Salary caps

[Davefevs]

On 10/08/2020 at 15:49, Mr Popodopolous said:

That moron Gordon Taylor needs to get back in his box.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-8609679/PFA-threatened-injunction-prevent-salary-cap-voted-League-One-Two-clubs.html

I suppose he is doing what unions need to do but does he not get it- there might not be a League One and League Two or a severely decimated one in a few years without drastic action- are the players at this level not aware of the dire straits caused by Covid at many of the clubs??

Strange how many of the Leaders of football are or have been basically inadequate.

I'm fairly convinced though, that under relatively pragmatic and fresh blood this stupid posturing by PFA leadership wouldn't be happening.

Yep, imho he’s outstayed his time at the PFA.  Did a lot of good back in the 80s and 90s but commands a colossal wage (certainly £2m at one point, think it’s lower now).

On 11/08/2020 at 02:01, Mr Popodopolous said:

Well said Simon Jordan- well said!

I think the PFA certainly have a role to play, but not that idiot who heads them up.

I’m more aligned with Simon Jordan, he is a business who’s made mistakes in football, but I think he sees the future....and it’s clubs going down the pan.

The salary cap in Lg1/2, only impacts new contracts, so a team keeping the vast majority of its squad aren’t gonna be impacted til 21/22....so have time to prepare.

The EFL need to come up with some form of bond that owners put into to cover debt.  EFL invest it and give a return.  When a club gets sold, new owner buys the bond off of the old owner.  No Wigan in this scenario.

[Mr Popodopolous]

This isn't yet applicable to the Championship[ but an interesting spot by Kieran Maguire.

EFL have beefed up or been granted beefed up powers for the salary cap!

https://twitter.com/KieranMaguire/status/1305078295134982145/

You mentioned payroll records a few weeks back @Davefevs I think it was you anyway.

Seems it's that and then some!

[ExiledAjax]

32 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

This isn't yet applicable to the Championship[ but an interesting spot by Kieran Maguire.

EFL have beefed up or been granted beefed up powers for the salary cap!

https://twitter.com/KieranMaguire/status/1305078295134982145/

You mentioned payroll records a few weeks back @Davefevs I think it was you anyway.

Seems it's that and then some!

There's a typo in rule 5.20.2.

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 hour ago, ExiledAjax said:

There's a typo in rule 5.20.2.

The spirit and legacy of Shaun Harvey lives on! 

[Davefevs]

2 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

This isn't yet applicable to the Championship[ but an interesting spot by Kieran Maguire.

EFL have beefed up or been granted beefed up powers for the salary cap!

https://twitter.com/KieranMaguire/status/1305078295134982145/

You mentioned payroll records a few weeks back @Davefevs I think it was you anyway.

Seems it's that and then some!

Yes, it was.

If a club wants to falsify submissions, then they are gonna bit in big trouble.

[Pezo]

Soooo just to get this right, people that are crazy rich won't be able to pay people that are extremely well off more more money in pursuit of sporting success?

Is any of these savings guaranteed to find there way back to lower costs for supporters or is this just people that are crazy rich not wanting to pay as much for there toys. 

Is there any consideration for the tax implications over time? Concerned that the average tax from a 10% wage cut is basically the cost of a nurse (I find it interesting that the average championship footballer pays about 9 nurses through the tax they pay).

IMO we don't need people earning less and a wage cap we need a cap on ticket prices to stop fans being fleeced, we need FFP as a percentage of income (like it is now), maximum debt of 100% of income and unlimited gifts (if people that are rich enough want to give money away they should be able to) - we need more people earning more not less people earning more. 

[Davefevs]

9 minutes ago, Pezo said:

Soooo just to get this right, people that are crazy rich won't be able to pay people that are extremely well off more more money in pursuit of sporting success?

Is any of these savings guaranteed to find there way back to lower costs for supporters or is this just people that are crazy rich not wanting to pay as much for there toys. 

