PJ87
Journeyman Pro
Think the closing line is overlooked too much .. FIFA and uefa two of the most corrupt organisations in the world making up rules to avoid dodgy money is hilarious
Think the closing line is overlooked too much .. FIFA and uefa two of the most corrupt organisations in the world making up rules to avoid dodgy money is hilarious
Swango1980
Well-known member
Within the constraints of FFP.
I believe those are the constraints that all the clubs signed up for. They all agreed. So if any clubs decided to not stick to those constraints, then that would be considered unfair, especially if other clubs did stick to those constraints.
There is little point in debating what City might be worth now. Because, If Newcastle decided to completely ignore FFP constraints now, ended up winning the PL many seasons in a row a few years from now and reached a value over £5 billion, would most people consider that fair? I'd imagine Newcastle fans would consider Man City's potential breaches very unfair, given they are not just doing the same thing now
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
We are talking about Premier League rules here not FIFA or UEFA - it’s the premier league that has charged them , City already used loopholes to get around the UEFA rules
But not liking the rules is not a justification to ignore them
City’s potential cheating could have cost other clubs significantly
It’s worth remembering that all clubs signed up for the rules , the clubs have to ok the rules that the premier league brings in
Tashyboy
Please don’t ask to see my tatts 👍
Totally get that, but us fans now say us fans are left behind when it Comes To football now being a business. And that’s what football is a business.
City have a Business plan whilst “ trying” to work within the constraints of FFP. That has been very very successful in terms
Of growing the value of the Club/ business/ team.
City have a Business plan whilst “ trying” to work within the constraints of FFP. That has been very very successful in terms
Of growing the value of the Club/ business/ team.
Last edited:
Tashyboy
Please don’t ask to see my tatts 👍
Is that Fair
Leveraged buyoutsedit
There was also concern at the heavy debt being loaded onto some clubs as a result of new owners borrowing heavily to acquire the club and then using future earnings to pay the interest, a practice known as a leveraged buyout (LBO).[39][40] One of the world's richest clubs, Manchester United, was bought in this way by the Glazer family in 2005 after which the club, previously very profitable, remains several hundred millions of pounds in debt.[39] Since 2005, more than £300 million which might otherwise have been spent on players, improving facilities or simply kept as a contingency has been taken out of Manchester United and spent on interest, bank fees and derivative losses.[citation needed] (While Manchester United FC Limited was almost debt free, its ultimate holding company "Red Football Shareholder Limited" had a negative equity of £64.866 million in its consolidatedTashyboy
Please don’t ask to see my tatts 👍
Is that fair.
Liverpool
found itself in a similar position after being purchased by Americans Tom Hicks and George Gillett in February 2007.[41] Although subjected to less leveraged debt than Manchester United, by 31 July 2010, the club was suffering a negative equity of £5.896 million while its holding company, KOP Football Limited – the entity which carried the debt – had a negative equity of £111.88 million, leaving the club tottering on the verge of bankruptcy, and had to be put up for sale. Hicks and Gillett placed what was widely believed to be an unrealistic value on the club in the hope of making a vast profit however, for which they were severely criticised in the House of Commons as "asset strippers draining the club with their greed".[42] Eventually Liverpool was bought by a new American consortium, but because leveraged buyouts are permitted under normal stock market rules they will not be addressed by the FFP rules.[43]
Liverpool
found itself in a similar position after being purchased by Americans Tom Hicks and George Gillett in February 2007.[41] Although subjected to less leveraged debt than Manchester United, by 31 July 2010, the club was suffering a negative equity of £5.896 million while its holding company, KOP Football Limited – the entity which carried the debt – had a negative equity of £111.88 million, leaving the club tottering on the verge of bankruptcy, and had to be put up for sale. Hicks and Gillett placed what was widely believed to be an unrealistic value on the club in the hope of making a vast profit however, for which they were severely criticised in the House of Commons as "asset strippers draining the club with their greed".[42] Eventually Liverpool was bought by a new American consortium, but because leveraged buyouts are permitted under normal stock market rules they will not be addressed by the FFP rules.[43]
Tashyboy
Please don’t ask to see my tatts 👍
The read up on FFP on Wikipedia is very very good. 
GB72
Money List Winner
I really have lost all interest in FFP (even though Leicester may have suffered as as result of breaches). It is a misnomer in itself in the name seems to imply that it promotes some form of parity as a result.
Personally, I think that there should be one of 2 options:
1. If you want financial fair play, every team is given the same wage and transfer budget annually. Then you have true financial fairness.
2. If you cannot do that, take the shackles off and make it a free for all with the proviso that owners can pump as much money into clubs so long as it does not result in any form of debt being created. That at least gives everyone the chance to get a rich owner and spend what they like to get to the top table.
Either of those systems would represent a better system of fair play than we have at the moment.
Personally, I think that there should be one of 2 options:
1. If you want financial fair play, every team is given the same wage and transfer budget annually. Then you have true financial fairness.
