Everton, our summer transfers and short term cost control regulations

[rochdaleblue]

Good Article Esk

I guess it depends how quickly we want to get back to the top as current sponsorship and revenue won't support huge salaries and transfers without the TV revenues. If we are looking to catch up quickly then we will have to spend huge amounts of cash on player recruitment and even though we can recoup some of that with player sales.

The game changer would be the stadium as that would provide us with a platform to go out and generate the sums needed to be competitive.

Selling Stones is a way to go but I'd rather have keep him then sell him.....if only we got a huge 45m pound offer for Naisse

So typical Everton. We wait a lifetime for a billionaire to come along and we still have to sell one of our 'stars' in order to meet FFP requirements. However we should only be sailing in choppy waters for the next 12 months, as I have every confidence in our new owner to negoiate significantly better commercial deals for the club, but I don't think we will see significant 'growth' until we are in our new stadium.

 

[bizzaro]

But given the situation with players being off the books (Osman, Hibbert etc and Kone and so on going)

Commercial contracts ending (Chang).

New commercial contracts potentially starting.

There is certainly slack been generated in the wage bill structure.



Plus the club could put in the individual player contacts a faster wage rise provision after this year.

That would be the way I circumvent the compliance rules at Everton @The Esk

And you know how good I am at knowing how to get around the compliance rules and FFP....

i.e.
Year A .... x
Year B .... x + 1
Year C .... x + 2

Whereas this might in the initial year mean we offer less than other clubs - Moshiri's business guru's can be force multipliers by guarenteeing we are earning more commercial revenue by year C to ensure we attract and retain these players.

What I am saying @The Esk - is that we can offer the potential of a fast wage rise - due to the impact of Moshiri.

So although year 1 wages might not be as at other clubs. Within three years they will be.

Contracts can be written to guarentee the players a slopping in built wage rise that might meet their acceptance.

A player may not be that bothered about how the deal is structured - provided they are very rich men at the end of a three year period.

 

[ToffeeDoug]

So typical Everton. We wait a lifetime for a billionaire to come along and we still have to sell one of our 'stars' in order to meet FFP requirements. However we should only be sailing in choppy waters for the next 12 months, as I have every confidence in our new owner to negoiate significantly better commercial deals for the club, but I don't think we will see significant 'growth' until we are in our new stadium.

Absolutely, if all the desired growth was possible at GP we wouldn't be wanting a stadium move.

 

[Efcjake]

No mate. Details of the proposed punishments just haven't been published (not in the public domain).

Doesn't mean they do not exist or are known to the clubs.

Why wouldn't they publish them? If you're going to publish the rules for the public to read then why not the punishments also?

I have read today that it is decided by a board of Premier League representatives what the respective punishments would be. If you have seen something detailing that some sort of structured punishment exists I would appreciate if you could post it for me to read up on.

 

[bizzaro]

Why wouldn't they publish them? If you're going to publish the rules for the public to read then why not the punishments also?

I have read today that it is decided by a board of Premier League representatives what the respective punishments would be. If you have seen something detailing that some sort of structured punishment exists I would appreciate if you could post it for me to read up on.

The Premier League is a private sporting association. You actually get invited into it.

They don't have to publish absolutely everything. They don't publish their meeting minutes or similar.

 

[Efcjake]

What I am saying @The Esk - is that we can offer the potential of a fast wage rise - due to the impact of Moshiri.

So although year 1 wages might not be as at other clubs. Within three years they will be.

Contracts can be written to guarentee the players a slopping in built wage rise that might meet their acceptance.

A player may not be that bothered about how the deal is structured - provided they are very rich men at the end of a three year period.

How can we avoid the same problem we are facing now with what you suggest? Simply raising existing wages at a set rate is not going to change the set limit in place for the next year. all that does is reduce the amount we have to play with for the following year.

 

[Efcjake]

The Premier League is a private sporting association. You actually get invited into it.

They don't have to publish absolutely everything. They don't publish their meeting minutes or similar.

And they didn't have to publicly publish the rules but they did. So why not do the same for the punishments if there is an explicit structure in place as you suggest?

 

[bizzaro]

Why wouldn't they publish them? If you're going to publish the rules for the public to read then why not the punishments also?