Is there any consideration for the tax implications over time? Concerned that the average tax from a 10% wage cut is basically the cost of a nurse (I find it interesting that the average championship footballer pays about 9 nurses through the tax they pay).

IMO we don't need people earning less and a wage cap we need a cap on ticket prices to stop fans being fleeced, we need FFP as a percentage of income (like it is now), maximum debt of 100% of income and unlimited gifts (if people that are rich enough want to give money away they should be able to) - we need more people earning more not less people earning more. 

I think you need to divorce the wages of Prem (and a lot of Champ) players from Lg1 and Lg2 players.

We don’t need clubs going bust and have creditors being owed money.

(sorry sounds condescending, not meant to be....just Prem is worlds apart).

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

I think you need to divorce the wages of Prem (and a lot of Champ) players from Lg1 and Lg2 players.

We don’t need clubs going bust and have creditors being owed money.

(sorry sounds condescending, not meant to be....just Prem is worlds apart).

Tbh, PL with their revenue streams- Covid notwithstanding of course but in nortmal times I mean- all clubs and I mean all, should be making a profit. I know cash flow is more important for solvency but all clubs should be quite capable of turning a profit in normal times in the PL, year in and year out.

The fact a number don't is actually quite amazing- it's not even just the smaller clubs either!

[Mr Popodopolous]

Wonder when it might come in?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2020/11/25/championship-clubs-talks-18m-salary-cap/

£18m the mentioned figure, think there could be another vote soon. Behind a paywall so can't read it at this time.

Obviously as before, that £18m excludes U21s, transitional arrangements between divisions no doubt would be there and promotion/cup run bonuses also not included.

It says from the bits I could see that a number of clubs are facing punishment under P&S/FFP but also that 6 clubs are against removing these regulations until after next season.

[Tipps69]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Wonder when it might come in?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2020/11/25/championship-clubs-talks-18m-salary-cap/

£18m the mentioned figure, think there could be another vote soon. Behind a paywall so can't read it at this time.

Obviously as before, that £18m excludes U21s, transitional arrangements between divisions no doubt would be there and promotion/cup run bonuses also not included.

It says from the bits I could see that a number of clubs are facing punishment under P&S/FFP but also that 6 clubs are against removing these regulations until after next season.

After next season? Or this? Or is this those clubs hoping that spending a fortune will be covered by them gaining promotion this season so it won’t affect them anyway?

[Mr Popodopolous]

On 28/11/2020 at 17:04, Tipps69 said:

After next season? Or this? Or is this those clubs hoping that spending a fortune will be covered by them gaining promotion this season so it won’t affect them anyway?

It wasn't altogether clear- there can sometimes be a way to see the article quickly even if on Telegraph site, but unsure it works again.

However on the P&S/FFP front, I managed to pick out this bit, well I saw it elsewhere online also.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2020/11/25/championship-clubs-talks-18m-salary-cap/

I do wonder about bits of this though- for a start to penalise for Covid losses would be a nonsense. I'd firewall them off from general FFP regs, I'd make it £39m + Allowable Costs + LEGITIMATE AND VERIFIABLE Covid Losses- or however it was reworked.

Quote

While there is widespread support for the cap to be introduced, six Championship clubs — including Brentford, Preston and Middlesbrough — are insisting that the EFL’s Profitability & Sustainability rules must remain in place until the end of next season.

The P & S rules — previously known as Financial Fair Play — are designed to limit losses and control spending, but are proving unpopular as a number of clubs are facing punishment after being impacted by the coronavirus crisis, with many of them making losses of about £1 million a month.

Six second-tier clubs insist they will only agree to the salary cap if P & S regulations stay for another 18 months, so talks are likely to prove complicated ahead of a resolution during the winter.

I think the six clubs want it to remain in place until the end of 2021/22- assume the number of clubs would face punishment this or next season.

Personally, I'm pro the P&S regs staying in play until this cycle is done- so that would mean I'm on the side of those six clubs- clubs cannot wriggle off the hook due to Covid or a change in regulations- cannot be allowed to happen and I hope Mark Ashton is making that point forcefully and consistently at the EFL.

