Financial Fair Play / Profit & Sustainability - New APT Rules Approved by Premier League

[r0cafella]

It’s actually highly amusing the person least likely to leave in the heat of all of the noise was actually Bruno. 

[Elliottman]

How anyone can see yesterday anything other than positive is baffling. £60+ for Minteh and Anderson ffs. 

[Zero]

6 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

It’s actually highly amusing the person least likely to leave in the heat of all of the noise was actually Bruno. 

I think that’s just because Man City decided not to bid.

 

I am also surprised they didn’t go for Douglas Luiz, given that’s a cut price deal.

[WilliamPS]

1 minute ago, Elliottman said:

How anyone can see yesterday anything other than positive is baffling. £60+ for Minteh and Anderson ffs. 

Good prices but we are fans of a football club not accountants

 

We want the club to keep the best players not sell them to meet some arbitrary cap designed to limit competition 

[Elliottman]

7 minutes ago, WilliamPS said:

Good prices but we are fans of a football club not accountants

 

We want the club to keep the best players not sell them to meet some arbitrary cap designed to limit competition 

Anderson and Minteh were not our best players though. 

[Menace]

Would Anderson even get many games this season? Probably not. Its insane money.

[SUPERTOON]

Just now, Menace said:

Would Anderson even get many games this season? Probably not. Its insane money.

Not unless we have another injury crisis.

[loki679]

This feels like another sliding doors moment in our takeover saga. Just like putting that amazing run together when we were dead and buried, avoiding relegation and keeping the dream alive. If we'd have gone down then we would be looking at a very different situation right now. 

 

If we'd have got a points deduction neutering us for next season or lost Isak or Bruno due to PSR then our trajectory would be very different to what we're looking at now. 

[BlazeT44]

I'm really not buying that the management of our PSR situation was so bad we had to sell Minteh AND Anderson and that we had to reach an agreement for Ashworth.

 

I do believe there was a deficit, and it would have been irresponsible and naive for the club to place all their eggs in one basket to ensure compliance.

 

Given that Minteh went for 30M and Anderson 35M, I believe that is telling.

 

I think there's some smoke and mirrors going on, and long term I wouldn't be surprised if this year's figures gave us some wiggle room in the future (i.e. we are well and truly in the black!)

 

 

Edited July 1 by BlazeT44

[Adam P]

I note that the Athletic article says 'Premier League clubs are speculating' about our PSR status and then uses an 'insider' to say that we were close to having a PSR issues. 

 

My view is that the PSR angle was used by the club out of fear of a backlash against selling a homegrown and popular player. The noise around PSR intensified last week and was driven by people like Downie and Hope. The stories about Isak and Gordon could have some truth in them but as i reckon the PSR angle was being pushed into the media, seems like the same journalists were having this angle pushed to them too.

 

When we concluded our transfer business last summer, the revenue we had coming in for the season would have been predicted to within a few thousand pounds. Our cost estimates including all wages to players etc, would have been predicted to within far greater degrees of accuracy. In short there were no surprises, in terms of cost or revenues, from August 2023 to June 2024. So when the club smartly brought in 68m for a reserve midfielder and a lad who had never played for us, it suggests they were in control. 

 

Swiss Ramble, the source of the '40m PSR' figure was looking at our accounts published last year, there are a lot of revenues not accounted into that figure. I may be wrong, but my read of the individuals in place within the executive roles at the club is that none of them run a business with the level of risk invovled where they could be 'up to 100m overspent' on budget. Its a farcical suggestion to me. My bet would be that without selling Minteh, we might have been close but that we knew we could make a deal months ago. Even then i am not convinced we were in real trouble. Anderson is a PSR sale in that we need to sell to buy the right players to improve us this summer, not that we need to sell to avoid a points deduction. Thats the beauty of spin. 

 

[Colos Short and Curlies]

I'm sticking with the idea that one of the sales was necessary but we saw enough value in both to follow through.

 

In simple terms we needed to make a £35m profit this year to balance off 2 lots of £70m losses. We achieved that with £55m of sales (ASM and one of yesterday's deals). We start this year with a £70m loss and a £35m profit so have a £70m loss to play with.

 

We should see some sales this summer and hopefully a few new sponsorship deals to bring in a further £15m-£20m and then have a really fun summer.

