Financial Fair Play / Profit & Sustainability

[RobsonsWonderland]

There will come a point very soon where I think the big 6 will turn on each other.

 

Man utd and Spurs will both miss champions league for another year or two and it will begin to hit their financials

 

Man U need to sell players on inflated wages that no one else can afford due to PSR.

 

So you can't tell me the Liverpool, Arsenal and City boards are not watching and thinking the longer man utd struggle the better it is for them.

 

It will not be long before Ratcliff is saying the current system is unfair and we need to change the rules.... Which is ironic as they might listen to the 'biggest club' in the world.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited Monday at 23:13 by RobsonsWonderland

[Pokerprince2004]

Also get a feeling Sky Sports could be getting pretty annoyed as the transfer windows were something they built up massively, seems like its totally died on its arse last 2 years (strange that even though 'PSR' has been around for over 10 years, I wonder what changed 🙄). 

[sushimonster85]

19 minutes ago, Pokerprince2004 said:

Also get a feeling Sky Sports could be getting pretty annoyed as the transfer windows were something they built up massively, seems like its totally died on its arse last 2 years (strange that even though 'PSR' has been around for over 10 years, I wonder what changed 🙄). 

 

Definitely think this is more likely to happen first than the big six properly turning on each other. This and maybe another league starting to muscle in. La liga really should be doing better than it does commercially.

[duo]

57 minutes ago, Pokerprince2004 said:

Also get a feeling Sky Sports could be getting pretty annoyed as the transfer windows were something they built up massively, seems like its totally died on its arse last 2 years (strange that even though 'PSR' has been around for over 10 years, I wonder what changed 🙄). 

It'll only feature four clubs who are able to spend - City, Man U, Liverpool and Chelsea (who seem to be able to sell their car park to get round PSR).  I really wish we would take UEFA and the PL to court over these blatantly corrupt rules.  

 

 

Edited yesterday at 00:02 by duo

[TheBrownBottle]

1 hour ago, Pokerprince2004 said:

Also get a feeling Sky Sports could be getting pretty annoyed as the transfer windows were something they built up massively, seems like its totally died on its arse last 2 years (strange that even though 'PSR' has been around for over 10 years, I wonder what changed 🙄). 

Part of the issue is that the £105m in allowable FFP losses over that period hasn’t moved 

[duo]

16 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

Part of the issue is that the £105m in allowable FFP losses over that period hasn’t moved 

Exactly and price for players/wages has shot up - needs be index liked.  But the cartel can still spend so all good.

[Jaqen]

1 hour ago, RobsonsWonderland said:

There will come a point very soon where I think the big 6 will turn on each other.

 

Man utd and Spurs will both miss champions league for another year or two and it will begin to hit their financials

 

Man U need to sell players on inflated wages that no one else can afford due to PSR.

 

So you can't tell me the Liverpool, Arsenal and City boards are not watching and thinking the longer man utd struggle the better it is for them.

 

It will not be long before Ratcliff is saying the current system is unfair and we need to change the rules.... Which is ironic as they might listen to the 'biggest club' in the world.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think Man United and Spurs are both perfectly fine being able to hide behind PSR. I don't think either clubs want to spend anymore than they already do ideally. Not even sure if Spurs try and push their spending to its limits already, I think they in particular will know that they'd fall much further away from the current top 6 and be leapfrogged by ourselves and Villa pretty sharphish. 

[TheBrownBottle]

9 minutes ago, Jaqen said:

 

I think Man United and Spurs are both perfectly fine being able to hide behind PSR. I don't think either clubs want to spend anymore than they already do ideally. Not even sure if Spurs try and push their spending to its limits already, I think they in particular will know that they'd fall much further away from the current top 6 and be leapfrogged by ourselves and Villa pretty sharphish. 

Spurs are ahead of Arsenal and Chelsea financially; I don't think they'd have too much to worry about re Villa or even us on that front for quite a while.  Spurs' ownership seem more concerned with income than winning things.

[Cristov]

8 hours ago, Jaqen said:

 

I think Man United and Spurs are both perfectly fine being able to hide behind PSR. I don't think either clubs want to spend anymore than they already do ideally. Not even sure if Spurs try and push their spending to its limits already, I think they in particular will know that they'd fall much further away from the current top 6 and be leapfrogged by ourselves and Villa pretty sharphish. 

 

I think the biggest issue for top clubs is going to be moving on players, The other clubs are having to be intrinsic about where they are spending now and cant afford to take massive gambles on players that are on the final chapter of their careers. When top teams are haemorrhaging managers and back room staff and looking to sell on any player failures its going to get more and more difficult to do so. Man U being the prime example just now re. Rashford, Anthony etc. I personally hope that other clubs are deliberately avoiding trying to pick up these types of players from these clubs as a big FU, I was a bit disappointed that Saudi started a bit of an influx and threw funds at buying in these types of players and would have liked for them to target players for free in final 6-12 months of contract.  

