hallamblue
Player Valuation: £35m
Players may be greedy but some clubs are stupid. If someone offered you a massive salary for 5 years would you take it?
Would love a video of them singing about us being cheats on repeat to be posted on every Twitter post of them complaining about their impending punishment
Chrismac
Player Valuation: £10m
After seeing how long ours was drawn out for id be surprised if you get an update this fast.
Our mid-feb ended up being the 26th!
Thats a joke we have had to wait for what feels like half this season for both times in the first charge. Also seeing stuff they would give -2 off just to avoid an appeal is pathetic by the league
Unrelated but could "Improve fan engagement" be removing the 3pm blackout?
WestStandLower
Player Valuation: £1.5m
1) It’s not the PL management that makes the decisions it’s the shareholders ( namely the clubs ).
2) The question would be were Forest and Everton singled out or for 22/23 for both and 21/22 as well for Everton were the rules only applied to two clubs or were all clubs treated the same ?
3) Have the PL management actually said anything at all about the wholes within PSR? The IC haven’t really although we all know that there are flaws and significant ones at that but again it’s the clubs that voted for the process
Incidentally this area of governance is not going to be within the initial remit of a regulator
nevsonlymate
Player Valuation: £8m
And unfortunately that's why the same teams year in year out win nearly everything while the rest just make up the numbers money has made the gave un-competitive , going to be great moving in to the new stadium paying 10-15% more for a season ticket just hoping to finish in the top 3 of the 12-13 teams in the same boat as us
BullensRoad
Player Valuation: £15m
Hopefully everyone realises now it’s a closed shop. They want the current “big clubs” competing at the top, due to fan following in Asia, Africa and North America.
If they keep challenging and playing each other in cup competitions and title challenges, it brings in more tv and commercial revenue.
This ultimately ruins any chance of teams outside of this bubble to spend/challenge.
Unless you somehow get a major following in a different continent over night you’ve got very little chance.
We could have had a chance if Bill let the experts do what we needed to do to grow:
“Sources reveal Ryazantsev's attempts to move the club forward while on the board were met by what was perceived as Kenwright intransigence.
'Sasha wanted to go from local to global, away from the image of the People's Club but felt he couldn't get Bill to agree,' Sportsmail is told.
'And if Bill didn't agree then nothing changed. At that time at least he was still in charge of the boardroom seating plan.' Quite why some Everton fans are so furiously opposed to Kenwright is a hard to fathom.”
THE CULT OF BILL: Kenwright cannot cut ties with Everton
SPECIAL REPORT BY IAN LADYMAN: In Premier League circles, Everton are known as one of its most dysfunctional clubs and at the centre of it all, aged 77 is Kenwright.
www.dailymail.co.uk
(I know it’s the mail but I read it somewhere else a while back).
Could any of you P&S boffins help me understand something which doesn't make sense to me.
If we do sell Branth and Onana as many believe we will, and let's say we get 150m (for arguments sake). Do we theoretically have to spend most, if not all of that in the same financial season to stay compliant in following years? For example if we sell them and wait until the next financial year to reinvest, 4 years later it'll look like we have spent 150m in season 1 (of 3), despite it all coming in the season before, becoming an endless cycle of selling our most promising.
If its true, we can't only be thinking of selling branth and onana, but also need to think of who we can get to replace them in the same season.
If we do sell Branth and Onana as many believe we will, and let's say we get 150m (for arguments sake). Do we theoretically have to spend most, if not all of that in the same financial season to stay compliant in following years? For example if we sell them and wait until the next financial year to reinvest, 4 years later it'll look like we have spent 150m in season 1 (of 3), despite it all coming in the season before, becoming an endless cycle of selling our most promising.
If its true, we can't only be thinking of selling branth and onana, but also need to think of who we can get to replace them in the same season.
No first the clubs we got them from will take a cut, we can spend a decebt amount of it but still wont be going crazy. I still think one will go unless a crazy offer and that is onana who i think will be gone. Add in other sales the club will be looking to do mauapay godfrey holgate ect.
Okay. Exclude all the other stuff, just to help me understand. so they take a cut, for arguments sake we have 100 left for both them 2 (or whatever it would be) we have 100m profit. We don't spend straight away, instead we reinvest the next season. How does that look 4 years down the line, as season 1 we will have lost 100m, so its gonna be an uphill battle. Or does it work differently. Is there some consideration that in season 0 or -1 we made that 100m?
Is the total of the seasons aint it so would help i dont really kno the full details of it. Also all depends what other stuff the club can get in stadium naming rights all deals to bring money into the club
Gilbert..
Player Valuation: £40m
Well they're not going to publicly state it as they would be dead in the water. You've only got to look at Masters in the parliamentary select committee meeting to see not only is it full of holes but the punishment was sham. How can you get to a stage where a club can get 10 points deducted for a 19m overspend and 9 points for going to the wall and bust. it just dosent sit well that the PL have even gone down this road to a system they will now champion as fair that Everton wouldnt have breached under. If they had thought their PSR was ok they wouldnt have even put it to the vote to change.
Yeah I understand there will be other elements, im asking hypothetically. I'm just trying to understand if P'n'S is designed where you need invest in your profit straight away, otherwise when the season you got the large boost drops off the 3 year period, it looks like you have -100m as a starting block (despite the +100m the season before)
Tony’s Carp
Player Valuation: £40m
Any profit you make will count on the books for that season but that season will remain part of the calculation for the next two years too but yes you are correct that if you sell big in Y1 and then spend big in Y2 then even though the numbers balance that could become problematic when Y1 falls off the calculation. However, remember that spending is amortised over several years anyway, whereas sales go on the books only once, so timing your sales is more important than timing your spend.
So it makes sense to sensibly balance the timing of your sales in particular. In our position, we may have to sell a player before the end of the year to balance the year. But what you don't want is overkill - if one player (say Onana) can balance this year's PSR then don't also sell Branthwaite until the next financial year, as essentially, you get one more year out of that profit that way.
