Financial Fair Play

[Kanchelskis17]

Dont know if its an error on ESPN's part but there indicating that were one of the 4 clubs that have opposed the new FFP rules, along with City, Fulham and Westbrom. Be surprised if its true tbh, cant think of many reasons why we would oppose it?

The Premier League has moved a step closer to introducing UEFA's Financial Fair Play rules after representatives from every club met in London on Thursday.

Although there was no decision handed down from the meeting, the Premier League gained a vote of confidence from a majority of clubs, with only Manchester City, Fulham, Everton and West Bromwich Albion opposing the break-even rule, which would prevent clubs from operating at a loss.

There were also proposals of other strategies to introduce FFP, including wage restraints and contract guarantees, but a break-even restriction has enough support to be passed through.

It is a major step forward, with a final decision expected to be enforced for the beginning of next season as the Premier League looks to improve competition.

With a number of English clubs currently in debt, the break-even rule would require flexibility in the short term to enable a gradual balance of finances, particularly following the major losses experienced by Liverpool and Manchester City last season.

West Ham co-owner David Gold believes an FFP strategy should be introduced immediately to improve the quality of the Premier League.

"There have been no decisions made," he told Press Association Sport. "The debate carries on. I am hoping that we can come to some conclusions for the best interest of the football clubs and the league as a whole, hopefully before the start of next season."

Swansea chairman Huw Jenkins shares Gold's views and sees the rules as a key part of holding integrity in English football.

"I think we will get a consensus on this. Over the next few months we should get something in place, most likely before the start of next season," Jenkins said. "The main issue is that in the present economic climate, we as a league, portray the right image and make sure that everyone involved in football is looking after the supporters and making sure everything is kept under control and is run in the right manner.

"We are looking at the financial fair play rules and introducing that throughout the Premier League for the good of everyone in the Premier League and for the good of the game.

"I see it generally as a good discussion about making sure the Premier League retains its position as the number one league in the world and that we keep portraying the right image.

"It's great that we have got everyone on board all fighting for the same cause. It should work well for everyone connected in football."

Arsenal chief executive Ivan Gazidis supported the FFP proposal on Thursday, suggesting it would help with a more stable structure and would not affect the quality of players in the league.

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/s...-closer-to-financial-fair-play-rules?cc=5739#

The Telegraph has Villa rather than us as the other club & The Mail seems to think we didnt have a clue what we wanted.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...ague-steps-closer-to-financial-fair-play.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...mier-League-fair-play-plan--Charles-Sale.html

 

[Ring master]

Its not true,kenwright denied it on sky yesterday as he would do.

 

[Kanchelskis17]

Its not true,kenwright denied it on sky yesterday as he would do.

Ah fair enough, didnt think it would be true, i've always thought we were for it - just going on things i've heard Elstone say like

 

[SaffaBlue]

I haven't read the OP. However I can believe it, as I understand it to be you may not operate at a loss. I'm sure we have done that recently?

 

[davek]

Sorry, I posted this in the other thread.

 

[Duncan Disordely]

The telegraph originally had us as one of the 4 clubs but they amended the story as that was incorrect. I think other news outlets picked it up and ran with it without checking the facts. The reporter Paul Kelso posted on twitter that'd he'd put us in accidentally thus amended it

 

[GrandOldTeam]

The Premier League need 14 of their 20 clubs to agree to any FFP changes. Fulham, along with Manchester City, Aston Villa and West Bromwich are wholeheartedly against, with Everton wavering.

I understand this to be true.

Everton seeking some clarification.

 

[Duncan Disordely]

In principle I think this is needed in the premier league, however I think it punishes clubs who haven't had recent billionaire takeovers.

If FFP was to come in tomorrow you could guarantee we'd get taken over the day after and not be able to spend our new found wealth.

