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

[TheBrownBottle]

7 hours ago, Stifler said:

In all fairness it’s only been 5 of the top 6 who have tried to stop us, as well as Everton, Villa, and I think West Ham, who all think they are on the fringes of breaking in.

Every other club gets bullied to fuck by the same teams.

To amend PL rules needs a two-thirds majority.  So 14 clubs - minimum - needed to vote to change those rules.  So it’s not just the Sky Six. 

[The Prophet]

2 hours ago, Gawalls said:

Been thinking that for days now but wasn’t going to say it, however now you have then I’ll step up to say absolutely.  

 

As long as you aren't owned by anyone as ambitionless as Mike Ashley, you'll be affected by it.

[GeordieDazzler]

59 minutes ago, Optimistic Nut said:

 

 

 

 

Sorry is he trying to reframe City and Chelsea as the good guys here?

[Guest]

35 minutes ago, GeordieDazzler said:

Sorry is he trying to reframe City and Chelsea as the good guys here?

 

If the big 3 had their way, he's not wrong is he?

[Tiresias]

I just think the ffp thing is a slight misnomer i agree that it doesn't even the playing field and Indeed really helps clubs with huge commercial income and there should be rules to deal with that as well but actually stopping clubs spending beyond their means is entirely sensible purely to prevent financial disasters in clubs. Its financial fair play not football fair play. I am all for discussions on how best to improve competitiveness in the league but the ffp rules are only bad because in absence of other rules it helps the really rich and successful clubs who aren't spending beyond their means. If that was followed up with other limits to spending power we could actually do something but punishing clubs for spending stupidly may make clubs try harder in future to look after their clubs future even if it means fuck all in terms of making League more competitive

[FloydianMag]

7 hours ago, Tiresias said:

I just think the ffp thing is a slight misnomer i agree that it doesn't even the playing field and Indeed really helps clubs with huge commercial income and there should be rules to deal with that as well but actually stopping clubs spending beyond their means is entirely sensible purely to prevent financial disasters in clubs. Its financial fair play not football fair play. I am all for discussions on how best to improve competitiveness in the league but the ffp rules are only bad because in absence of other rules it helps the really rich and successful clubs who aren't spending beyond their means. If that was followed up with other limits to spending power we could actually do something but punishing clubs for spending stupidly may make clubs try harder in future to look after their clubs future even if it means fuck all in terms of making League more competitive

Sounds very much like the arguments put forward by the big 6 to prevent other clubs challenging them tbh.

[r0cafella]

As others have pointed out, if the goal was to stop clubs going bust we could have enforced directors guarantees and banned leveraged takeovers. The fact none of these are in place should tell you everything you need to know. 
 

Also, if your an owner who has less ambition than your fans FFP is fantastic. 

 

 

Edited November 21, 2023 by r0cafella
Fuck me, I better start proofreading shit.

[Mattoon]

1 hour ago, r0cafella said:

As others have pointed out, if the goal was to stop clubs going bust we could have enforced directors guarantees and banned leveraged takeovers. The fact none of these are in place should tell you everything you need to know. 
 

Also, if your an honour who has less ambition than your fans FFP is fantastic. 

 

You only have to look at Man u with a crumbling stadium and £1b debt like a mill wheel around their neck to know its not about protecting clubs from unscrupulous owners.

[Tiresias]

1 hour ago, FloydianMag said:

Sounds very much like the arguments put forward by the big 6 to prevent other clubs challenging them tbh.

 

You miss my point, yes the big six want this because this alone does help them, there needs to be other rules as others have outlined to improve competitiveness. This doesn't mean clubs should be allowed to spend loads more than they earn and thus accrue debt just for the sake of allowing them to challenge briefly before imploding. 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Tiresias said:

 

You miss my point, yes the big six want this because this alone does help them, there needs to be other rules as others have outlined to improve competitiveness. This doesn't mean clubs should be allowed to spend loads more than they earn and thus accrue debt just for the sake of allowing them to challenge briefly before imploding. 

 

Imagine being wealthy, starting your own supermarket chain, then being told you can't spend money on decent staff wages and products, because you don't earn as much money as Tesco, Sainsbury, etc. Even if you have the means to pump this money in yourself. 

[LeeB]

Anyone know what this is about?

 

The one in Blaydon was still open last night.

 

 

 

Edited November 20, 2023 by LeeB

[r0cafella]

Just now, LeeB said:

Anyone know what this is about?

 

The one in Blaydon was still open last night.

 

 

 

 

It means pure undiluted copium. 

[Cronky]

9 hours ago, Tiresias said:

I just think the ffp thing is a slight misnomer i agree that it doesn't even the playing field and Indeed really helps clubs with huge commercial income and there should be rules to deal with that as well but actually stopping clubs spending beyond their means is entirely sensible purely to prevent financial disasters in clubs. Its financial fair play not football fair play. I am all for discussions on how best to improve competitiveness in the league but the ffp rules are only bad because in absence of other rules it helps the really rich and successful clubs who aren't spending beyond their means. If that was followed up with other limits to spending power we could actually do something but punishing clubs for spending stupidly may make clubs try harder in future to look after their clubs future even if it means fuck all in terms of making League more competitive

 

I think the difficulty in imposing other spending curbs is that football has an international dimension. If the Premiership were to introduce things like salary caps, then the clubs might lose competitiveness with many clubs on the continent. American sports are a closed shop, so their devices to maintain competition don't create that problem.

[MrRaspberryJam]

37 minutes ago, LeeB said:

Anyone know what this is about?

 

The one in Blaydon was still open last night.

 

 

 

 

What did Balague do? 

[Shearergol]

2 minutes ago, MrRaspberryJam said:

What did Balague do? 

 

He backed Rafa and criticised how Everton fans treated him. So in revenge they left 1 star reviews of his book. It was quite the standoff.

[MrRaspberryJam]

1 minute ago, Shearergol said:

 

He backed Rafa and criticised how Everton fans treated him. So in revenge they left 1 star reviews of his book. It was quite the standoff.

? it’s a dog eat dog world. 

[FloydianMag]

52 minutes ago, Tiresias said:

 

You miss my point, yes the big six want this because this alone does help them, there needs to be other rules as others have outlined to improve competitiveness. This doesn't mean clubs should be allowed to spend loads more than they earn and thus accrue debt just for the sake of allowing them to challenge briefly before imploding. 

But it shouldn’t be about accruing debt, if you haven’t got it then you shouldn’t spend it. If you have owners who are prepared to invest their money, and I’m not talking vast amounts of money, why should they be restricted by FFP or even FMV. Football isn't and shouldn’t be exempt from competition law.

 

PL shareholders are meeting tomorrow and intend to make FMV even more stringent, that’s aimed squarely at us to prevent growth. If that happens it should be time for the lawyers.

[Pixelphish]

1 hour ago, LeeB said:

Anyone know what this is about?

 

The one in Blaydon was still open last night.

 

 

 

 

 

White Goodman vibes.

[Tiresias]

2 hours ago, Optimistic Nut said:

 

Imagine being wealthy, starting your own supermarket chain, then being told you can't spend money on decent staff wages and products, because you don't earn as much money as Tesco, Sainsbury, etc. Even if you have the means to pump this money in yourself. 

 

And the league is supposed to trust everyone who says yes i have enough money to pump into clubs? Yes obviously it's clear ours do but say these didn't exist, our owners go out and sign 15 players on huge wages straight away. Then political shit happens at home and the owners put club up for sale with no more money coming in. Club then has to accrue debt to pay for the wages of players and quickly it becomes a financial clusterfuck. 

 

This is not equivalent of a supermarket chain. If this was a supermarket chain Ashley would have been a fine owner because no-one gives a damn about supermarket chains like football clubs ffs. The point should not be sold as about competitiveness, you are all absolutely right it does the opposite and does not help the league, the point is to protect fans from seeing their clubs disappear out form under them. My Everton mate has genuinely been fretting about Everton not existing in the future due to the financial mismanagement if they can never afford to finish the stadium and get liable for huge debts. That is what this is about. I am not arguing that this is good for the competitiveness of the league and i am annoyed that the league makes that argument too! But if you don't have those rules huge number of clubs will put themselves in massive debt on hope of getting in champions league and only so many can and the others then could end up in real trouble. There need to be more rules to help competitiveness completely and the motivation for this rule is totally partially to make it hard for us, but ditching it would be dangerous too. 

 

 

Edited November 20, 2023 by Tiresias

[Guest]

Isn't that what the Fit and Proper owner's check or whatever it's called should cover? If they're happy to whack £500m into the clubs coffers and want to spend it, they should 100% be allowed.

[SteV]

2 hours ago, LeeB said:

Anyone know what this is about?

 

The one in Blaydon was still open last night.

 

 

 

A while ago the Dominoes Twitter account put out a joke tweet out ripping Richarlison (whilst still at Everton).

 

Everton fans heads collectively fell off and they all decided to boycott them.

[pinkeye]

Saw something on Facebook, on an Everton Fan Group that somehow crept into my feed...

 

A Sunderland fan praising them, telling them to all stick together and they will be fine.  How cruel and awful the Premier League are for imposing the sanctions and blaming the previous owners for not being ambitious enough....

 

Followed by tons of Everton fans fawning over Sunderland fans stating they are the finest fans in the North East blah blah blah!!!

 

Two sets of fans that are perfectly aligned to each other, both massively in the shadow of their far larger neighbours and both sets of fans that crave anything to gain attention and praise from any other football club / set of fans.  The Real Mackems and the Merseyside Mackems.

 

 

 

 

Edited November 20, 2023 by pinkeye

[Stal]

2 hours ago, LeeB said:

Anyone know what this is about?

 

The one in Blaydon was still open last night.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just as an aside, is Roma pizza still a thing in that neck of the woods?

[Tiresias]

47 minutes ago, Optimistic Nut said:

Isn't that what the Fit and Proper owner's check or whatever it's called should cover? If they're happy to whack £500m into the clubs coffers and want to spend it, they should 100% be allowed.

 

Fit and Proper owners check is a fucking joke and everyone knows it. 

 

There is no world where you can make the league more competitive by allowing unchecked spending. If we did of course it would be a league of us and maybe man city keeping up and that would be it and it would be dull. I know I am arguing against our own self interest here but actually i want to win the league on merit not by spending 3 times everyone else like Man City have done but that may just be me. Salary Caps and Spending Caps would be good but will never get passed and the league would worry too much about not being the "best league in the world". The thing is the reason the league is good is that the broadcasting rights are more even than say in La Liga where Madrid and Barca take most the money. I would argue keep it egalitarian (just in news going other way lol) and also increase solidarity payments down the league system. In the long term financially healthy EFL will allow them to buy and produce better quality players that can flow upwards. The way things are going is a bubble, more and more money for Man City and us in future the more impoverished the rest of the league system, and suddenly we're French footy.

 

Man City and Chelsea need to be punished proportionally to how Everton were in line with their breaches, that would be a start. I would try and improve the checks and balances so that rather than investigations going on for fucking years this happens quickly so clubs aren't punished for historic crimes, it's fucking pathetic. I would really try and look into rules that if we can't have a wage cap or a price cap that would bring down the inflation on player value. Players that even a few years ago would have been affordable for most the league are suddenly going for £50m or more. It's daft. Equally players that sit on the benches of big clubs and want to leave are on wages that no other club could possibly afford so they end up stuck (I mean by their own choice but who wants to accept a pay cut?). 

 

If it is much harder for Man City and Chelsea to price everyone else out of players and stockpile them, if wages don't get so out of control then it becomes a more even league. 

 

If you just let us spend it we will win it soon enough and it will be boring. I do not want to be PSG. I have loved this last couple of seasons, I love this squad, I love the togetherness. You don't get that if we weren't constrained tbh. Yes I understand the pain but let's get Chelsea and Man City relegated for breaching the rules and have a laugh at that, that would be lovely. 

[SteV]

3 minutes ago, Tiresias said:

 

Fit and Proper owners check is a fucking joke and everyone knows it. 

 

There is no world where you can make the league more competitive by allowing unchecked spending. If we did of course it would be a league of us and maybe man city keeping up and that would be it and it would be dull. I know I am arguing against our own self interest here but actually i want to win the league on merit not by spending 3 times everyone else like Man City have done but that may just be me. Salary Caps and Spending Caps would be good but will never get passed and the league would worry too much about not being the "best league in the world". The thing is the reason the league is good is that the broadcasting rights are more even than say in La Liga where Madrid and Barca take most the money. I would argue keep it egalitarian (just in news going other way lol) and also increase solidarity payments down the league system. In the long term financially healthy EFL will allow them to buy and produce better quality players that can flow upwards. The way things are going is a bubble, more and more money for Man City and us in future the more impoverished the rest of the league system, and suddenly we're French footy.

 

Man City and Chelsea need to be punished proportionally to how Everton were in line with their breaches, that would be a start. I would try and improve the checks and balances so that rather than investigations going on for fucking years this happens quickly so clubs aren't punished for historic crimes, it's fucking pathetic. I would really try and look into rules that if we can't have a wage cap or a price cap that would bring down the inflation on player value. Players that even a few years ago would have been affordable for most the league are suddenly going for £50m or more. It's daft. Equally players that sit on the benches of big clubs and want to leave are on wages that no other club could possibly afford so they end up stuck (I mean by their own choice but who wants to accept a pay cut?). 

 

If it is much harder for Man City and Chelsea to price everyone else out of players and stockpile them, if wages don't get so out of control then it becomes a more even league. 

 

If you just let us spend it we will win it soon enough and it will be boring. I do not want to be PSG. I have loved this last couple of seasons, I love this squad, I love the togetherness. You don't get that if we weren't constrained tbh. Yes I understand the pain but let's get Chelsea and Man City relegated for breaching the rules and have a laugh at that, that would be lovely. 

Unless you can get global agreement, wage caps are an absolute non-starter.