Financial fair play

[cdbearsfan]

The whole idea is shit. Either have a salary cap, so everyone competes on a genuinely fair basis. Or have a free-for-all, so teams can try to compete with the very best. The current situation, attempting to guarantee that the wealthiest clubs of the last few decades will be the best FOR EVER, is the worst of both worlds.

It doesn't help clubs like Bury, either. You are scaring off all the potential owners who want to take over a small club and "live a dream" of taking them all the way to the Premier League. That leaves a far smaller pool of potential good owners, and means that the shysters who want to make money out of clubs, legally or otherwise, make up a far bigger percentage of potential owners.

[PeterWithesShin]

If there's a free for all far more clubs will go tits up.

[villa `cross the mersey]

All they're checking is if the valuation was fair market value. They're hardly out to get us, the EFL are doing the same with Derby, Sheff Weds and Reading.

I take your point PWS .....I really hope there is nothing in this and that the club were given the go ahead following three independent valuations - the present owners are savvy enough not to put the into disrepute or financial meltdown

[Gareth]

It’s a quiet football news week.

If EFL had 3 independent valuations and were satisfied there’s nothing to see here - when it was done we were an EFL club, nowt to do with Premier League.

This is just a precursor to the practice being regulated.

[cdbearsfan]

If there's a free for all far more clubs will go tits up.

Well, no. Because no (league) club had since Maidstone.

Bury went bust despite these amazing regulations.

[PeterWithesShin]

The PL back up the EFL more these days, so as the EFL are checking the other 3 i'm assuming they've asked the FA to do the same with us. I'd be very surprised if we did overvalue VP, mainly as it is such an easy thing to be busted on.

[dave.woodhall]

If there's a free for all far more clubs will go tits up.

Well, no. Because no (league) club had since Maidstone.

Bury went bust despite these amazing regulations.

Enough clubs had gone into administration, though. That's one thing that has been virtually eradicated since FFP.

[PeterWithesShin]

If there's a free for all far more clubs will go tits up.

Well, no. Because no (league) club had since Maidstone.

Bury went bust despite these amazing regulations.

You don't have to cease to exist to go tits up. Portsmouth and Leeds are still paying the price even though they still exist.

Bury and Bolton are the first 2 clubs to go into administration for 5 years, from 2007-13 over 20 did from the Conference North/South up. You don't think FFP had anything to do with the change in numbers?

[cdbearsfan]

You aren't going to go into administration if you have owners happy to throw hundreds of millions at the club.

The rules make that less likely.

[PeterWithesShin]

So all clubs should be able spend way beyond their means because a small amount around the world will have owners happy to cover the losses? And if they shouldn't all be allowed to do it and loads end up bust or in administration from chasing the dream, how do you stop it without FFP?

[cdbearsfan]

It's not spending beyond your means, if owners have the money.

In any case, the rules seem designed to fuck over clubs in trouble. You're massively in debt. If you sell some land that would help with the debt... we'll fine you (or worse).

Bonkers.

[PeterWithesShin]

Do you really think that if there is no FFP that no clubs will spend beyond their means and get deep into the shit chasing the dream?

Or is it a coincidence that 2 clubs have gone into administration in the last 6 years, the 6 years before that it was 23?

[cdbearsfan]

Absolutely loads of clubs have circled that particular drain, Villa for instance. We were only saved by rich owners, which the rules try to prevent.

And, again, the rules have proven not to work as Bury have gone bust. And Bolton were incredibly close.

[dave.woodhall]

I would say that any legislation that led to a 90% reduction in a problem was pretty successful.

[PeterWithesShin]

Do you really think that if there is no FFP that no clubs will spend beyond their means and get deep into the shit chasing the dream?

Or is it a coincidence that 2 clubs have gone into administration in the last 6 years, the 6 years before that it was 23?
Make it 3 in 6 years if you want to add us, compared to 23 before plus all the clubs that circled the drain 07-13 but avoided it as you're trying to include those.