Rob26

that would make more sense, mad how its proposed like it levels the playing field tho yeah your allowed to outspend them, but no more than 500% more than the teams with the least money. I suppose it may come in to play more in future years if the money in europe etc gets out of hand

i dont get it, so am I right thinking they are going from 85% for wages and players fees of your clubs actual revenue, but instead are proposing 500% of the lowest clubs revenue? I must be getting it wrong coz that just sounds like a its good if u want to invest in your club and you got the money and not going to change your mind, but sounds like a recipe for disaster for clubs that take on incredible liabilities in a failed push like everton and then go down, potential for an owner to change their mind due to the level of debt the club owes would be huge surely.

as one of the members of the premier league tho they are entitled to argue and negotiate and propose changes. think your wasting your time tho when you have to comply with uefa as well, and surely uefa will be pushing as many leagues to fall in line with their rules as they can to even it out, they can argue it out but in the end if they are qualifying for europe they got to comply anyways with uefas version.

everton look like they may get took over if 777 pay this loan off https://football-italia.net/genoa-owners-step-closer-to-everton-takeover/

everton sound like they are running out of options https://inews.co.uk/sport/football/everton-takeover-stuck-purgatory-crisis-3010133 777 had to pay this loan off by april as a condition of approval for take over, which hasn't happened, and although they are rumoured to be others interested the fact the owners are letting the 777 saga drag on this long i'm sure is a sign there is nothing concrete, with maybe buyers wanting to see what league they are buying them in before get serious. going to be in a world of shit if the owner dont get back to covering the bills if the 777 can't take it over. they will sharp want their money back too

I meant for FFP, I linked the article in my first post about it, here is the part I got that from tho

is it a loophole tho? is it not part of the rules you can sell assets in your group but it has to be fair value? the media describe it as loopholes for the clicks and sales but just thought its inter group transactions which all get fair value if deemed valid. the smart move on their behalf would of been doing it slightly under value - as apposed to them being greedy and relying on a value that won't stand up and will bite them in the ass later on. that sun article reckons it puts them at a 63m profit for the year, but there is only so many times you can kick this can down the road tho before things tighten up and you don't have these options open to you. maybe thats why I don't get mad at the clubs that find these holes in the system, part of me hopes the leagues get better and patch the holes up, but the clubs that can't manage their ffp without doing this can only do it so many times, and it might delay them getting hit, but makes the fall a little more juicy. Everytime teams like this do it and still fail to climb back into the champions league to balance the books, you just know when it does hit them its going to be something worth getting the popcorn out for, these badly managed clubs often dont seem like they even know how to handle the extra money for spending they have farmed and always seems like are just constantly making things worse. they must be getting close to a point where they need a bit of luck and players/managers not performing actually start to turn things around, as how much more can they keep spending on game changing players? yet all they will probs come up with is sell players to make 10-20m of profit only for them to 5x over 5 years again at 50m-100m on one or two players, not thinking ahead they need a 10-20m profit on sales in each of the next 4 years to pay for it, and thats without paying for the rest of the players that are amortised in the accounts for even longer from past seasons I wonder if the rules on 5 years amortisation only applies to new signings, can they reset the remaining amortisation by extending some deals back up to 5 years, or longer with extensions

yeah I think clubs on the edge of FFP are pushing accounts till the end of june, so if they have just extended to then it is to be expected, as they are kicking that can down the road and will want the chance of a fire sale in june if things dont come to plan. would be mildly amusing if this hotel sale went under B15 and they said its not allowed and they had to get their fire sale on

the ffp guy saying on talksport it may not get approved, it may go against the good commercial faith rule B15 where the league can disallow it if it serves no commercial purpose other than benefitting their ffp situation

chelsea sold hotels to themselves to stay within ffp (76m value) https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/chelsea-wages-todd-boehly-ffp-32580676 whats the rules on property sales these days? value and approval needs to be given by the league, so they need to be worth 76m or more for it to be allowed. listening on talk sport they have only sold the property and have kept the revenue streams from the hotel

