Financial Fair Play / Profit & Sustainability

[r0cafella]

1 minute ago, Gawalls said:

You get caught on two different speed cameras then you get done for speeding twice. They broke the rules twice so they get punished twice.

Yeah that’s two separate incidents though. From what I was hearing on some podcast they are being penalized again for the same breach (yes they should have tried to make the equivalent profit in the next financial year to neutralise it). 

[Stifler]

5 minutes ago, Gawalls said:

You get caught on two different speed cameras then you get done for speeding twice. They broke the rules twice so they get punished twice.

Some police authorities do it so if you get caught twice in 20 minutes, it is classed as 1 offence, some also do it if you get caught twice in an hour or a day.

I think that only applies to mobile speed cameras though.

[Lush Vlad]

On 19/01/2024 at 05:59, leffe186 said:

Yeah, you might blow every other club out of the water. Except maybe Man City who could now spend whatever they wanted. And maybe Chelsea - Boehly clearly is happy to spend whatever he wants. I don’t know about the other guys - the Chinese owners of Wolves, that Egyptian guy at Villa, that bloke (Iranian?) who bought Everton. Maybe he could buy Everton a new ground.

 

I dunno. All I know is that I felt really, well, sad when Abramovich was throwing his money at Chelsea and it wasn’t because it wasn’t us. Same with what happened at Man City. If this is what you want then I get it, and maybe it would make the league better. I have no idea any more, really. It just makes me feel a bit sad again

I lean more this way TBH. Whilst I recognise issues with the bits I understand of FFP. The main one being that the totals haven’t been increased since they were introduced. All whilst the cost of everything has sky rocketed and transfer values have gone crazy. 
 

I still wouldn’t want it to be be a free for all and I do think restrictions of some kind, whether that be American style salary cap, a transfer cap or some reformed version of FFP/PSR. I don’t really know. As I’m sure there would be loopholes and ways to abuse the system. The same as in the NFL. 
 

But I don’t think I’d want us to go full City or Chelsea as a shortcut to success. I’ve waited this long. What’s another 10 years  

[Stifler]

If FFP stays, then I honestly think it’s just going to make the closed league happen faster.

It’s ok our owners turning and saying we will build a a new stadium, but other clubs are going to look at Everton and think ‘Fuck that’. Soon you’ll get it where clubs who stand a chance of having a bad season and going down just will not even risk any sort of stadium development. Look at Villa who have halted some of their stadium development.

Everton are obviously too far gone in their project to stop now, but if they knew this was to happen then you would bet that they wouldn’t have bothered. Man Utd will always have the money for their new stadium, obviously our owners could drop the money for a new stadium and not feel any difference. Luton have planned theirs for a while and seem to have financed it without the need for Premier League money.

 

The thing is a lot of our clubs have stadiums that haven’t been changed for years, the last change many of them had was in the 90’s when they went to all seaters, many of them on the cheap. Look at clubs who could come up, let alone teams like Palace, Bournemouth etc who have aged shitboxes as grounds, and you can see that maybe a problem. Even Leeds’ stadium which is one of the better Championship ones, isn’t too far away from needing major refurbishment, or rebuilding.

I wonder how long the Premier League will be happy with these shitboxes being shown on TV globally.

Someone posted about the Buffalo Bills new stadium this morning, they were shit for fucking years, never won a Super Bowl, and they are building a new stadium. It would never have happened if  it wasn’t for the closed league nature of the NFL where they know they are going to get at least a billion over the next few years. The Premier League doesn’t have that luxury, except for a few teams.

[duo]

What I can't get my head around is why PL clubs voted to bring in FFP? I understand they were concerned about rising wages, transfer fees etc, but has it actually had 'any' impact on that? Wages are still going up astronomically, and records are continuing to be broken on transfer fees paid.  The only thing FFP seems to have done is limit a clubs ability in being able to afford to pay them.  It is like they had no foresight to think "how is this going to affect us grow in the future".   

[r0cafella]

6 minutes ago, duo said:

What I can't get my head around is why PL clubs voted to bring in FFP? I understand they were concerned about rising wages, transfer fees etc, but has it actually had 'any' impact on that? Wages are still going up astronomically, and records are continuing to be broken on transfer fees paid.  The only thing FFP seems to have done is limit a clubs ability in being able to afford to pay them.  It is like they had no foresight to think "how is this going to affect us grow in the future".   

