The Football Regulator

[Mr Popodopolous]

Cap on Football wages, player amortisation and agents fees 70% and then 85% for freshly relegated sides.

Club A

£20m in non T.V. related revenue.

This 70% cap is £14m.

A further £20m in Solidarity plus regular..it rises to £28m.

Club B

£20k in non T.V. related revenue.

This 85% cap is £17m.

A further £40m in total for a reduced Parachute plus TV cash.

This 85% cap, it rises to £51m.

Already a gap of perhaps £23m baked in.

One possible idea on the table is that Transfer Profit can also be classed as revenue or relevant income anyway.

Club A

Raised £20m in Transfer Profit. That is another £14m.

Club B

By dint of relegation you can gain more in the market, how about £40m. That would be £34m.

£43m gap baked in..

Yet all things being equal if yoyo club you might have £60-65m easily now in terms of theoretical headroom. £22m for the extra PL year plus of course the Solidarity and T.V. vs Year 1 Parachute and T.V. gap of say £40-45m

[ExiledAjax]

17 hours ago, chinapig said:

Looks like things are not going well. Self interest and greed are setting Premier League clubs against each other, the EFL and the government. The Independent Regulator needs strong powers to put a stop to this.

This part stands out in particular:

The meeting also ended without a resolution on what has been called the New Deal for football. For two years, the Premier League has been under pressure from government to give more money to the EFL to help with the financial stress many lower-league clubs are under. That money has yet to materialise, with the Premier League preferring a broader deal that restructures a number of elements of the English game, from controls on spending to the structure of the Bristol Street Motors Trophy.

Expectations had been raised (including from within the Premier League) that the offer would be finalised this week. Instead, there was three hours of debate on the topic in which every club aired their opinions and some said the proposals were unworkable for them. The same proposals that have been mooted, in some form, for more than a year.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2023/nov/23/premier-league-appears-fractured-as-external-pressures-continue-to-mount

Yeh and this was expected to pass. I don't know how close it was to passing but I wonder who voted against it.

I am assuming it was a separate vote on each issue rather than a "package" deal.

It does increase the likelihood that the Regulator will dictate a deal - although my understanding is that everyone wants to avoid that unless absolutely necessary.

[Mr Popodopolous]

31 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Yeh and this was expected to pass. I don't know how close it was to passing but I wonder who voted against it.

I am assuming it was a separate vote on each issue rather than a "package" deal.

It does increase the likelihood that the Regulator will dictate a deal - although my understanding is that everyone wants to avoid that unless absolutely necessary.

EA, in your view, would the EFL be better off waiting for the Regulator to impose something or not?

[chinapig]

38 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Yeh and this was expected to pass. I don't know how close it was to passing but I wonder who voted against it.

I am assuming it was a separate vote on each issue rather than a "package" deal.

It does increase the likelihood that the Regulator will dictate a deal - although my understanding is that everyone wants to avoid that unless absolutely necessary.

Yep, Kieran Maguire announced a few weeks ago that an agreement had been reached. It's clear now that that was with the PL Executive only and that the clubs have rejected their recommendations.

A case of watch this space I guess.

[ExiledAjax]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

EA, in your view, would the EFL be better off waiting for the Regulator to impose something or not?

Do you think that the EFL has the luxury of that choice?

I think the EFL is going to be dictated to buy either the PL or by the Regulator.

So I think the question you are really asking is who is it better to be screwed by: the devil you know or the angel you don't?

For me if there's a gun to my head...I'd say wait for the Regulator's solution. But I'm not someone currently burning £15m a season keeping a club afloat. That person may prefer an earlier solution even if it's ultimately worse.

[Mr Popodopolous]

28 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Do you think that the EFL has the luxury of that choice?

I think the EFL is going to be dictated to buy either the PL or by the Regulator.

So I think the question you are really asking is who is it better to be screwed by: the devil you know or the angel you don't?