how about have sporting sanctions that are in the rules in black and white. clubs then know up front what the penalties are. then for non complex cases all you can really appeal on is the value level of the breach £ for example: obviously the points and fines may be different but have bands and set them in black and white like this 5% over your FFP = 1 point deduction & £3m fine 5-10% over your FFP = 2 point dedication & £6m fine additional points and fines etc for aggravating factors - eg not meeting reporting deadlines, issuing misleading reports/forecasts also have similar black and white penalties for non payment of bills etc and other financial things clubs can do wrong and get sanctioned for. if clubs argue over the rules over what is allowable and what isn't and the rules have loopholes, then the league closes the loophole in line for the following season, it should then eventually be pretty black and white was is a breach and what isn't so it can be measured and punished by the level of the breach, within the penalties set out in the rules. I don't personally like how it seems like they just decide a fine and points deduction instead of it being something in black and white already.

all the regular uefa clubs are not going to be interested in this surely? as they will be bound by the uefa rules which will be tighter than this. the uefa system in the BPL probs wouldn't mean the talent leaves the league due to lower wages, because i'd imagine other uefa clubs that they would goto are going to be under the same restrictions, huge clubs with massive revenue based on the fan base will be able to continue to match the BPL clubs, but like now once you get past the huge clubs in the european leagues the teams below them don't have close to the same revenue from tv deals that our clubs do, so it won't really change anything for the BPL in retaining talent, its not like PSG/Real Madrid etc have an issue competing with clubs for big wages and fees. I can see it happening with the championship after a few years in where £20k+ a week talent has to go abroad because they can't improve their wages as not good enough for the prem, but in the BPL come on the level of revenue even the relegation fodder clubs have dwarfs most european clubs revenue (excluding the huge clubs who's have international fan revenue) seems like strange ideas, on one hand they say everton and forrest points deductions were not how the original intentions of ffp were, but I always thought the intentions was so clubs don't have owners gamble with their futures and then when the money owed by the club gets too hot to handle and/or the owners get bored/the owners other businesses cause them a cash squeeze - that they dont pull funding from the club and leave it in a place where the administrators cannot save the club. not sure how a luxury tax would even cover that, if anything in the situation of a owner cutting off cashflow that would only make things worse. it could work if you had the luxury tax - along with money in a league controlled joint bank account to cover any club liabilities with no debt added to the clubs that wasnt pre-funded in this account would work much better. so you pay other clubs to overspend, but at the same time if you want to operate without FFP constraints you need the full balance in this account for all your current contracts and payments owed in the bank as proof of funds to cover these. these deals would then be paid through that account and if a player is sold you can then send the numbers into the league and they make that part of the account withdrawable. under this system i'd have every single deal that goes through the league tell them how much they need in that account and the payments for wages and fees can come from this account for them deals would allow this sort of investment and also protect the clubs involved from the owners too. whats the worst that they could do operating without ffp limits if the money was in the bank, would mean they never walk away.

They are probs paying it back over the long term or when they exit with a sale. some bournmouth stuff up on swiss ramble, i only get the free emails tho so maybe others can add the rest or they might be enough for you all to your thing :laugh:

I think that is something you just have to take with a pinch of salt, sure I've seen similar things in our accounts where its basically highlighting that if our owners decide to throw the towel in and stop funding the club then it will go t!ts up. management fee seems a bit iffy tho, but then if they have a shortfall its them who are going to have to come to terms with financing it. does it say anything about their loans? did they get refinanced? I know sheff utd did, and I wonder if they will be called in early due to relegation, I'm certain the payment terms for the loans the prince took out to fund the club this year may mirror their parachute payment schedule now they are going down. amazing he hasn't been able to sell his club on promotion, given he wanted 90m from dozy in the EFL, you would think someone else would of come in and offered just slightly more while before they were rooted to the bottom, I wonder if he got greedy - as I struggle to imagine that any club in the premier league during the first half of the season would struggle to find buyers unless they were loaded with everton levels of debt, and even then there is still value in the ground etc at everton that could make that money worth swallowing as an very long term investment maybe the spike if its gone up is due to the insurance payout?

loads of cardiff stuff on swiss i dont pay so someone else can post the rest