FFP is a protection racket for the established clubs but it scales right. 
 

The so called big 6 are protected from challengers but the also the rest of the league is shielded is from upstarts like forest who want to come up and cement the place in the league. 
 

to be frank, most clubs in the EPL don’t want to compete they just want to enjoy the gravy train and reap the rewards. 

 

FFP actually benefits most of the clubs when you look at it from a business sense. 

[duo]

7 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

FFP is a protection racket for the established clubs but it scales right. 
 

The so called big 6 are protected from challengers but the also the rest of the league is shielded is from upstarts like forest who want to come up and cement the place in the league. 
 

to be frank, most clubs in the EPL don’t want to compete they just want to enjoy the gravy train and reap the rewards. 

 

FFP actually benefits most of the clubs when you look at it from a business sense. 

I don't understand how it benefits any club other than the established big 6. They must have been laughing at the other PLs who voted it in - they've been mugged.

[Groundhog63]

1 hour ago, Gawalls said:

You get caught on two different speed cameras then you get done for speeding twice. They broke the rules twice so they get punished twice.

I always thought that was unfair, tbh. A bit double jeopardy, if you will. 

I mean if you knew straight away, via some app or an electric shock from a device attatched to the back of your neck, you'd slow tf down after the 1st thus not receiving the 2nd

[TheHoob]

1 hour ago, Stifler said:

Some police authorities do it so if you get caught twice in 20 minutes, it is classed as 1 offence, some also do it if you get caught twice in an hour or a day.

I think that only applies to mobile speed cameras though.

 

I got caught twice within about 3 minutes on the a69 by the fixed cameras but they let me off with one thankfully. 

[leffe186]

1 hour ago, Lush Vlad said:

I lean more this way TBH. Whilst I recognise issues with the bits I understand of FFP. The main one being that the totals haven’t been increased since they were introduced. All whilst the cost of everything has sky rocketed and transfer values have gone crazy. 
 

I still wouldn’t want it to be be a free for all and I do think restrictions of some kind, whether that be American style salary cap, a transfer cap or some reformed version of FFP/PSR. I don’t really know. As I’m sure there would be loopholes and ways to abuse the system. The same as in the NFL. 
 

But I don’t think I’d want us to go full City or Chelsea as a shortcut to success. I’ve waited this long. What’s another 10 years  

Yeah, every fan base is going to have people who want to “do a City”, people who don’t want to but go along with it and people who hate it.

 

These posts are from here precisely 11 years ago:

 

I think we've sold the soul of football.  Clubs which by their very inception were local clubs are losing what remnants they had of their local identity.

 

We've got players playing for the club who largely don't give two hoots about whether the club they play for is Newcastle, QPR or Anzhi, as long as the money comes in.

 

We've got clubs being franchised and moved 100 miles up the road to another town.

 

We've got clubs owned and totally controlled by rich chaps from countries half a world away who cannot possibly have any association with the area, the club or the fans.

 

Sickening that the only way we'll ever really be any more than a top 6 club is if we sell out a la Chelsea or City.

 

To me it's more sickening that we can't do that. Chelsea and Man City fans I know are happier than I am each weekend.

 

no no no no

 

we're big enough in terms of support, revenue etc, if run properly, to have a tilt eventually, and do it the right way

 

That's why in a way you gotta admire what Spurs did to break down so called "Big 4" not by having a sugar daddy.  They actually made many successful transfers, both in and out, to accumulate the squad that can compete with the likes of Chelsea.

 

There are Spurs fans who’d love to be/have been owned by a foreign country and spend infinite money. There are clearly Newcastle fans who think you’re not “big enough in terms of support, revenue etc, if run properly, to have a tilt eventually, and do it the right way.” I don’t agree, but nothing I say is going to change their minds so all I’m really doing is laying out how I feel.

[Fezzle]

1 hour ago, Groundhog63 said:

I always thought that was unfair, tbh. A bit double jeopardy, if you will. 

I mean if you knew straight away, via some app or an electric shock from a device attatched to the back of your neck, you'd slow tf down after the 1st thus not receiving the 2nd

It's unfair if you can't read a speedometer or simply don't care about speeding? 