 

Basically needing to sell late in June for last year does not mean we have no money to spend this season

[Ash]

12 minutes ago, Adam P said:

I note that the Athletic article says 'Premier League clubs are speculating' about our PSR status and then uses an 'insider' to say that we were close to having a PSR issues. 

 

My view is that the PSR angle was used by the club out of fear of a backlash against selling a homegrown and popular player. The noise around PSR intensified last week and was driven by people like Downie and Hope. The stories about Isak and Gordon could have some truth in them but as i reckon the PSR angle was being pushed into the media, seems like the same journalists were having this angle pushed to them too.

 

When we concluded our transfer business last summer, the revenue we had coming in for the season would have been predicted to within a few thousand pounds. Our cost estimates including all wages to players etc, would have been predicted to within far greater degrees of accuracy. In short there were no surprises, in terms of cost or revenues, from August 2023 to June 2024. So when the club smartly brought in 68m for a reserve midfielder and a lad who had never played for us, it suggests they were in control. 

 

Swiss Ramble, the source of the '40m PSR' figure was looking at our accounts published last year, there are a lot of revenues not accounted into that figure. I may be wrong, but my read of the individuals in place within the executive roles at the club is that none of them run a business with the level of risk invovled where they could be 'up to 100m overspent' on budget. Its a farcical suggestion to me. My bet would be that without selling Minteh, we might have been close but that we knew we could make a deal months ago. Even then i am not convinced we were in real trouble. Anderson is a PSR sale in that we need to sell to buy the right players to improve us this summer, not that we need to sell to avoid a points deduction. Thats the beauty of spin. 

 

 

This is about where I’m at too. There are so many contradictions floating around, even solely within Waugh’s piece this morning. Something doesn’t add up and it feels like there is still a game at play. Not quite sure what it is or even to what end but hopefully it’s ultimately about clearing the decks to allow us to go big this summer. 

[r0cafella]

11 minutes ago, Colos Short and Curlies said:

I'm sticking with the idea that one of the sales was necessary but we saw enough value in both to follow through.

 

In simple terms we needed to make a £35m profit this year to balance off 2 lots of £70m losses. We achieved that with £55m of sales (ASM and one of yesterday's deals). We start this year with a £70m loss and a £35m profit so have a £70m loss to play with.

 

We should see some sales this summer and hopefully a few new sponsorship deals to bring in a further £15m-£20m and then have a really fun summer.

 

Basically needing to sell late in June for last year does not mean we have no money to spend this season

Putting your CFO hat on, and of course I know revenue generation wouldn’t be your wheelhouse but what do you anticipate the plan is to catch the big 6’s financials?

[black_n_white]

The club have navigated this superbly last few days. Yes we should never had been in this situation and the players leaving may become superstars of the future but hopefully it’s lesson learnt, this could have ended horribly.

[Matt1892]

You could make the case that every player is sold for PSR concerns unless you are a club that makes regular profits every window but the sale of Anderson was a no brainer.

[Stifler]

Now that the penny has dropped that PSR prevented Man Utd from getting Ashworth in the press, although they are somehow trying to spin the story that it was the other way around, they are beginning to question PSR rules.

Talk Sport saying they think it will not look on the Premier League with teams getting deducted points, we could lose our place as best league in the world, and that it’s not fit for purpose etc.

 

All it ever was going to take was one of the big clubs to be held back by it and suddenly everyone would question it.

[Stifler]

2 minutes ago, black_n_white said:

The club have navigated this superbly last few days. Yes we should never had been in this situation and the players leaving may become superstars of the future but hopefully it’s lesson learnt, this could have ended horribly.

We were always going to hit a barrier like this.

We were either going to have to sell the likes of Bruno, or Isak, or get lucky with deals involving academy prospects. We got lucky with Minteh, and yes ideally the club would have preferred to have kept him, but at the end of the day Bruno, and Isak are proven at Premier League level, and bring in money on shirt sales/name & number printing, and Minteh isn’t.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

It never made any sense for the PL to vote to starve its own product of money, it's so strange. 

 

I don't know who voted for what and why, but I guess it's a combination of 6 clubs (or so) wanting to protect their lead and 6 clubs (or so) wanting to stay in the league as cheaply as possible. Either way it wouldn't happen if the PL actually had a directing mind or any kind of overall strategy for growth.

 

It's just anti what you would expect for a money-hungry sporting league that wants to be the best in the world. If the Saudi state wants to plough money in they should be asking how much and how they can help. I wonder if the PL executives actually regret what the clubs themselves want to do. 

