The Humble Realist Posted April 15 Report Share Posted April 15 (edited) Didnt post in the womens team thread as a fundamental question about the set up of the womens game. There are rules in the men game like FFP that stop Lansdown or any other owner just pouring money in. Even then the prices are so large that it would cost 100s of millions to achieve anything in the top division. What are the rules in the WSL? I think the world record for a womens transfer is about 500k? What stops lansdown spending 10 millon and having one of the best , if not the best womens team in the world ? Are there FFP rules and if so how is it governed? If it's based on revenue etc do womens team publish accounts etc? How does their commercial revenue compare to our mens team. Be interesting to see, if the WSL grows like some are suggesting it will whether it goes through an episode like the mens game had when Abramovich came in and 'bought the league '. Thoughts ? P.s. no comments on lansdown not putting his hands in his pockets because hes lansdown !! Edited April 15 by The Humble Realist 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrs Court Red Posted April 15 Report Share Posted April 15 That would be an insane thing to do considering the lack of spending in the mens team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Humble Realist Posted April 15 Author Report Share Posted April 15 Yeah, but forget the city specific narrative. I mean for any WSL owner ? Why not buy the title? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBFC II Posted April 15 Report Share Posted April 15 (edited) As far as I'm aware, there's a salary cap which means top flight sides can spend 40% of their turnover on wages. That turnover is for the whole club though, so it would still be a huge amount for the WSL were we to do that. The big issue is with the lack of revenue the womens game makes, spending huge money on wages etc would lead to big losses, which isn’t sustainable in the long term Edited April 15 by JBFC II Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cidercity1987 Posted April 15 Report Share Posted April 15 Why didn't Lansdown get us established in the Prem in the 2000's before FFP was a thing and before other very wealthy owners joined the party Who bloody knows Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luke_bristol Posted April 15 Report Share Posted April 15 Concentrating on the FA Youth Cup. 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Humble Realist Posted April 15 Author Report Share Posted April 15 Haha I should have predicted this thread would lead to a load of SL comments rather than WSL comments but thanks @JBFC II for rising above it with an explanation. Does this mean lansdown can spent 40% of the mens/womens team combined on the womens team if he wants to ? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBFC II Posted April 15 Report Share Posted April 15 4 minutes ago, The Humble Realist said: Haha I should have predicted this thread would lead to a load of SL comments rather than WSL comments but thanks @JBFC II for rising above it with an explanation. Does this mean lansdown can spent 40% of the mens/womens team combined on the womens team if he wants to ? As far as I’m aware, although that rule may have changed. I heard an interview with Karen Brady where she basically said that although the temptation is there to do just that, it won’t help the women’s game at all so West Ham refuse to live beyond their means Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Back of the Dolman Posted April 15 Report Share Posted April 15 38 minutes ago, JBFC II said: As far as I’m aware, although that rule may have changed. I heard an interview with Karen Brady where she basically said that although the temptation is there to do just that, it won’t help the women’s game at all so West Ham refuse to live beyond their means Karen Brady doesn’t care about helping the women’s game. That’s not why West Ham wouldn’t put money into their women’s team. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashton_fan Posted April 16 Report Share Posted April 16 Everybody keen on spending someone else's money, should be politicians! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FNQ Posted April 16 Report Share Posted April 16 2 hours ago, ashton_fan said: Everybody keen on spending someone else's money, should be politicians! Well in fairness, SL’s keen on taking everybody else’s money too.. And if you have an asset that you’d like to sell at way above true market value then you really should ensure that you properly service, grow and maintain it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashton_fan Posted April 16 Report Share Posted April 16 2 hours ago, FNQ said: Well in fairness, SL’s keen on taking everybody else’s money too.. And if you have an asset that you’d like to sell at way above true market value then you really should ensure that you properly service, grow and maintain it. SL doesn't see a penny of the money paid in by supporters, it all goes towards the players wages Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted April 16 Report Share Posted April 16 6 minutes ago, ashton_fan said: SL doesn't see a penny of the money paid in by supporters, it all goes towards the players wages The annual accounts say different! He has a “big” shareholding in the club, he has loans in the club that pay him interest. I have no issue with this by the way. Other club owners lend their clubs money interest free. Although I’m not an SL fan, I recognise he has funded the club. But it’s also very fair to say he hasn’t done it as a philanthropist, he wants his return on it. For anyone to suggest he’s just slinging his money away carefree and wants none of it back is very naive. Why do you think the Sporting Quarter only goes ahead if Longmoor Housing does? Because that’s the business case, one funds the other…and some. If Longmoor falls through as a result of the judicial review, then Sporting Quarter doesn’t happen. And on the intangible side, shouldn’t someone expect to pay a bit of money to get 20 years of enjoyment? Having said that, I don’t think he gets much joy anymore. And I don’t hold a “be careful what you wish for” view. If SL decides to sell us to someone unscrupulous to get his $dollar, then it says more about him than the new owner. Personally I don’t see SL doing that, so why would I worry? He’ll do his due diligence won’t he? Surely? 