QPR, FFP and what does it mean for us?

[Jim D]

What's to stop Fernandez & Mittal (via Air Asia or some other org) signing an £80M per year shirt sponsorship deal? That would count as income wouldn't it?

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

Sponsorship is very important to our club , we have a new shirt sponsorship deal , some partnership sponsor deals will have been renegotiated that were originally set at League 1 rates before our move to The Amex. There will be a new catering franchise awarded over the summer. The only thing hampering us at the moment is not have an academy in place with players being sold to bolster incoming revenue.

 

[KZNSeagull]

What's to stop Fernandez & Mittal (via Air Asia or some other org) signing an £80M per year shirt sponsorship deal? That would count as income wouldn't it?

Nothing at the moment, but all of the dodgy ways of raising income like this are being looked at and will eventually be legislated against. FFP is work in progress. But it all counts for nought if the Premier League introduce a watered down version or a version that is easily circumvented.

 

[KZNSeagull]

Sponsorship is very important to our club , we have a new shirt sponsorship deal , some partnership sponsor deals will have been renegotiated that were originally set at League 1 rates before our move to The Amex. There will be a new catering franchise awarded over the summer. The only thing hampering us at the moment is not have an academy in place with players being sold to bolster incoming revenue.

Indeed.

I am far happier supporting a club that wants to play by the rules than one that gambles it's future like QPR etc seem to want to do. If that puts us at a disadvantage, then so be it - at least we will have a club in the long term.

 

[mune ni kamome]

Surely if the Premier league choose to ignore FFP then they won'y be allowed to compete in Europe. Isn't that the object of the exercise?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Mittal could sponsor the ground, the shirts, individual stands, jackets of the stewards in the car parks or anything else for millions and QPR's income would rise and losses brought under control (see Man City and the Etihad sponsorships - and PSG getting 200m euros A YEAR from Quatar Tourism to promote Qatar - http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2013/feb/04/manchester-city-financial-fair-play). These are massive firms with expensive accountants who will find loopholes.

Nothing fair about FFP - it protects the top clubs and legislates against the smaller ones and anyone not in the Prem.

The UEFA FFP rule will assess any deal from companies which are linked to the club. If the deal is judged to be above market value then it cannot be included. I presume this will be the same for the Prem and FL.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

What's to stop Fernandez & Mittal (via Air Asia or some other org) signing an £80M per year shirt sponsorship deal? That would count as income wouldn't it?

See above.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Surely if the Premier league choose to ignore FFP then they won'y be allowed to compete in Europe. Isn't that the object of the exercise?

No. What the Premier League do is up to them BUT clubs wishing to compete in any UEFA tournament will have to comply with the UEFA FFP rules. If they do not then they will not get a license to compete.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Reading that BBC article it's fairly clear to me our situation.

What I find difficult to understand is other club's situations, when we are the best attended club in the league. I can't imagine that many other clubs are making that much money beyond the people who pay for tickets and eat and drink at the ground and buy replica shirts.

Surely they are in far more difficult position than us?

Agree. In the long run FFP will only benefit well run clubs like Brighton IMHO. Amongst many things it will promote astute and shrewd managers and put a stop to the likes of Redknapp who simply waves a cheque book around.

 

[HastingsSeagull]

What's the point of them going straight back up if they are 240M in debt and on top of that have to pay 58M as a penalty? That's as much extra income as they'd get for a single season up there surely?

 

[Couldn't Be Hyypia]

The UEFA FFP rule will assess any deal from companies which are linked to the club. If the deal is judged to be above market value then it cannot be included. I presume this will be the same for the Prem and FL.

Yep - I take your point. But the same could be said of the tax man - he's there to make sure everyone pays. Accountants are there (in some firms) to make sure companies can find loopholes. These big corps (as top football clubs are) will always be one loophole ahead of the legislators.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

There was some comment after the Ars/Wigan game last night that FFP was being challenged in the courts and may not happen anyway. First I had heard of this or did I infact mis-hear?

WRT to the UEFA FFP, out of interest does anyone know how a challenge might work? There does not seem to be a legal issue (there a a multitude of rules of compliance for UEFA competition, FFP is just one of many. Remember, it's a competition so it has to have rules and rules which are voted through by the members) so I presume it can only be challenged via that sports arbitration place in Switzerland?

 

[willyfantastic]

well how are they supposed to slash wages at QPR when they have Harry Redknapp in charge? far more likely that they will TRIPLE

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Yep - I take your point. But the same could be said of the tax man - he's there to make sure everyone pays. Accountants are there (in some firms) to make sure companies can find loopholes. These big corps (as top football clubs are) will always be one loophole ahead of the legislators.

