Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Football] The ticking Profit and Sustainability (FFP) timebomb...



Creaky

Well-known member
Mar 26, 2013
3,862
Hookwood - Nr Horley
Rules are the same but the number is different
Indeed but seems a little unfair to promoted teams.

In the Championship the permitted loss is £39m over a 3 year period, (average of £13m/annum).

The PL rules for P&S assume however a newly promoted club has lost £22m a year for each of the first two of a three year period.

Considering a newly promoted squad needs greater investment than an established one in order to compete it strikes me as unreasonable to then potentially reduce the amount they can spend.
 




Kinky Gerbil

Im The Scatman
NSC Patron
Jul 16, 2003
58,790
hassocks
Indeed but seems a little unfair to promoted teams.

In the Championship the permitted loss is £39m over a 3 year period, (average of £13m/annum).

The PL rules for P&S assume however a newly promoted club has lost £22m a year for each of the first two of a three year period.

Considering a newly promoted squad needs greater investment than an established one in order to compete it strikes me as unreasonable to then potentially reduce the amount they can spend.
There is investment, then there is buying 23 players.....
 


Stat Brother

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 11, 2003
73,888
West west west Sussex

The Premier League’s biggest net spenders over the last five years​



20. Brighton & Hove Albion - £92.3m profit

Yep, the best-run club in the country have actually made nearly £100m in pure profit from transfers since they earned promotion to the Premier League. And they built a new stadium. And seem to have gotten even better every single year. It’s getting boring just how efficient they are at absolutely everything, but it doesn’t seem likely to end any time soon. Give it five more years and they’ll be champions of Europe after selling their entire squad at a mark-up twice over.
 


PILTDOWN MAN

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Sep 15, 2004
19,594
Hurst Green
Indeed but seems a little unfair to promoted teams.

In the Championship the permitted loss is £39m over a 3 year period, (average of £13m/annum).

The PL rules for P&S assume however a newly promoted club has lost £22m a year for each of the first two of a three year period.

Considering a newly promoted squad needs greater investment than an established one in order to compete it strikes me as unreasonable to then potentially reduce the amount they can spend.
They had operating loss of over 60m in the 2 years prior to promotion and then bought 5 players a day for a month.
 


Creaky

Well-known member
Mar 26, 2013
3,862
Hookwood - Nr Horley
They had operating loss of over 60m in the 2 years prior to promotion and then bought 5 players a day for a month.
That's is as maybe in the case of Forest, I don't know what their FFP financial figures were.

I was simply making the point that the P&S rules for promoted clubs favours the established PL clubs.

The P&S rule assumes that a promoted club has made a loss of £44m in the two years prior to promotion - i.e. that all promoted clubs have breached Championship FFP limits.
 




PILTDOWN MAN

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Sep 15, 2004
19,594
Hurst Green
That's is as maybe in the case of Forest, I don't know what their FFP financial figures were.

I was simply making the point that the P&S rules for promoted clubs favours the established PL clubs.

The P&S rule assumes that a promoted club has made a loss of £44m in the two years prior to promotion - i.e. that all promoted clubs have breached Championship FFP limits.
Where is that in the rules. I don't doubt it but never seen it until you mentioned it
 


Justice

Dangerous Idiot
Jun 21, 2012
20,658
Born In Shoreham
Indeed but seems a little unfair to promoted teams.

In the Championship the permitted loss is £39m over a 3 year period, (average of £13m/annum).

The PL rules for P&S assume however a newly promoted club has lost £22m a year for each of the first two of a three year period.

Considering a newly promoted squad needs greater investment than an established one in order to compete it strikes me as unreasonable to then potentially reduce the amount they can spend.
I actually agree with the rules here, managers should trust the squad that got them promoted more. Add three or four in key positions or to replace loans if you had any.
 


Green Cross Code Man

Wunt be druv
Mar 30, 2006
20,730
Eastbourne
I actually agree with the rules here, managers should trust the squad that got them promoted more. Add three or four in key positions or to replace loans if you had any.
Yep, that is what kept us up for a few years, great team spirit and the efforts of Dunk especially. Team spirit is a wonderful thing, but it's fragile and can dissipate very quickly.
 




PILTDOWN MAN

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Sep 15, 2004
19,594
Hurst Green
I actually agree with the rules here, managers should trust the squad that got them promoted more. Add three or four in key positions or to replace loans if you had any.
Just like Forest did
forest.jpeg
 


Creaky

Well-known member
Mar 26, 2013
3,862
Hookwood - Nr Horley
Where is that in the rules. I don't doubt it but never seen it until you mentioned it

A Club will be in breach of the PSRs if its PSR Calculation over the relevant period results in a loss in excess of £105 million (with that threshold reduced by £22million for each season that the relevant Club has been in the Championship during the relevant period)
- Due to Nottingham Forest spending two seasons in the Championship within the three-year assessment period, the maximum loss for the club is £61million
 


PILTDOWN MAN

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Sep 15, 2004
19,594
Hurst Green

A Club will be in breach of the PSRs if its PSR Calculation over the relevant period results in a loss in excess of £105 million (with that threshold reduced by £22million for each season that the relevant Club has been in the Championship during the relevant period)
- Due to Nottingham Forest spending two seasons in the Championship within the three-year assessment period, the maximum loss for the club is £61million
So it's 13m each season then in the EFL 35-22=13 13+13+35=61m
 






PILTDOWN MAN

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Sep 15, 2004
19,594
Hurst Green
Little wonder you bamboozled the breweries :bowdown: .
Especially BTU's, APV, specific gravity, SRM (using a Cuvette and a spectrophotometer at 430nm and a logarithmic scale).

At the end of the day. What does it taste like? Nice. Good.
 






Kinky Gerbil

Im The Scatman
NSC Patron
Jul 16, 2003
58,790
hassocks



Reading some bits online, seems Everton are on the verge of going under and 777 are keeping them afloat by already putting money in.
 




Nobby Cybergoat

Well-known member
Jul 19, 2021
8,622
Result of Everton appeal due this week, going to be interesting.

Any real back tracking gives the go ahead for cheats to over spend.
It will be very interesting.

The ideal message to send out, is that the result is the result and appeals are only going to work if you have genuine new evidence.
Relegation places are up for grabs, so we can't have legal appeals going on through the summer.
 


Insel affe

HellBilly
Feb 23, 2009
24,330
Brighton factually.....
It will be very interesting.

The ideal message to send out, is that the result is the result and appeals are only going to work if you have genuine new evidence.
Relegation places are up for grabs, so we can't have legal appeals going on through the summer.
I would add if the appeal is upheld, further point deductions are added to prevent clubs wasting time and avoiding relegation if that is the case, when they are as guilty as hell.
 




Wardy's twin

Well-known member
Oct 21, 2014
8,866
People say man city's case is complicated, yep it is 115 charges so why not just take the most serious and start with that one and get a decision. Then move on to the next one. 10 points now would ensure they don't win the PL and that could be followed by more deductions as they process the next one.
 


Nobby Cybergoat

Well-known member
Jul 19, 2021
8,622
People say man city's case is complicated, yep it is 115 charges so why not just take the most serious and start with that one and get a decision. Then move on to the next one. 10 points now would ensure they don't win the PL and that could be followed by more deductions as they process the next one.
Great shout. I just wonder how interconnected the charges are.

I can't think how infuriating this must be for their current title rivals
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here