FFP / Wages v Turnonover explanation?

[chicoazul]

@bizzaro @bizzaro @bizzaro Aston Villa @bizzaro @bizzaro @bizzaro

 

[coollino]

With the purchase of Stekelenburg, we are currently WITHIN the prescribed limit.

 

[The Esk]

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

I'd have thought FFP is beneficial to the share price to be honest as it restricts wage growth in line with revenue growth and caps the ability to sustain long term trading losses.

It also makes it a less exciting stock to hold compared to non regulated sports, but I guess there's few of them if any.

 

[The Esk]

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

Within the FA Handbook there's references to the PL board's ability to check deals are done on a 'fair value' basis, meaning exactly that - we couldn't do a £200 million naming rights deal with a mate of Moshiri's for Goodison.

 

[Rudolf Hucker]

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

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

Thanks, that's the one. STCC. I just read it twice. Probably need another 5 goes to sink in.


It just seems mental that we have to sell a player like Stones now we're (allegedly) brewsterred.

Didn't ManC pay a fine? How much was that? Why don't we take that option?

 

[The Esk]

Thanks, that's the one. STCC. I just read it twice. Probably need another 5 goes to sink in.


It just seems mental that we have to sell a player like Stones now we're (allegedly) brewsterred.

Didn't ManC pay a fine? How much was that? Why don't we take that option?

Off the top of my head I can't recall the exact penalty Man City paid. Yes in theory we could pay a fine, but there's no defined penalty so you'd never be sure what the punishment would be.

 

[bluerobert]

Within the FA Handbook there's references to the PL board's ability to check deals are done on a 'fair value' basis, meaning exactly that - we couldn't do a £200 million naming rights deal with a mate of Moshiri's for Goodison.

Any idea how City got around it. Would it be based for example on the scope for potential growth and investment in non footballing areas of a club?

 

[Gwladys St. Glory]

Off the top of my head I can't recall the exact penalty Man City paid. Yes in theory we could pay a fine, but there's no defined penalty so you'd never be sure what the punishment would be.

There would be a precedent, though...so I don't think they could screw us too badly.

 

[The Esk]

Any idea how City got around it. Would it be based for example on the scope for potential growth and investment in non footballing areas of a club?

There you go mate:

Manchester City accept £49m fine and transfer cap from Uefa over FFP

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/may/16/manchester-city-fine-transfer-cap-uefa-ffp?

 

[Gwladys St. Glory]

There you go mate:

Manchester City accept £49m fine and transfer cap from Uefa over FFP

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/may/16/manchester-city-fine-transfer-cap-uefa-ffp?

*has second thoughts*

 

[bluerobert]

There you go mate:

Manchester City accept £49m fine and transfer cap from Uefa over FFP

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/may/16/manchester-city-fine-transfer-cap-uefa-ffp?

Cheers mate, ouch!

 

[bluerobert]

There you go mate:

Manchester City accept £49m fine and transfer cap from Uefa over FFP

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/may/16/manchester-city-fine-transfer-cap-uefa-ffp?

I suppose when your family is worth $1 Trillion it's like paying 5p for a bag

 

[Jags..class]

So with these new rules, does this explain why chelsea and city won't pay our prices for Lukaku and Stones

 

[The Esk]

So with these new rules, does this explain why chelsea and city won't pay our prices for Lukaku and Stones

No mate, but it does explain why they're desperate for huge increases in sponsorship and other commercial revenues, and sadly how far behind we are.

 

[deipnosophist]

selling a player initially affects profit/loss account (hence impacts STCC)
Buying a player initially affects the balance sheet hence does not impact STCC (NB the annual amortisation/depreciation of that asset over it's realistic 'life' feeds into the P/L account and will impact STCC)