The journo might be conflating two separate issues tbh. Which is surprising as Percy is pretty good!

[Davefevs]

6 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

It wasn't altogether clear- there can sometimes be a way to see the article quickly even if on Telegraph site, but unsure it works again.

However on the P&S/FFP front, I managed to pick out this bit, well I saw it elsewhere online also.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2020/11/25/championship-clubs-talks-18m-salary-cap/

I do wonder about bits of this though- for a start to penalise for Covid losses would be a nonsense. I'd firewall them off from general FFP regs, I'd make it £39m + Allowable Costs + LEGITIMATE AND VERIFIABLE Covid Losses- or however it was reworked.

I think the six clubs want it to remain in place until the end of 2021/22- assume the number of clubs would face punishment this or next season.

Personally, I'm pro the P&S regs staying in play until this cycle is done- so that would mean I'm on the side of those six clubs- clubs cannot wriggle off the hook due to Covid or a change in regulations- cannot be allowed to happen and I hope Mark Ashton is making that point forcefully and consistently at the EFL.

The journo might be conflating two separate issues tbh. Which is surprising as Percy is pretty good!

By combining 19/20 and 20/21 into an average they gave clubs the opportunity in the close season to start to re-work their budgets, reduce wage bills, etc.  Yes, clubs might not have expected to still be without any crowds....but surely you have a budget plan for “worse case”?

I wonder how many clubs might be forced into fire sales (of sorts) in January as their last chance to bring in some money before the end of this cycle.

I see the point of salary caps in Lg1/2, and I totally get the logic of £18m / 25 man squad in the Champ and negating PPs.  But what’s to stop clubs racking up losses by paying transfer fees whilst controlling wage budget?  

 

[Tipps69]

6 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

It wasn't altogether clear- there can sometimes be a way to see the article quickly even if on Telegraph site, but unsure it works again.

However on the P&S/FFP front, I managed to pick out this bit, well I saw it elsewhere online also.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2020/11/25/championship-clubs-talks-18m-salary-cap/

I do wonder about bits of this though- for a start to penalise for Covid losses would be a nonsense. I'd firewall them off from general FFP regs, I'd make it £39m + Allowable Costs + LEGITIMATE AND VERIFIABLE Covid Losses- or however it was reworked.

I think the six clubs want it to remain in place until the end of 2021/22- assume the number of clubs would face punishment this or next season.

Personally, I'm pro the P&S regs staying in play until this cycle is done- so that would mean I'm on the side of those six clubs- clubs cannot wriggle off the hook due to Covid or a change in regulations- cannot be allowed to happen and I hope Mark Ashton is making that point forcefully and consistently at the EFL.

The journo might be conflating two separate issues tbh. Which is surprising as Percy is pretty good!

I would assume we’re in that 6 club list as well?

It very much felt like during the summer a few clubs were looking for a reason to bend the rules in their favour & use the pandemic situation as their way of getting out of things because all clubs were now going to incur bigger losses but while that is likely to be the case, they should of still been able to limit those losses, no?

12 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

By combining 19/20 and 20/21 into an average they gave clubs the opportunity in the close season to start to re-work their budgets, reduce wage bills, etc.  Yes, clubs might not have expected to still be without any crowds....but surely you have a budget plan for “worse case”?

I wonder how many clubs might be forced into fire sales (of sorts) in January as their last chance to bring in some money before the end of this cycle.

I see the point of salary caps in Lg1/2, and I totally get the logic of £18m / 25 man squad in the Champ and negating PPs.  But what’s to stop clubs racking up losses by paying transfer fees whilst controlling wage budget?  

 

And how does affect a sponsor paying someone’s wages? I mean, what’s to stop Mr Bet 365 signing Zlatan to come it at Stoke & then paying his wages? Or Mansion Bet being happy with us signing John Stones for example? I still fail to see how Derby have got away with the Rooney signing! And I assume his wages aren’t included in FFP because they aren’t paying them & the betting site is?

