Financial Fair Play

[SteveAWOL]

Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

Agreed, but at the same time I do hate Emirates Marketing Project, Chelsea, PSG etc for the way that they have been allowed to spend obscene amounts of money that the club itself hasn't earned. So for all the problems with FPP, I think the status quo was far from acceptable too. Which is why, in an ideal world, I'd like to see (in combination with the FPP rules) a form of tax on merchandise, sponsorship, gate receipts etc of the elite teams, which could either go towards smaller clubs or to development projects in the local area. It's disgusting how much money is in the game and how much money players get paid, whilst the local areas for some clubs remain poor and undeveloped and ticket and shirt prices continue to rise. I know football clubs already dedicate more of their revenues to this kind of thing than the average business, but football clubs are / should be more a part of their local community than businesses are.

Agreed. In combination with the FFP which prevents sugar daddies from financially doping a club, some form of "luxury tax" to level the playing the field between ManU and the rest of the league should be brought in so that they can't keep cherry picking the best players from the rest of the Premiership as they have for most of the past 20 years.

The method used by the NBA seems like a pretty good one, whereby there is a squad salary cap and for every dollar over that limit a team spends they have to pay a $1 tax which is then redistributed to the clubs which don't overspend. If this was implemented in the Premier League with a cap of say £80million then the Luxury Tax Bills for 2011/12 would have been:

Chelsea = £110m
Emirates Marketing Project = £94m
Manchester United = £73m
Liverpool = £55m
ARSEnal = £44m
Tottenham = £11m
Aston Villa = £3m

Such a system would have to be implemented across Europe by UEFA in order to work but maybe if they got a cut of the tax revenue for themselves to use for their own projects (similar to the system used in MLB) then Platini and co might consider it...

Barcelona = £142m
Real Madrid = £114m
AC Milan = £91m
Bayern Munich = £51m

 

[braineclipse]

Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

I don't think FFP was put in place to make leagues more competitive and make sure smaller clubs had more of a chance to get into the top positions. It will probably slightly strengthen the grip the top clubs have on the rest of the league, but nowhere near as much as the financial development in football in the last 20 years has already done. Does anyone really think that clubs like United, Real or Barca would fall away at this point if not for the FFP regulations?

FFP was put in place to protect the clubs from crazy investors and to prevent situations like what happened at Pompey, the debt clubs like Valencia find themselves in etc. There was an overview of how many clubs in Europe that were in massive (relative to their turnovers) debt back when FFP was introduced. There were a lot of clubs in trouble and importantly a lot of clubs outside the top of their respective leagues.

 

[braineclipse]

Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

Agreed. In combination with the FFP which prevents sugar daddies from financially doping a club, some form of "luxury tax" to level the playing the field between ManU and the rest of the league should be brought in so that they can't keep cherry picking the best players from the rest of the Premiership as they have for most of the past 20 years.

The method used by the NBA seems like a pretty good one, whereby there is a squad salary cap and for every dollar over that limit a team spends they have to pay a $1 tax which is then redistributed to the clubs which don't overspend. If this was implemented in the Premier League with a cap of say £80million then the Luxury Tax Bills for 2011/12 would have been:

Chelsea = £110m
Emirates Marketing Project = £94m
Manchester United = £73m
Liverpool = £55m
ARSEnal = £44m
Tottenham = £11m
Aston Villa = £3m

Such a system would have to be implemented across Europe by UEFA in order to work but maybe if they got a cut of the tax revenue for themselves to use for their own projects (similar to the system used in MLB) then Platini and co might consider it...

Barcelona = £142m
Real Madrid = £114m
AC Milan = £91m
Bayern Munich = £51m

I think that would be a great solution. Not going to happen though.

 

[jimmyb]

Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

If FFP gets past, so would Revenue sharing. Its about placing in the rules and everyone abiding by them rules. In a sense the Premier League has revenue sharing already with its Television money. At the beginning of the season Liverpool tried to get the right to search its own overseas TV rights, akin to Barcelona and Madrid getting all the money in Spain. The Premier League clubs knocked them back and to stick with the revenue sharing option.

A relatively equitable division of broadcasting revenues is one thing.

But there won't be any further revenue sharing.

FFP was agreed because it suits the existing elite clubs. Revenue sharing will not.

And I'm not too confident that the likes of Man Utd won't start making noises (and threats) about getting a larger slice of the TV pie some time in the future.

 

[braineclipse]

Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

A relatively equitable division of broadcasting revenues is one thing.

But there won't be any further revenue sharing.

