Financial Fair Play / Profit & Sustainability

[andycap]

It stinks of the top six putting pressure on the Premier league. No one should be able to have that type of sway. 

[gjohnson]

49 minutes ago, Ben said:

I can't see how fair market value can ever be challenged 

Well let's rewind the clock to 2008, none of the old 5 would say a peep about money, and then the Man City came...now you're all so terrified of the Nufc that you have to have your meetings in daylight so the Magpie can't get you. It's simple....we kill the Magpie

[TheHoob]

Can't believe how blatant they are making it  

[Colos Short and Curlies]

28 minutes ago, Pokerprince2004 said:

 

Reading the replies it seems moving the accounting date does effect PSR. Aston Villa moved it from May to June to give themselves an extra month apparently 

I don’t have a telegraph subscription so haven’t read the document but I can’t see it making a difference otherwise Forest would have just moved their date forward to 31st August to avoid falling foul of the rules last season (you get until the day you need to file the accounts to change the date so they had plenty of time to do it).

 

2 other points, the psr period is (as I read it) based on seasons and the accounting period to 30th June is just used as a proxy for this. There’s a couple of clubs who don’t have 30th June and the premier league seem fine with that but moving the period when it looks like you’d breach is likely to fall

foul of any good faith clause. 

 

Villa moving from May to June only adjusts price money recognition by 1/12 it’s not encroaching into another transfer window which is probably why it was allowed

[Kimbo]

I don’t really see the issue with these transfers. If the rules exist to stop clubs going broke, and these transfers don’t jeopardise that, then so what? I see nothing wrong with two clubs doing each other favours, it’s been happening since transfers began.

[gbandit]

Aye, but we all know what the rules are there for. Not sure there’s a single football fan that doesn’t understand their purpose at this point 

[Fezzle]

59 minutes ago, Colos Short and Curlies said:

I don’t have a telegraph subscription so haven’t read the document but I can’t see it making a difference otherwise Forest would have just moved their date forward to 31st August to avoid falling foul of the rules last season (you get until the day you need to file the accounts to change the date so they had plenty of time to do it).

 

2 other points, the psr period is (as I read it) based on seasons and the accounting period to 30th June is just used as a proxy for this. There’s a couple of clubs who don’t have 30th June and the premier league seem fine with that but moving the period when it looks like you’d breach is likely to fall

foul of any good faith clause. 

 

Villa moving from May to June only adjusts price money recognition by 1/12 it’s not encroaching into another transfer window which is probably why it was allowed

Aston villa moving it affects companies house. Nothing to do with football 

[cannybagoftudor]

I remember fondly the days of "War Chests" and "keeping our powder dry" - they were magical times - you would read the paper and I remember thinking Berkamp was coming to us - the last thing I did was think, will this break PSR - fuck PSR and fuck VAR this is not the game I grew up with - sorry 59 M and disillusioned. Ah fuck it - I hope we are around when the whole bent facade falls.

[duo]

2 hours ago, andycap said:

It stinks of the top six putting pressure on the Premier league. No one should be able to have that type of sway. 

They run the PL - Richard Masters is their man

[Jonas]

2 hours ago, gjohnson said:

Not necessarily. Barring the odd upset most leagues only have a couple of teams that can or do win their domestic leagues.

 

Scotland...Rangers or Celtic without fail

Spain...R.Madrid or Barcelona with Atletico occasionally interfering

France...closed shop for PSG barring a massive balls up

Germany...as France barring Bayern having a shocker

Italys got a bit of variety now, but it's hard to get past Juventus or one of the Milans

Portugal has a few at the minute, but still the same candidates..Benfica, Porto, SP Lisbon

Netherlands...barring that one off Alkmaar season a while back it's always been Ajax, PSV or Feyenoord

Competitiveness used to generally, and players here from other countries even said it, said to be what marked our league out for better or worse.

Outside of the elites many mentioned above, the rest had a cannon-fodder feel to it and no hope of overhauling the establishment.

Until Man United's dominance there wasn't a sense here that any number of clubs couldn't be the top boy and sustain it. The Newcastle, Leeds or Villa equivalent in those countries had no chance of doing that but we all had those hopes whilst challenging for titles in 90s.

That's only possible with money because, ironically they (the elite) made it that way through commercialising football to advantage themselves in the first place.

Now were going about making our league exactly like those.

 

 

Edited Thursday at 22:28 by Jonas

[Jamesmcc222]

Just letting everyone spend whatever they want doesn’t end well either. The world is becoming more unequal, football would too. As nice is it has been for Man City to deny classically dislikable teams that would get old soon too. 
 