2. If you cannot do that, take the shackles off and make it a free for all with the proviso that owners can pump as much money into clubs so long as it does not result in any form of debt being created. That at least gives everyone the chance to get a rich owner and spend what they like to get to the top table.
Either of those systems would represent a better system of fair play than we have at the moment.
Beezerk
Money List Winner
Damn, I wasn’t fast enough to post this…
You snooze, you lose!!
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
PJ87
Journeyman Pro
Same money for all would be brilliant
The NFL is fantastic for fairness of sharing talent with it's draft etc
GB72
Money List Winner
Thing is the NFL want a strong and competitive league where any team can win and so a league that is great for all fans.
Aztecs27
Money List Winner
My main gripe with FFP (outside of the whole debacle of City abusing it and not yet being punished) is that it's a one-rule-for-all, which isn't really fair for teams being promoted.
Taking Forest as an example - last season when we were promoted, we ended up with approx 14-15 first team players available once loanees had gone back to parent clubs and expired contracts meant players moved on. They had two choices:
- Buy a large number of players to try and compete and stay in the hardest league in the world
- try and survive with very little spend in hope that some younger academy players and/or loanees/free agents make enough of a difference.
I don't think it's at all fair that promoted clubs are only permitted losses of £63m over the 3 season period, where clubs already established in the PL are allowed £105m...it makes it that much harder to try and compete in the premier league and often (as we'll likely see this year) see teams just go straight back down.
There should be some balance/allowances to give clubs the incentive to build a strong enough squad to try and compete within the Premier League. The current system is designed to keep the top teams at the top and the bottom teams at the bottom - which provides zero parity and the same teams fighting for the title every single season. There are, of course, exceptions to this happening, but overall, no wonder so many teams yoyo as the jump from the Championship to the bottom of the PL is HUGE.
That being said, Forest absolutely did not need to sign ALL of the players they signed last season, and with better recruitment, would have maybe a.) stayed within FFP...whether we'd have stayed up or not remains to be seen as we were ravaged with injuries last season. Whatever punishment they dish out just needs to be accepted and the goal should be to overcome and reset the goals next season.
Taking Forest as an example - last season when we were promoted, we ended up with approx 14-15 first team players available once loanees had gone back to parent clubs and expired contracts meant players moved on. They had two choices:
- Buy a large number of players to try and compete and stay in the hardest league in the world
- try and survive with very little spend in hope that some younger academy players and/or loanees/free agents make enough of a difference.
I don't think it's at all fair that promoted clubs are only permitted losses of £63m over the 3 season period, where clubs already established in the PL are allowed £105m...it makes it that much harder to try and compete in the premier league and often (as we'll likely see this year) see teams just go straight back down.
There should be some balance/allowances to give clubs the incentive to build a strong enough squad to try and compete within the Premier League. The current system is designed to keep the top teams at the top and the bottom teams at the bottom - which provides zero parity and the same teams fighting for the title every single season. There are, of course, exceptions to this happening, but overall, no wonder so many teams yoyo as the jump from the Championship to the bottom of the PL is HUGE.
That being said, Forest absolutely did not need to sign ALL of the players they signed last season, and with better recruitment, would have maybe a.) stayed within FFP...whether we'd have stayed up or not remains to be seen as we were ravaged with injuries last season. Whatever punishment they dish out just needs to be accepted and the goal should be to overcome and reset the goals next season.
SteveW86
Head Pro
Guess that set up works when the sport is only played in 1 country, so the only thing that matters is that league.
Pin-seeker
Well-known member
Spot on.
how is it fair for the clubs with bigger revenue to out spend other teams?
If that was the case it’d be a 2 horse race every season
clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
I didn’t know that you can not spend the same as the other teams in the league!
How the hell is that fair?
Swango1980
Well-known member
If it wasn't for FPP, do you think promoted clubs would be able to compete with the finances of most of the established clubs in the PL anyway?
The top teams, which are usually vastly more wealthy, are always able to outstanding everyone else, and it would be almost impossible for the lower clubs to catch up, especially without FPP.
The only caveat to that is if a club gets a massively wealthy owner, they technically can't just go out on a spending spree. Without FPP, that would really be the only hope for a smaller club, get bought by a nation state and almost limitless money
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
That’s doesn’t seem fair that teams that get promoted are not allowed to spend the same as other teams or should I say they are not allowed to have as much loses as teams in the prem already - with parachute payments etc that doesn’t seem fair
PJ87
Journeyman Pro
The only "fair" thing they have done in the last couple decades is the transfer windows.
Gone are the days of a relegation or title battle and teams buying their rivals best player 3 weeks before the season ends.
Of course they have still done it poorly and not had all leagues windows closing at the same time or even same day
Gone are the days of a relegation or title battle and teams buying their rivals best player 3 weeks before the season ends.
Of course they have still done it poorly and not had all leagues windows closing at the same time or even same day
