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

[Jim in the West]

This will build and build until the Premier League clubs vote to get rid of FFP. Only logical conclusion I can see. I'm certain there's already a majority of owners that want to spend more money, but FFP persists because it protects the status quo of the biggest clubs. Once they start getting punished or restricted in the market it will be out of the door.

You could be right, but as others have said, the UEFA FFP restrictions are stricter, and all the big boys obviously want to be UEFA compliant to play in their competitions. So the other logical conclusion is that the Super League comes into being, and the English representatives will leave the Premier League. It's a pretty dismal scenario all round.

 

[dazzer6666]

All I know is if I was a Premier league team, I would not be paying top dollar for players from any of these teams. I'd rather spend abroad.

"Oh, FFP struggles you say? Well instead of 60million, we'll give you 30m if you're desperate... Oh, and if not, enjoy the points deduction because no one else in Europe has that kind of money lolzzzz"

Beyond belief why United and Arsenal spent money on Mount and Havertz respectively which helped Chelsea massively. Seems counter productive.

Yep……this is the next stage I reckon. PL teams not buying from other PL teams if it’s going to help their FFP numbers. Chelsea for example deciding they have to offload Gallagher and Colwill before they can buy………but no buyers until there’s a fire sale to avoid penalties.

 

[deletebeepbeepbeep]

All I know is if I was a Premier league team, I would not be paying top dollar for players from any of these teams. I'd rather spend abroad.

"Oh, FFP struggles you say? Well instead of 60million, we'll give you 30m if you're desperate... Oh, and if not, enjoy the points deduction because no one else in Europe has that kind of money lolzzzz"

Beyond belief why United and Arsenal spent money on Mount and Havertz respectively which helped Chelsea massively. Seems counter productive.

I was also surprised these teams were so keen to help Chelsea out by buying players which haven't pulled up any trees anyway. If every PL team put their middle finger up to Chelsea they would have been screwed.

 

[El Presidente]

Newcastle have lost £200,000 a day since the takeover. This is still substantially less than both Chelsea and Manchester City lost since they were acquired In the first two years of Abramovich/Mansour ownershi.

The Albion lost substantial amounts of money in three of their first five seasons in the PL (Covid didn’t help) and is 12th in the list of all time loss making clubs, despite a relatively short tenure in the PL, although I expect record profits in 22/23 to reverse them out of this table. (figures in blue are up to 22/23, figures in non blue are up to 21/22)

I’m aware of one PL club that is pressurising its auditors to agree to restate previous years losses in order to comply with PSR too…

Financial Fair Play has nothing to do with fairness, Profitability and Sustainability Rules have nothing to do with Profitability nor Sustainability

 

[KZNSeagull]

Newcastle have lost £200,000 a day since the takeover. This is still substantially less than both Chelsea and Manchester City lost since they were acquired In the first two years of Abramovich/Mansour ownershi.

The Albion lost substantial amounts of money in three of their first five seasons in the PL (Covid didn’t help) and is 12th in the list of all time loss making clubs, despite a relatively short tenure in the PL, although I expect record profits in 22/23 to reverse them out of this table. (figures in blue are up to 22/23, figures in non blue are up to 21/22)

I’m aware of one PL club that is pressurising its auditors to agree to restate previous years losses in order to comply with PSR too…

Financial Fair Play has nothing to do with fairness, Profitability and Sustainability Rules have nothing to do with Profitability nor Sustainability

View attachment 172636

Is that statement based upon what has happened historically to clubs that have broken the rules, not what may happen if there is finally to be a clampdown?

 

[HeaviestTed]

I just think the teams I like should be spared and the teams I hate should have points deducted, simple.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I know this has been touched upon on the Everton deduction thread, but it feels worthy of another thread for the other clubs currently walking the PSR/FFP tightrope.

I'd heard that Forest could be in danger and that Newcastle, Arsenal and Chelsea were in a bit of a bind, with limited headroom to bring in players without selling first, but I didn't know why it was all coming to a head just now before I heard the excellent David Ornstein on 5Live earlier.

Now, maybe most other people know this, but some of it was new to me, so I'll share. From what I can remember...

1. A lot of clubs kicked off at the timing of the Everton punishment, and how it feels unjust that it got pushed out to this season.
2. ...so, all clubs had to submit their 2022/23 accounts to the Premier League by 31st December.
3. ...after which the PL would take 14 days to review them, announcing breaches and charges by 14th January (tomorrow, as I type).
4. Clubs who are charged will have 14 days to respond.
5. Any subsequent independent commission hearing must be finished by April 7th.
6. Any appeals need to be concluded by 24th May. This is actually after the last game of the season, so the final league table may not be, errrrm, final after all.

