Don_Simon Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 4 hours ago, stewiek2 said: I know it's Joey Barton's podcast but the one with Keiran Maguire is interesting. In it Maguire says that the £105m figure was implemented in 2013 and hasn't changed since. This means that clubs are trying to operate at that year's 3 year cycle. The player salaries for Villa in 2013 were around £32.78m for the 13/14 season, compared to around £117m now. The issue with the FFP/PSR 3 year £105m is that it has stuck at that whilst the whole cost of football has sky rocketed. It hasn't changed with the economic landscape at all. Kieran Maguire did a podcast with Joey Barton? I now think substantially less of Kieran Maguire. 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewiek2 Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 It's an interesting watch. Next season there's a cap of 70% of revenue has to go on wages, no more... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewiek2 Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 19 minutes ago, stewiek2 said: It's an interesting watch. Next season there's a cap of 70% of revenue has to go on wages, no more... Go to about 32 min in he discusses the 2013 decision. Says that if it is indexed linked clubs would have a £216m 3 year limit but has stayed at £105m. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vive_La_Villa Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 I personally think it’s all corrupt as ****. End of. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 3 hours ago, stewiek2 said: It's an interesting watch. Next season there's a cap of 70% of revenue has to go on wages, no more... Its Joey Barton so No 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vive_La_Villa Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 10 hours ago, stewiek2 said: It's an interesting watch. Next season there's a cap of 70% of revenue has to go on wages, no more... This is interesting, just a bit long. Good point about the lose staying at 105m since 2013. That makes no sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Dogg Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 11 hours ago, stewiek2 said: It's an interesting watch. Next season there's a cap of 70% of revenue has to go on wages, no more... Please don't link to that word removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewiek2 Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 1 hour ago, Mr_Dogg said: Please don't link to that word removed. Don't be so naive. I'm not linking it because of him, aim linking as it's an expert on football finance explaining it all. But fine, keep your blinkers on and not listen to an expert but froth and panic over it all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Dogg Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 1 hour ago, stewiek2 said: Don't be so naive. I'm not linking it because of him, aim linking as it's an expert on football finance explaining it all. But fine, keep your blinkers on and not listen to an expert but froth and panic over it all. Joey Barton is a parasite, stop giving him clicks. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKP90 Posted March 9 VT Supporter Share Posted March 9 (edited) Is that podcast really called 'Common Sense with Joey Barton'? Someone is clearly taking the piss there. Other such podcasts include: 'The Secret to Quiet Understatement, with Donald Trump'. Edited March 9 by HKP90 Typo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewiek2 Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 2 hours ago, Mr_Dogg said: Joey Barton is a parasite, stop giving him clicks. Try watching that one, you may learn something from what Keiran Maguire has to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrBlack Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 18 hours ago, paul514 said: Very true, I have heard there has been meetings recently to increase the cycle amount. Now if that is for both the PL and europe I don't know. Unless its for both it is pointless It's irrelevant for European clubs. Uefa's rules are based on your spend as a percentage of your turnover, which is by far the bigger limiting factor for clubs like ours outside the scum 6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul514 Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 3 hours ago, MrBlack said: It's irrelevant for European clubs. Uefa's rules are based on your spend as a percentage of your turnover, which is by far the bigger limiting factor for clubs like ours outside the scum 6. To my knowledge they have the 105m ffp cap and 70% wage to turnover cap that is being tapered in like it is in the premier league. All I am basically saying is even if the Premier League brings in more relaxed rules, if UEFA don't then it is irrelevant as you are spending money to get up the league and then into UEFA competitions. Therefore whatever rules they set are the rules everyone tries to adhere to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheltenham_villa Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 On 08/03/2024 at 14:39, stewiek2 said: I know it's Joey Barton's podcast but the one with Keiran Maguire is interesting. In it Maguire says that the £105m figure was implemented in 2013 and hasn't changed since. This means that clubs are trying to operate at that year's 3 year cycle. The player salaries for Villa in 2013 