For me if there's a gun to my head...I'd say wait for the Regulator's solution. But I'm not someone currently burning £15m a season keeping a club afloat. That person may prefer an earlier solution even if it's ultimately worse.

Thanks.

Oh yes the EFL will be dictated to many respects but I see a Regulator as probably being less bad than the PL in this sense. Maybe the specifics of the proposed deal aren't so bad, albeit the Parachute Payments remaining well much will depend on their size. Solidarity rising is good the gap should be reduced between Parachute and non Parachute clubs but is it by enough.

I am like you perhaps leaning towards wait until the Regulator has imposed a solution but at the same time, owners may not want to be spending quire so much as you say.

Owners have competing objectives too, certain clubs at this level totally distort the market for the rest of us..check Stoke and Fulham accounts and the absurd amounts of equity and it Cash Flow put in, the former having the Bet365 backing of course. Reliant on a greater % of own revenue could be sensible in line with a proper redistribution.

I can only assume the EFL have accepted it based on the lack of media reporting to the contrary.

Edited November 24, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[chinapig]

28 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Do you think that the EFL has the luxury of that choice?

I think the EFL is going to be dictated to buy either the PL or by the Regulator.

So I think the question you are really asking is who is it better to be screwed by: the devil you know or the angel you don't?

For me if there's a gun to my head...I'd say wait for the Regulator's solution. But I'm not someone currently burning £15m a season keeping a club afloat. That person may prefer an earlier solution even if it's ultimately worse.

Agreed, we can't just assume that the Regulator will decide something that favours the EFL. So the EFL may well concede more to the PL to get an agreement.

[Mr Popodopolous]

By way of example of distortion, not so much in terms of Profit and Loss, that binds all clubs but..

I'm not saying they are breaching anything and solid investment is good but does it distort the wider market?

These are two Covid years I'll grant you and a decent chunk is legacy but they were also Years 2 and 3 of Parachute Payments. They burnt through £39m in 2021-22, as far as Cash went to finish midtable at this level.

Does £156m of Owner input in 2 years at this level cash wise distort the market?

Edited November 24, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[chinapig]

Good to see the EFL sticking to its guns:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2024/jan/24/efl-not-easing-its-fixture-list-as-premier-league-standoff-continues

The EFL has raised the stakes in its standoff with the Premier League over the future of English football, stating there will be no easing of the fixture list without a deal for financial redistribution.

In an announcement made several months earlier than is customary, the EFL revealed its schedule for the 2024-25 season on Wednesday, confirming two-leg semi-finals for the Carabao Cup.

An end to two-leg ties and cup replays has been part of broader demands made by the Premier League during tortuous negotiations over redistribution that will soon enter a third year. But according to the EFL’s chief executive, Trevor Birch, the calendar will stay the same until the top flight offers more cash for the rest of the pyramid.

“Whilst the fixture calendar remains a shared asset across the EFL, Premier League and Football Association, additional pressures from revamped European competitions means that scheduling across the season remains challenging and complex, so it requires a whole game response to find a solution,” Birch said.

“As it stands there is no agreement in place to make any changes to the Carabao Cup’s two-legged semi-final format, which continues to provide significant financial benefit to EFL clubs.

“The league [EFL] remains committed to a review of the calendar, but any significant changes cannot be made unilaterally, and would need to come with significant levels of compensation and adopted as part of any new distribution deal with the Premier League and its clubs.”

The decision by the EFL to confirm its position for next season with half of the current term still to go, and to do so in public, reflects the stakes at play. The government has promised to bring its football governance bill to parliament imminently and with it the promise of an independent regulator for the English game, but the scope of that regime is still to be decided.

On Monday the EFL hosted a dinner at the House of Lords for club executives and MPs at which the need for the regulator to deliver sustainability for the English game was argued for by the EFL chair, Rick Parry. This is widely understood to mean a mixture of greater redistribution and cost controls, with agreement yet to be reached between the EFL and the Premier League over the levels of each.