So, it all be quite fun for a while, so long as we're not involved - and there's no indication we will be. I've read Everton could possibly be in trouble again though!

Interesting. Do you know if the charges will be announced publicly tomorrow?

 

[El Presidente]

Is that statement based upon what has happened historically to clubs that have broken the rules, not what may happen if there is finally to be a clampdown?

Clubs have not historically broken the rules TBF. Should be noted that the £105m PSR limit was set in 2013. If it had kept pace with PL wage inflation since then it would now be about £180m

 

[Mancgull]

All I know is if I was a Premier league team, I would not be paying top dollar for players from any of these teams. I'd rather spend abroad.

"Oh, FFP struggles you say? Well instead of 60million, we'll give you 30m if you're desperate... Oh, and if not, enjoy the points deduction because no one else in Europe has that kind of money lolzzzz"

Beyond belief why United and Arsenal spent money on Mount and Havertz respectively which helped Chelsea massively. Seems counter productive.

Agree, gave them a ‘get out of jail free’ card.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

14 clubs voted in December to close the loop hole Chelsea used to a maximum player deal of five years. The big top four or whatever don’t have the voting power to vote against FFP. It would make no sense for the rest of the league clubs to vote out FFP and make it less competitive.
With 14 votes to the good that renders the traditional so called big top six powerless to make such a decision.

Currently. But we are talking about Everton, Wolves, Forest, Newcastle here. Sheffield voted with the big six on the loans between clubs decision. Palace are for sale. Leicester are owned by overseas money. At the moment the big guys like FFP I reckon. But if that changes then i think the votes will follow.

 

[KZNSeagull]

Clubs have not historically broken the rules TBF. Should be noted that the £105m PSR limit was set in 2013. If it had kept pace with PL wage inflation since then it would now be about £180m

So is the argument then that this limit has restricted the smaller clubs more than it should have as they do not have the massive supplementary incomes of the bigger boys?

 

[Triggaaar]

FFP persists because it protects the status quo of the biggest clubs.

It feels like that sometimes, yet the big clubs are often the ones breaking the rules: City, Chelsea

Once they start getting punished or restricted in the market it will be out of the door.

Chelsea have already been restricted in the past, and that didn't send it out the door.

 

[Triggaaar]

Citeh and PSG aren’t Cinderalla stories. They involve tax fraud on a momental scale, see Operation Longbow.

Project Longbow.

I'd love to see the likes of City thrown out of the league. I imagine similar should happen to the likes of Real Madrid who somehow outspend oil states.

 

[Flounce]

It feels like that sometimes, yet the big clubs are often the ones breaking the rules: City, Utd, Chelsea




Chelsea have already been restricted in the past, and that didn't send it out the door.

Chelsea had Frank Lampard to steer them through the austerity caused by using kids from the academy as back up players. Probably the only time he’s done a half reasonable job as a manager.

I am not holding my breath that any of the mega rich clubs will be held to account and meaningfully punished for over spend though, top lawyers will see to that. Chelsea was probably a one off. We’ll see.

Interesting thread though

 

[peterward]

I know this has been touched upon on the Everton deduction thread, but it feels worthy of another thread for the other clubs currently walking the PSR/FFP tightrope.

I'd heard that Forest could be in danger and that Newcastle, Arsenal and Chelsea were in a bit of a bind, with limited headroom to bring in players without selling first, but I didn't know why it was all coming to a head just now before I heard the excellent David Ornstein on 5Live earlier.

Now, maybe most other people know this, but some of it was new to me, so I'll share. From what I can remember...

1. A lot of clubs kicked off at the timing of the Everton punishment, and how it feels unjust that it got pushed out to this season.
2. ...so, all clubs had to submit their 2022/23 accounts to the Premier League by 31st December.
3. ...after which the PL would take 14 days to review them, announcing breaches and charges by 14th January (tomorrow, as I type).
4. Clubs who are charged will have 14 days to respond.
5. Any subsequent independent commission hearing must be finished by April 7th.
6. Any appeals need to be concluded by 24th May. This is actually after the last game of the season, so the final league table may not be, errrrm, final after all.

So, it all be quite fun for a while, so long as we're not involved - and there's no indication we will be. I've read Everton could possibly be in trouble again though!

I can.understand the reasons why it was brought it, to avoid another Portsmouth, Massive, Leeds financial calamity.

But there is a danger the best league in the world is making a rod for its own back.