This system is flawed because it is already biased to bigger teams without letting others close the gap. The do nothing system is flawed because it rewards who has the richest owners rather than anything else. I’m increasingly moving towards wanting a spending cap that isn’t dictated by revenue, losses etc. but is purely an absolute limit based on spend over the last x number of years. Maximise number of transfers allowed, don’t reward pure profit academy sales. Allow other teams to catch up and reward savvy transfers, good management and importantly great support. 
 

A pipe dream and not thought through but anything to stop the accountants or Chelsea winning. 

[Abacus]

Instead of all this malarkey, I remember when we paid an eye-watering £1.75m to Bristol City for Andy Cole and fretting that could be a huge mistake at the time, before him and Beardsley then nearly tore up the league.

 

Never even in my wildest boyhood dreams did I imagine that later I'd be worrying about amortisation, the sale of infrastructure or the farming out saleable assets (human beings by the way) for the sake of profit calculations.

 

Ah, for a simpler time. Jumpers for goalposts etc.

[Colos Short and Curlies]

I'd like to see a limit on the number of players you can have registered. If a player is not in the registered 25 (excluding academy products under the age of 21) then you have to take the full remaining value on the balance sheet and impair it, recognise the remaining contract value as an onerous contract (so recognise the full value immediately) and the player is available to move at any time for a transfer fee fixed at one years base salary (or remaining salary if less than 1 year) - and these moves can be at any point in the season.

 

This would be in conjunction with an overall spending cap rather than the current PSR rubbish.

 

You'd need to add clauses in for injuries but that will punish clubs for holding a bloated squad and allow players to move when they are not in squads.

[Wolfcastle]

4 minutes ago, Abacus said:

Instead of all this malarkey, I remember when we paid an eye-watering £1.75m to Bristol City for Andy Cole and fretting that could be a huge mistake at the time, before him and Beardsley then nearly tore up the league.

 

Never even in my wildest boyhood dreams did I imagine that later I'd be worrying about amortisation, the sale of infrastructure or the farming out saleable assets (human beings by the way) for the sake of profit calculations.

 

Ah, for a simpler time. Jumpers for goalposts etc.

 

Its even less fun thinking that we probably wouldn't be allowed under current rules to make that signing - despite getting back more than treble the investment a few years later after record breaking goal-scoring - the sort of football thing of its first 150years that did okay that new rules don't and cant take into account.

[andycap]

Easily sort it. arsenal man united Chelsea spurs man city and Liverpool arent allowed to spend for a few years lets the rest catch up.

[Abacus]

Legacy fan alert.

[r0cafella]

I really don’t see how they can legislate against clubs trading with one another. The amount of over reach we see from the league before this is breathtaking the fact they are willing to continue to step it up leaves me speechless. 
 

Cmon city, destroy these cunts. 

[McDog]

Just now, r0cafella said:

I really don’t see how they can legislate against clubs trading with one another. The amount of over reach we see from the league before this is breathtaking the fact they are willing to continue to step it up leaves me speechless. 
 

Cmon city, destroy these cunts. 

 

 

To be honest it seems like they have tripled down on anything that might allow teams to get around the silly rules they put in place to ensure the Saudi's don't buy their way into many titles. It has gone to absurd levels now where anytime anything get's discussed in the media it elicits an immediate response unless it's from the chosen ones. I mean as a relative outsider this is many levels beyond the goofiest shit in sports I've seen, and from the biggest league in the footballing world no less. This isn't some league in a dictator run country doing what it wants, it's in jolly ole England and I'm frankly shocked at the silly shit the league has been spouting the last couple of years. And it seems like it is escalating. 

[Stifler]

If the Premier League really wanted to prevent clubs from going bust then debt would either be banned or limited.

Instead you have Man Utd at over £1bn worth of debt for over 10 years, without it reducing. You have Spurs at £1bn worth of debt, and you allowed the likes of Burnley to be bought via a leveraged buyout.

 

If they didn’t want 1 team having an advantage financially over the other, there would be a hard spending and salary cap. That would leave the Premier League open to competition from other leagues for the best players though, and also would prevent the clubs they do want to have a financial average over, from having one.

 

It all falls down at the first line of questioning, but people actually believe it. They believe because they want too. It’s a simple answer. It’s the reason why Klopp never won back to back titles, it’s the reason why Man Utd no longer compete, it’s the reason why Arsenal are the good guys, it’s the reason why despite having the best stadium in sport, Spurs are not at the level they should be, it’s the reason why Crystal Palace will never have any ambition to build upon what they do, the reason why Fulham have to build a swimming pool in their new stand etc.

