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

[jcdenton08]

They’re seriously f***ed. Good.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

The other way I look at all this is to ask the question. How many clubs have no PSR / FFP issues at all?

Because it's all very well all these clubs saying they need to sell a player for £30m before July, but the pool of clubs able and willing to spend is very small.

Liverpool? Surely well in the clear. Us of course, but I don't think we'll buy lots of established talent.

Most of the top 6, can't have that much wiggle room. Yes, they are in Champs league, and are commercially big, but have been spending hundreds of millions and not really selling for a long time.

I think transfer fees are going to be very depressed in the summer and the coming years. Due to the small puddle of clubs that have significant wiggle room here.

It has never been our model, but with all this FFP stuff, and our massive bag of swag, it is the next logical step if we want to step up.

Mr Bloom is not a man to not place a bet when the odds are right.

Interesting times.

 

[jcdenton08]

It has never been our model, but with all this FFP stuff, and our massive bag of swag, it is the next logical step if we want to step up.

Mr Bloom is not a man to not place a bet when the odds are right.

Interesting times.

Excellent point. Some (including our esteemed head coach) have implied that Bloom is somehow risk averse.

All the evidence shows he is the exact opposite. He just wants the odds stacked in his favour before gambling - which is why he runs a company providing that exact service to billionaires.

We will do business, but it’ll be on his terms (and on the advice of his excellent heads of department) when he sees value. He’ll gamble alright - but not on “Sad Ken” the one legged blind racehorse.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Excellent point. Some (including our esteemed head coach) have implied that Bloom is somehow risk averse.

All the evidence shows he is the exact opposite. He just wants the odds stacked in his favour before gambling - which is why he runs a company providing that exact service to billionaires.

We will do business, but it’ll be on his terms (and on the advice of his excellent heads of department) when he sees value. He’ll gamble alright - but not on “Sad Ken” the one legged blind racehorse.

Classic episode.

Every time I think of Sad Ken, I think of West Ham

 

[Mancgull]

I can see them offloading Jacob Ramsey.

But they have enough players to make a dent in it, plus a couple are only on loan.

FML I've just seen Callum Chambers is still there

Ramsey is a player that could be of interest but what would Villa be paying him?

 

[Hiheidi]

Ramsey is a player that could be of interest but what would Villa be paying him?

If you are to believe Spotrac, he's on £70,000 a week!

 

[nwgull]

If you are to believe Spotrac, he's on £70,000 a week!

Same website said we were paying Caicedo 3.5K per week

 

[Acker79]

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Seems odd clubs like Villa and Everton would vote on this?

Even tighter controls over spending?

 

[Hiheidi]

Seems odd clubs like Villa and Everton would vote on this?

Even tighter controls over spending?

Sorry to sound thick, but does this clubs will be able to spend more or less, compared to current regulations?

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Sorry to sound thick, but does this mean clubs will have more or less to spend than under current regulations?

I *think* it's club related right?

It's done on turn over now, how I've read it anyway

So United can spend pretty much unrestricted v Brighton will have less money before they break the rules.

 

[Hiheidi]

I *think* it's club related right?

It's done on turn over now

Yes, I got that, but can't fathom if it will give more breathing space for the likes of Chelsea/ Villa, or not.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Yes, I got that, but can't fathom if it will give more breathing space for the likes of Chelsea/ Villa, or not.

The rules seem tighter, so no

It's not for a couple of seasons anyhow

If it's done on turnover, it doesn't really matter who they sell v home grown in current set up.

Teams like Villa/Everton/Wolves who are at risk would have been in more trouble if those rules were in place, how I read it anyway

 

[Weststander]

I *think* it's club related right?

It's done on turn over now, how I've read it anyway

So United can spend pretty much unrestricted v Brighton will have less money before they break the rules.

It depends on Briighton’s next two published accounts, 2022/23 and 2023/24. By all accounts we could be laughing. Then those other two extremely well run clubs LFC and THFC are laughing, they’re run as proper businesses by owners who don’t financial dope.