were around £32.78m for the 13/14 season, compared to around £117m now. The issue with the FFP/PSR 3 year £105m is that it has stuck at that whilst the whole cost of football has sky rocketed. It hasn't changed with the economic landscape at all. But revenues have also sky rocketed. Look at the TV deal the vs now, look at the change in ticket prices. Personally I don't want us losing more money than that over a 3 year period. PSR is a good thing for football in my opinion. I want my club to be hear in the future Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul514 Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 13 minutes ago, cheltenham_villa said: But revenues have also sky rocketed. Look at the TV deal the vs now, look at the change in ticket prices. Personally I don't want us losing more money than that over a 3 year period. PSR is a good thing for football in my opinion. I want my club to be hear in the future PSR (capped wages to turnover) is a good thing IMO.... FFP isn't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 (edited) 19 minutes ago, paul514 said: PSR (capped wages to turnover) is a good thing IMO.... FFP isn't Hang on, you do know man city's turnover is approaching 4x ours? I think even spurs is double ours How is it a good thing? It'll just further increase the whoring out of football clubs and the embarrassing bed and pillow partnership bullshit let alone the fleecing of fans and preference of day trippers Edit - this week is a timely reminder of what football has become under FFP - we had a kids charity as our main sponsor when FFP was introduced, now we have some garbage Asian betting company absolutely no one wants Edited March 9 by villa4europe 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheltenham_villa Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 2 hours ago, villa4europe said: Hang on, you do know man city's turnover is approaching 4x ours? I think even spurs is double ours How is it a good thing? It'll just further increase the whoring out of football clubs and the embarrassing bed and pillow partnership bullshit let alone the fleecing of fans and preference of day trippers Edit - this week is a timely reminder of what football has become under FFP - we had a kids charity as our main sponsor when FFP was introduced, now we have some garbage Asian betting company absolutely no one wants I don't think the commercial whoring of Premier league football clubs can be blamed on ffp. It was comfortably hear before it. Any system that protects the club and secures it future is a good one for me. I'd prefer us to be sustainable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul514 Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 4 hours ago, villa4europe said: Hang on, you do know man city's turnover is approaching 4x ours? I think even spurs is double ours How is it a good thing? It'll just further increase the whoring out of football clubs and the embarrassing bed and pillow partnership bullshit let alone the fleecing of fans and preference of day trippers Edit - this week is a timely reminder of what football has become under FFP - we had a kids charity as our main sponsor when FFP was introduced, now we have some garbage Asian betting company absolutely no one wants I do know their turnover is several times ours as is all the sky six clubs turnover. So? In the days before any regulations that was the case for Utd and Liverpool for example, they could always bid more and pay more. FFP as a system is bankrupt, it stops investment in clubs and has sod all to do with a club going bust. If an owner wants to spend a billion quid out of his own pocket that is fine by me as long as the finances come from HIS pocket up front or from his pocket in the form of a bond which comes from his pocket, that is the only change I would make. PSR however is a great system, wages are what kill clubs, you might sign someone for free but if he wages are 9 million a year for 5 years that is a 45m pound commitment, extrapolate that to an entire squad, what happens if you stop getting CL or relegated etc. It's all a risk even when that cap reaches the eventual 70% in a couple of years time. Spurs spend less than 40% of their turnover on wages, that is a well run club! we spend 87% I think I saw the other day? completely unsustainable. If that means you have to sell someone who wants mega bucks, then so what it will help the FFP calculation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted March 10 Moderator Share Posted March 10 6 hours ago, paul514 said: FFP as a system is bankrupt FFP doesn’t exist. It isn’t a thing. As per the club’s snarky reply to an FAB question. The Prem has PSR rules, UEFA has financial sustainability rules. The Prem’s rules are probably about to be changed (again) and adjusted for the current world or climate we operate in, the UEFA rules are (IMO) more about levelling up the playing field against the English model of letting states and Oligarchs own clubs and “dope” them financially, about cementing the current “big” clubs in their lucrative places. The UEFA rules to an extent are protectionist of “names”, the Prem rules are flawed but well intended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterSw Posted March 11 Share Posted March 11 Sky Sports video about the new rules. Hopefully get full rules at some point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts