FFP

[AV84]

Was Everton's takeover ever approved or completed? Could they end up in real trouble from all this?

[sid1964]

Just read on the Mail website, that the clubs who have broken FFP rules will be informed today.

Hopefully we will be okay.

[pablo_picasso]

I was talking about ManC specifically, but it should cover all teams I suppose. Would hopefully stop teams from dragging their feet.

[Gareth]

Was Everton's takeover ever approved or completed? Could they end up in real trouble from all this?

Sure I read somewhere that they were not confident that the takeover would be ratified…takes something to fail a PL fit and proper test lol….which would be interesting as they took another 50m loan from them the other week

[Nunkin1965]

Was Everton's takeover ever approved or completed? Could they end up in real trouble from all this?

Sure I read somewhere that they were not confident that the takeover would be ratified…takes something to fail a PL fit and proper test lol….which would be interesting as they took another 50m loan from them the other week

Yes there's  a piece in The Athletic about 777 and it's not a good reading if you're an Everton fan.
Just wish I was clever enough to post the link or whatever you do!

[Dave P]

We shouldn't be worried....should we?

[Ads]

Nah

[Somniloquism]

Can Everton be punished again? 10 points was already unprecedented at this level so I presume it would be a heavy fine which doesn't really help them get their house in order. Locking them out of transfer windows for a year or two wouldn't make much difference as they don't have anything to spend anyway.

Yes they can. Different charge to the last one at a guess. Derby had two points deductions in the same season when the Saviour of St Andrews was there, one for Admin and then the second for the dodgy books.

[LeeB]

Nah

I dunno man, Stockley Park are still checking to see if Bailey's toe is over the FFP threshold, and if they can't prove it they'll move onto something else.

[chrisw1]

It's clear that FFP pulls up the drawbridge and it does it brilliantly.

But without it we'd now have a second 'Man City' situation with Newcastle and Chelsea could spend another billion if they wanted to.

I really hate it as a concept, particularly as it's us knocking at the door, but would allowing Necastle to dominate alongside Man City for the next 10 years be any more palatable?

[LeeB]

It's clear that FFP pulls up the drawbridge and it does it brilliantly.

But without it we'd now have a second 'Man City' situation with Newcastle and Chelsea could spend another billion if they wanted to.

I really hate it as a concept, particularly as it's us knocking at the door, but would allowing Necastle to dominate alongside Man City for the next 10 years be any more palatable?

It's a good point. The problem is it actually seems to be working in the way it's 'intended', not just as the drawbridge puller upper, but getting teams to live within their means.

I'm forever seeing our friends down the road moaning about it for instance (like it's holding them back from world dominance), but without it in the Championship that previous lot would have taken them to the wall.

[chrisw1]

So the only way you can really disrupt is to have a manager who is capable of getting a team punching above their weight and at the same time do what you can to close the financial gap.  Us and Brighton (and arguably Newcastle) have the former.  The next step is to increase revenue.  Newcastle have more opportunity with their larger stadium and no doubt the will be some 'in-house' sponsoring shenanigans.

And this is why Heck (and Purslow before) are having to start squeezing the pips.

As for ground redevelopment, I can see both sides.  Would the North make enough of a difference?  Well, possibly not, but it's the shortest-term solution to at least give some more FFP room while we have a generational manager on board.  The alternative means Emery won't really get significant extra financial assistance over and above what he generates with his own success.  For me that's disappointing.  The chances are by the time any new stadium is out the ground we'll have run our race and be back somewhere between 6-12th.     

[Risso]

So the only way you can really disrupt is to have a manager who is capable of getting a team punching above their weight and at the same time do what you can to close the financial gap.  Us and Brighton (and arguably Newcastle) have the former.  The next step is to increase revenue.  Newcastle have more opportunity with their larger stadium and no doubt the will be some 'in-house' sponsoring shenanigans.

And this is why Heck (and Purslow before) are having to start squeezing the pips.

As for ground redevelopment, I can see both sides.  Would the North make enough of a difference?  Well, possibly not, but it's the shortest-term solution to at least give some more FFP room while we have a generational manager on board.  The alternative means Emery won't really get significant extra financial assistance over and above what he generates with his own success.  For me that's disappointing.  The chances are by the time any new stadium is out the ground we'll have run our race and be back somewhere between 6-12th.     

We're competing against teams who have both Champions League money and much bigger grounds. Hopefully the Champions League issue will be sorted this season, but as Chelsea are finding because you have it one year, it doesn't mean that it's guaranteed income forever. As it stands, we're stuck with our nice but inadequate stadium for years now.

[Clive W]

Just as a matter of interest, based on the current restrictions of the surrounding area, and assuming limitless funds, what would be the potential capacity of VP?

Probably a very hypothetical question for the architects among us

[Clive W]

Apologies - should have posted it in the VP redevelopment thread