There is a growing sense that some inside the EFL believe the regulator should settle the dispute and such sentiments have been echoed by influential voices from inside the global game. Speaking in a personal capacity at the dinner, the deputy secretary general of Fifa, Alasdair Bell, said that setting levels of redistribution for the game would “fall squarely” within the regulator’s anticipated remit. “You wouldn’t expect football to be able to strike a deal,” he said. “The Premier League doesn’t exist just at one moment in time and this needs to be factored into what is a fair settlement for football. It needs a long-term decision not a series of ad hoc deals.”

[shahanshahan]

Tracey Crouch, the MP who wrote the fan led review, has announced she will not be running in the next General Election

I think we can agree for those that are interested in this topic to express her thanks for getting the fan led review set up in the first place - leading to the subsequent developments

 

[chinapig]

12 hours ago, shahanshahan said:

Tracey Crouch, the MP who wrote the fan led review, has announced she will not be running in the next General Election

I think we can agree for those that are interested in this topic to express her thanks for getting the fan led review set up in the first place - leading to the subsequent developments

 

Absolutely deserves our thanks. She stood firm against pressure from the Premier League throughout and saw through measures that have led to them acting seriously on FFP for the first time (unless anybody believes no club had ever breached the limits until now).

It's a little out of character for a Tory MP to want to regulate the rich and powerful so good for her for going against the grain also.

On the down side Kieran Maguire will be heartbroken.

[ExiledAjax]

Looking like this is all delayed again. Too much fighting between EFL/PL around financial deals, and the ailing government in its death throes is sticking it's oar in.

Very messy right now, with fan interests and concerns being right at the bottom of the pile.

[Mr Popodopolous]

[ExiledAjax]

2 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

What the article, which is published by the company that owns the domestic rights to broadcast the Premier League, doesn't mention is Frazer's car crash meeting with EFL clubs last Thursday.

In that meeting she encouraged the clubs to accept "a deal" from the PL and stated that if they don't do that then they'll be worse off under any deal the regulator eventually imposes.

How Frazer knows what deal the regulator would impose is unclear. It's also unclear which deal she wants EFL clubs to accept as there's currently now deal on the table.

So, far from the PL nobly hurrying to put together a deal, this is a case of the the PL attempting to use leverage created by a dying government to impose a "take this or leave it" deal on the EFL.

EFL clubs are livid and I doubt many will accept whatever comes forward.

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

What the article, which is published by the company that owns the domestic rights to broadcast the Premier League, doesn't mention is Frazer's car crash meeting with EFL clubs last Thursday.

In that meeting she encouraged the clubs to accept "a deal" from the PL and stated that if they don't do that then they'll be worse off under any deal the regulator eventually imposes.

How Frazer knows what deal the regulator would impose is unclear. It's also unclear which deal she wants EFL clubs to accept as there's currently now deal on the table.

So, far from the PL nobly hurrying to put together a deal, this is a case of the the PL attempting to use leverage created by a dying government to impose a "take this or leave it" deal on the EFL.

EFL clubs are livid and I doubt many will accept whatever comes forward.

Ooh very very interesting times.

I can imagine EFL clubs will be in no mood to accept now in a lot of cases as you say.

Well well..I do not understand why the Regulator would look to propose/impose a worse deal than was apparently but not seemingly now, on the table.

[ExiledAjax]

6 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Ooh very very interesting times.

I can imagine EFL clubs will be in no mood to accept now in a lot of cases as you say.

Well well..I do not understand why the Regulator would look to propose/impose a worse deal than was apparently but not seemingly now, on the table.

The regulator's deal will need to fit the remit of the regulator's power. We won't know exactly what that is until the Bill is published, but it's hopefully aimed at keeping clubs alive. Whether it's worse or better will be subjective.