It’s like listening to Reform and thinking ‘Aye, they’ve got the answer’. It’s fucking bullshit, and those believing it all are just trying to comfort themselves, because now it’s their turn in the dark, after they casted decades long shadows over other clubs, or forever lived in one.

 

 

Edited Friday at 05:59 by Stifler

[Ben]

17 minutes ago, Stifler said:

If the Premier League really wanted to prevent clubs from going bust then debt would either be banned or limited.

Instead you have Man Utd at over £1bn worth of debt for over 10 years, without it reducing. You have Spurs at £1bn worth of debt, and you allowed the likes of Burnley to be bought via a leveraged buyout.

 

If they didn’t want 1 team having an advantage financially over the other, there would be a hard spending and salary cap. That would leave the Premier League open to competition from other leagues for the best players though, and also would prevent the clubs they do want to have a financial average over, from having one.

 

It all falls down at the first line of questioning, but believe actually believe. They believe because they want too. It’s a simple answer. It’s the reason why Klopp never won back to back titles, it’s the reason why Man Utd no longer compete, it’s the reason why Arsenal are the good guys, it’s the reason why despite having the best stadium in sport, Spurs are not at the level they should be, it’s the reason why Crystal Palace will never have any ambition to build upon what they do, the reason why Fulham have to build a swimming pool in their new stand etc.

It’s like listening to Reform and thinking ‘Aye, they’ve got the answer’. It’s fucking bullshit, and those believing it all are just trying to comfort themselves, because now it’s their turn in the dark, after they casted decades long shadows over other clubs, or forever lived in one.

 

100% agree however debt is not the issue, keeping the top6 at the top is the only priority here, every rule put in place is to prevent Newcastle getting close

[Gawalls]

10 hours ago, et tu brute said:

I'd still be very surprised if we have went over the PSR restraints. If for some reason we have, then I think PIF will (and should) be asking some very serious questions. Still think it's a load of shit and media are scaremongering. 

I think you’re right about the pif however if it was just us then yes we need to look inwards, if it truly is or was sic as reported then the system needs to be challenged - that’s around 30% for Christ sake.

[RobsonsWonderland]

Another two windows of no real transfer activity across the majority of clubs and I think there will be greater pressure for change.

 

The whole premise of the Premier League being the greatest in the world is that every team can beat any other team on the day because we had the strong hold of all the top end players in the world. 

 

If this changes then the likes of sky and other sponsorship companies may begin to ask why do they need to break the record Everytime they bid for the tv rights etc.

[Whitley mag]

Just wait until they suspect we’ve breached PSR, you can bet they’ll rush in a rule change such as a transfer ban before beginning the investigation.

[Gaztoon]

3 minutes ago, RobsonsWonderland said:

Another two windows of no real transfer activity across the majority of clubs and I think there will be greater pressure for change.

 

The whole premise of the Premier League being the greatest in the world is that every team can beat any other team on the day because we had the strong hold of all the top end players in the world. 

 

If this changes then the likes of sky and other sponsorship companies may begin to ask why do they need to break the record Everytime they bid for the tv rights etc.

 

Said it before about Sky not being happy with the lack of spending.. deadline day is  huge viewing figures.

[Terraloon]

9 hours ago, cannybagoftudor said:

I remember fondly the days of "War Chests" and "keeping our powder dry" - they were magical times - you would read the paper and I remember thinking Berkamp was coming to us - the last thing I did was think, will this break PSR - fuck PSR and fuck VAR this is not the game I grew up with - sorry 59 M and disillusioned. Ah fuck it - I hope we are around when the whole bent facade falls.

 What an absolutely brilliant post.

 

I actually blame Arsenal Wenger for all this. Inventing the term “ Financial Doping” yes  RA turned up and put vast money in but that money by and large was paid by way of transfer fees  which stayed in football. Did we inflate the market? Yes but didn’t Man Utd, didn’t Blackburn didn’t every club that paid big even before RA showed up ?
 

Yes  we made the jump from a 4th place team to winning the league but it was the fact the we dare knock both Utd and yes Arsenal down from their domination of the PL that was their issue  issue . I can almost visualise Wenger kicking, screaming and stamping his feet saying it’s  not fair.

 

Arsenal and its supporters made us all become experts in finance. No more discussions at work on a Monday talking about a great goal it’s now about amortisation or football income. They say we won it all because of money yet ignore the fact that they won it all ( well maybe not all) because of money 

 

Did any of you care about the length of a players contract or were you afraid of celebrating a goal for fear VAR will say that it’s disallowed because 20 minutes prior to it being scored someone passed wind ?
I fell in love with football aged 7 , I fell out of love with football at age 65

 

 

 

Edited Friday at 06:56 by Terraloon