FFP RIP?

[barneygumble]

It's pretty much a club and it's the big boys who run it.
It's COVID that has finally brought it to its knees.
I'm an old cynic I don't think it will change.
If they go for this European Super League idea (and I think they will)
then football as we know is pretty much finished. Well it will be for me at least.

It's just not feasible.

Let's be brutally honest, IF they were to succeed with a European Super League, then they're asking (from a UK perspective) Sky or BT to stump up even more money than what they'd get from Champions League, and a way to increase the revenue for the domestic league (on the basis that they'll continue in both).

What's the appeal? I know as a City fan, you've looked from the outside for the majority of recent time, before the last decade, so it's a fair reflection on your behalf, but what is the appeal? The lure of drawing a Barca/Real/Bayern must be amazing, and then getting to see your team play there, and win and progress must be things dreams are made of, but what excitement is there, if it's just a League game? And they know that.

As a person who doesn't subscribe to any of the channels, due to the prices anyway, why would anyone outside of the chosen few pay for subscriptions? I don't do it for the Champions League, so why am I doing it for a league we'll never be part of.

COVID has had lots of negatives, but there are some things we'll take away from it, and it could be the return of a fair balance in football, and I'm excited for that.

 

[PaulPowersTash]

It's just not feasible.

Let's be brutally honest, IF they were to succeed with a European Super League, then they're asking (from a UK perspective) Sky or BT to stump up even more money than what they'd get from Champions League, and a way to increase the revenue for the domestic league (on the basis that they'll continue in both).

What's the appeal? I know as a City fan, you've looked from the outside for the majority of recent time, before the last decade, so it's a fair reflection on your behalf, but what is the appeal? The lure of drawing a Barca/Real/Bayern must be amazing, and then getting to see your team play there, and win and progress must be things dreams are made of, but what excitement is there, if it's just a League game? And they know that.

As a person who doesn't subscribe to any of the channels, due to the prices anyway, why would anyone outside of the chosen few pay for subscriptions? I don't do it for the Champions League, so why am I doing it for a league we'll never be part of.

COVID has had lots of negatives, but there are some things we'll take away from it, and it could be the return of a fair balance in football, and I'm excited for that.

I genuinely hope you are right.
But unfortunately, I think they will pursue it. They are not interested in how exciting it is for the fans.
They are just interested in how much money they can make. The greed knows no bounds and its the
same for all of the big clubs and City are no different and are just as bad as the rest of them these days.
You are right when you say its great to watch Bayern or Barca or Real Madrid. But only the first few times.
Amazingly it becomes boring when you are playing the same teams at the same stage of the competition
year after year. That's why the Europa League was more fun. Different teams, different away days to different
cities. After visiting Barcelona 5 or 6 years in a row the novelty wears off. I know that may sound daft but it
actually does (not to mention the totaly biased officiating to make sure the favoured teams progress).
A European Super League would kill domestic football as we know it - but as you say maybe in the long run that
is for the best. The game needs to reset itself but I believe before it does it will have to kill itself and they are
doing a pretty good job of that at the moment.

 

[Tipp blue]

The fundamental problem at the core of the super league that the big clubs don’t want to admit is that they’re not very interesting to watch. No one wants to see AC Milan Manchester United every week. It was bad enough seeing Arsenal get battered by Barcelona and Bayern every year in the CL. The group phases of the champions league are boring. There’s no rivalries, there’d be no underdog successes, no relegation, no Sam Allardyces, no Grant Holts. The rich tapestry of league football in England is what draws people in and is the goose that has laid the golden egg. There is just no market for Liverpool v Real Madrid four times a season every season with nothing riding on it. It’s boring, and they all know it which is what annoys them so much. They’d break away and the product would immediately fail and if anything just boost interest in all the leagues they left behind that would immediately become more competitive.

It’s a cache 22 for the big clubs that they’ll never break out of. They want more money and less competition, but the only way to make more money is for more people to be interested, and people only like competitive sport. They just can’t break out of this bind and it continues to annoy them. The best way to freshen up the CL would be if FFP was relaxed and more teams gatecrashed it, if Everton, Villarreal, Fiorentina, Wolfsburg etc. were in it some years rather than the same tired old teams. They’re terrified to allow it though even though it’s probably the only thing that will save a competition that is frankly even less exciting than the league cup until the quarter final stages.