Whilst Villa, Chelsea and Everton are stuffed, on wages alone they exceed the new 85%.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

It depends on Briighton’s next two published accounts, 2022/23 and 2023/24. By all accounts we could be laughing. Then those other two extremely well run clubs LFC and THFC are laughing, they’re run as proper businesses by owners who dope financial dope.

Whilst Villa, Chelsea and Everton are stuffed, on wages alone they exceed the new 85%.

Agreed, Brighton are in a great place at the moment, but if they muck up a window or two there is very little wiggle room to undo it.

On the wages front, if it doesn't matter who you flop v the current system it will be easier to get the wages down?

 

[Weststander]

Agreed, Brighton are in a great place at the moment, but if they muck up a window or two there is very little wiggle room to undo it.

On the wages front, if it doesn't matter who you flop v the current system it will be easier to get the wages down?

Did you spot that UEFA’s identical system becomes 70% from 2025/26? Currently 90%. So in a couple of seasons time, to compete in Europe at all Chelsea, Villa and Everton will have to drastically reduce their wild spending and wages. The 85% won’t be their main concern,

I wonder if most PL clubs will reduce for convergence of rates over time?

The 70% makes great sense, as overheads come off of that, for the first time proper business principles.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Did you spot that UEFA’s identical system becomes 70% from 2025/26? Currently 90%. So in a couple of seasons time, to compete in Europe at all Chelsea, Villa and Everton will have to drastically reduce their wild spending and wages. The 85% won’t be their main concern,

I wonder if most PL clubs will reduce for convergence of rates over time?

The 70% makes great sense, as overheads come off of that, for the first time proper business principles.

I saw it was coming down as there was talk of it being matched in the PL, I am assuming some clubs books are in such a mess most the league would be facing a points deduction if it went that low.

If Brighton are selling out the Amex every game, an expansion is a must to increase revenue.

Looks like City were the only team to vote against it.

 

[Weststander]

I saw it was coming down as there was talk of it being matched in the PL, I am assuming some clubs books are in such a mess most the league would be facing a points deduction if it went that low.

If Brighton are selling out the Amex every game, an expansion is a must to increase revenue.

Looks like City were the only team to vote against it.

I think you follow these things too, a spend of say £50m on the Amex to increase capacity by x thousand, even if corporates, just doesn’t make economic sense. The awful Falmer Station and Lewes line would prevent it anyway. Clubs like CP2010 and us get almost all our income from broadcasting. I was already skeptical about the economics of CP2010’s proposed £160m main stand. Parish talks about the added income, but our shiny stadium only earns an addition £6m per season over the rust heap. For them, construction costs rise at 8% a year .

I think TB and PB will work wisely with our resources.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

I think you follow these things too, a spend of say £50m on the Amex to increase capacity by x thousand, even if corporates, just doesn’t make economic sense. The awful Falmer Station and Lewes line would prevent it anyway. Clubs like CP2010 and us get almost all our income from broadcasting. I was already skeptical about the economics of CP2010’s proposed £160m main stand. Parish talks about the added income, but our shiny stadium only earns an addition £6m per season over the rust heap. For them, construction costs rise at 8% a year .

I think TB and PB will work wisely with our resources.

Unless it's Anfield/Amex like stadiums, I don't think new stands are the way to go, there is very good money in concerts/NFL etc outside of football, a new stand on the likes of selhurst isn't going to be able to tap into that market, a new stadium in South London might.

What are the restrictions on the Amex and concerts? It's the ideal location for a south coast market of concert goers.

The 50 million wouldn't count towards FFP, but you need to sell out every game to get any benefit.

 

[Weststander]

Unless it's Anfield/Amex like stadiums, I don't think new stands are the way to go, there is very good money in concerts/NFL etc outside of football, a new stand on the likes of selhurst isn't going to be able to tap into that market, a new stadium in South London might.

What are the restrictions on the Amex and concerts? It's the ideal location for a south coast market of concert goers.

The 50 million wouldn't count towards FFP, but you need to sell out every game to get any benefit.

Someone who doesn’t follow football asked me that.

So, NSC, why does the Amex no longer hold big concerts?

In the early years we had FBS, a dance music night and Rod Stewart.