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Tipps69 said:

I would assume we’re in that 6 club list as well?

It very much felt like during the summer a few clubs were looking for a reason to bend the rules in their favour & use the pandemic situation as their way of getting out of things because all clubs were now going to incur bigger losses but while that is likely to be the case, they should of still been able to limit those losses, no?

And how does affect a sponsor paying someone’s wages? I mean, what’s to stop Mr Bet 365 signing Zlatan to come it at Stoke & then paying his wages? Or Mansion Bet being happy with us signing John Stones for example? I still fail to see how Derby have got away with the Rooney signing! And I assume his wages aren’t included in FFP because they aren’t paying them & the betting site is?

From Derby’s point of view, Red32 aren’t paying Rooney’s wages.  They are sponsoring Derby increasing Derby’s income.  Derby are using that increased income to pay Rooney.

The argument is whether Red32’s deal is inflated or not and as a result is it “fair”.

But Red32 aren’t paying Rooney’s wages.

[Tipps69]

53 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

From Derby’s point of view, Red32 aren’t paying Rooney’s wages.  They are sponsoring Derby increasing Derby’s income.  Derby are using that increased income to pay Rooney.

The argument is whether Red32’s deal is inflated or not and as a result is it “fair”.

But Red32 aren’t paying Rooney’s wages.

Ah ok, I thought that was how they were getting around it (them paying his wages not them upping their sponsorship). But that still asks the question, what’s to stop similar happening at City or Stoke (other than morals)?

[Davefevs]

2 minutes ago, Tipps69 said:

Ah ok, I thought that was how they were getting around it (them paying his wages not them upping their sponsorship). But that still asks the question, what’s to stop similar happening at City or Stoke (other than morals)?

I think FFP (P&S) basically would look at whether the sponsorship amount is realistic or not.

For example if Red32 said they’d sponsor the kit for £5m that doesn’t seem unreasonable (high but not unreasonable).  If Derby want to use all of that income to play Rooney’s £100k a week that’s up to them.  But if they said the deal is worth £10m, the EFL might say that’s unrealistic, e.g. there’s a sanity check against market rates.  Probably not my best explanation, but basically clubs can only take the piss within limits

[Tipps69]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I think FFP (P&S) basically would look at whether the sponsorship amount is realistic or not.

For example if Red32 said they’d sponsor the kit for £5m that doesn’t seem unreasonable (high but not unreasonable).  If Derby want to use all of that income to play Rooney’s £100k a week that’s up to them.  But if they said the deal is worth £10m, the EFL might say that’s unrealistic, e.g. there’s a sanity check against market rates.  Probably not my best explanation, but basically clubs can only take the piss within limits

You really think the EFL would question if someone got too much sponsorship? After allowing clubs to sell their own stadiums to themselves, I don’t think they’d question anything. After all, how did Wolves manage to sign half of the Portuguese  national team without it being an issue?

So what we could do is get Hargreaves Lansdown to sponsor us & then SL could employ Messi, Ronaldo, Rashford & Mbappe as financial analysts at Hargreaves Lansdown while playing for us outside of office hours?

[Hxj]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

I think FFP (P&S) basically would look at whether the sponsorship amount is realistic or not.

Not sure that the current regulations allow them to do so unless it is a Related Party transaction.  Not sure that Red32 is related to Derby County.

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

 ... basically clubs can only take the piss within limits

I know at least one poster who will have a different view @Mr Popodopolous

[Davefevs]

7 hours ago, Tipps69 said:

You really think the EFL would question if someone got too much sponsorship? After allowing clubs to sell their own stadiums to themselves, I don’t think they’d question anything. After all, how did Wolves manage to sign half of the Portuguese  national team without it being an issue?

yes, the precedent has been set with Ground naming at fair market price.

Wolves didn’t sign that many....several were loans. (See pic)  it was a gamble that paid off.  Had they failed to get promoted they’d have just sold Neves.