Let them on with their super league, no relegation no promotion, hopefully any team that goes Liverpool and United will be kicked out of English FA competition. It would only take a few years until the 2 Spanish sides start finishing 1 and 2 every year, hoovering up all the south American talent. Not much fun when the best your looking at is 3rd, when teams come crawling back the FA need to have the balls to tell them, yea you are welcome back but you are starting off in non league.

 

[KloppShambles]

 

[barneygumble]

I genuinely hope you are right.
But unfortunately, I think they will pursue it. They are not interested in how exciting it is for the fans.
They are just interested in how much money they can make. The greed knows no bounds and its the
same for all of the big clubs and City are no different and are just as bad as the rest of them these days.
You are right when you say its great to watch Bayern or Barca or Real Madrid. But only the first few times.
Amazingly it becomes boring when you are playing the same teams at the same stage of the competition
year after year. That's why the Europa League was more fun. Different teams, different away days to different
cities. After visiting Barcelona 5 or 6 years in a row the novelty wears off. I know that may sound daft but it
actually does (not to mention the totaly biased officiating to make sure the favoured teams progress).
A European Super League would kill domestic football as we know it - but as you say maybe in the long run that
is for the best. The game needs to reset itself but I believe before it does it will have to kill itself and they are
doing a pretty good job of that at the moment.

No, no mate, I completely understand.

I think from an Everton perspective, i'm quite excited about the prospect of the Europa Conference League - yes, it's a tinpot cup, but some of the teams in the competition will be from really interesting, unique places such as Poland, Czech Republic, Hungary where you know you'll have a ball no matter what.

The one thing which gets me about Champions League games, is the sheer tenacity (usually Spanish sides) to charge you through the roof for a tickey, think Liverpool fans were charged €170 for a ticket recently for theirs.

The Super League surely has to be exciting for the fans though, because if there's no interest, there's no profit, surely, there's got to be a better solution than randomly allocating games, and who has best record wins. It's so flawed. Guaranteed to fail. Not sure why they wouldn't just run a money spinner in the UAE with a select few chosen, post-season to suppress the need to change, but also give them the finance they need. Everyone wins, and then smaller clubs can live in hope.

 

[mahermi1]

What Financial Fair Play changes would mean for Everton and Moshiri

European football's governing body are reported to be considering major changes to Financial Fair Play

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk

If the Echo's backing it, it can't be good for Everton.
Let's be honest, if FFP isn't working, what the governing bodies mean, it isn't working well enough for the big clubs. Does anyone really think, that they will even up the playing field ?

 

[Tipp blue]

If the Echo's backing it, it can't be good for Everton.
Let's be honest, if FFP isn't working, what the governing bodies mean, it isn't working well enough for the big clubs. Does anyone really think, that they will even up the playing field ?

Short of saying this list of clubs can spend what they want the rest have to abide by these rules then the playing field will be evened up from what it was under FFP.

 

[catcherintherye]

The fundamental problem at the core of the super league that the big clubs don’t want to admit is that they’re not very interesting to watch. No one wants to see AC Milan Manchester United every week. It was bad enough seeing Arsenal get battered by Barcelona and Bayern every year in the CL. The group phases of the champions league are boring. There’s no rivalries, there’d be no underdog successes, no relegation, no Sam Allardyces, no Grant Holts. The rich tapestry of league football in England is what draws people in and is the goose that has laid the golden egg. There is just no market for Liverpool v Real Madrid four times a season every season with nothing riding on it. It’s boring, and they all know it which is what annoys them so much. They’d break away and the product would immediately fail and if anything just boost interest in all the leagues they left behind that would immediately become more competitive.

It’s a cache 22 for the big clubs that they’ll never break out of. They want more money and less competition, but the only way to make more money is for more people to be interested, and people only like competitive sport. They just can’t break out of this bind and it continues to annoy them. The best way to freshen up the CL would be if FFP was relaxed and more teams gatecrashed it, if Everton, Villarreal, Fiorentina, Wolfsburg etc. were in it some years rather than the same tired old teams. They’re terrified to allow it though even though it’s probably the only thing that will save a competition that is frankly even less exciting than the league cup until the quarter final stages.

I agree with all of that, but I'd add it is one of numerous structural problems. You're absolute right though, that it's not the team name that brings the razzamatazz factor but them competing to win the league, or get into the CL or whatever. I remember when Marseille, or Ajax, or PSV wer ethe star names of European football, and PSG were an also. I remember City being in the 3rd division. If you would have said to someone 20 years ago, English football won't survive with Manchester City, but Leeds,Aston Villa and Newcastle will stay in the PL you'd have been laughed out of town. It's all cyclical.

