thabucks Posted March 11 Share Posted March 11 Why aren’t permissible losses not index linked to inflation ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaVilla Posted March 11 Share Posted March 11 56 minutes ago, sharkyvilla said: Sounds like they're changing the rules then for the summer. Hopefully good for us. to what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaVilla Posted March 11 Share Posted March 11 17 minutes ago, PeterSw said: Sky Sports video about the new rules. Hopefully get full rules at some point so, if its a salary to turnover % type thing, where are we in terms of turnover compared to other PL clubs?, we are probably mid table? (so, unless we can increase revenue massively, this will limit us as well) is this type of limitation, better than the current FFP tho!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Czarnikjak Posted March 11 Share Posted March 11 1 minute ago, OutByEaster? said: The key is getting that revenue up to £300m plus asap - that's why the sponsorship deals are so important. Here is a thought. Salary cap based on percentage of Broadcast and ticket revenue only. Eliminates efforts having to deal with related party sponsorships, makes it easy to audit revenue figures, allows better ran clubs to actually make some money by having good commercial deals. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaVilla Posted March 11 Share Posted March 11 1 minute ago, Czarnikjak said: Here is a thought. Salary cap based on percentage of Broadcast and ticket revenue only. Eliminates efforts having to deal with related party sponsorships, makes it easy to audit revenue figures, allows better ran clubs to actually make some money by having good commercial deals. that would be much too logical.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punkiller1981 Posted March 11 Share Posted March 11 2 minutes ago, Czarnikjak said: Here is a thought. Salary cap based on percentage of Broadcast and ticket revenue only. Eliminates efforts having to deal with related party sponsorships, makes it easy to audit revenue figures, allows better ran clubs to actually make some money by having good commercial deals. That might be fair the sky 6 won’t have that 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Czarnikjak Posted March 11 Share Posted March 11 4 minutes ago, punkiller1981 said: That might be fair the sky 6 won’t have that I think teams like spurs, arsenal and United would love it. They would be able to stay competitive and make huge profits for their owners. City and Chelsea would probably not like it though 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Follyfoot Posted March 11 VT Supporter Share Posted March 11 (edited) 34 minutes ago, Czarnikjak said: I think teams like spurs, arsenal and United would love it. They would be able to stay competitive and make huge profits for their owners. City and Chelsea would probably not like it though How can you not mention Liverpool in Klopps last year????? Edited March 11 by Follyfoot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul514 Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 7 hours ago, PeterSw said: Sky Sports video about the new rules. Hopefully get full rules at some point Those rules would be terrible for us, the current system would be far better, just sell a player for a big FFP profit and problem solved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MotoMkali Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 14 hours ago, punkiller1981 said: That might be fair the sky 6 won’t have that Yeah but the rest of the league would still have been able to force it down mid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 14 hours ago, Czarnikjak said: Here is a thought. Salary cap based on percentage of Broadcast and ticket revenue only. Eliminates efforts having to deal with related party sponsorships, makes it easy to audit revenue figures, allows better ran clubs to actually make some money by having good commercial deals. Really hate the idea of salary caps. I think they’re probably favoured because we’re looking up the table and want to be able to catch other sides, but the idea of completely limiting, say, Bournemouth and Luton to a set wage based on them having an 11k capacity stadium and not being on the telly as much as more “interesting to the neutral” sides feels utterly wrong. I don’t know what the solution should be (I think some sort of financial rules are good), but caps based on ticket sales and TV revenue isn’t it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duke313 Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 15 hours ago, Czarnikjak said: Here is a thought. Salary cap based on percentage of Broadcast and ticket revenue only. Eliminates efforts having to deal with related party sponsorships, makes it easy to audit revenue figures, allows better ran clubs to actually make some money by having good commercial deals. That would still benefit the Sky 6 as they have higher broadcast and matchday revenue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommo_b Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 Just a salary cap world wide, players capped at £100k, which is still freaking absurd money for playing football, and then top ups from performance and team bonuses, would make Football much more competitive and enjoyable 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrBlack Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 (edited) I dont like this new rule. Locks in the scum 6. Just look how much room they have spare to spend on salaries compared with nearly all the rest of the league. Forces a club to make very gradual improvement and prevents a club even doing what we did to try and compete. Unless there's some leeway for owners to top up the revenue with backed grants, its a killer for the immediate future. Having the same rules as uefa would be sensible, but they're only coming onboard over a rolling several year period. Again, if they'd been at the level they'll be in two years time when we qualified for the UECL, we'd have never got there. At least not in the timeframe we've done so. Allowing some clubs to spend more than others is not fair play. It's a financially forced unfair competition. Edit: I know "FFP" doesn't really exist, and it's more about sustainability, which I accept these rules do ensure better... but it's miles from creating a fair competition. Edited March 12 by MrBlack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevonIsAPlaceOnEarth Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 I get a sense that the new rules may provide more opportunities for grey areas. There’s obviously more scope for big revenue sides, but I think Villa and Newcastle will see the new rules as an opportunity and a way to loosen the belt a little this summer - and ultimately will live with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul514 Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 19 minutes ago, DevonIsAPlaceOnEarth said: I get a sense that the new rules may provide more opportunities for grey areas. There’s obviously more scope for big revenue sides, but I think Villa and Newcastle will see the new rules as an opportunity and a way to loosen the belt a little this summer - and ultimately will live with it. it tightens our belt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thabucks Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 If these new rules are so restrictive to growth and competition why would the 16 clubs required for it to be ratified vote for it ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wainy316 Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 Are we voting for it out of short termism perhaps because we’re really close to falling foul of the old rules? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrBlack Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 20 minutes ago, thabucks said: If these new rules are so restrictive to growth and competition why would the 16 clubs required for it to be ratified vote for it ? Because their owners are sick of losing money and they're happy to be ever presents in the PL, make money, and not win anything? I guess the point is for a lot of teams it's barely any different from the current rules. It's us and Everton that are currently closest to a hypothetical limit, so not sure how the rest will see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted March 12 Moderator Share Posted March 12 If the new rules are only based on a revenue vs wages calculation - does that means you can spend £500m on players as long as you don't pay them very much? Could we pay a team from a smaller league a big sum for their star player, ask them to give him a £10m golden handshake from that exorbitant sum, then pay him half the wages he'd usually be expected to get because we've just arranged a £10m payment for him on someone else's account? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts