Financial Fair Play / Profit & Sustainability

[Wolfcastle]

Nothing epitomises what ffp is (to me at least) more than them going after Leicester.

Them winning the league was one of the greatest and most romantic stories in the history of sport, offered hope, was refreshing

but they must be punished for it and for depriving a cartel club of a season of CL money after finishing 4th

[Miggys First Goal]

Just now, Wolfcastle said:

Nothing epitomises what ffp is (to me at least) more than them going after Leicester.

Them winning the league was one of the greatest and most romantic stories in the history of sport, offered hope, was refreshing

but they must be punished for it and for depriving a cartel club of a season of CL money after finishing 4th

Exactly. It’s like a…

 

 

by the Sky Super Six. 

[The Prophet]

Not sure if this has been posted.

[Geordie Ahmed]

6 hours ago, Slim said:

They could just not vote for them 

 

It was voted for 10 or so years ago and a big chunk of the clubs are no longer in the Premier League

 

I do wonder if enough clubs got together now whether they would be able to abandon FFP/PSR all together, though I suspect you won't get the 14 votes needed

[Stifler]

The 777 takeover of Everton has been approved.

[Yorkie]

I get the argument re the ESL Six but surely the greatest beneficiary of FFP is Kieran Maguire?

[Jack27]

10 minutes ago, Stifler said:

The 777 takeover of Everton has been approved.

“Conditionally” approved, whatever that means

[Nucasol]

10 minutes ago, Stifler said:

The 777 takeover of Everton has been approved.

Kicking the can down the road. Their financial structure seems exactly what the D&O test and PSR was set up to avoid but they get waved through regardless.

[gbandit]

Makes for a total farce of these sustainability rules, they’re exactly the type of owners who have precisely zero interest other than making profit. I know all owners want profit but some are actually invested in attempting to achieve something else too

[Dokko]

Just now, Jack27 said:

“Conditionally” approved, whatever that means

 

It means 777 are an awful set of owners, to which Everton will go nowhere fast. This is perfect Cannon Fodder for the big 6 and therefore accepted on the condition they don't show any ambition.

[duo]

9 hours ago, The Prophet said:

Not sure if this has been posted.

I wish would join them - FFP rules are anti-competitive 

[Whitley mag]

35 minutes ago, Dokko said:

 

It means 777 are an awful set of owners, to which Everton will go nowhere fast. This is perfect Cannon Fodder for the big 6 and therefore accepted on the condition they don't show any ambition.

Spot on they’ll be voting with the 6 on everything as they’ll have no other ambitions other than profit.

[Abacus]

Good work in approving that Everton takeover, PL.

 

777 seem perfectly above board and the model of how all owners should be.

 

Well, aside from all the allegations over them and the previous convictions of their founder.

[huss9]

https://www.themag.co.uk/2024/03/gareth-southgate-asked-about-newcastle-united-brings-up-financial-fair-play-as-key-factor-tottenham/

 

"Why? Financial fair play means clubs need to generate their own money, so we’re in a bizarre world where there’s more money in the game than ever before, and yet everyone is scrambling across federations and clubs to generate more."

 

 

Edited March 23 by huss9

[Mase]

Read this on another forum -

 

I highly doubt Premier League CEO Richard Masters sleeps very well at night knowing what’s coming this year regarding City “charges,” but that’s not the only thing giving him anxiety…
What will people think when the severely underreported revelations from 2020 resurface? Namely the fact that Liverpool and Man united had special access to vet Richard Masters as a candidate in the running to be Premier League CEO. 
Masters was the League committee’s fourth choice for the role, the other three miraculously decided the job wasn’t for them, leaving the reds lap dog as the only option left.

 

Didn't know that about Masters. 

[FloydianMag]

3 minutes ago, Mase said:

Read this on another forum -

 

I highly doubt Premier League CEO Richard Masters sleeps very well at night knowing what’s coming this year regarding City “charges,” but that’s not the only thing giving him anxiety…
What will people think when the severely underreported revelations from 2020 resurface? Namely the fact that Liverpool and Man united had special access to vet Richard Masters as a candidate in the running to be Premier League CEO. 
Masters was the League committee’s fourth choice for the role, the other three miraculously decided the job wasn’t for them, leaving the reds lap dog as the only option left.

 

Didn't know that about Masters. 

I’d heard that, is there any hard evidence to support the claims?

[Abacus]

37 minutes ago, FloydianMag said:

I’d heard that, is there any hard evidence to support the claims?

I'd seen that multiple times in the press, Daily Mail, Mirror etc.

 

Here's how the Times reported it back in 2020;

 

Rivals to Liverpool and Manchester United are up in arms after the two clubs appeared to be given special access to vet candidates to be the Premier League’s chief executive.

 

The recruitment process to find the person to succeed Richard Scudamore was run by a nominations committee headed by Bruce Buck, the Chelsea chairman, with Burnley’s chairman Mike Garlick and Leicester City’s chief executive Susan Whelan also involved.