On a personal note I think it's pretty probable that we would see legal challenges to the power that the regulator might wield in this regard. I think the PL is playing for time and is happy for this all to rumble on until the regulator sticks a deal in...and then it launches a challenge in the courts (see the Agents regs challenges for reference).

The other thing missing from the article is that the level of infighting in the PL is high. I have heard that the clubs are split 10 and 10 on the matter of where the money for a "New Deal" comes from - basically whether it is pro rata paid or is taken as a fixed sum from each club. Obviously the bigger clubs want the latter and the smaller want the former.

Some clubs are also openly telling DCMS that they don't need to listen to them because it'll be Labour who ultimately bring the regulator into being once the Tories get smashed at the next GE.

Edited February 20 by ExiledAjax

[phantom]

Premier League clubs will meet on 29 February to have another attempt agreeing a funding deal for the English Football League (EFL).

Agreement over how the 'New Deal' should be financed has proved elusive over the past few months.

Some clubs have felt the 'bigger' members of the top flight should pay a greater percentage.

The overall sum, which will be partly tied to future TV revenues, is expected to be around £900m over six years.

There had also been disagreement over financial regulations to be implemented in the Championship.

There is no guarantee of a conclusion to the matter on 29 February and there is potential for a further meeting on 11 March should it be needed.

However, sources at a Premier League shareholders' meeting in London earlier this month expressed increased confidence over a positive outcome.

News of the short notice nature of the next meeting comes as the Government prepares to publish legislation around the installation of an independent football regulator.

MPs had demanded a model be agreed or the top flight risked having a settlement forced on it.

A report by the Culture, Media and Sport (CMS) Select Committee in June said if no funding plan is reached soon, the government should bring forward a move to set up an independent football regulator (IREF) "to impose a deal".

The plan for a regulator, recommended by a fan-led review, has been confirmed by the government. It should ensure a fair distribution of money filters down from the Premier League.

TAKEN FROM: Premier League clubs to meet in February about EFL funding deal - BBC Sport

[Mr Popodopolous]

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2024/02/20/premier-league-new-deal-efl-clubs-government-summit/

My two main issues so far are, assuming the underlying negotiating position hasn't removed.

1) Retaining Parachute Payments even if the gap is to be reduced.

2) Allowing Championship perennials 70% ratio but relegated clubs, 85% was mentioned??

To compound matters, one suggestion was that EFL clubs would have an absolute obligation to comply whereas Relegated Clubs would be under a best endeavours regime.

That is a disgraceful offer.

Edited February 20 by Mr Popodopolous

[chinapig]

On 19/02/2024 at 15:00, ExiledAjax said:

Looking like this is all delayed again. Too much fighting between EFL/PL around financial deals, and the ailing government in its death throes is sticking it's oar in.

Very messy right now, with fan interests and concerns being right at the bottom of the pile.

From PMQs earlier:

Clive Betts (Lab) asks when the government will go ahead to set up an independent regulator for football.

Sunak says the independent regulator will put fans at the heart of football. He says plans were in the king’s speech. Discussions on how to do this are underway, he says.

Not going to happen before a general election I'm sure.

[ExiledAjax]

3 minutes ago, chinapig said:

From PMQs earlier:

Clive Betts (Lab) asks when the government will go ahead to set up an independent regulator for football.

Sunak says the independent regulator will put fans at the heart of football. He says plans were in the king’s speech. Discussions on how to do this are underway, he says.

Not going to happen before a general election I'm sure.

Honestly I think I'd rather it was brought in under a Labour government anyway. They'll get broader support for it from their MPs. They'll work better with campaign groups. 

I'm not in the business of campaigning for any particular politician or political party, and I don't want this thread to derail into that realm, but it might be better to take the hit and have this brought in under Labour.

Whoever forms the next government, this will be such an easy thing to "win" on in the first 100 days.

Edited February 21 by ExiledAjax

[phantom]

I don't know if this is of interest to anyone?

