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

[gdm]

Been a few new shite posters on here lately that I suspect are all Mackems 

[Terrymac1966]

Yep definitely on the blue pop this one....

[Ghandis Flip-Flop]

Aye there’s a few cloaca’s getting ruined tonight by the cheesy chips lot in celebration of their 'killer wit' on here these past 24 hours

[midds]

The night is dark and full of terrors. Few disappearances tonight I reckon

[Dancing Brave]

1 hour ago, NowakThePolak said:

Why don't PIF just buy the PL/UEFA/FIFA and then rig the rules to suit us and us only?

 

Our owners have more money than God but they're umming and ahhing about whether to sign Nigel Martyn or Tim Flowers as back up, back up, back up, back up keeper

 

Wow ! this mackem whopper is a terrible wum. 

[FloydianMag]

22 minutes ago, LionOfGosforth said:

 

He's a macekm mate

Ok…….he’s not naive, just fucking stupid.

[TheBrownBottle]

The wind-ups don’t really work when the relative status of the clubs is where it is.  It has a tragi-comedy air of desperation to it all.  
 

When we do it atm it will absolutely sting, because they know it is true - they’re fucked, they’re bitter, and they’re lying only to themselves.  When they do it to us - well, we know the previous sentence applies there too

[FloydianMag]

Kieran Maguires input is always worth a listen. He mentioned a case before the European courts that could blow the transfer system apart creating a Wild West for players.

 

 

[FloydianMag]

Questions being asked why Arbitration Hearings like City’s APT challenge and I guess their 115 charges are held in private.

 

 

[Abacus]

The Times were reporting yesterday the PL are potentially looking at Chelsea's sale of the women's team under FMV - they referenced the sale of other women's teams globally for a lot less. Interestingly, there was talk in May that they were looking for minority investors in the women's team - so I'm guessing that's what they'd have to support any valuation.

 

But it supports the basic point that how do you value a women's team in the first place? It's a growing sport after all, but nobody can know how much it can grow, and how do you compare the value of teams from other leagues globally anyway.

 

They also reported that the PL still hadn't signed off on the previous hotels deal. Let's say that isn't signed off - what does that mean for PSR implications? Should they have been docked points and what would that mean for other clubs who would have placed higher?

 

Pretty sure there were also their self declared breaches, which I haven't heard anything about for a long time.

 

That's even before you get into the Man City arbitration and the never ending investigation into their alleged breaches and the implications of that for the integrity of the league.

 

Anyway, both just illustrated how impossible it is to try to enforce the rules in the first place.

[Fezzle]

8 minutes ago, Abacus said:

The Times were reporting yesterday the PL are potentially looking at Chelsea's sale of the women's team under FMV - they referenced the sale of other women's teams globally for a lot less. Interestingly, there was talk in May that they were looking for minority investors in the women's team - so I'm guessing that's what they'd have to support any valuation.

 

But it supports the basic point that how do you value a women's team in the first place? It's a growing sport after all, but nobody can know how much it can grow, and how do you compare the value of teams from other leagues globally anyway.

 

They also reported that the PL still hadn't signed off on the previous hotels deal. Let's say that isn't signed off - what does that mean for PSR implications? Should they have been docked points and what would that mean for other clubs who would have placed higher?

 

Pretty sure there were also their self declared breaches, which I haven't heard anything about for a long time.

 

That's even before you get into the Man City arbitration and the never ending investigation into their alleged breaches and the implications of that for the integrity of the league.

 

Anyway, both just illustrated how impossible it is to try to enforce the rules in the first place.

What Chelsea are doing, and getting away with is a disgrace. Every person alive could see they had shattered the rules never mind broken them. Forest and Everton should be furious after they were punished for considerably less.

[Nucasol]

13 minutes ago, Abacus said:

The Times were reporting yesterday the PL are potentially looking at Chelsea's sale of the women's team under FMV - they referenced the sale of other women's teams globally for a lot less. Interestingly, there was talk in May that they were looking for minority investors in the women's team - so I'm guessing that's what they'd have to support any valuation.

 

But it supports the basic point that how do you value a women's team in the first place? It's a growing sport after all, but nobody can know how much it can grow, and how do you compare the value of teams from other leagues globally anyway.

 

They also reported that the PL still hadn't signed off on the previous hotels deal. Let's say that isn't signed off - what does that mean for PSR implications? Should they have been docked points and what would that mean for other clubs who would have placed higher?

 

Pretty sure there were also their self declared breaches, which I haven't heard anything about for a long time.

 

That's even before you get into the Man City arbitration and the never ending investigation into their alleged breaches and the implications of that for the integrity of the league.

 

Anyway, both just illustrated how impossible it is to try to enforce the rules in the first place.

If Chelsea don’t get them signed off they’ll sue, plain and simple. Never underestimate how litigious US people are, they serve lawsuits like we do cups of tea. Can the PL tackle them, City, Everton, Forest, Leicester all coming at them?

 

I can see now why we’re quietly letting it all play out as I doubt the PL can afford / will want to spend a significant portion of their administrative expenses battling their own members.

 

 

Edited July 19 by Nucasol

[Whitley mag]

The PL is eating itself at this point and somewhere along the line all these legal cases will bring it crashing down.

[Eveready]

Such bollocks as isn't women's team's investment excluded from PSR calculations but somehow the sale of the asset is allowable?