 

It has now emerged that Liverpool and Manchester United met at least three candidates — Susanna Dinnage, who pulled out of the appointment, the NBC executive Dave Howe, who appears to have been vetoed from taking up the post, and David Pemsel, who withdrew after allegations about his private life.

 

The meetings are understood to have taken place before any decisions were made by the nominations committee.

 

The special treatment for United and Liverpool has caused widespread resentment with one club source saying the likes of Arsenal, Tottenham Hotspur and Manchester City were especially aggrieved.

 

The Premier League said it did not comment on appointment processes, but it is understood they are confident there was appropriate involvement for all clubs.

 

The Times revealed last month that Howe, the son of the late English football coach Don Howe, had been close to getting the job after being interviewed last May.

Howe, who has a degree in German and French and was a leading executive for NBC in the United States, ticked many boxes. But, according to the New York Times, after meeting Liverpool and United executives he was then told he had not got the job — and despite Liverpool reportedly approving of him.

 

Liverpool and United also met Dinnage before her appointment in November 2018 — she pulled out the following month. It was not until February that United’s chief executive Ed Woodward and Crystal Palace’s chairman Steve Parish were added to the nominations committee.

 

There also appears to be no explanation why Liverpool were given the opportunity to meet prospective candidates. Richard Masters, who had held the role on an interim basis for more than a year, was eventually given the job.

 

 

 

Edited March 23 by Abacus
Date correction

[TheBrownBottle]

Disgrace that a club like Everton could be sold to those shysters.  The club was punished for being ambitious (ultimately they did break the rules), but no issue from the PL for that type of ownership model for one of England’s grandest clubs - one with a greater history than Chelsea or Man City.  Absolute disgrace. 

[The Prophet]

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/10-777-partners-everton-controversies-jason-stephens

 

A long, but informed read on Everton's potential new owners.

[The Prophet]

They're actually currently subject of a lawsuit from Obra Capital (owned by Milan owners and Liverpool shareholders Redbird Capital) for an unpaid loan of circa $63 million.

 

 

[Erikse]

Leicester litterally stopped spending to the point of going from a top 4 candidate to relegation in 2 seasons. Just because of the FFP. They didn't even spend massively prior to that, compared to the other clubs fighting for top 4. I brought it up earlier in a discussion here on FFP how they went from threatening the big clubs to getting relegated because of FFP, and it was a bit of a confusion as to whether it was FFP or just that they couldn't afford to spend anymore. I guess we know now.

 

 

Edited March 23 by Erikse

[Gawalls]

21 hours ago, Wolfcastle said:

Nothing epitomises what ffp is (to me at least) more than them going after Leicester.

Them winning the league was one of the greatest and most romantic stories in the history of sport, offered hope, was refreshing

but they must be punished for it and for depriving a cartel club of a season of CL money after finishing 4th

Or they went after them for failing to submit their accounts but yours reads better.

[DebuchyAndTheBeast]

3 hours ago, Erikse said:

Leicester litterally stopped spending to the point of going from a top 4 candidate to relegation in 2 seasons. Just because of the FFP. They didn't even spend massively prior to that, compared to the other clubs fighting for top 4. I brought it up earlier in a discussion here on FFP how they went from threatening the big clubs to getting relegated because of FFP, and it was a bit of a confusion as to whether it was FFP or just that they couldn't afford to spend anymore. I guess we know now.

 

 

 

 

I read somewhere that it's combination of factors. Their finances being hit by Covid19, their high wage to revenue ratio and profits being mainly driven by player sales which failed to materialise in the past 2-3 seasons. While FFP is definitely a thorn in our side, I can't say that I'm sorry for teams like Everton, Forest and now Leicester who are being penalised because they haven't managed their finances properly.

[Keegans Export]

16 minutes ago, DebuchyAndTheBeast said:

 

I read somewhere that it's combination of factors. Their finances being hit by Covid19, their high wage to revenue ratio and profits being mainly driven by player sales which failed to materialise in the past 2-3 seasons. While FFP is definitely a thorn in our side, I can't say that I'm sorry for teams like Everton, Forest and now Leicester who are being penalised because they haven't managed their finances properly.

I'm the same. You can think the rules are shit, but if the majority of clubs follow them it's only right for those who don't to be punished.

[The College Dropout]

4 hours ago, Erikse said:

Leicester litterally stopped spending to the point of going from a top 4 candidate to relegation in 2 seasons. Just because of the FFP. They didn't even spend massively prior to that, compared to the other clubs fighting for top 4. I brought it up earlier in a discussion here on FFP how they went from threatening the big clubs to getting relegated because of FFP, and it was a bit of a confusion as to whether it was FFP or just that they couldn't afford to spend anymore. I guess we know now.

 

 

 

Aye there was speculation the family had difficulties with the business and could no longer fund Leicester. But aye - it was just them falling shy kf FFP. 

 

For Leicester it was the wages and modest revenues. To be FFP compliant they would need to sell a star player every other season or qualify for the CL. They never got the big money for Tielemans or Maddison and didn’t get CL.  Only the top 6 can do that and not fall foul of FFP.