duke313 Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 5 minutes ago, imavillan said: We're in good company with the teams that voted against Can anyone explain what it means? Why did we vote against it? Will it impact us negatively? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post stewiek2 Posted April 29 Popular Post Share Posted April 29 32 minutes ago, Villa_Vids said: 1 13 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post ender4 Posted April 29 Popular Post Share Posted April 29 (edited) 30 minutes ago, wishywashy said: Why exactly have Villa/Heck voted against this lol? It makes sense. The 'big 6' have massive revenues, the cap is so high that they hit the European cap first but can still spend £300-400m or so a season. The small revenue clubs not in Europe can now massively outspend Villa up to £300-400m per season. Villa hit the European cap first rather than the PL cap, so we can only spend £150-200m per season. Basically it kills Villa and any other non big 6 club that qualifies for Europe. This is literally the worst option of all spending proposals for Villa. Almost like it was specifically designed to kill Villa and Newcastle. Edited April 29 by ender4 4 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andycv Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 3 minutes ago, ender4 said: It makes sense. The 'big 6' have massive revenues, the cap is so high that they hit the European cap first but can still spend £300-400m or so a season. The small revenue clubs not in Europe can now massively outspend Villa up to £300-400m per season. Villa hit the European cap first rather than the PL cap, so we can only spend £150-200m per season. Basically it kills Villa and any other non big 6 club that qualifies for Europe. This is literally the worst option of all spending proposals for Villa. Almost like it was specifically designed to kill Villa and Newcastle. This is what I thought.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 12 minutes ago, duke313 said: We're in good company with the teams that voted against Can anyone explain what it means? Why did we vote against it? Will it impact us negatively? Massive negative for Villa and Newcastle. It doesn't impact the 'big 6' as they have huge revenues so can spend up to the UEFA cap of 75% of income, and still not hit this PL cap. Means those smaller clubs not in Europe can spend massively more, up to £400m a season rather than current rules of around £150-200m (dependant on their turnover). Villa and Newcastle are screwed - they are still capped by UEFA rules which is based on their smaller turnover, but now smaller clubs can spend double what Villa and Newcastle spend. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjw63 Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 1 minute ago, ender4 said: Massive negative for Villa and Newcastle. It doesn't impact the 'big 6' as they have huge revenues so can spend up to the UEFA cap of 75% of income, and still not hit this PL cap. Means those smaller clubs not in Europe can spend massively more, up to £400m a season rather than current rules of around £150-200m (dependant on their turnover). Villa and Newcastle are screwed - they are still capped by UEFA rules which is based on their smaller turnover, but now smaller clubs can spend double what Villa and Newcastle spend. Sounds totally fair Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Czarnikjak Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 7 minutes ago, ender4 said: It makes sense. The 'big 6' have massive revenues, the cap is so high that they hit the European cap first but can still spend £300-400m or so a season. The small revenue clubs not in Europe can now massively outspend Villa up to £300-400m per season. Villa hit the European cap first rather than the PL cap, so we can only spend £150-200m per season. Basically it kills Villa and any other non big 6 club that qualifies for Europe. This is literally the worst option of all spending proposals for Villa. Almost like it was specifically designed to kill Villa and Newcastle. No. This cap doesn't replace the proposed new Premier League PSR rules, it's only in addition to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulMcGrath_5 Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 1 minute ago, Czarnikjak said: No. This cap doesn't replace the proposed new Premier League PSR rules, it's only in addition to them. Premier League spending cap: Clubs vote in principle for new rules - BBC Sport Quote the new model will replace the Profit and Sustainability Regulations presently used from the 2025-26 season onwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 I'm surprised West Ham voted for this seeing that they are a small revenue club who aspire to qualify for Europe. I guess they never plan to spend anywhere close to any cap so it makes no difference to them lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baldricks Cunning Plan Posted April 29 Visiting Supporter Share Posted April 29 I think that the spending cap will be in conjunction with the PSR rules linked to Spending/Turnover ratios which is rumoured to be 85% in the Premier League. If anything it will mean that the biggest clubs can't go crazy with their spending, other clubs can but they would then fall foul of the spending/turnover ratios. In practice it doesn't change much from what I can see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duke313 Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 5 minutes ago, ender4 said: Massive negative for Villa and Newcastle. It doesn't impact the 'big 6' as they have huge revenues so can spend up to the UEFA cap of 75% of income, and still not hit this PL cap. Means those smaller clubs not in Europe can spend massively more, up to £400m a season rather than current rules of around £150-200m (dependant on their turnover). Villa and Newcastle are screwed - they are still capped by UEFA rules which is based on their smaller turnover, but now smaller clubs can spend double what Villa and Newcastle spend. Why did Chelsea abstain? Do they plan on spending another billion if they don't qualify for Europe 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 1 minute ago, duke313 said: Why did Chelsea abstain? Do they plan on spending another billion if they don't qualify for Europe Yes i guess so. It makes sense that they would want to spend more than the current rules allow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 2 minutes ago, Baldricks Cunning Plan said: I think that the spending cap will be in conjunction with the PSR rules linked to Spending/Turnover ratios which is rumoured to be 85% in the Premier League. If anything it will mean that the biggest clubs can't go crazy with their spending, other clubs can but they would then fall foul of the spending/turnover ratios. In practice it doesn't change much from what I can see. I think this is meant to replace the current Premier League PSR rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imavillan Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 7 minutes ago, ender4 said: Massive negative for Villa and Newcastle. It doesn't impact the 'big 6' as they have huge revenues so can spend up to the UEFA cap of 75% of income, and still not hit this PL cap. Means those smaller clubs not in Europe can spend massively more, up to £400m a season rather than current rules of around £150-200m (dependant on their turnover). Villa and Newcastle are screwed - they are still capped by UEFA rules which is based on their smaller turnover, but now smaller clubs can spend double what Villa and Newcastle spend. 1 minute ago, duke313 said: Why did Chelsea abstain? Do they plan on spending another billion if they don't qualify for Europe if it impacts us more the real question is why did we vote for it? can't get my head round it tbh 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 6 minutes ago, Czarnikjak said: No. This cap doesn't replace the proposed new Premier League PSR rules, it's only in addition to them. It's scrapping the PSR rules and replacing with this new cap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duke313 Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 2 minutes ago, imavillan said: if it impacts us more the real question is why did we vote for it? can't get my head round it tbh I think we voted against it, along with City and United Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imavillan Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 1 minute ago, duke313 said: I think we voted against it, along with City and United yeah you are right....my bad typo thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 The only good thing is that this is from the 2025/26 season. We have 14 months to basically double our current revenue if we want to compete at the top end of the table. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baldricks Cunning Plan Posted April 29 Visiting Supporter Share Posted April 29 5 minutes ago, ender4 said: I think this is meant to replace the current Premier League PSR rules. Yes, I should have mentioned new (PSR?) rules for the 2025/26 season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villarule123 Posted April 29 VT Supporter Share Posted April 29 3 minutes ago, ender4 said: The only good thing is that this is from the 2025/26 season. We have 14 months to basically double our current revenue if we want to compete at the top end of the table. We had better build the new North Stand asap then! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts