Financial Fair Play / Profit & Sustainability

[TRon]

33 minutes ago, JUICE690 said:

Most of these pundits are too lazy to put any time into researching things like

this. Only when it’s the footballing zeitgeist will they bother to bring it up. And only then as sensationalised phone in for thick cunts.

 

Stopped listening to football phone-ins years ago. It's like reading the Star to get political insights.

[nufcjmc]

13 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

It doesn’t - but back-of-a-fag packet calcs can be done; the picture is clearer once we know which competitions we’re in.  The issue is that our income for this season won’t have grown much in relation to last season, and the wages and amortisation won’t have changed by much at all this year

You know your stuff better than me here but miggy sale, losses from the spend from 3 seasons ago and going deeper into the league cup competition,stack money, Gordon contract extension pushing his amortisation spend to 5 years again must have helped alleviate most issues. Might prevent that June grey area spend but come the summer we must be OK.

 

Edit just clutching at straws here and just realised this whole losses from past windows wouldn't kick in until next financial year not in June. 

 

 

Edited April 29 by nufcjmc

[Rich]

Stories are starting to emerge about teams struggling to hit the 30th June limit. West Ham and Spurs have been mentioned so far.

 

[Ben]

1 minute ago, Rich said:

Stories are starting to emerge about teams struggling to hit the 30th June limit. West Ham and Spurs have been mentioned so far.

 

 

Spurs ? 

[54]

3 minutes ago, Rich said:

Stories are starting to emerge about teams struggling to hit the 30th June limit. West Ham and Spurs have been mentioned so far.

 

Jarrod Bowen for £40m please.

[timeEd32]

Without even looking back at the numbers I don't see how Spurs could possibly have any sort of problem. What's the source on that?

[The College Dropout]

1 hour ago, timeEd32 said:

People haven't really caught on to the gap that has grown. I said recently to a group of people that the clubs trying to create a mid-table moat around them like Fulham, Brighton, Brentford, Palace, etc. are arguably as big a problem as the ones at the top and they all thought I was crazy. The fact they are all southern clubs makes it worse too. Pulling the drawbridge up on clubs with long histories like Leeds, Sunderland, the Sheffield clubs, West Brom, etc. feels especially wrong. 

The clubs you mentioned + any pursuing innovative models are the only ones capable of breaking that southern belt. 
 

There’s also a semi permanent underclass of yo-yo teams.  They have the greatest chance of breaking into that mid pack eventually. Burnley, Southampton, Leeds, previously Fulham and Norwich.  Most of these are southern too. 

[Keegans Export]

6 minutes ago, timeEd32 said:

Without even looking back at the numbers I don't see how Spurs could possibly have any sort of problem. What's the source on that?

They've earned £530m, £550m and £450m and they haven't spent crazy money (compared to the other big earners) so I'd be very surprised. 

 

Their problem is more cash on hand isn't it? Rather than falling foul of FFP

[timeEd32]

7 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

The clubs you mentioned + any pursuing innovative models are the only ones capable of breaking that southern belt. 
 

There’s also a semi permanent underclass of yo-yo teams.  They have the greatest chance of breaking into that mid pack eventually. Burnley, Southampton, Leeds, previously Fulham and Norwich.  Most of these are southern too. 

 

Yeah, I hope at least one of Leeds, Burnley, Sheffield United / mackems stay up next season. I think Leeds with their new owners, planned stadium expansion, etc. have the best chance.

[FloydianMag]

 

[Sibierski]

2 hours ago, 54 said:

Jarrod Bowen for £40m please.

We sign him for £60m, they sign Longstaff from us for £30m.

[Whitley mag]

Tony Bloom one of the mouth pieces who objected to Villa’s request to raise the limit on losses, yet is having to loan his club 400 million.

 

In what world would we want to raise the amount clubs can lose and it’s imperative we keep a level playing field he cliamed.

 

What a smarmy cartel cuck this cunt is.

 

 

Edited April 29 by Whitley mag

[Wolfcastle]

5 hours ago, timeEd32 said:

People haven't really caught on to the gap that has grown. I said recently to a group of people that the clubs trying to create a mid-table moat around them like Fulham, Brighton, Brentford, Palace, etc. are arguably as big a problem as the ones at the top and they all thought I was crazy. The fact they are all southern clubs makes it worse too. Pulling the drawbridge up on clubs with long histories like Leeds, Sunderland, the Sheffield clubs, West Brom, etc. feels especially wrong. 

Yeah they want to preserve the pecking order (Man U, Arsenal, Liverpool) from new (and old) challengers, for the good of the game its been said but aren't so bothered about bigger historical clubs you mentioned being overhauled by the Brighton's, Fulham's and Bournemouth's of the world due to none footballing reasons like postcode lotteries and having the misfortune to not be near a Premier League chair when they decided to turn the music off both more unfair than coming into new money.

To say nothing of clubs being enabled to rip their fans off to try and deal with these rules.

[midds]

The 17 teams that remain after the current bottom 3 go down will start in the PL for the fourth season in a row in August. That's 4 consecutive years of growth and investment with the cash that comes with just participating in the league and it looks like being the current 17 + 3 for the next few seasons imo. 

 

At some point something will happen to one of the 17 and they'll go down eventually but it's impossible to see any of the new teams to finish above any of the current 17. Even Wolves, Palace and Everton look way, way stronger than anything coming up. 17 + 3 guests. Marvellous 

[RobsonsWonderland]

Surely  man u are not set up to miss the champions League for any length of time.

 

And they can't keep making up shit to balance their books every year either.

 

As soon as Spurs and Man U are in trouble I wonder if they will push for a rule change or if the remaining Big 4 will turn their backs on them.

