : £24m Arsenal : £29.7m Liverpool: £36.3m So within 20% of Arsenal's income, about 35% of Liverpool's. Those shirt sponsor deals 8x plus ours by the time Ashley left. FFP my arse. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 8 minutes ago, nufcnick said: It’s bollocks mate and would be an utter disaster, and means no other club except the 6 greedy cunts at the top would try in the league or cup. It would be too much of a risk, going from 85% to %70 is a massive drop. take us for example our turnover is £250m with likely no Europe this season meaning we could spend £212m on wages and amortisation, even if we grew our turnover to £300m(£50m increase on the season before) , qualifying for European competition the season after, would mean we would have to reduce our wages and amortisation by £2m to £210m. It’s a farce and would totally close the shop to everyone except the 6 greedy cunts. It make sense that the limit for teams qualifying for Uefa competition is in line with Uefa’s own rule, no..? It would we worse if the PL rule allowed a lower percentage for clubs not in Europe as that would really give the bigger clubs an unfair advantage. The proposed rule at least gives teams not in Europe a possibility to catch up, whilst providing some protection against clubs going bust. Everything hinges on what metric any percentage is taken of though. If its revenue of any kind that’s fine. If its artificially restricted revenue it’s as farcical as the current system in place. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isaksbigrightfoot Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 Just now, Optimistic Nut said: https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/uk/Documents/sports-business-group/deloitte-uk-deloitte-football-money-league-2006.pdf I know it's not broken down into shirt sponsors, but that file has the commercial revenues in 2006 just before Ashley came in. Newcastle: £23.9m Spurs : £24m Arsenal : £29.7m Liverpool: £36.3m So within 20% of Arsenal's income, about 35% of Liverpool's. Those shirt sponsor deals 8x plus ours by the time Ashley left. FFP my arse. Our commercial income went backwards in the Ashley era by a mahoosive amount. Factor in inflation and it’s surprising we didn’t go out of business. This is why I have no concerns with our commercial income rising by 150-200m in the next 2-4 years because the PL cannot legally stop it because the top six clubs are already earning that much. Remember there income will also go up aswell. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pokerprince2004 Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 Surely if they are changing some of the rules regarding FFP then there will be a vote on it by the clubs? Could see it being knocked back Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 (edited) 1 hour ago, Isaksbigrightfoot said: Our commercial income went backwards in the Ashley era by a mahoosive amount. Factor in inflation and it’s surprising we didn’t go out of business. This is why I have no concerns with our commercial income rising by 150-200m in the next 2-4 years because the PL cannot legally stop it because the top six clubs are already earning that much. Remember there income will also go up aswell. It's crazy. It's why I think we should have the right to go to the PL etc and say "here's the sort of revenue this club is able to generate when run properly". Haven't searched for the most recent overall revenue (not just shirt sponsors) but I bet it's absolutely dwarved. Edited January 17 by Optimistic Nut Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 1 minute ago, Pokerprince2004 said: Surely if they are changing some of the rules regarding FFP then there will be a vote on it by the clubs? Could see it being knocked back Aye they will vote on it and it will pass. The makeup of the league means restrictive FFP rules are very popular. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isaksbigrightfoot Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 4 minutes ago, Pokerprince2004 said: Surely if they are changing some of the rules regarding FFP then there will be a vote on it by the clubs? Could see it being knocked back And this would be why….. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 Surely the sensible thing to do would be to have a flat rate cap on sponsorships. So shirt sport max is £50 million, sleeve £10 million etc. Then everyone is playing from the same rule set. Or instead of the wage 70% thing, you have a flat wage cap (like NFL). This could be based on the largest income in the league the previous season? I suppose with that you have owners who would just throw money in vs growing the revenue. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infatuation Junkie Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 1 hour ago, Isaksbigrightfoot said: This is what we were up against last year. Richest owners in the world but because a dummy like Ashley was an idiot. Let’s face facts here. We are fucked. Proper fucked. We will sit 3/4 up the table for eternity Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isaksbigrightfoot Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 16 minutes ago, Infatuation Junkie said: Let’s face facts here. We are fucked. Proper fucked. We will sit 3/4 up the table for eternity No quite the opposite. We will significantly improve now we have an ownership/leadership model that wants to improve every facet of the club. Our commercial income in the next 2-4 years will more than double. Which gives us more scope. Every aspect of the club has improved since they took over. But Rome wasn’t built in a day. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 6 minutes ago, Isaksbigrightfoot said: No quite the opposite. We will significantly improve now we have an ownership/leadership model that wants to improve every facet of the club. Our commercial income in the next 2-4 years will more than double. Which gives us more scope. Every aspect of the club has improved since they took over. But Rome wasn’t built in a day. I agree in principle, but I also agree with the assessment that the cards are stacked against us (and others in our position). Other sports, like motorsport, try to keep the field close using "balance of power" measures (e.g. additional weight in faster cars). The PL has quite equitable distribution of TV revenue (compared to La Liga for example), but FFP as currently implemented, and especially FMV, has cemented the strong starting position of the clubs that just happened to be on top when these rules came into effect. Our owners' wealth and commitment will eventually see us make up the difference I'm sure, but it will take a lot of time and meticulous planning from our higher ups. What I'd love to see one day is for the "big six" to face karma when they try to make up ground to us and can't due to rules stopping them to spend beyond their means. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
timeEd32 Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 1 hour ago, Optimistic Nut said: https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/uk/Documents/sports-business-group/deloitte-uk-deloitte-football-money-league-2006.pdf I know it's not broken down into shirt sponsors, but that file has the commercial revenues in 2006 just before Ashley came in. Newcastle: £23.9m Spurs : £24m Arsenal : £29.7m Liverpool: £36.3m So within 20% of Arsenal's income, about 35% of Liverpool's. Those shirt sponsor deals 8x plus ours by the time Ashley left. FFP my arse. If it wasn’t so sad it’d be impressive that in 15 years we grew commercial revenue by roughly £5m total during a period of massive global growth for the league. Ashley’s incompetence still doesn’t get the credit it deserves. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 1 hour ago, timeEd32 said: If it wasn’t so sad it’d be impressive that in 15 years we grew commercial revenue by roughly £5m total during a period of massive global growth for the league. Ashley’s incompetence still doesn’t get the credit it deserves. I found one clip where our shirt deal went down one year. £10m per year from Northern Rock/Virgin Money to £6m from Wonga. Absolute negligence. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
timeEd32 Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 3 minutes ago, Optimistic Nut said: I found one clip where our shirt deal went down one year. £10m per year from Northern Rock/Virgin Money to £6m from Wonga. Absolute negligence. Have you seen matchday revenue pre-Ashley? I was trying to find it but couldn't in a quick search. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 12 minutes ago, timeEd32 said: Have you seen matchday revenue pre-Ashley? I was trying to find it but couldn't in a quick search. https://web.archive.org/web/20181016135229/https://ashleyout.com/finances/match-day-revenue/ I may still have the Excel somewhere on my laptop Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 15 minutes ago, timeEd32 said: Have you seen matchday revenue pre-Ashley? I was trying to find it but couldn't in a quick search. It wasn’t far from what it is atm the at its peak in the mid-00s - it was in the mid-£30ms at one point. And that’s not allowing for inflation 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