Westminster Forum Projects | Next steps for football governance in England

Morning, Thursday, 22nd February 2024

This conference will focus on next steps for football governance in England.

 

Discussion will explore priorities for ensuring the long-term financial sustainability of football, looking at key issues at all levels of the game following the announcement in the recent King’s Speech of a Football Governance Bill.

It is bringing key stakeholders together with policymakers to examine the way forward for implementing an independent football regulator in England, and priorities for achieving a smooth transition into a regulatory landscape. It follows the consultation responses to the DCMS white paper A sustainable future - reforming club football governance.

Delegates will consider the development of the independent regulator, looking at interoperability with existing governing bodies, issues around independence and impartiality, and the way forward for fostering long-term financial sustainability across all five tiers of English football.

We also expect discussion on measures outlined by the Government following the King’s Speech, including the introduction of a licensing system for clubs, creating a new owner’s and director’s test, and an emphasis on fan engagement.

Attendees will assess priorities for the in-depth ‘State of Football’ study being undertaken by the regulator to assess the financial health of the industry, as well as discussing the timescale and pathways for regulatory implementation, management and operation, including the possible introduction of a Shadow Regulator.

 

Further key areas for discussion include:

driving the sustainable financial growth of the women’s game

the state of grassroots football support, and improving equality, diversity and inclusion throughout all levels

measures to improve the welfare of players and officials, and the way forward for tackling all forms of abuse

 

We are pleased to be able to include keynote sessions with: Ben Dean, Director, Sport and Gambling, DCMS; Rick Parry, Chairman, English Football League; Tony Burnett, Chief Executive Officer, Kick It Out; Niall Couper, Chief Executive Officer, Fair Game; Christopher Davis, Principal, Regulation and Market Design, Oxera; and Dr Christina Philippou, Principal Lecturer, Accounting, Economics and Finance, University of Portsmouth.

 

Overall, areas for discussion include:

independent regulator:

next steps for implementation - key policy priorities following the fan-led review of football governance - ensuring long-term financial sustainability - informing best practice

preparing for the operation phase and a smooth transition - next steps for major projects such as the proposed State of Football study

the shape of the new licensing system for clubs - creating a new owner’s and director’s test - ensuring that fans have their say in the future of the game

regulatory frameworks: proposed scope and practicalities - working alongside existing football governing bodies - managing overlap - ensuring independence and impartiality

implementation measures: analysing the financial health of the industry on both a micro and macro level - putting the structures in place for full regulation across all five tiers of English football

financial sustainability: distribution of revenue - parachute payments - wage bills, debt and commercial deals - priorities for sustainable financial growth of the women’s game

duty of care: supporting football governing bodies in addressing concerns around player welfare, equality, diversity and inclusion at all levels

 

The conference will be an opportunity for stakeholders to consider the issues alongside key policy officials who are due to attend from the DBT; DCMS; DSIT; House of Commons Library; NAO; Ofcom; The Scottish Government; and the Welsh Government - as well as parliamentary pass-holders from both Houses of Parliament.

[ExiledAjax]

14 minutes ago, phantom said:

I don't know if this is of interest to anyone?

Westminster Forum Projects | Next steps for football governance in England

Morning, Thursday, 22nd February 2024

I'm attending through work.

[chinapig]

13 minutes ago, phantom said:

I don't know if this is of interest to anyone?

Westminster Forum Projects | Next steps for football governance in England

Morning, Thursday, 22nd February 2024

This conference will focus on next steps for football governance in England.

 

Discussion will explore priorities for ensuring the long-term financial sustainability of football, looking at key issues at all levels of the game following the announcement in the recent King’s Speech of a Football Governance Bill.

It is bringing key stakeholders together with policymakers to examine the way forward for implementing an independent football regulator in England, and priorities for achieving a smooth transition into a regulatory landscape. It follows the consultation responses to the DCMS white paper A sustainable future - reforming club football governance.