[Teslact]

7 hours ago, Stifler said:

Someone posted about the Buffalo Bills new stadium this morning, they were shit for fucking years, never won a Super Bowl, and they are building a new stadium. It would never have happened if  it wasn’t for the closed league nature of the NFL where they know they are going to get at least a billion over the next few years. The Premier League doesn’t have that luxury, except for a few teams.

 

They are getting $850m from the local government disguised as creating jobs lest they fuck off to St Louis or somewhere.

[Stifler]

1 hour ago, Teslact said:

 

They are getting $850m from the local government disguised as creating jobs lest they fuck off to St Louis or somewhere.

Aye, that’s the way they do it over there though. The enforce the local cities/state to fund them, then they introduce a new tax to pay for it.

I think the worry for the Bills is that they fuck off to Toronto.

[huss9]

"Manchester City are in pole position to land Brazil’s new teen sensation - Savio.

The Under-20 international winger is currently on loan at shock La Liga leaders Girona from French top-flight strugglers Troyes. And that immediately gives City a major edge in the likely summer battle to secure Savio’s services.

Both Girona and Troyes are owned by the English club’s City Football Group – meaning they could snatch him for as little as £10million in July. That is a third of the price any of Europe’s top clubs chasing in Savio, 19, will have to pay."

 

the whole systems fucked.

[Weznufc]

35 minutes ago, huss9 said:

"Manchester City are in pole position to land Brazil’s new teen sensation - Savio.

The Under-20 international winger is currently on loan at shock La Liga leaders Girona from French top-flight strugglers Troyes. And that immediately gives City a major edge in the likely summer battle to secure Savio’s services.

Both Girona and Troyes are owned by the English club’s City Football Group – meaning they could snatch him for as little as £10million in July. That is a third of the price any of Europe’s top clubs chasing in Savio, 19, will have to pay."

 

the whole systems fucked.

Surely the pl will step in and stop this? No just us then. Joke!

[TheBrownBottle]

14 hours ago, duo said:

I don't understand how it benefits any club other than the established big 6. They must have been laughing at the other PLs who voted it in - they've been mugged.

It helps the other clubs by stopping runaway escalation.  It limits the ‘non-big six’ in what they can spend to stay up - keeping the odds as closer to three-in-fourteen as a chance of relegation.  And by the ‘big’ clubs being curtailed, transfer fees remain with a degree of consistency - they can only increase in relation to turnovers.

 

Makes perfect sense if you’re either one of the sky six, or you’re a club which is simply happy to enjoy PL income with no more ambition than that.   Look at the clubs in the PL - Fulham, Palace, Bournemouth, Luton, Brighton, Brentford.  Those clubs between them have a solitary League Cup win between them in their collective histories.  They’re all clubs who have spent the vast majority of their history in the second or third tier.  Every year in the PL is an achievement, and their ambitions go no higher.  Add to that Forest, Sheff Utd, Burnley, Wolves - all of whom do have a history, but have little to no chance of getting back to their peak.  
 

Why would they give a shit about whether or not a Newcastle or a Villa or an Everton can restore their status at the top end of the table?  Even West Ham - with their new ground etc - will be perfectly happy with the status quo, protecting as it does their current status.  West Ham has finished in the top four once in their entire history - they’re not about to start aiming for it now.

 

FFP is good for all but a handful of clubs.

 

 

Edited January 21 by TheBrownBottle

[Wolfcastle]

15 hours ago, duo said:

I don't understand how it benefits any club other than the established big 6. They must have been laughing at the other PLs who voted it in - they've been mugged.

Benefits them if they are sick of trying to compete and just want to go through the motions every year of having even greater advantages over newly promoted teams and no way to catch up to the teams ahead.

I found it alluring the possibility of fluctuating status amongst clubs.Holding some back, stopping others (punishments aside) from imploding kinda feels like a procession. Takeovers and rich owners have been the only thing that's shuffled the pack since the PL started.

Thankfully Ashley checked out when he did, this would have been ideal for the likes of him.

 

 

Edited January 21 by Wolfcastle

[Gawalls]

15 hours ago, TheHoob said:

 

I got caught twice within about 3 minutes on the a69 by the fixed cameras but they let me off with one thankfully. 

I got 11 (that’s right - eleven) £60 fines in one day for parking on the zig zag lines by a pedestrian crossing in London as I was helping mates move and they lived in block of flats with no parking so I just stopped there with hazards on whilst they loaded the car.