 

 

Edited July 1 by AyeDubbleYoo

[Froggy]

2 minutes ago, Stifler said:

All it ever was going to take was one of the big clubs to be held back by it and suddenly everyone would question it.

 

Why are we acting like this is the first time? You think we wanted to sign Wout Weghorst on loan last year? 

[r0cafella]

2 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

It never made any sense for the PL to vote to starve its own product of money, it's so strange. 

 

I don't know who voted for what and why, but I guess it's a combination of 6 clubs (or so) wanting to protect their lead and 6 clubs (or so) wanting to stay in the league as cheaply as possible. Either way it wouldn't happen if the PL actually had a directing mind or any kind of overall strategy for growth.

 

It's just anti what you would expect for a money-hungry sporting league that wants to be the best in the world. If the Saudi state wants to plough money in they should be asking how much and how they can help. I wonder if the PL executives actually regret what the clubs themselves want to do. 

 

 

 

They practically all voted for it and it’s really good for the majority. Especially with the championship having similar rules. Basically everyone is looking over their should and not forwards, most clubs have done to accept the position they have and are happy to ride the gravy train. 
 

PSR is only an impediment to those wishing to challenge the established order and most of the league are quite content with how things are, that actually hasn’t changed. 

[Adam P]

22 minutes ago, Colos Short and Curlies said:

I'm sticking with the idea that one of the sales was necessary but we saw enough value in both to follow through.

 

In simple terms we needed to make a £35m profit this year to balance off 2 lots of £70m losses. We achieved that with £55m of sales (ASM and one of yesterday's deals). We start this year with a £70m loss and a £35m profit so have a £70m loss to play with.

 

We should see some sales this summer and hopefully a few new sponsorship deals to bring in a further £15m-£20m and then have a really fun summer.

 

Basically needing to sell late in June for last year does not mean we have no money to spend this season

 

I think the margins could be smaller than that. The 70m losses are for 21/22 and 22/23. The PSR date was June 24 so there is something missing, no?

 

The June date also 'creates a market' so it becomes a de facto time to sell. We probably did need a sale but i would say that if the CEO, COO or CFO are anywhere near what they are paid, then the deficit would be smaller than the minimum estimated selling price of Mineh. Otherwise they have built an unacceptable level of risk. 

 

 

Edited July 1 by Adam P

[AyeDubbleYoo]

1 minute ago, r0cafella said:

They practically all voted for it and it’s really good for the majority. Especially with the championship having similar rules. Basically everyone is looking over their should and not forwards, most clubs have done to accept the position they have and are happy to ride the gravy train. 
 

PSR is only an impediment to those wishing to challenge the established order and most of the league are quite content with how things are, that actually hasn’t changed. 

 

Yeah, like I said, it's because the PL is a members club and not a company. As long as you're in it you don't have an interest in growing the overall thing (if it would put you at risk). 

 

It's still odd though. 

 

Sometimes we talk about the PL as if it is a single thing with a strategy, when in fact it isn't.

 

 

 

Edited July 1 by AyeDubbleYoo

[madras]

Do we know whether the funds from the Ashworth "transfer" are included in 23/24 or 24/25 ?

[The College Dropout]

53 minutes ago, Elliottman said:

How anyone can see yesterday anything other than positive is baffling. £60+ for Minteh and Anderson ffs. 

You have to look beyond face value.

 

1. That Anderson fee is inflated and not genuine. We will spend similar money on a Forest player if not more. We haven't fleeced them like we did for Wood.

2. Minteh deal to us is like the Lewis Hall deal from Chelsea. Aye we've got a good fee for a youngster that probably isn't ready to start regularly. But we've also sold a prospect that could play in the side for the next 10 years - with a ceiling of ability that high. We'll end up using the money we've got to spend more money on a replacement. Nobody thinks Chelsea's approach is cool - not even their own fans.

[Stifler]

6 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

Why are we acting like this is the first time? You think we wanted to sign Wout Weghorst on loan last year? 

Probably not, and I’m not having a go at Man Utd, rather the system and the Premier League. However last year no club had been deducted points for breaching the rules, and everyone in public/press thought everyone would get off lightly.

Now Everton have been deducted points twice, Forest have also, and you have the likes of Leicester who run the risk of being relegated due to their pending points deduction, as well as Forest, Everton, and others still running the risk of further points deductions.