Jump to content

PIF, PCP, and RB Sports & Media


Yorkie

Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, mrmojorisin75 said:

 

Yeah that rang a bell with me, I thought around the £200m mark for some reason.

 

I mean you'd think that'd probably do for the next couple of windows :lol:

Simon Jordan said if we spread the transfer fee over the length of a players contract it could be a lot more 

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, nbthree3 said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-10121965/Newcastle-Man-City-fear-rivals-ganging-ownerships.html

 

Newcastle and Manchester City are unhappy at being targeted by the rest of the Premier League after the chief executive of another club this week called for curbs on investment from companies specifically from the Gulf.

Sportsmail has learned that the explicit geopolitical reference to funding from the region came in an email sent to the other clubs before the emergency Premier League meeting on Monday, at which they voted to introduce a one-month ban on sponsorship involving related parties.

Newcastle voted against the proposal and City abstained, due to doubts over whether the ban is legally enforceable and the speed with which the restriction was being introduced.

 

The tone of some of the other correspondence between the clubs this week also raised eyebrows, particularly the tendency to lump Newcastle and City together due to their ownership groups — Saudi Arabia and Abu Dhabi respectively. 


They won’t be wanting that juicy BEin Sports money anymore then?

Link to post
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, mrmojorisin75 said:

 

Yeah that rang a bell with me, I thought around the £200m mark for some reason.

 

I mean you'd think that'd probably do for the next couple of windows :lol:

 

Especially as it's profit and not cash. Any transfers etc will be depreciated over 5 or so seasons so that's a huge amount in reality. Assuming new sponsorship in place by year 3 to offset then we're golden.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ben said:

Simon Jordan said if we spread the transfer fee over the length of a players contract it could be a lot more 

That’s how it works anyway, if you spend £100m on 5 players on 5 year contracts it only counts as £20m per season toward the FFP cap, the trouble comes if you keep spending £150m+ Year on year as by the time you get to year 3 your hitting the FFP ceiling, this is why it’s important to spend well. (this is what has happened to Everton this season, lots to spend but would break FFP rules if they did because of poor spending in year 1 and 2 ) 

the way round it is to give longer contracts 6-7 years because that then spreads the FFP rule over a longer term ie £20m toward FFP per season would become just over £14m per season 

 

 

Edited by nufcnick

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Hanshithispantz said:

So do the likes of West Ham and Villa think this will help them bridge the gap between them and City?

 

I mean footballs fucked, this is all completely vile and I wish none of it had ever happened and we were back to the 90s, but since the rift in money between the clubs has gotten to this point their only hope of ever competing is to go down the same route we have. We'll be fine, there's no way they will be able to legally put in place enough roadblocks at this point, but they might be in place if ISIS or some other conglomerate ever purchase them, in which case they're really just fucking themselves.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, nufcnick said:

That’s how it works anyway, if you spend £100m on 5 players on 5 year contracts it only counts as £20m per season toward the FFP cap, the trouble comes if you keep spending £150m+ Year on year as by the time you get to year 3 your hitting the FFP ceiling, this is why it’s important to spend well. (this is what has happened to Everton this season, lots to spend but would break FFP rules if they did because of poor spending in year 1 and 2 ) 

the way round it is to give longer contracts 6-7 years because that then spreads the FFP rule over a longer term ie £20m toward FFP per season would become just over £14m per season 

 

 

 

 

Can we just give players 100 year contracts with a break option at 3 years then?

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, TRon said:

Thought it would just be the bigger clubs who would be pissed off, quite surprised that little Crystal Palace fans are also seething with jealousy. 

The Palace fans who have had Simon Jordan and Steve Parish as owners/fans?

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, FloydianMag said:

We’re rich and they don’t like it.

 

It's not our fault they are a small club who'll never attract the big boys, it's just geography. London has loads of more attractive clubs, they should be proud of what they are. A small club with limited pulling power. 

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...