• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Financial Fair Play

Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

Do these rules matter for the top clubs, surely the Uefa rules are more stringent with regards debt.

Am I right in thinking that now that Arsenal have paid of its stadium they cannot raise there wages bill by more than 4million, despite the leap in profits for them next year, and with this it will also mean that despite our new stadium, we too cannot raise our wage bill by more than 4million.

Surely a clubs wage bill should be run within the clubs means. Our new income rise on matchday would cover that 4m in two or three home games.

Shouldn't there be a clause in there where depending on a profit rise due to stadium infrastructure build the wage bill can reflect that move.

Having two sets of rules is barmy and over complicates everything.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

So, how much and where did the TV money go

article-2328266-19E83587000005DC-761_634x938.jpg
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

So each notch in the Prem worth an extra c£1m, meaning only £5m difference between us and the highest, Man U, but £16m between us and lowest, QPR.

Good to see a system of reward reflecting performance and based on merit.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

does anyone know how to get hold of the financial records of say PSG. Would be interesting read to look at there structures.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

Spur of the moment said:
So each notch in the Prem worth an extra c£1m, meaning only £5m difference between us and the highest, Man U, but £16m between us and lowest, QPR.

Good to see a system of reward reflecting performance and based on merit.
Click to expand...


More like £750k per place, but the idea is good.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

Inspired by Footballers' wages: No cheap points | The Economist and Wage and the Premier League scaled table | Financial Fair Play

TeamTotal Points Won (position)Annual Wage Bill, £m (rank)Difference between League Position and Wage RankPoints Per £m
Swansea46 (9th)34 (20th)+11 1.35
Southampton41 (14th)37 (17th)+3 1.11
Norwich44 (11th)41 (16th)+5 1.07
West Brom49 (8th)48 (15th)+71.02
Everton63 (6th)62 (11th)+5 1.01
Wigan36 (18th)37 (18th)= 0.97
West Ham46 (10th)51 (14th)+4 0.90
Reading28 (19th)34 (19th) =0.82
Fulham43 (12th)55 (13th) +10.78
Tottenham72 (5th)93 (6th)+1 0.77
Stoke City42 (13th)55 (12th)-1 0.76
Saudi Sportswashing Machine41 (16th)65 (9th)-7 0.63
Sunderland39 (17th)62 (10th)-7 0.63
Man Utd89 (1st)162 (3rd)+20.55
Aston Villa41 (15th)75 (7th)-8 0.55
Arsenal 73 (4th)144 (4th)= 0.51
Liverpool61 (7th)127 (5th)-20.48
Chelsea75 (3rd)172 (2nd)-10.44
Emirates Marketing Project78 (2nd)200 (1st)-10.39
QPR25 (20th)69 (8th)-12 0.36
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

The UEFA President spoke of the worrying financial situation at certain clubs in Europe. "Financial fair play was established in order to ensure the long-term sustainability of European clubs," he said. "The philosophy of this project can be expressed in one sentence and is, above all, simple good sense: 'Do not spend more money than you make.' It is about the clubs managing their finances in a responsible manner, but it is also about making clubs pay the money they owe to tax authorities, other clubs and all of their employees, both players and coaches.

"UEFA had a duty to step in, and it will be up to the independent bodies to punish the few clubs that have not realised.

"Working for football, we have everything… we need to be happy, but aware also of our responsibilities," Mr Platini concluded. "But if we always remember that it is our duty to protect the game, the players and our values, those of the national associations, we will have right on our side.

"For we should not fool ourselves: protecting the game, the players and our values is essential; protecting the game, the players and our values is our mission; protecting the game, the players and our values should always be what guides our actions. [The associations] do that in a remarkable manner at national level, in conditions that are not always easy. And together – because we are united – we will succeed in doing so at European level, too.

"With you there," the UEFA President told the associations, "I will never walk alone."

http://www.uefa.com/uefa/aboutuefa/organisation/congress/news/newsid=1955930.html#move+forward+looking
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

Failure to qualify for the Champions League could be a "financial disaster" for clubs, according to AC Milan director Umberto Gandini.

By finishing fifth, Tottenham missed out on a possible £4.5m from the group stages, with Chelsea receiving a total of £51m for their winning run in 2012.

"Had we not qualified it would have been a financial disaster," Gandini told BBC Sport.

"Such a disaster could affect most clubs."

AC Milan took the third, and last, Champions League berth afforded to Serie A sides on the final day of the season thanks to Philippe Mexes's goal three minutes from time that gave the Rossoneri a 2-1 over Siena.

"We still have to navigate the play-offs," continued Gandini, who was in London at the Uefa Congress.

"Winning that tie is the difference between having an extra 30m euros or not. There's so much at stake - a fifth of our budget."

The winners of this year's Champions League final between Bayern Munich and Borussia Dortmund will pocket just over £9m
plus all the money accumulated from the previous rounds. The 2012 Europa League champions Atletico Madrid collected only £9m in total for their entire efforts during that season's competition.

Gandini, who is also vice-chairman of the European Club Association - a body that represents European clubs' interests, says he is hopeful that the disparity of the possible earnings from both competitions can be reduced in the future.

"This is something that will be mentioned at the next European Club Association meeting when we start to talk about new financial distribution models for the 2015-18 Uefa cycle," added the Italian.

"We will look to reduce the financial gap in various ways with perhaps a more even distribution of monies between both competitions so that it lessens the impact on the Europa League teams who fail to qualify for the Champions League."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22655994

Finally something sensible, though it's quite obvious why it's coming from the Italians since they've lost a spot and Napoli has ousted one the big 3.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

Superhudd said:
Do these rules matter for the top clubs, surely the Uefa rules are more stringent with regards debt.