 

So what we could do is get Hargreaves Lansdown to sponsor us & then SL could employ Messi, Ronaldo, Rashford & Mbappe as financial analysts at Hargreaves Lansdown while playing for us outside of office hours?

 

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Assuming it is ratified, this seems like EXCELLENT news.

There needs to be a watertight, legally binding and enforceable agreement- I also have a preference for in-season punishment, or maybe refusal of promotion for cheats but this is a good start.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-9053171/Championship-salary-cheats-hit-points-deductions-Premier-League.html

Quote

Promoted clubs who breach the Championship's new salary cap on their way up could be hit with Premier League points deductions.

Would be excellent- needs to be punitive and swingeing if applied in PL

Quote

Sportsmail can reveal that what would be a historic 'jurisdictional bridge' is set to be brought in from next season, should proposals get the green light.

The planned regulations of the proposed £18million cap have been sent to each Premier League club for approval and feedback.

Binding watertight deal would be a must.

Quote

An 'Overrun Tax' will also be introduced which could see those in breach of the cap pay £3 for every £1 overspent to a fund which will then be split between the Championship clubs who have complied.

This would be I assume in addition to points penalties. I like the idea!

Quote

There is widespread support among Championship clubs — although some do not want the rules to come into play until the end of next season. The cap needs a 66 per cent majority to be signed off at a meeting due to be held in the new year.

Wonder which clubs? Also the price of the bailout deal?

Quote

Previously, clubs who were promoted but found to have breached existing profit and sustainability rules were only hit with financial penalties, with the likes of Leicester City and Bournemouth reaching settlements many viewed as meaningless. But the new rule would see the door opened for points deductions.

Yes and no. These were the rules which pre-dated the Profitability and Sustainability- however in the case of e.g. Aston Villa, perhaps more should have been done by the PL!

Quote

Premier League sides have been asked to state by next Wednesday whether they are in favour of the concept and amount of the salary cap. They have also been asked if they would support the 'jurisdictional bridge'.

And top-flight sides were asked whether they would support punishments by way of fines for clubs who breach the cap by less than 20 per cent and points deductions for those whose breaches are in excess of 20 per cent.

Hmm. On one level that seems fair, but OTOH an overspend is an overspend- albeit it'd be an overspend of £3.6m before points kick in.

Quote

Clubs have been encouraged to report those they suspect of non-compliance. They will have their anonymity protected by the league, unless an arbitral body or court order demands otherwise.

Ashton: "Hello, EFL! I suspect Aston Villa, Derby, Sheffield Wednesday and maybe Reading of being in breach".

Rightly so too, this is what we need- the clubs on the case!

This bit though- well it's what was mooted.

Quote

In an attempt to allow Premier League clubs threatened with the drop to protect their assets, players on contracts above £720,000 a year — a divisional average calculated by dividing the £18m by 25 (the number of players in a squad) — will be registered at the £720,000 mark and their contracts can be extended at existing levels of pay should they have less than 18 months on their deals remaining and should their clubs be in receipt of parachute payments.

Unsure how I feel about the protection of PL clubs assets- you need transitional arrangements but...

[Hxj]

All very interesting.  The following is particularly interesting:

"The £18m figure includes taxes, signing-on and loyalty fees, image rights, agents' fees, loan fees and other fees and expenses paid directly to all registered players."

Assuming it means what it says the real annual salary cap is going to be significantly below the £18 million referred too. 

 

[Lanterne Rouge]

On 15/12/2020 at 12:02, Hxj said:

All very interesting.  The following is particularly interesting:

"The £18m figure includes taxes, signing-on and loyalty fees, image rights, agents' fees, loan fees and other fees and expenses paid directly to all registered players."

Assuming it means what it says the real annual salary cap is going to be significantly below the £18 million referred too. 

 

Might persuade a few players to have a long hard look at how much their agent is leaching out of the game.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Looks like it's back to the drawing board!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-9165499/Championship-clubs-set-reject-18m-salary-cap-season.html

Maybe in jeopardy at least.