Initial 10, then reduced to 6 + 2 Point Deductions

[DayL08]

So we get a one time benefit in this years accounts and then what ? Recruit £200m of players which will increase our amortisation rate £40m pa for next say 5 years. We then have to make sure the club can generate sufficient income in subsequent years plus how do the Women's team/club repay the £200m if it renders them insolvent and illiquid ?

Why would the women’s team pay. The Friedkins would as they would own both. Do you think Chelsea’s women’s team who make a loss each year are paying £200m

 

[Blue peter]

That's not PSR - its Marster's challenging w*nk chart - with easiest at the top

Probably less of the ‘challenging’ for him

 

[gixerk6]

Read on Facebook this morning (can’t remember where the article came from sorry) that at a premier league meeting that a lot of premier league teams did not want new rules that would close the loophole on that Chelsea used to mess with PSR regarding selling assets but realistically still owning them. Premier league teams apparently were so non committal about it that it wasn’t even voted on to close the loophole.
So if true this means teams will still be able to screw the system but may face UEFA repercussions as it goes against their rules.

 

[Goat]

Read on Facebook

Why?

 

[gixerk6]

Why?

Just came up in my feed. Wasn’t looking for it but as it was Everton related and I didn’t need to click on an external link I just read it. It might be crap it might not

 

[allen]

Just came up in my feed. Wasn’t looking for it but as it was Everton related and I didn’t need to click on an external link I just read it. It might be crap it might not

For something you read on Facebook, it’s surprisingly substantively true.

Premier League fails to close Chelsea PSR loophole

West London club ‘profited’ from selling hotels and their own women’s team to sister company to ensure they complied with financial rules

www.thetimes.com

 

[MikeH72]

So we get a one time benefit in this years accounts and then what ? Recruit £200m of players which will increase our amortisation rate £40m pa for next say 5 years. We then have to make sure the club can generate sufficient income in subsequent years plus how do the Women's team/club repay the £200m if it renders them insolvent and illiquid ?

Why have you just invented this bit?

 

[gixerk6]

For something you read on Facebook, it’s surprisingly substantively true.

Premier League fails to close Chelsea PSR loophole

West London club ‘profited’ from selling hotels and their own women’s team to sister company to ensure they complied with financial rules

www.thetimes.com

What I read was from that article. I know FB has a lot of crap on it but there are some factual stuff that appears in my feed from reputable places.
I do tend to ignore most of it but as everyone was talking about Chelsea being ropey and the possibility of of us doing something similar with our women’s team or even the stadium I just thought I’d mention it.

 

[allen]

What I read was from that article. I know FB has a lot of crap on it but there are some factual stuff that appears in my feed from reputable places.
I do tend to ignore most of it but as everyone was talking about Chelsea being ropey and the possibility of of us doing something similar with our women’s team or even the stadium I just thought I’d mention it.

Mate, “Facebook” is not a source.

No one should be citing it.

It gives equal weight to respected media organisations that care about truth and your mad uncle who thinks vaccines are turning dogs trans.

 

[GN!]

Mate, “Facebook” is not a source.

No one should be citing it.

It gives equal weight to respected media organisations that care about truth and your mad uncle who thinks vaccines are turning dogs trans.

Yeah apparently we were swapping branthwaite for Grealish yesterday

 

[Jacko93]

Read on Facebook this morning (can’t remember where the article came from sorry) that at a premier league meeting that a lot of premier league teams did not want new rules that would close the loophole on that Chelsea used to mess with PSR regarding selling assets but realistically still owning them. Premier league teams apparently were so non committal about it that it wasn’t even voted on to close the loophole.
So if true this means teams will still be able to screw the system but may face UEFA repercussions as it goes against their rules.

But you can only do it once. If they closed it after the fact, then Chelsea has gotten away with it. If your one of the last 4 to do it, you've lost out.

 

[gixerk6]

Mate, “Facebook” is not a source.

No one should be citing it.

It gives equal weight to respected media organisations that care about truth and your mad uncle who thinks vaccines are turning dogs trans.

I never said Facebook was the source, it was just the carrier/link of the original media source which I couldn’t remember which another member in this thread posted the link to.

 

[Marc bolan]

Yeah apparently we were swapping branthwaite for Grealish yesterday

Yes and Branthwaite for Stones the day before

 

[GN!]

Yes and Branthwaite for Stones the day before

Jesus Christ

 

[Timbucktoo]

Yes and Branthwaite for Stones the day before

Jesus Christ

Are we signing Jesus Christ?