Financial Fair Play investigation

Status
Not open for further replies.
Article 17 of FIFAs rules on players already allows players to tear up their contracts after 3 years if aged under 28 and 2 years if over without a fee albeit compensation would be payable.

I know what the rule is mate. I'm just saying culturally if they start getting used more, it will have far reaching consequences.
 
I know what the rule is mate. I'm just saying culturally if they start getting used more, it will have far reaching consequences.
It was your response earlier where you said “ if they come in” suggested ( it seems erroneously) that you were implying that they weren’t already a possibility and as we both know they already are an option.

Until now there have been few instances where a player has given formal notice but there have been a few but as they say targets drive behaviours at some point a top club will sign / encourage a player to join them on an article 17 which almost certainly would be a cheaper option that a conventional transfer then in the blink of an eye the rumoured unwritten agreement that seems to be in place will be a thing of the past.

The advance of American ownership for me ( and yes we Chelsea have such a model) is perhaps the biggest threat to the football structure firstly down through the football pyramid then ultimately at the top level. Super league by the back door ?

The American ownership model isn’t close to the benefactor model those Americans must be rubbing their hands with glee in anticipation and if the gloves come off in terms contract stability it is inevitable that compensation v fee will be a a cost saving leading to more cash left in their pots!

Bosman shifted the landscape of that there is no doubt as yet haven’t seen any massive impact following Wester other that it being a very handy negotiating tool / threat when a player is looking to get a squeaky new and elevated pay deal but the 70%FFP target will not benefit clubs that already are spending north of 70% on wages alone when circa 90% of their income comes from the Sky/ BT TV deal.

I personally think FFP is significantly flawed it’s elitist and anti competitive but the clubs voted for it some say as a knee jerk to RA but self interest is obvious and in the day those clubs that pushed for changes to how match day income was distributed weren’t thinking about the wider football community it was all about their own coffers.
 

It was your response earlier where you said “ if they come in” suggested ( it seems erroneously) that you were implying that they weren’t already a possibility and as we both know they already are an option.

Until now there have been few instances where a player has given formal notice but there have been a few but as they say targets drive behaviours at some point a top club will sign / encourage a player to join them on an article 17 which almost certainly would be a cheaper option that a conventional transfer then in the blink of an eye the rumoured unwritten agreement that seems to be in place will be a thing of the past.

The advance of American ownership for me ( and yes we Chelsea have such a model) is perhaps the biggest threat to the football structure firstly down through the football pyramid then ultimately at the top level. Super league by the back door ?

The American ownership model isn’t close to the benefactor model those Americans must be rubbing their hands with glee in anticipation and if the gloves come off in terms contract stability it is inevitable that compensation v fee will be a a cost saving leading to more cash left in their pots!

Bosman shifted the landscape of that there is no doubt as yet haven’t seen any massive impact following Wester other that it being a very handy negotiating tool / threat when a player is looking to get a squeaky new and elevated pay deal but the 70%FFP target will not benefit clubs that already are spending north of 70% on wages alone when circa 90% of their income comes from the Sky/ BT TV deal.

I personally think FFP is significantly flawed it’s elitist and anti competitive but the clubs voted for it some say as a knee jerk to RA but self interest is obvious and in the day those clubs that pushed for changes to how match day income was distributed weren’t thinking about the wider football community it was all about their own coffers.

I don't know if its 70% wages or 70% wages + amortisation. That has some impact.

Just to clarify my initial comments re Webster, by come in, I was referring to "be in wide usage". It is hardly ever used currently. If it starts to be used more widely, I can see some pressure on footballs CEO structure. As throughout the game, fees as important.

In a lot of ways, for a lot of our top teams, we tend to re sell players back to Europe, for lesser fees, but feels that still showna profit. If that is lost, there will be unforeseen consequences.
 
The proposed target is 70% of income on wages + amortisation + agents fees + impairment.

The ripples from a “ collapse “ of the current transfer process and market would be catastrophic for some teams ironically more so for European clubs outside the top teams in Germany, Spain and possibly France but elsewhere they rely massively on transfer income to subsidise wages that just wouldn’t be affordable without the trickle down in the main from PL income.
 
If we go down I take it any punishment such a points deduction will be suspended? Given this is Premier League profit and sustainability and not EFL rules which are separate they can’t sanction us in the Championship. EFL rules are a lot more tighter and strict so it’s a certainty we will breach them as and when.

It will be interesting if we come back up first time of asking and having had a suspended points deduction, this would then be activated.
 
If we go down I take it any punishment such a points deduction will be suspended? Given this is Premier League profit and sustainability and not EFL rules which are separate they can’t sanction us in the Championship. EFL rules are a lot more tighter and strict so it’s a certainty we will breach them as and when.

It will be interesting if we come back up first time of asking and having had a suspended points deduction, this would then be activated.
It depends when the punishment comes.
If (and it is if) we are found guilty and if it’s a points deduction, then this coukd be applied this season. If it comes later it could be to next season.
of we get relegated, we’d be better taking it this season wouldnt we?
 
If things don't go our way, an immediate appeal would buy us more time and allow us sign players. We might even win the appeal and use the intervening time to get our house in order further, if only.
Are you certain because these rules are kind of harmonised and in the EFL as soon as an FFP charge kicks in, there is some sort of soft embargo. It's a grey area and still quite untested however.
 

If we go down I take it any punishment such a points deduction will be suspended? Given this is Premier League profit and sustainability and not EFL rules which are separate they can’t sanction us in the Championship. EFL rules are a lot more tighter and strict so it’s a certainty we will breach them as and when.

It will be interesting if we come back up first time of asking and having had a suspended points deduction, this would then be activated.
Untested, hard to say. Rules are supposedly harmonised hut obviously more strictly enforced at EFL level. On paper via the CFRP maybe but again nobody knows until such time as the scenario arises.
 
As it goes, at the risk of looking like an idiot at the end of June there is zero chance of a deduction applying to this season. Zero- have they even set a date for a Hearing yet
 
But over half the league would be in immediate breach of the new rules.
I was under the impression that it was 90 pct Year 1, 80 pct Year 2 and finally settling on 70 pct Year 3.

Inclusive of football wages, Player Amortisation and agents fees. Otoh transfer sale profits can bolster the other side. Could be annual, averaged or instalments.
 
There is an increased allowable loss if the club receives investment, allowing 35m loss per year. But it has got to the stage where people just discuss P&S threshold as 35m a year in the assumption that the owner is investing money. If the club has a large debt which incurs a large interest repayment each month, a wealthy owner can invest in a club and clear all debt, thus reducing the payments on debt and this has a positive impact on P&S/FFP
The interest is what goes through Profit and Loss, loans don't of course- but the less debt the better and it assists with the Cash Losses section. I must say however the method of payment in 2019 for Villa Park as a Loan Receivable sitting on the Balance Sheet...hmm. It was unusual at least in football terms.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top