The worry is that instead of levelling the playing field FFP will keep the current order of things

 

[dixie7]

bigger clubs simply get increased sponsorship deals and expand their brand to rake in more money what about the clubs that barley break even, if we make a loss does this mean we wont be able to take part in europe.

and with the scheme being so new theres bound to be loopholes for clubs to take advantage, look at chelsea, abramovich pays money into chelsea limited and then loans money from there to chelsea fc. chelsea FC are actually debt free

to take advantage of the FFP rules you need business men running the club that know what their on about, not people who when money is needed the answer is always "lets take out another long term loan and think about the consequences a few years down the line"

 

[davek]

bigger clubs simply get increased sponsorship deals and expand their brand to rake in more money what about the clubs that barley break even, if we make a loss does this mean we wont be able to take part in europe.

and with the scheme being so new theres bound to be loopholes for clubs to take advantage, look at chelsea, abramovich pays money into chelsea limited and then loans money from there to chelsea fc. chelsea FC are actually debt free

to take advantage of the FFP rules you need business men running the club that know what their on about, not people who when money is needed the answer is always "lets take out another long term loan and think about the consequences a few years down the line"

Spot on, mate.

 

[carlos_the_jackal]

The whole FFP stuff seems like a great idea at first glance but what it is really about is keeping the status quo for the clubs currently very big and well-supported globally.

Take United with their established global fanbase who make a hell of a lot of money from their merchandise and sponsorship deals and selling out Old Trafford week in week out. Imagine how much easier the last 7 or 8 years would have been for them if Chelsea and then City weren't allowed to have hundreds of millions of pounds donated to them to build the highly-priced squads they have. The likes of United, Real Madrid, Barcelona, AC Milan - basically the old G14 clubs - don't want these cheeky upstarts coming in and muscling in on their success.

Where do Everton stand in all this? On the one hand, it would have benefitted us of the last few years if City and Chelsea hadn't been allowed to become the beasts they have. On the other hand, we could be denied one big option which may enable us to become great once again.

 

[carlos_the_jackal]

bigger clubs simply get increased sponsorship deals and expand their brand to rake in more money what about the clubs that barley break even, if we make a loss does this mean we wont be able to take part in europe.

and with the scheme being so new theres bound to be loopholes for clubs to take advantage, look at chelsea, abramovich pays money into chelsea limited and then loans money from there to chelsea fc. chelsea FC are actually debt free

to take advantage of the FFP rules you need business men running the club that know what their on about, not people who when money is needed the answer is always "lets take out another long term loan and think about the consequences a few years down the line"

Where do Manchester United sit in your view of things then?

 

[Kanchelskis17]

The whole FFP stuff seems like a great idea at first glance but what it is really about is keeping the status quo for the clubs currently very big and well-supported globally.

Take United with their established global fanbase who make a hell of a lot of money from their merchandise and sponsorship deals and selling out Old Trafford week in week out. Imagine how much easier the last 7 or 8 years would have been for them if Chelsea and then City weren't allowed to have hundreds of millions of pounds donated to them to build the highly-priced squads they have. The likes of United, Real Madrid, Barcelona, AC Milan - basically the old G14 clubs - don't want these cheeky upstarts coming in and muscling in on their success.

Where do Everton stand in all this? On the one hand, it would have benefitted us of the last few years if City and Chelsea hadn't been allowed to become the beasts they have. On the other hand, we could be denied one big option which may enable us to become great once again.

Spot on there mate; on paper the FFP looks great & as a club that generally operates within our means (in football club terms) you'd think Everton will benefit from them, but really all that will happen is the likes of United, Arsenal etc. will continue to grow - with their match day income, world-wide fan bases, corporative sponsors & champs league income, whilst the likes of us will have to continue selling to build & hoping we find another gem in the academy.

 

[met069]

The only sort of regulations that would benefit us would be hard spending or wage limits, perhaps the sort of salary cap rules that American sports leagues have. Otherwise, as people have elucidated very well above, the status quo is merely supported/enforced by the powers-that-be...

 

[Coach]

The whole FFP stuff seems like a great idea at first glance but what it is really about is keeping the status quo for the clubs currently very big and well-supported globally.

Take United with their established global fanbase who make a hell of a lot of money from their merchandise and sponsorship deals and selling out Old Trafford week in week out. Imagine how much easier the last 7 or 8 years would have been for them if Chelsea and then City weren't allowed to have hundreds of millions of pounds donated to them to build the highly-priced squads they have. The likes of United, Real Madrid, Barcelona, AC Milan - basically the old G14 clubs - don't want these cheeky upstarts coming in and muscling in on their success.

Where do Everton stand in all this? On the one hand, it would have benefitted us of the last few years if City and Chelsea hadn't been allowed to become the beasts they have. On the other hand, we could be denied one big option which may enable us to become great once again.

Platini introduced the idea after the World Cup in France and their clubs had had a load of big new stadiums built - go figure.