The PL has qualification for the CL which is big story, qualification for Europe, who wins the cups, and the battle for relegation alongside who wins the title. You have 4 or 5 different avenues for drama there which will simply not be available in the Super League, as there's no such concept. It's all a bit corny, but when you work so closely with TV companies, they dictate the drama and the "top 4 race" becomes a massive selling point.

Most of the teams going into it are sacrificing almost guarenteed periods at the top of their own league and Europe, for the majority of them going into a league which they will be nowhere near winning. It has more potential to drive down exposure than drive up exposure.

The other structural factor, is they have got to generate huge revenues. They all take the lions share of revenue from their domestic leagues. They've got to drive enough revenue to pay not just what we pay the top 3-4 teams but 18 teams at least that level of reveue as a starting point. When you factor in they may not be allowed to play in the CL either, and have those values, you are talking maybe upwards of double the revenue that the PL generates for 3-4 teams to 18 teams. The PL is one of the most successful sporting enterprises in it's sector of sport. Just to break even, you have to outperform that by numerous degrees.

This is all in a world coping with the fall out from covid. A world where streaming services will be driving down costs per broadcast etc etc. I mean there is a world where it might be feasibly to do all of that, but if you were a betting man, you'd look at the simple numbers and can only assume it's extremely unlikely they get close.

And they will have to burn all bridges to be able to access this enormous risk for nominal reward scenario.

Thats before you even get into what actually happens if some of the already established teams say thanks but no thanks. Either they don't agree in principle, or they see better opportunities to dominate the existing structures. Or that they don't ideologically agree with greater protectionism that will inevitably follow it's creation. You suddenly lose 3/4/5 top teams and suddenly you are replacing those teams with lesser known names, and it looks like more big names are in the CL anyway.

 

[catcherintherye]

If the Echo's backing it, it can't be good for Everton.
Let's be honest, if FFP isn't working, what the governing bodies mean, it isn't working well enough for the big clubs. Does anyone really think, that they will even up the playing field ?

I haven't bothered to read the article, as I don't really see a lot of sense from the Echo. But sometimes as Groucho Marx says, if it walks like an idiot, talks like an idiot, please do not be confused, that man is an idiot".

We are very constrained by FFP, we are pushing the laws to their limits, and trying to find creative ways around the rules. At least in the short term, it going would be good.

Longer term, I find it almost impossible they can strengthn it in the way the established teams want, as what they are asking for is illegal as per the laws around competition.

You also have to factor in, a lot of these big teams, need money to start being spent. They don't have much of their own cash, and have huge wage bills they can't meet. So allowing "new money" to start sloshing money about would help them.

 

[catcherintherye]

It looks to me like what happened was that UEFA did not expect a cottage industry of third parties springing up that essentially loaned clubs their outgoing transfer payment amounts in return for repayment in installments.

The bet by clubs and investors appears to have been that consistent year-over-year increases in club revenues meant that they were better off grabbing up all the marketable assets that they could, as even if they did not develop further they would generally be worth more in the future due to clubs' increased capacity to pay for them.

Add in Barca's borrowing for an overdue refurbishing of the Camp Nou (and the FFP exception for stadium investment, which in turn would be expected to increase revenues and improve their FFP position) and you have a toxic brew.

The big problem with the stadium exception was that the clubs that were already big could expect a much greater return on investment than smaller clubs could - and now it's no surprise that the clubs that are caught out are by and large the big clubs with recent big stadium projects intended to chase the revenue bump for FFP purposes.

This is a really astute post. Football has been a massive bull market, and some creative thinkers have essentially hedged the bull market more than the competition. Barcelona are a clear example of this, but Liverpool are to a degree as well. What destroys companies like that, is a downturn.

 

[catcherintherye]

Unless they are a small part of a large group, like Phillip Greens lot that went pop, (and even then, they would be sold off as a going concern), and/or carried huge debt they couldnt service, cant see why.

I am always on the very cautious wing in my life about debt, but in honesty in business it's never been the biggest priority for me if I was taking a decision as to if they are good business (it's a factor). A good business can still take debt on, and if it has a good return on capital, it is often quite a sensible move to do so.

There's no doubt to me the long bull market of football has probably contributed to the equilibrium going too far the other way. People tend to try and outdo each other in bull markets, so it becomes increasingly in vogue to take on more debt, knowing with an inflation rate of close to 15% over a 30 year period, todays debt is virtually wiped out in 10 years. A quick calculation is that within 10 years a 1bn debt is worth less than 200m in real terms at a 15% inflation rate.

