New PL FFP rules

Sporty said:
Will they? They've hoyed more at their own Saudi league so far haven't they and the amount they've hoyed at golf is massive compared to what they've spent at the mags.

Also bear in mind the mags are worth considerably more than what Ashley sold them for so what is the net loss for the Saudi's if they sold them tomorrow?
Click to expand...
Huge loss considering how much they’ve spent and not many buyers around
 


Banks said:
But it's not impossible and the rule is 85% for the premier league. 70% for uefa.

If your turnover is 100m you can spend 70m every single season

The only condition is to have a working capital of 25m

Not profit capital.

Clubs like the mags can spend fortunes as long as they can secure lucrative long term sponsorships which they will.

It's to let clubs spend more not less.
Click to expand...
It's being phased in over 3 years. 85%, then 75 and finally 70.
 
Banks said:
The fact you keep quoting the incorrect figure says it all. It's 85% being proposed for premier league clubs.

The problem is use of working capital makes it's too easy to manipulate. Spending 100m can be seen as a direct 100m loss or it can spread over ten years and become a ten million loss for a season

You are extremely naive

The fact remains the mags can can spend 85% of a figure they can easily manipulate. It's laughable that you think this won't benefit them
Click to expand...
Grumpy Old Man said:
It's being phased in over 3 years. 85%, then 75 and finally 70.
Click to expand...
I googled that 85% and is that not something that was proposed for teams outside of Europe after the phasing in? Teams in Europe will therefore benefit from spending 70% of the extra millions from Europe so it's one or the other. The numbers in blue below are for 70% but 85% for the mags would be £212.5m spending so an extra £35.2m. That's wiped out by a team getting £50m in Europe and winning the Champions League is worth well over £100m now. Even if a team just gets £20m it's still £14m more spend so the difference is just over £20m. That wouldn't buy much these days anyway. Though the extra revenue spend from Europe is irrelevant given they can already spend way more than the mags anyway.

inews.co.uk

What new FFP rules mean for Newcastle and how they could affect transfer plans

The Premier League is set to overhaul its Profit and Sustainability Rules which will have a knock-on effect on contract renegotiations
inews.co.uk inews.co.uk

The Premier League – who want to see the competitive balance of the division maintained – agree on reckless spending but are doing things slightly different. Their proposals will give leeway to clubs who haven’t qualified for European competition to spend 85 per cent of their revenue on wages and transfer fees. Sources tell i that is partly to give them the ability to spend more and catch up with the previous year’s top six.

In practice it will work like this: Manchester City’s gargantuan revenue in 2023 was over £700m so they will be able to spend £490m on transfers and transfer wages. Newcastle’s revenue is increasing swiftly but in 2023 it was around £250m. They will have room to spend £175m on transfer costs, player wages and agent fees.

Brett said:
I wouldn't have thought they would make a profit in the investment currently.

Spent 500 million pounds on players, guess they would want at least 900 million to break even
Click to expand...
forever changes said:
Huge loss considering how much they’ve spent and not many buyers around
Click to expand...
Nah it's obvious they wouldn't make a profit. It was just over £300m they paid for them and invested £400m on players, not £500m, so a total £700m. They've also sold players so and their net spend on players is estimated to be around £350m. That's a total investment of £650m and the squad is valued at over £400m.

www.shieldsgazette.com

Premier League clubs on 'high alert' as fast-track FFP charge date announced

Premier League clubs could face Financial Fair Play charges during the January transfer window.
www.shieldsgazette.com www.shieldsgazette.com

Since PIF's takeover of Newcastle, the club has already spent almost £400million on permanent signings while recouping less than £50million in player sales, leaving a significant net spend as a result.

Forbes has them valued at £630m, just £20m less than their investment so even selling them for a 'bargain' £600m (they would probably ask for more given they're on the up so will increase in value with more investment) means a £30m loss. As I said, given the money they've hoyed elsewhere, a lot of which they won't be recouping is more than they mags. These figures are estimates of course but even so, it's probably less than £100m they'd lose if they sold them tomorrow which is nowt at all to the Saudi's.

 
Last edited:
Adamoah said:
The PL treat the EFL with absolute disdain and would never agree such a deal.
Click to expand...
But it isn't just that is it? That plan would see the likes of the scum and Man City, given free reign and indeed spending not just 'x' but XXXXXX as they see fit. A 10% 'tax' on that spend wouldn't be much of an issue to them, and would see the gap between the dodgy moneyed clubs and the rest of football widening still further. And who'd be confident any pot of money accrued by this would get allocated properly by the EFL anyway? These are the same clowns who allowed that Dai Yongge fella to buy Reading after he'd already soundly fucked two other clubs in Europe in plain sight. These people are morons at the very best, and colossally bent at worst.

Money doesn't just talk in football, it sings the the entire f***ing tune these scumbags dance to.
 
Last edited:
So we can never be anything again on current turnover that's well under half what the 17th placed PL team would get from TV alone. Even if KLD and family fancied it. Just because now, with the usual greedy players all ensconched (Spurs) is when they've decided to stop the music.
Nobody at the top can fall on hard times or be usurped and nobody not at the top who has been usurped can get back there.
Ah the Beautiful Game.
 
JL1985 said:
Their fans need to get it through their thick skulls that they are nowhere near the richest club in the world.
Click to expand...
It’s dawning on them that the rules have changed since Chelsea and Man City came onto to the scene, can’t just spend and win titles.

Locals are about to get very frustrated , I imagine the next thing the chronicle will be kicking off with is FFP
 
Brett said:
It’s dawning on them that the rules have changed since Chelsea and Man City came onto to the scene, can’t just spend and win titles.

Locals are about to get very frustrated , I imagine the next thing the chronicle will be kicking off with is FFP
Click to expand...
surely it has to affect the saudis. their main flex is coin. wouldn't surprise me if their stay was short lived it they don't get their own way.
 
kingkeane said:
surely it has to affect the saudis. their main flex is coin. wouldn't surprise me if their stay was short lived it they don't get their own way.
Click to expand...
the Saudis probably thought money would buy them titles , doesn't work like that
 
Last edited:
the premier league are easily bought by the 'big' clubs example the 5 subs rule, a scratter club scrapping away for a point then 5 internationals come on with 20 mins remaining
 

Back
Top