3 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1960maaan Posted April 16 Report Share Posted April 16 10 minutes ago, Davefevs said: And I don’t hold a “be careful what you wish for” view. If SL decides to sell us to someone unscrupulous to get his $dollar, then it says more about him than the new owner. Personally I don’t see SL doing that, so why would I worry? He’ll do his due diligence won’t he? Surely? Well the EFL etc do due diligence, and they never make the mistake of letting convicted crooks or dubious characters in as owners do they. I think we are safe Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashton_fan Posted April 16 Report Share Posted April 16 2 hours ago, Davefevs said: The annual accounts say different! He has a “big” shareholding in the club, he has loans in the club that pay him interest. I have no issue with this by the way. Other club owners lend their clubs money interest free. Although I’m not an SL fan, I recognise he has funded the club. But it’s also very fair to say he hasn’t done it as a philanthropist, he wants his return on it. For anyone to suggest he’s just slinging his money away carefree and wants none of it back is very naive. Why do you think the Sporting Quarter only goes ahead if Longmoor Housing does? Because that’s the business case, one funds the other…and some. If Longmoor falls through as a result of the judicial review, then Sporting Quarter doesn’t happen. And on the intangible side, shouldn’t someone expect to pay a bit of money to get 20 years of enjoyment? Having said that, I don’t think he gets much joy anymore. And I don’t hold a “be careful what you wish for” view. If SL decides to sell us to someone unscrupulous to get his $dollar, then it says more about him than the new owner. Personally I don’t see SL doing that, so why would I worry? He’ll do his due diligence won’t he? Surely? The Sporting Quarter project and the housebuilding are separate from the football club, SL does expect to make a profit on those whereas the football club is always a loss maker and if he does get some money out (eg dividends) it's far less than he's putting in through share issues etc.. I doubt if any owner of a Championship club is making any money, they do it for fun and publicity in the main (I agree that this does not apply to SL now). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shahanshahan Posted April 16 Report Share Posted April 16 https://www.90min.com/posts/what-are-ffp-rules-womens-football Article from June 2023; but hopefully still relevant How does FFP function in the women's game? There is a lot less financial regulation in the women's game in the United Kingdom and Europe right now and that has led to calls for changes to be made. In the Women's Super League, there is a salary cap which allows top flight sides to spend 40% of their turnover on wages. The issue with that is that those totals can be merged with the men's team within the same club, so the likes of Manchester United Women can spend 40% of a much larger pot of cash as the overall club of Man Utd generates so much money. Man Utd's head of group planning and finance that has been recently calling for more financial regulation in the UK women's game so that a small set of teams do not kill the competitiveness of the division. Speaking at the European Club Association's first women's football summit, Francesca Whitfield said: "Currently in the WSL we have a salary cap system which is 40% of revenue, but that includes parent club income, meaning the larger clubs naturally benefit from shirt deals on the men's side. "That's creating a gap that is affecting the product and this can't be something that we just address domestically, this has to be something we address on a European level to make sure the European tournaments are the best and we're at the forefront of that." In the Premier League right now, the rules allow for total losses over a three-year period of £105m. There are penalties in place for clubs that exceed that figure. Whitfield is aware that it is not as simple as copying the rules in the men's game as it is a different financial landscape. "We can't simply emulate or replicate what we did on the men's side, the game is in a different space and we need to ensure that we can invest but equally attract investment," said Whitfield. "Smaller clubs are not able to invest at that level, so how do we encourage them to do so if it's not a fair playing field and they can't possibly ever be competitive with how things currently are?" https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/womens-football-needs-ffp-rules-says-manchester-united-chief-j632d2sdf Another article from June 2023, which I can't read because of a paywall. But it's title & heading are Women’s football needs FFP rules, says Manchester United chief Present rules allow men’s clubs to transfer wealth to their women’s team, which it is feared will harm competitiveness Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eco Posted April 16 Report Share Posted April 16 1 hour ago, shahanshahan said: https://www.90min.com/posts/what-are-ffp-rules-womens-football