[TheBrownBottle]

4 minutes ago, RobsonsWonderland said:

Surely  man u are not set up to miss the champions League for any length of time.

 

And they can't keep making up shit to balance their books every year either.

 

As soon as Spurs and Man U are in trouble I wonder if they will push for a rule change or if the remaining Big 4 will turn their backs on them.

Man Utd and Spurs incomes dwarf the other 14 clubs even without CL football - they’re in no danger re FFP; both have around £200m+ of headroom vs the 7th richest club (us) even without CL football.  They can survive extended periods like this one. 

[TheBrownBottle]

40 minutes ago, midds said:

The 17 teams that remain after the current bottom 3 go down will start in the PL for the fourth season in a row in August. That's 4 consecutive years of growth and investment with the cash that comes with just participating in the league and it looks like being the current 17 + 3 for the next few seasons imo. 

 

At some point something will happen to one of the 17 and they'll go down eventually but it's impossible to see any of the new teams to finish above any of the current 17. Even Wolves, Palace and Everton look way, way stronger than anything coming up. 17 + 3 guests. Marvellous 

And this is the answer to anyone asking ‘why do the other clubs support FFP?’

 

I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the PL is full of historically small clubs - to an unusual degree.  This season we’ve won more trophies than Brentford, Fulham, Palace, Bournemouth and Brighton have between them in their combined histories - and I’ve basically just listed the PL’s midtable.  

[RobsonsWonderland]

3 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

Man Utd and Spurs incomes dwarf the other 14 clubs even without CL football - they’re in no danger re FFP; both have around £200m+ of headroom vs the 7th richest club (us) even without CL football.  They can survive extended periods like this one. 

That's ignoring how much they will need to spend to get back up there.

Overpaying wages to get a player to choose them over a champions League team.

 

I remember how quick Liverpool dropped off in the 90s.

[TheBrownBottle]

Just now, RobsonsWonderland said:

That's ignoring how much they will need to spend to get back up there.

Overpaying wages to get a player to choose them over a champions League team.

 

I remember how quick Liverpool dropped off in the 90s.

Liverpool finished 8th once, but they continued to sit in the top four places and won plenty of cups during that period

 

I’m not convinced they do need to spend huge sums to get back up the table - look at who they need to leapfrog.  Man Utd and Spurs are still massive draws to players - if Forest get a CL place, I still would be surprised if they attracted a player ahead of those clubs. 

[Fatwax]

Yeah but they would have dropped like a stone if there were financial regulations then like there are now. They spent loads and kept bobbing along.

[TheBrownBottle]

5 minutes ago, Fatwax said:

Yeah but they would have dropped like a stone if there were financial regulations then like there are now. They spent loads and kept bobbing along.

Unlikely, given that they would still have an income which outstripped 95% of the top division

 

Looking at Man Utd and Spurs’ current position and thinking that this is anything other than a blip is wishful thinking.  They’ll both be back amongst it, maybe even as early as next season (Man Utd are the bigger basket case of the two, so do need more work).  FFP builds in the advantages to these clubs, so they could have multiple years like this one and still outspend the likes of us or Villa

[TheBrownBottle]

By way of example, here’s the income figures for last season:

 

Man Utd: £662m

Spurs: £528m

NUFC: £320m

 

Our income last season was closer to your local pub team than to Man Utd’s.  Man Utd’s wage bill was higher than our turnover - they’ll be back, because ultimately money talks 

[Groundhog63]

1 minute ago, TheBrownBottle said:

By way of example, here’s the income figures for last season:

 

Man Utd: £662m

Spurs: £528m

NUFC: £320m

 

Our income last season was closer to your local pub team than to Man Utd’s.  Man Utd’s wage bill was higher than our turnover - they’ll be back, because ultimately money talks 

I know it's a daft question but I'll ask it anyway and do so not to curry favour with the likes of @Froggy

BUT how much of those two club's turnover is

A) profit and, more importantly

B) squirreled away by the owners/shareholders

[TheBrownBottle]

3 minutes ago, Groundhog63 said:

I know it's a daft question but I'll ask it anyway and do so not to curry favour with the likes of @Froggy

BUT how much of those two club's turnover is

A) profit and, more importantly

B) squirreled away by the owners/shareholders

About £60m per year goes to pay for the Glazer’s leveraged buyout 

 

Spurs lost about £30m and Man Utd about £110m post-tax.  Spurs’ loss is pretty normal for a PL club. 

[tarie4]

3 hours ago, TheBrownBottle said:

Unlikely, given that they would still have an income which outstripped 95% of the top division

 

Looking at Man Utd and Spurs’ current position and thinking that this is anything other than a blip is wishful thinking.  They’ll both be back amongst it, maybe even as early as next season (Man Utd are the bigger basket case of the two, so do need more work).  FFP builds in the advantages to these clubs, so they could have multiple years like this one and still outspend the likes of us or Villa

That's wrong, some of those clubs' income depends on European football. Missing two CL seasons would really hurt them.

 

But the main thing you're overlooking is the difference between FFP wiggle room and actual cash. Spurs and Man U are losing money. Forget FFP for a sec – they're in the red, huge debts. Spurs are finding this out now. You can have FFP headroom, but you also need owners willing to keep funding it because the club itself isn't making money. It's losing money.

 

 

So yeah, if the Glazers/Sir Jim or the Lewis trust/Levy are willing to keep funding them for years, fine, but I seriously doubt that. Multiple seasons without CL would be a disaster for either team.

 

If Chelsea miss the Champions League this season and next season, it'll really hurt them (include spurs and man u). Because while they're struggling, we and Villa are just getting stronger.