Am I right in thinking that now that Arsenal have paid of its stadium they cannot raise there wages bill by more than 4million, despite the leap in profits for them next year, and with this it will also mean that despite our new stadium, we too cannot raise our wage bill by more than 4million.

Surely a clubs wage bill should be run within the clubs means. Our new income rise on matchday would cover that 4m in two or three home games.

Shouldn't there be a clause in there where depending on a profit rise due to stadium infrastructure build the wage bill can reflect that move.

Having two sets of rules is barmy and over complicates everything.
Click to expand...

From what I understand the £4m rule only applies to the added tv revenue.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2307471/English-Premier-League-clubs-ratify-Financial-Fair-Play-regulations.html

Clubs whose total wage bill is more than £52m will only be allowed to increase their wages by £4m per season for the next three years.

But the restrictions only apply to the income from TV money — so any income from sponsorship deals or tickets sale can still be spent on wages.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...cial-Fair-Play-regulations.html#ixzz2UI1b9scS
Click to expand...

And this is only for the next three years, seems to me most likely that the top clubs were just in a way agreeing to not go into a complete wage-war with the TV money straight away.

-------------------------------------------

Somewhat interesting article: http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/latest-news/legal-challenge-to-uefa-ffp-rules-by-bosman-lawyer

Short version: Same lawyer that handled the Bosman case trying to challenge the FFP rules with the European commission. If successful then UEFA will be liable for any loss of income resulting from their punishment. Could be massive amounts of money. First sets of punishment set to be announced in December likely to be less harsh.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

^^^

But the main part of Champions League revenue is TV revenue. As this would boost revenues by 20-30% depending on club, not allowing them to spend it on wages would seem to support the closed shop.

Or does it only apply to PL TV money? In which case how are promoted clubs restricted?
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

Former Manchester United chief executive David Gill has been handed power by UEFA to recommend bans on clubs such as rivals Emirates Marketing Project and Chelsea, who may find themselves in breach of new European Financial Fair Play rules.

Having stepped down from his post at Old Trafford at the end of last season to become a UEFA executive member, Gill has now been appointed chairman of the governing body’s extremely influential Club Licensing Committee.

The committee essentially decides which clubs are entitled to licences to play Champions League and Europa League football. This will become increasingly important as UEFA’s FFP rules shape the landscape of European football in the coming years.

Gill is a known advocate of FFP and one of four Barclays Premier League chiefs who proposed similar rules be implemented in English domestic football back in January.

He said 18 months ago that the new European system would only work if ‘appropriate sanctions’ were imposed on those who missed the targets. Sanctions already discussed by UEFA president Michel Platini have included fines and, for severe offences, competition bans.

Gill’s appointment will certainly raise eyebrows at clubs such as City and Chelsea who are currently striving to ensure their losses are no greater than the 845million (£38m) limit allowed by FFP across last and next season.

Both clubs have been used to viewing Gill as a rival in recent years and it will not have escaped their attention that the 55-year-old is to remain a United director and board member, despite handing over the chief executive baton to Ed Woodward.

On Monday night, a UEFA spokeswoman confirmed that Gill’s committee will have an influence over whether clubs’ finances entitle them to play in major European competition.

This is despite that fact that the Club Financial Control Body will go through individual clubs’ finances initially to see if they meet the targets set by FFP. Gill will play no role in this part of the process.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2343384/UEFA-David-Gill-power-punish-Manchester-Uniteds-rivals-like-Chelsea-Manchester-City.html
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

Jordinho said:
Former Manchester United chief executive David Gill has been handed power by UEFA to recommend bans on clubs such as rivals Emirates Marketing Project and Chelsea, who may find themselves in breach of new European Financial Fair Play rules.

Having stepped down from his post at Old Trafford at the end of last season to become a UEFA executive member, Gill has now been appointed chairman of the governing body’s extremely influential Club Licensing Committee.

The committee essentially decides which clubs are entitled to licences to play Champions League and Europa League football. This will become increasingly important as UEFA’s FFP rules shape the landscape of European football in the coming years.

Gill is a known advocate of FFP and one of four Barclays Premier League chiefs who proposed similar rules be implemented in English domestic football back in January.

He said 18 months ago that the new European system would only work if ‘appropriate sanctions’ were imposed on those who missed the targets. Sanctions already discussed by UEFA president Michel Platini have included fines and, for severe offences, competition bans.

Gill’s appointment will certainly raise eyebrows at clubs such as City and Chelsea who are currently striving to ensure their losses are no greater than the 845million (£38m) limit allowed by FFP across last and next season.

Both clubs have been used to viewing Gill as a rival in recent years and it will not have escaped their attention that the 55-year-old is to remain a United director and board member, despite handing over the chief executive baton to Ed Woodward.

On Monday night, a UEFA spokeswoman confirmed that Gill’s committee will have an influence over whether clubs’ finances entitle them to play in major European competition.

This is despite that fact that the Club Financial Control Body will go through individual clubs’ finances initially to see if they meet the targets set by FFP. Gill will play no role in this part of the process.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2343384/UEFA-David-Gill-power-punish-Manchester-Uniteds-rivals-like-Chelsea-Manchester-City.html
Click to expand...

Blue moon is going to break the Internet...
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

@FootballLaw: Big day for FFP today. Clubs will submit 11/12 accounts to UEFA for break-even compliance if they want to play in UEFA comp.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back