FFP / Wages v Turnonover explanation?

Rudolf Hucker · July 31, 2016

Apologies my search skill are useless. I know it's on here, just can't find it.

Trying to get my head round how selling stones & paying the same for a replacement benefits us.

Ta.

Eggs · July 31, 2016

...from what @roydo said, the Stones monies will be ring fenced to pay for increased salaries. I'm not sure if this is connected to ffp guidelines.

ilikecheese · July 31, 2016

Cue Damo

roydo · July 31, 2016

Fair point on trying to find it!

Others have far deeper understanding than me, but try this.

A new rule came in alongside the new TV deal, to try to keep a lid on wages. It means that each club can only increase their current wage bill by X%. But, if they can increase their profit, that X% becomes a higher Y%.

So, we sell Stones, our wage bill can increase by an amount big enough to pay the salaries new players will/can demand.

summerisle · July 31, 2016

Hope this helps.

Jags..class · July 31, 2016

roydo said:
Fair point on trying to find it!

Others have far deeper understanding than me, but try this.

A new rule came in alongside the new TV deal, to try to keep a lid on wages. It means that each club can only increase their current wage bill by X%. But, if they can increase their profit, that X% becomes a higher Y%.

So, we sell Stones, our wage bill can increase by an amount big enough to pay the salaries new players will/can demand.

So this new deal benefit man u as they have just signed Ibrahimovic and about to sign progba

Connor · July 31, 2016

ilikecheese said:
Cue Damo

If you write it, he will come.

BlueToff · July 31, 2016

roydo said:
Fair point on trying to find it!

Others have far deeper understanding than me, but try this.

A new rule came in alongside the new TV deal, to try to keep a lid on wages. It means that each club can only increase their current wage bill by X%. But, if they can increase their profit, that X% becomes a higher Y%.

So, we sell Stones, our wage bill can increase by an amount big enough to pay the salaries new players will/can demand.

this post should be pinned to the top of the transfer thread...

The Esk · July 31, 2016

Rudolf Hucker said:
Apologies my search skill are useless. I know it's on here, just can't find it.

Trying to get my head round how selling stones & paying the same for a replacement benefits us.

Ta.

Have a read of this mate. Happy to answer any questions

https://www.grandoldteam.com/2016/0...ransfers-short-term-cost-control-regulations/

BlueToff · July 31, 2016

Jags..class said:
So this new deal benefit man u as they have just signed Ibrahimovic and about to sign progba

Man U's revenue is the highest in global football. it hasn't and likely never will negatively effected them

The Esk · July 31, 2016

BlueToff said:
Man U's revenue is the highest in global football. it hasn't and likely never will negatively effected them

United have the same issue everyone else does. If you increase your wage bill by more than £7 million in a year you have to match the increase in wages with a corresponding increase in non broadcasting income.

Admittedly because their income is so huge their ability to grow income to match wage increases should be greater than others.

bluerobert · July 31, 2016

Jags..class said:
So this new deal benefit man u as they have just signed Ibrahimovic and about to sign progba

As some have said their commercial revenue means it won't really effect them. For teams like us with a small commercial set up by comparison we can increase our wages by the profit we make on player sales. So if we bough stones for 2 million and sell him for 60 million. Take away what we owe Barnsley and that's the increase in wages we can make. Means we can offer the likes of Witsel et al fat swonk. That's how I understand it mate

bluerobert · July 31, 2016

The Esk said:
United have the same issue everyone else does. If you increase your wage bill by more than £7 million in a year you have to match the increase in wages with a corresponding increase in non broadcasting income.

Admittedly because their income is so huge their ability to grow income to match wage increases should be greater than others.

Is there a panel set up to review these deals mate? Ala City and their naming rights deal.

For example what would the likelyhood of one of Moshiri's friends giving us a £200M naming rights deal by chance being looked at given we couldn't possibly command that sort of fee with our current profile

BlueToff · July 31, 2016

The Esk said:
United have the same issue everyone else does. If you increase your wage bill by more than £7 million in a year you have to match the increase in wages with a corresponding increase in non broadcasting income.

Admittedly because their income is so huge their ability to grow income to match wage increases should be greater than others.

yeh basically my point Esk!

It won't really effect them too much as their income is already so massive, due to commercial deals and the like.

Of course, that doesn't mean they can go mental - I'm sure there'll be a fair few outs at Old Trafford towards the end of the window just to offset the Pogba deal, but in the grand scheme of things they have very little to worry about.

ilikecheese · July 31, 2016

The Esk said:
United have the same issue everyone else does. If you increase your wage bill by more than £7 million in a year you have to match the increase in wages with a corresponding increase in non broadcasting income.

Admittedly because their income is so huge their ability to grow income to match wage increases should be greater than others.

As a publically traded company is their stock value independent from FFP?