 

[Creaky]

So is the argument then that this limit has restricted the smaller clubs more than it should have as they do not have the massive supplementary incomes of the bigger boys?

That's precisely why the high revenue clubs have historically shown support for P&S rules. Stops the smaller clubs from threatening their position in the league. I doubt either of the Manchester clubs nor Liverpool, (clubs with 3 x the revenue of Brighton), will be voting for it's removal any time soon.

This same type of differential between what the top and bottom clubs can spend exists between the leagues. Why can Premier League owners buy £90m of shares over a 3 year period to cover losses yet the overall allowed maximum loss in the Championship is £39m. This puts any promoted club at a serious disadvantage.

The same can be asked about all the divisions in the EFL

 

[Hamilton]

I have been thinking of a better / additional way to penalise clubs who breach FFP. 10 points is nothing, really. Fines are nothing if a breach means you avoid the drop.

I do think that as a secondary punishment, say a club has broken FFP by £20m.

All of the most recent transfers in, covering the value of that £20m (I.e the very latest £25m signing) Should be completely banned from being able to record any financial income from sales after any future transfer out of the club.

I.e a club who breaches by £20m. Say they signed a player for £25m on the last day of the financial year. That is the deal which is adjudged to have pushed them into breaching the rule. (Note - this could be several players, depending on the size of the breach and the size of transfers)

If they then sold that player for £50m at any point in future they shouldn't be able to record any of that as income as part of their financial accounting for FFP purposes.

Otherwise, a team could go nuts buying great young talent, take the hit on a nothingy points penalty and fine now, but reap the benefits for years to come anyway by selling and taking FFP profits on players they should never have signed in the first place.

I'm my head that makes sense, and would be a good deterrent.

I guess the question is, where would that balance go if the player was sold? If the player was not sold then what penalties would you impose? And what does this mean for that player and their rights?

 

[Hamilton]

Saw smuggies press conference, he was almost crying when saying they probably can't spend any money this window.
after the Everton points deduction these teams are realising they need to be more careful.
Wonder how their owners feel having unlimited funds backing up.
Our model is looking better by the day.

I think Smug Eddie will be sacked at the end of the season. Newcastle want an Ancelotti in their minds.

And this FFP if directed at the big clubs will just drive them into the arms of the European Super League. Money and the right to grab as much of it as possible is what formed the Premier League. It will be what forms the ESL.

And the ESL know that if fans are unhappy that their club has been hit with points deductions, then opposition to an ESL will start to weaken. Fans will be distracted by aiming their ire at the PL and UEFA, while the banks and money men quietly steal the game from them.

That’s not to say this shouldn’t happen, but it will have all sorts of ramifications if it does.

 

[Triggaaar]

Otherwise, a team could go nuts buying great young talent, take the hit on a nothingy points penalty and fine now, but reap the benefits for years to come anyway by selling and taking FFP profits on players they should never have signed in the first place.

Ok so from your last point I see what you were getting at, but it doesn't make sense to try and work out which purchase pushed them over the limit. For a start, a new £25m player isn't a sudden £25m loss, the £25m is amortised over the length of the contract. Also, a club wishing to do as you suggested, could make those purchases before their star signings, so it's the star signings that push them over and they get to sell the young talent later anyway - all a bit of a mess when it comes to auditing.

And clubs cheating their way to the top tend to be doing it by buying the best players. It's not necessarily the worst thing when they're investing in young talent.

I don't know what the current rules are on a club paying itself a trillion for sponsorship (this seems to be how clubs like City try and get away with it), but sponsorship rules should limit funds for FFP to the size of deals done on the open market (eg, how much would other listed companies pay City for shirt sponsorship). That loophole aside, the current rules seem ok, they just need to enforce them with a punishment that fits the crime.

City have won 5 of the last 6 seasons. If they're all thanks to cheating FFP rules, is a few point deduction much of a deterrent? Obviously not. It should be the same as doping. Any season where you won silverware by cheating, the silverware is taken and handed to the closest team that didn't cheat. That's just the start, as it doesn't take into account that the cheat benefited financially too (or that the wronged teams lost out). They should also be kicked out of the league. f***'em

 

[Triggaaar]

You could be right, but as others have said, the UEFA FFP restrictions are stricter, and all the big boys obviously want to be UEFA compliant to play in their competitions. So the other logical conclusion is that the Super League comes into being, and the English representatives will leave the Premier League. It's a pretty dismal scenario all round.

If some big English clubs leave the PL to join a Super League, that's fine by me. Adios amigos. As long as they can't then play in our competitions and we'll carry on with the greatest league in the world without them.