True. But we're talking about two very different things here. I understand the FL have the ultimate sanction of expelling a football club from their competition. Remember, it is a competition and it has many rules...it has to by definition. If a club continually bends the rules they can be voted out by the other members and this will not be based on the legality or otherwise of any specific act but on a simple decision by each club whether they want the club to continue in the competition or not. If memory serves me correctly there was a vote on our membership back in the 90s. I presume this is also the reason why clubs do not challenge the points deductions for administration etc even though some structured their clubs in such a way so the club was not actually in administration.

 

[luge]

The UEFA FFP rule will assess any deal from companies which are linked to the club. If the deal is judged to be above market value then it cannot be included. I presume this will be the same for the Prem and FL.

Exactly this. I've covered the FFP story for quite some time - any massive financial doping will be investigated. That's not to say Fernandes et all can't sponsor what they like - they can - it's just within reasonable market values.

In a way, this still means that the top clubs will still have a financial advantage, The market worth of Ethiad sponsoring anything at Manchester City is MUCH higher than Loftus road. Manchester United now have official partners in different countries - Shinhan are the credit card partner for south korea, they have mobile phone partners in India etc... all of which have paid a significant sum into United's coffers. (see this list http://www.manutd.com/en/General-Footer-Section/Privacy-Policy.aspx?filter=partners).

Barber's Amex deal was a significant one. It will eventually up the market value of other sponsorships around the club, and is presumably structured to increase if we get into the PL. There's also a commercial nous in place in the club to take advantage of any "partner" deals - Brighton and Hove Jobs are one of them, they are the official jobs partner of BHAFC.

On another note - the wage budgets of clubs will come down. I know of a few players who have had their wages cut significantly. One went form £5k p/w in League one, to £500 p/w - and that was the best offer he could get from several clubs.

Gus may want to pay loads of cash for big players, but the reality is that they aren't going to be offered it many places outside of the top few clubs.

The parachute payment argument is valid, however. But not if you are QPR. They're f****d either way, as that article highlights. Clubs going up to the PL will have to be careful not to overspend, because if they go down, they are hit with horrendous penalties if they overspend.

 

[BadFish]

Mittal could sponsor the ground, the shirts, individual stands, jackets of the stewards in the car parks or anything else for millions and QPR's income would rise and losses brought under control (see Man City and the Etihad sponsorships - and PSG getting 200m euros A YEAR from Quatar Tourism to promote Qatar - http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2013/feb/04/manchester-city-financial-fair-play). These are massive firms with expensive accountants who will find loopholes.

Nothing fair about FFP - it protects the top clubs and legislates against the smaller ones and anyone not in the Prem.

Certainly seems that way. Until the Premier League is somehow reigned in and made to play by the same rules as everyone else I am afraid that the gap between it and The Championship will get wider and it's clubs will get Richer (and the England team poorer).

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Exactly this. I've covered the FFP story for quite some time - any massive financial doping will be investigated. That's not to say Fernandes et all can't sponsor what they like - they can - it's just within reasonable market values.

In a way, this still means that the top clubs will still have a financial advantage, The market worth of Ethiad sponsoring anything at Manchester City is MUCH higher than Loftus road. Manchester United now have official partners in different countries - Shinhan are the credit card partner for south korea, they have mobile phone partners in India etc... all of which have paid a significant sum into United's coffers. (see this list http://www.manutd.com/en/General-Footer-Section/Privacy-Policy.aspx?filter=partners).

Barber's Amex deal was a significant one. It will eventually up the market value of other sponsorships around the club, and is presumably structured to increase if we get into the PL. There's also a commercial nous in place in the club to take advantage of any "partner" deals - Brighton and Hove Jobs are one of them, they are the official jobs partner of BHAFC.

On another note - the wage budgets of clubs will come down. I know of a few players who have had their wages cut significantly. One went form £5k p/w in League one, to £500 p/w - and that was the best offer he could get from several clubs.

Gus may want to pay loads of cash for big players, but the reality is that they aren't going to be offered it many places outside of the top few clubs.

The parachute payment argument is valid, however. But not if you are QPR. They're f****d either way, as that article highlights. Clubs going up to the PL will have to be careful not to overspend, because if they go down, they are hit with horrendous penalties if they overspend.

Agree with all of this. As you point out the big clubs will have an advantage but then they always have. FFP will put a lid on some of their excessive spending though so it will adjust the current imbalance even if only by a small amount. Long term though I imagine many more clubs will be competitive and success will be a barometer of their managerial and player talent as opposed to their financial clout which is surely a good thing.