[mighty__mag]

Keep seeing the same comments all over social media regarding the alleged 60m we thought we could use to sign Guehi in the summer. 

 

'Wheres the 60m gone'

 

As matters change during a season, do people not realise, with all the speculation surrounding players like Isak, we'd have to make him our highest paid player, most of the first team players are on 100k plus pw.

 

You'd argue, Hall, Livramento, Isak, would all want improved contracts. 

[Colos Short and Curlies]

This may be a controversial one but I don't think academy players should be 100% PSR profit.

 

I'd set a sliding scale of say 50 first team appearances and any transfer fee is then offset by the number of games played in the first team below 50 x 1/50 of the fee - if that makes sense?

 

So say Chelsea sell an academy product for £50m who has only made 10 appearances the profit is £50m - £40m.

 

It would never happen is it would hurt the cartel club more than anyone else.

[bowlingcrofty]

There's probably some mileage in that because it would incentivise them to actually play their academy players as well. 

[The College Dropout]

15 hours ago, Jaqen said:

 

I think Man United and Spurs are both perfectly fine being able to hide behind PSR. I don't think either clubs want to spend anymore than they already do ideally. Not even sure if Spurs try and push their spending to its limits already, I think they in particular will know that they'd fall much further away from the current top 6 and be leapfrogged by ourselves and Villa pretty sharphish. 

Absolutely delighted with PSR both of these. Spurs stadium and location drives their revenue more than CL football.

 

Cheapest season ticket £428, most expensive £2367. Levy has hit the belly.

 

https://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/media/yjsmqb4u/2024-2025-season-ticket-pricing.pdf

[The College Dropout]

3 hours ago, Colos Short and Curlies said:

This may be a controversial one but I don't think academy players should be 100% PSR profit.

 

I'd set a sliding scale of say 50 first team appearances and any transfer fee is then offset by the number of games played in the first team below 50 x 1/50 of the fee - if that makes sense?

 

So say Chelsea sell an academy product for £50m who has only made 10 appearances the profit is £50m - £40m.

 

It would never happen is it would hurt the cartel club more than anyone else.

It's an accounting measure that predates PSR.

 

The cost of academy's is already covered (and excluded from PSR correctly). 

 

 

The system works well for youngsters imo. Without PSR Anderson is probably sitting on our bench. Now he's really establishing himself as a good PL player. 

[mouldy_uk]

This thread makes me feel equal amounts angry and thick.
 

I just want the simple days of an exciting transfer window back and not have to worry/think like an accountant or lawyer. Football should be an escape from crap like that. 

 

[Keggy_Keagal]

Fuck it why don't we just breach Psr then let our army of lawyers and accountants tie it all up in the courts/circumnavigate the consequences with clever tricks ? Seems to work for several other clubs and Nick DeMarco's proven able to box rings round these twats that run the Premier League

[MagCA]

12 minutes ago, Keggy_Keagal said:

Fuck it why don't we just breach Psr then let our army of lawyers and accountants tie it all up in the courts/circumnavigate the consequences with clever tricks ? Seems to work for several other clubs and Nick DeMarco's proven able to box rings round these twats that run the Premier League

The rest are probably just waiting for the club to mess up like this so they can justify removing the owners. 

[Keggy_Keagal]

Are Man City's owners going to removed if they're found guilty of their charges ? 

[MagCA]

Wouldn’t surprise me if they try. 
 

They should be anyway. 

[Keggy_Keagal]

Were Leicester's ? Or Everton's? Chelsea's haven't been and the talk is they are negotiating a fine for further breaches . Haven't Forest benefited far in excess of their 4 point deduction ? Manchester United were given a 40 million allowance by the league to allow themselves to swerve a possible breach. The clubs who've breached have either got away with it or largely avoided serious long term consequences. 

 

 

Edited 1 hour ago by Keggy_Keagal
A bit drunk and went apostrophe mad

[MagCA]

Those right there are in no comparable to the seriousness or extend of City’s charges. 
 

You’re talking a one year misspend v a decade of breaking the rules. If they’re deemed to have broken the rules beyond reasonable doubt the directors responsible should be removed. Maybe they won’t go as far as removing the owners but “state-owned” clubs are already unpopular and I’d imagine that model will come under even further scrutiny. 
 

Whereas if Newcastle had a breach similar to Everton/Forest, I don’t think they would remove the owners because of it but I also don’t think a scenario where they try to for the “good” of the game is an unreasonable thought. We all talk about how PIF et al have seen progression blocked with every turn, the rest of the league are probably clamouring for the opportunity to give the owners a reason to sell. 
 

Might be chatting out my hoop but here we are.