FFP

[PaulWinch again]

I don’t know what happens if we pass that first requirement to be honest.

[andyh]

Of course, there's a simple solution to all this, which is to bin PSR and ban all state ownership or involvement in football clubs.

Convenient how the "simple solution" is the precise one that means we're more financially powerful than  nearly every other club (until our ownership changes) but screws the very few clubs who we'd still not be able to compete with.

He's arguing for a free market where clubs like us with rich owners aren't limited in what we can do. So yes Liverpool would still have spent 400M. It just means we could have spent 200M and not a negative net spend. The bigger point is under the current model because our commercial revenues will never be that of Man U or Liverpool we will never be able to catch up. And we will forever be selling our best players to essentially stand still.

We’d have spent £200m and added a fortune to our wage bill. So our BAU outgoings would be way way higher than our income. What happens if you still dont get champions league and the owners get bored? We’d be 2018 all over again.

I think all clubs should operate within their means. 

All premier league clubs have a huge wealth of assets made up by stadiums, training grounds, playing staff and huge commercial and television contracts.
There is no way a premier league club get into financial jeopardy nowadays, and even if they did, there are buyers lining up to jump in.
Chelsea and Man U were up to their eyes in debt when buyers were happy to buy in.

The financial restraints are not fit for purpose and trying to fix a problem that doesn’t exist.

[ozzjim]

That they may be, but the UEFA ones are more restrictive. It will be very interesting to see how Sunderland navigate PSR having spent £180m this summer, or indeed Forest navigate SCR when they've spent £115 plus net this summer and added some big wages into that squad.

[adrenachrome]

Some very good points raised in the posts above, but the simple fact is that we we have been royally fucked by these various financial restrictions, and we will now do well to finish in the top half of the EPL.

[London Villan]

I guess the rules are there to stop what could have happened to us in 2018... Established PL club, get relegated and then implodes. We were 48 hours away from administration (at best) and potentially even worse.

[LeeS]

I guess the rules are there to stop what could have happened to us in 2018... Established PL club, get relegated and then implodes. We were 48 hours away from administration (at best) and potentially even worse.

We should never forget this. It’s not about Portsmouth or Bury. It’s about what happened to us. If we have another 3 or 4 years of nearly breaking through but not quite, the owners may walk. In the meantime, a host of other clubs could get their own Wes and Nas and Unai and make it even harder. It could easily go wrong if we stretch beyond the clubs own means.

[cdbearsfan]

The rules do nothing to prevent scenarios like that. See Wednesday, Sheffield.

They are in place to protect the established elite, because Michel Platini didn't want teams being able to challenge/usurp Juventus in the same way that Man City were able to overtake Man U, Liverpool, etc.

[Demitri_C]

It just seems utterly ridiculous that again we are actually  showing  a positive balance on transfer  fees while manure again are in the red. Surely they are failing FFP because they are losing every window

[London Villan]

The rules do nothing to prevent scenarios like that. See Wednesday, Sheffield.

They are in place to protect the established elite, because Michel Platini didn't want teams being able to challenge/usurp Juventus in the same way that Man City were able to overtake Man U, Liverpool, etc.

Wednesday haven't obeyed the rules though and are on the verge of going out of existence. Follow the rules and it won't happen.

[Drummond]

It just seems utterly ridiculous that again we are actually  showing  a positive balance on transfer  fees while manure again are in the red. Surely they are failing FFP because they are losing every window

Their commercial revenues are huge in comparison.

[LeeS]

It just seems utterly ridiculous that again we are actually  showing  a positive balance on transfer  fees while manure again are in the red. Surely they are failing FFP because they are losing every window

Their commercial revenues are huge in comparison.

We get to spend the difference between our wage bill and our income. United, spend 55% of income on wages. We spent 90+%. They are a commercial behemoth

[Somniloquism]

Manure for the past few windows have mainly sold home grown talent and that is almost a 4-1 plus on the balance sheets as incoming fees and wages are spread over 4 years on the accounts but sold players are profit for that year (and against ffp figures over three IIRC). So in simple terms Sesko would only be a 15mil hit on this years accounts but Garnacho would be 40m of income. They might be pushing close but they will just sell Mainoo for £40-50 if they need to and be covered again. (I suspect that was more why they kept him as they wouldn't be able to sell him until the loan period was over but he might be sold in Jan).

But now it is more revenue based, they have an even stronger advantage as they are almost double ours even when they are shit.

[LeeS]

Manure for the past few windows have mainly sold home grown talent and that is almost a 4-1 plus on the balance sheets as incoming fees and wages are spread over 4 years on the accounts but sold players are profit for that year (and against ffp figures over three IIRC). So in simple terms Sesko would only be a 15mil hit on this years accounts but Garnacho would be 40m of income. They might be pushing close but they will just sell Mainoo for £40-50 if they need to and be covered again. (I suspect that was more why they kept him as they wouldn't be able to sell him until the loan period was over but he might be sold in Jan).

But now it is more revenue based, they have an even stronger advantage as they are almost double ours even when they are shit.

This does my head in. Yes, Sesko is spread over 4 years but next year they have another quarter of his fee to put on the books. And the year after and the year after that. And a quarter each of a Mbuemo, Cunha and Lemmans. I’m not accusing you of this but everyone forgets about that when they do the net all still has to be paid for and it all still counts for the sums for PSR eventually.

[Somniloquism]

The money does have to be paid, and in most cases the payments are spread over several years. But for the point of FFP working out, only 3/4 of the fee will appear at most at any one time and others are then dropping off, but the whole of the sold home-grown is on for the three years. So previously Elanga, McTominay, Greenwood, Henderson and the lower priced but multiple numbers of lower placed players all helped them waste the money the last few years.

But as SCR seems to be the new thing, it doesn't surprise me that all the clubs with the most revenues are spending all the money this year.

[LeeS]

The money does have to be paid, and in most cases the payments are spread over several years. But for the point of FFP working out, only 3/4 of the fee will appear at most at any one time and others are then dropping off, but the whole of the sold home-grown is on for the three years. So previously Elanga, McTominay, Greenwood, Henderson and the lower priced but multiple numbers of lower placed players all helped them waste the money the last few years.

But as SCR seems to be the new thing, it doesn't surprise me that all the clubs with the most revenues are spending all the money this year.

Yep, it’s all about revenue. I wonder how long before NSWE realise that only a Spurs style stadium will allow us to compete. Even if we manage to consistently get the 5th champions league spot, we’ll still be outgunned every single year on revenue. Spurs don’t even need CL money, they rake it in.