Delegates will consider the development of the independent regulator, looking at interoperability with existing governing bodies, issues around independence and impartiality, and the way forward for fostering long-term financial sustainability across all five tiers of English football.

We also expect discussion on measures outlined by the Government following the King’s Speech, including the introduction of a licensing system for clubs, creating a new owner’s and director’s test, and an emphasis on fan engagement.

Attendees will assess priorities for the in-depth ‘State of Football’ study being undertaken by the regulator to assess the financial health of the industry, as well as discussing the timescale and pathways for regulatory implementation, management and operation, including the possible introduction of a Shadow Regulator.

 

Further key areas for discussion include:

driving the sustainable financial growth of the women’s game

the state of grassroots football support, and improving equality, diversity and inclusion throughout all levels

measures to improve the welfare of players and officials, and the way forward for tackling all forms of abuse

 

We are pleased to be able to include keynote sessions with: Ben Dean, Director, Sport and Gambling, DCMS; Rick Parry, Chairman, English Football League; Tony Burnett, Chief Executive Officer, Kick It Out; Niall Couper, Chief Executive Officer, Fair Game; Christopher Davis, Principal, Regulation and Market Design, Oxera; and Dr Christina Philippou, Principal Lecturer, Accounting, Economics and Finance, University of Portsmouth.

 

Overall, areas for discussion include:

independent regulator:

next steps for implementation - key policy priorities following the fan-led review of football governance - ensuring long-term financial sustainability - informing best practice

preparing for the operation phase and a smooth transition - next steps for major projects such as the proposed State of Football study

the shape of the new licensing system for clubs - creating a new owner’s and director’s test - ensuring that fans have their say in the future of the game

regulatory frameworks: proposed scope and practicalities - working alongside existing football governing bodies - managing overlap - ensuring independence and impartiality

implementation measures: analysing the financial health of the industry on both a micro and macro level - putting the structures in place for full regulation across all five tiers of English football

financial sustainability: distribution of revenue - parachute payments - wage bills, debt and commercial deals - priorities for sustainable financial growth of the women’s game

duty of care: supporting football governing bodies in addressing concerns around player welfare, equality, diversity and inclusion at all levels

 

The conference will be an opportunity for stakeholders to consider the issues alongside key policy officials who are due to attend from the DBT; DCMS; DSIT; House of Commons Library; NAO; Ofcom; The Scottish Government; and the Welsh Government - as well as parliamentary pass-holders from both Houses of Parliament.

Thanks for this. No representative from the Premier League I see. I'm shocked I tell you, shocked!

[ExiledAjax]

2 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Thanks for this. No representative from the Premier League I see. I'm shocked I tell you, shocked!

Bill Bush was on. He's senior advisor to the PL CEO. He spoke entirely in favour of the current system.

[chinapig]

6 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Bill Bush was on. He's senior advisor to the PL CEO. He spoke entirely in favour of the current system.

Thanks. Again I'm shocked!

The Premier League must not be allowed to win this fight or it's another nail in the coffin. Let's hope we don't see regulatory capture down the line.

[Mr Popodopolous]

https://insidersport.com/2024/03/01/premier-league-efl-independent-reg/

[Mr Popodopolous]

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league-efl-independent-regulator-b2508079.html

[phantom]

Meeting this afternoon just finished 

No agreements reached

They couldn't even agree on anything that could have been put to a vote

Premier league clubs clearly don't like the proposed rules

[Mr Popodopolous]

I don't think EFL clubs Championship especially appreciate some of the PL proposals either...

[Mr Popodopolous]

12 minutes ago, phantom said:

Meeting this afternoon just finished 

No agreements reached

They couldn't even agree on anything that could have been put to a vote

Premier league clubs clearly don't like the proposed rules

I think they need 14/20 to change matters @phantom

Sounds like that is some way off in all areas.