[astraguy]

That Omar going from man city to man urd  seems massive, like he knows ffp will screw them I'm sure a few have moved on too including to us

[nufcnick]

23 hours ago, Stifler said:

If FFP stays, then I honestly think it’s just going to make the closed league happen faster.

It’s ok our owners turning and saying we will build a a new stadium, but other clubs are going to look at Everton and think ‘Fuck that’. Soon you’ll get it where clubs who stand a chance of having a bad season and going down just will not even risk any sort of stadium development. Look at Villa who have halted some of their stadium development.

Everton are obviously too far gone in their project to stop now, but if they knew this was to happen then you would bet that they wouldn’t have bothered. Man Utd will always have the money for their new stadium, obviously our owners could drop the money for a new stadium and not feel any difference. Luton have planned theirs for a while and seem to have financed it without the need for Premier League money.

 

The thing is a lot of our clubs have stadiums that haven’t been changed for years, the last change many of them had was in the 90’s when they went to all seaters, many of them on the cheap. Look at clubs who could come up, let alone teams like Palace, Bournemouth etc who have aged shitboxes as grounds, and you can see that maybe a problem. Even Leeds’ stadium which is one of the better Championship ones, isn’t too far away from needing major refurbishment, or rebuilding.

I wonder how long the Premier League will be happy with these shitboxes being shown on TV globally.

Someone posted about the Buffalo Bills new stadium this morning, they were shit for fucking years, never won a Super Bowl, and they are building a new stadium. It would never have happened if  it wasn’t for the closed league nature of the NFL where they know they are going to get at least a billion over the next few years. The Premier League doesn’t have that luxury, except for a few teams.

Stadium investment and construction doesn’t effect FFP, what does is interest payments on the loans used to build them, super rich owners that can pay for the stadium outright won’t run into the same problem with interest payments that Everton have. 

[leffe186]

1 hour ago, nufcnick said:

Stadium investment and construction doesn’t effect FFP, what does is interest payments on the loans used to build them, super rich owners that can pay for the stadium outright won’t run into the same problem with interest payments that Everton have. 

Yeah, that’s one reason why our financing and construction was such a massive ballache. Everything was stratospherically more expensive than, say, when Arsenal built the Emirates. Levy seems to have managed to secure long-term, relatively low-interest (effectively) loans that we can cover using our revenue and in particular revenue generated by the stadium itself (Beyoncé etc). 
 

Compare and contrast that with Man City and West Ham who were each effectively gifted a stadium. It makes a massive difference. It’s why I’m presuming that you’ll need a new custom-built stadium to bridge the gap, and the main question is whether Saudi Arabia will just build it themselves.

[Stifler]

1 hour ago, nufcnick said:

Stadium investment and construction doesn’t effect FFP, what does is interest payments on the loans used to build them, super rich owners that can pay for the stadium outright won’t run into the same problem with interest payments that Everton have. 

Aye but how many clubs have an owner who can build a new stadium and pay for it themselves?

Us, and Man Utd?

Even Villa are scaling back their stadium redevelopment.

[leffe186]

13 minutes ago, Stifler said:

Aye but how many clubs have an owner who can build a new stadium and pay for it themselves?

Us, and Man Utd?

Even Villa are scaling back their stadium redevelopment.

Got a link for that? Wifey is Villa and I want to check it out.

[Nucasol]

2 minutes ago, leffe186 said:

Got a link for that? Wifey is Villa and I want to check it out.

Apologising in advance for use of Daily Heil:

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-12885459/amp/Aston-Villa-Premier-League-stadium-plan-hold.html

[leffe186]

1 minute ago, Nucasol said:

Apologising in advance for use of Daily Heil:

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-12885459/amp/Aston-Villa-Premier-League-stadium-plan-hold.html

Cheers.

 

Yeah that’s peculiar. He doesn’t say “we don’t have the money” (unsurprisingly) but instead he doesn’t think they should tear down the one stand intended for expansion “while we’re playing like this…I think everything should be about all fans and not just one particular stand”.

 

I’d have to look into the fan discussion but on the face of it that suggests that rather than not having the money for redevelopment of Villa Park, they might actually be looking to build a new ground. Unless @Stifler you have something that says they don’t have the money?

 

My understanding is that a few clubs around Europe are looking at the Tottenham Stadium and thinking that a multi-purpose stadium is the way forward. Maybe Villa are thinking the same.