Article from June 2023; but hopefully still relevant How does FFP function in the women's game? There is a lot less financial regulation in the women's game in the United Kingdom and Europe right now and that has led to calls for changes to be made. In the Women's Super League, there is a salary cap which allows top flight sides to spend 40% of their turnover on wages. The issue with that is that those totals can be merged with the men's team within the same club, so the likes of Manchester United Women can spend 40% of a much larger pot of cash as the overall club of Man Utd generates so much money. Man Utd's head of group planning and finance that has been recently calling for more financial regulation in the UK women's game so that a small set of teams do not kill the competitiveness of the division. Speaking at the European Club Association's first women's football summit, Francesca Whitfield said: "Currently in the WSL we have a salary cap system which is 40% of revenue, but that includes parent club income, meaning the larger clubs naturally benefit from shirt deals on the men's side. "That's creating a gap that is affecting the product and this can't be something that we just address domestically, this has to be something we address on a European level to make sure the European tournaments are the best and we're at the forefront of that." In the Premier League right now, the rules allow for total losses over a three-year period of £105m. There are penalties in place for clubs that exceed that figure. Whitfield is aware that it is not as simple as copying the rules in the men's game as it is a different financial landscape. "We can't simply emulate or replicate what we did on the men's side, the game is in a different space and we need to ensure that we can invest but equally attract investment," said Whitfield. "Smaller clubs are not able to invest at that level, so how do we encourage them to do so if it's not a fair playing field and they can't possibly ever be competitive with how things currently are?" https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/womens-football-needs-ffp-rules-says-manchester-united-chief-j632d2sdf Another article from June 2023, which I can't read because of a paywall. But it's title & heading are Women’s football needs FFP rules, says Manchester United chief Present rules allow men’s clubs to transfer wealth to their women’s team, which it is feared will harm competitiveness Aren't Man Utd one of those clubs?! They appeared to have more support staff, coaches etc, than players in their huddle following the win over Chelsea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shahanshahan Posted April 16 Report Share Posted April 16 1 minute ago, Eco said: Aren't Man Utd one of those clubs?! They appeared to have more support staff, coaches etc, than players in their huddle following the win over Chelsea. I didn't see the game but am aware that it was a home semi-final, so maybe more staff were present than Chelsea's... I am aware that there has been more investment for staff & resources at Bristol City than in previous years (I recall Lauren Smith saying that the women's staff had to move office twice at the RHPC) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shahanshahan Posted April 16 Report Share Posted April 16 https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p0hm0c7d From last night's Sound of the City. During the City Women fans panel, it is brought up (about the 40 minute mark, but the overall segment starts from 20 minutes) on the lack of investment for the playing squad & how even more players that could have been brought in the transfer windows could have saved the season. Even a mention from host Ed Hadwin that the show has tried to reach out to the board (most likely chairman Gavin Marshall) and are looking to interview him or another board member Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Coach Posted April 16 Report Share Posted April 16 I kind of feel we did try to buy success during LJ’s tenure. However, that failed and we backed the wrong horse in typical Bristol City manner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nomad Posted April 16 Report Share Posted April 16 8 minutes ago, The Coach said: I kind of feel we did try to buy success during LJ’s tenure. However, that failed and we backed the wrong horse in typical Bristol City manner. Wrong horse? LJ wasn't a horse, he was full pony. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Natchfever Posted April 16 Report Share Posted April 16 21 hours ago, The Humble Realist said: Didnt post in the womens team thread as a fundamental question about the set up of the womens game. There are rules in the men game like FFP that stop Lansdown or any other owner just pouring money in. Even then the prices are so large that it would cost 100s of millions to achieve anything in the top division. What are the rules in the WSL? I think the world record for a womens transfer is about 500k? What stops lansdown spending 10 millon and having one of the best , if not the best womens team in the world ? Are there FFP rules and if so how is it governed? If it's based on revenue etc do womens team publish accounts etc? How does their commercial revenue compare to our mens team. Be interesting to see, if the WSL grows like some are suggesting it will whether it goes through an episode like the mens game had when Abramovich came in and 'bought the league '. Thoughts ? P.s. no comments on lansdown not putting his hands in his pockets because hes lansdown !! Maybe he thinks its overhyped and the arse will drop out of it sooner rather than later. Of course hes shown over decades that he knows jackshit on football matters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.