I have read today that it is decided by a board of Premier League representatives what the respective punishments would be. If you have seen something detailing that some sort of structured punishment exists I would appreciate if you could post it for me to read up on.

The premier leagure rule book is not a public document.


http://m.premierleague.com/content/premierleague/en-gb/about/who-we-are.html

The Premier League Rule Book serves as a contract between the League, the Member Clubs and one another, defining the structure and running of the competition.

Any serious breach of the Rule Book results in an independent three-person tribunal sitting to hear the case, ascertain guilt and set the punishment, which can range from fines to points deductions and, in extreme cases, expulsion from the competition (this has never happened in the history of the Premier League).

 

[The Esk]

So typical Everton. We wait a lifetime for a billionaire to come along and we still have to sell one of our 'stars' in order to meet FFP requirements.

It's not that bad mate. I liken it to chess, sometimes you sacrifice a piece to win the game.

The loss of Stones would be more than compensated by freedom it would give us to enhance and develop the squad. This can be a real win win.

 

[bobbydigital]

What I am saying @The Esk - is that we can offer the potential of a fast wage rise - due to the impact of Moshiri.

So although year 1 wages might not be as at other clubs. Within three years they will be.

Contracts can be written to guarentee the players a slopping in built wage rise that might meet their acceptance.

A player may not be that bothered about how the deal is structured - provided they are very rich men at the end of a three year period.

That's not going to fully solve the problem and there would be questions over whether players would agree to these contracts and also how they would be accounted for anyway.
It seems indisputable there needs to be sales which make player trading profits. Personally I would much rather we sold Coleman and Cleverly and tried to work things out that way, but it appears that Stones may have one foot out the door already unfortunately.

 

[bizzaro]

And they didn't have to publicly publish the rules but they did. So why not do the same for the punishments if there is an explicit structure in place as you suggest?

The closest thing to a 'public premier leagure rulebook' is what is published in the 'Premier League Handbook' which is a public document.

http://www.premierleague.com/conten...handbooks/premier-league-handbook-2015-16.pdf

However, do not confuse a 'guidance document' with law or actual rules. Which will be in a written document held at the Premier League's head quarters.

 

[bizzaro]

That's not going to fully solve the problem and there would be questions over whether players would agree to these contracts and also how they would be accounted for anyway.
It seems indisputable there needs to be sales which make player trading profits. Personally I would much rather we sold Coleman and Cleverly and tried to work things out that way, but it appears that Stones may have one foot out the door already unfortunately.

I'm not saying it will solve the entire issue.

What it will do - is create slack.

Slack in order to manage the situation is what @The Esk is looking for. Or is looking at how Moshiri will manage the issue.

 

[Efcjake]

The premier leagure rule book is not a public document.


http://m.premierleague.com/content/premierleague/en-gb/about/who-we-are.html

The Premier League Rule Book serves as a contract between the League, the Member Clubs and one another, defining the structure and running of the competition.

Any serious breach of the Rule Book results in an independent three-person tribunal sitting to hear the case, ascertain guilt and set the punishment, which can range from fines to points deductions and, in extreme cases, expulsion from the competition (this has never happened in the history of the Premier League).

That last paragraph is exactly what I was saying which you appeared to disagree over. If we break the salary expenditure increase limit then we go before a tribunal and they decide a punishment. Nothing about that indicates to me that there is a straightforward break rule x and face punishment y .

 

[Efcjake]

The closest thing to a 'public premier leagure rulebook' is what is published in the 'Premier League Handbook' which is a public document.

http://www.premierleague.com/conten...handbooks/premier-league-handbook-2015-16.pdf

However, do not confuse a 'guidance document' with law or actual rules. Which will be in a written document held at the Premier League's head quarters.

Is that the document I linked to earlier which has the E. 18 and E.19 rules for short term cost control detailed within and described as "rules" because that seemed like a document filled with official rules.

 

[bizzaro]

That last paragraph is exactly what I was saying which you appeared to disagree over. If we break the salary expenditure increase limit then we go before a tribunal and they decide a punishment. Nothing about that indicates to me that there is a straightforward break rule x and face punishment y .

The full rule book will likely give indications of penalty or sanction in the event of a breach.

The tribunal will only consider mitigation. However, the rule book will state what the punishments for certain offences are. As a frame of reference for the tribunal.