What you see now though, is the other side. A sharp downturn, you might even be fair to label a crash that is likely to cause damaged for 2 years, and then lingering problems. I look at the debt of clubs like Barcelona, and it's hard to see them being able to maintain position in the way they want too. Probably securing cash with a long term borrowing solution could work partially, but it would lead to a lot of belt tightening thats required.

 

[KloppShambles]

I think a good example of the precociousness/vulnerability that you're talking about is FC Shalke 04. They are an absolutely massive club in Germany that was qualifying for the Champions League but now have their current model/existence in question. It's a business at the end of the day but because of the sentimental value many clubs have to their supporters it's sad to see them run like this, with such risk.
I don't think Barcelona would need to belt tighten too much, they just need to win a CL again, that brand is one of the biggest in the world.

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

https://resources.premierleague.com/premierleague/document/2021/01/21/707a919b-7915-4364-9a96-ad09c6f0e328/2020-21-PL-Handbook-200121.pdf

E.49. Subject to Rule E.53, if the PSR Calculation results in a loss of up to £15m, then the Board shall determine whether the Club will, until the end of T+1, be able to pay its liabilities described in Rule E.14.7.1 and fulfil the obligations set out in Rules E.14.7.2 and E.14.7.3. E.50. Subject to Rule E.53, if the PSR Calculation results in a loss of in excess of £15m then the following shall apply: E.50.1. the Club shall provide, by 31 March in the relevant Season, Future Financial Information to cover the period commencing from its last accounting reference date (as defined in section 391 of the Act) until the end of T+2 and a calculation of estimated aggregated Adjusted Earnings Before Tax until the end of T+2 based on that Future Financial Information; E.50.2. the Club shall provide such evidence of Secure Funding as the Board considers sufficient; and E.50.3. if the Club is unable to provide evidence of Secure Funding as set out in Rule E.50.2, the Board may exercise its powers set out in Rule E.15. E.51. Subject to Rule E.53,

if the PSR Calculation results in losses of in excess of £105m: E.51.1. the Board may exercise its powers set out in Rule E.15; and E.51.2. the Club shall be treated as being in breach of these Rules and accordingly the Board shall refer the breach to a Commission constituted pursuant to Section W of these Rules. E.52. The sum set out in Rule E.51 shall be reduced by £22m for each Season covered by T-1, T-2 and T-3 in which the Club was in membership of The Football League. E.53.

In respect of Season 2019/20, the provisions of Rules E.48 to E.51 shall not apply.



E.15. The powers referred to in Rule E.14 are: E.15.1. to require the Club to submit, agree and adhere to a budget which shall include, but not be limited to, the matters set out in Rule H.1.1 to H.1.3;
E.15.2. to require the Club to provide such further information as the Board shall determine and for such period as it shall determine;
and E.15.3. to refuse any application by that Club to register any Player or any new contract of an existing Player of that Club if the Board reasonably deems that this is necessary in order to ensure that the Club complies with its obligations listed in Rule E.14.7



I think the Premier League still has STCC, but now its based solely on Profit and loss, the old version was binned with limits of wages and stuff.

It was suspended last season and will 100% be suspended this season, possibly considering that clubs have all took a massive hit, would be shocked if they choose to enforce it given the current climate were I would imagine most clubs in the league would fail for the next few seasons.

They binned it mate.

The new Financial Fair Play rule change that could completely change how next season’s Premier League plays out

The decision to do away with Short Term Cost Control makes it much easier for mid-table sides to break into European places

www.fourfourtwo.com

 

[Goat]

They binned it mate.

The new Financial Fair Play rule change that could completely change how next season’s Premier League plays out

The decision to do away with Short Term Cost Control makes it much easier for mid-table sides to break into European places

www.fourfourtwo.com

I know mate, but what I linked are the current Premier League rules.

The 105m limit is still there, but now its not based on how it was with regards wages and 7m a year.

But I cant see The Premier League going through anybody's books for a long, long time.

 

[PaulPowersTash]

I know mate, but what I linked are the current Premier League rules.

The 105m limit is still there, but now its not based on how it was with regards wages and 7m a year.

But I cant see The Premier League going through anybody's books for a long, long time.

They officially still haven't closed the case regarding FFP against City.
Can't see that one getting to far...