 

Before any ruling is made, where the PL will bring in different rules, we should create a new subsidiary for the women's team - completely owned by NUFC Ltd.  Pump £2bn cash as equity into the women's team entity then sell it to the NUFC Ltd parent company (PZ Newco*) for £2bn.  Can't argue with our valuation if they have that much cash.

 

*PZ Newco owns 100% of NUFC Ltd and itself is owned by PIF (85%) and RB (15%).

 

 

Edited July 19 by Eveready

[Boey_Jarton]

23 minutes ago, Eveready said:

Such bollocks as isn't women's team's investment excluded from PSR calculations but somehow the sale of the asset is allowable?

 

Before any ruling is made, where the PL will bring in different rules, we should create a new subsidiary for the women's team - completely owned by NUFC Ltd.  Pump £2bn cash as equity into the women's team entity then sell it to the NUFC Ltd parent company (PZ Newco*) for £2bn.  Can't argue with our valuation if they have that much cash.

 

*PZ Newco owns 100% of NUFC Ltd and itself is owned by PIF (85%) and RB (15%).

 

 

 

The injection of equity into subsidiary would increase the book value of the investment on NUFC's balance sheet and the subsequent sale to PZ Newco would factor this 'cost' into the profit on disposal. I.e. there would be not profit arising from the £2Bn. 

 

In any case, profit on sale to a direct holding company is eliminated on consolidation and I am positive this will already be factored into PSR, otherwise group restructures could simply crystalise PSR profit.

 

That said, there is clearly a loophole of building up the women's team within the corporate structure (not subject to PSR regs) and selling it to an affiliated company outside the immediate corporate group. 

 

The premier league has got itself in a right mess because by turning football into an accountancy game , it needs to adjudicate on the fair value of assets on club's balance sheets - be that hotels, women's football teams, commercial ventures. 

 

So long as revenue is factored into PSR, they can never fully close all these loopholes because there is an infinite amount of commercial possibilities and there is no 'right answer' as to their fair value. 

 

 

 

Edited July 19 by Boey_Jarton

[Eveready]

13 minutes ago, Boey_Jarton said:

The injection of equity into subsidiary would increase the book value of the investment on NUFC's balance sheet and the subsequent sale to PZ Newco would factor this 'cost' into the profit on disposal. I.e. there would be not profit arising from the £2Bn. 

 

In any case, profit on sale to a direct holding company is eliminated on consolidation and I am positive this will already be factored into PSR, otherwise group restructures could simply crystalise PSR profit.

 

That said, there is clearly a loophole of building up the women's team within the corporate structure (not subject to PSR regs) and selling it to an affiliated company outside the immediate corporate group. 

 

The premier league has got itself in a right mess because by turning football into an accountancy game , it needs to adjudicate on the fair value of assets on club's balance sheets - be that hotels, women's football teams, commercial ventures. 

 

So long as revenue is factored into PSR, they can never fully close all these loopholes because there is an infinite amount of commercial possibilities and there is no 'right answer' as to their fair value. 

 

 

 

 

I get that's how it would work under normal circumstances as an overall group consolidation.

 

Just with all this nonsense Chelsea are doing it's worth a go and trying to claim any costs relating to the disposal are entirely related to the women's team and should be deducted from PSR calculations.

[Paully]

Ridiculous! 
 

https://true-faith.co.uk/chelsea-psr/

[Groundhog63]

8 minutes ago, Paully said:

Ridiculous! 
 

https://true-faith.co.uk/chelsea-psr/

 

Job's fucked

[Ben]

So Chelsea now have nothing left to sell other than players ? Should be interesting next summer, unless the rules have changed by then.

[Keegans Export]

17 minutes ago, Paully said:

Ridiculous! 
 

https://true-faith.co.uk/chelsea-psr/

What I gather from that is that although the sale of the women's team has been completed and is on the accounts, it hasn't necessarily been pre-approved by the PL and therefore they could turn round and say "Well actually we think you've over-valued it by £50m so we're taking that off the calculation"

 

That's what the PL were threatening to do to Everton & Villa for those academy player swaps they were doing, if they deemed it a workaround they wouldn't allow the full amount brought in to be factored in to the PSR calculation.

[Ben]

9 minutes ago, Keegans Export said:

What I gather from that is that although the sale of the women's team has been completed and is on the accounts, it hasn't necessarily been pre-approved by the PL and therefore they could turn round and say "Well actually we think you've over-valued it by £50m so we're taking that off the calculation"

 

That's what the PL were threatening to do to Everton & Villa for those academy player swaps they were doing, if they deemed it a workaround they wouldn't allow the full amount brought in to be factored in to the PSR calculation.

 

Chelsea are one of the top6 this will be fine.

[Abacus]

1 minute ago, Ben said:

 

Chelsea are one of the top6 this will be fine.

I think there are fractures within the ESL 6.

 

Pretty obvious the rules as they stand disadvantage Man City for one and could now well do the same for Chelsea.

 

NB the difference with the Everton and Villa swaps is they aren't related parties as far as I know, so looking into that would have to be under the 'bad faith' clause, which would open up a further can of worms. Several, in fact.

[The Prophet]

 

[gbandit]

SUSTAINABILITY!

[Fezzle]

Another glorious day in the Premier League utopia....whats the fucking point for us peasants?