FFP was agreed because it suits the existing elite clubs. Revenue sharing will not.

And I'm not too confident that the likes of Man Utd won't start making noises (and threats) about getting a larger slice of the TV pie some time in the future.

A development towards a more top heavy system as seen in Spain (and Scotland I think) seems much more likely than a development the other way. The top clubs have so much power that they won't allow it to change in a way that goes against their interest and it does seem likely that they could force a move to their benefit.

Edit: In other words I completely agree with you

 

[Wriggly]

Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

Agreed. In combination with the FFP which prevents sugar daddies from financially doping a club, some form of "luxury tax" to level the playing the field between ManU and the rest of the league should be brought in so that they can't keep cherry picking the best players from the rest of the Premiership as they have for most of the past 20 years.

The method used by the NBA seems like a pretty good one, whereby there is a squad salary cap and for every dollar over that limit a team spends they have to pay a $1 tax which is then redistributed to the clubs which don't overspend. If this was implemented in the Premier League with a cap of say £80million then the Luxury Tax Bills for 2011/12 would have been:

Chelsea = £110m
Emirates Marketing Project = £94m
Manchester United = £73m
Liverpool = £55m
ARSEnal = £44m
Tottenham = £11m
Aston Villa = £3m

Such a system would have to be implemented across Europe by UEFA in order to work but maybe if they got a cut of the tax revenue for themselves to use for their own projects (similar to the system used in MLB) then Platini and co might consider it...

Barcelona = £142m
Real Madrid = £114m
AC Milan = £91m
Bayern Munich = £51m

You would create a gap between the top teams and the bottom teams doing that. Even the bottom teams in the prem would be so much richer than the championship teams. What about them ? and the rest of the leagues ? The gap would get much bigger. It's fine if you have a big team mentality but that would only widen the gap, something that FFP itself it in place trying to stop (one of the reasons).

 

[jimmyb]

Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

FFP was put in place to protect the clubs from crazy investors and to prevent situations like what happened at Pompey, the debt clubs like Valencia find themselves in etc. There was an overview of how many clubs in Europe that were in massive (relative to their turnovers) debt back when FFP was introduced. There were a lot of clubs in trouble and importantly a lot of clubs outside the top of their respective leagues.

If UEFA / the Premier League could have devised rules that merely furthered this aim, then I could have wholeheartedly supported them. That's exactly what FFP should be about.

 

[Superhudd]

Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

I don't think FFP was put in place to make leagues more competitive and make sure smaller clubs had more of a chance to get into the top positions. It will probably slightly strengthen the grip the top clubs have on the rest of the league, but nowhere near as much as the financial development in football in the last 20 years has already done. Does anyone really think that clubs like United, Real or Barca would fall away at this point if not for the FFP regulations?

FFP was put in place to protect the clubs from crazy investors and to prevent situations like what happened at Pompey, the debt clubs like Valencia find themselves in etc. There was an overview of how many clubs in Europe that were in massive (relative to their turnovers) debt back when FFP was introduced. There were a lot of clubs in trouble and importantly a lot of clubs outside the top of their respective leagues.

Agree.. and to add, it forces crazy investors to build the club from within, that be a deluxe state of the art training ground, or a new stand adding 7k with corporate facilities to double the gameday takings.

I'd imagine the majority of Spanish owners are relieved that FFP has come in, considering the brick there country is in. Half full decrepid stadiums everywhere. You can add Italy to that too. We sometimes forget this isn't just about teams in the Premier League.

 

[indianspur]

Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

the gap between the elite and the rest has already been created, and with FFP that gap can never ever be narrowed.

 

[braineclipse]

Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

If UEFA / the Premier League could have devised rules that merely furthered this aim, then I could have wholeheartedly supported them. That's exactly what FFP should be about.

Not sure what they realistically could have done more than what they have done. They have the big clubs putting pressure on them to do as they say, with them threatening to just go join their own super league. They have EU and national free trade laws to deal with keeping them from putting strict ownership restrictions in place. Restricting access to the EL/CL for teams that overspend, thus removing the incentive for owners to gamble with the long term future of clubs in the hope of it paying off seems like a good start. The fact that it's also marginally (imo) favourable for the big clubs meant that it could be implemented.

 

[Spursalot]

Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

the gap between the elite and the rest has already been created, and with FFP that gap can never ever be narrowed.

Disagree with that entirely. Spurs have been naturally progressing for some time without a billionaire owner.


What is to stop other teams doing the same thing? Granted it won't happen overnight, but over 10 or so years with the right marketing strategy i see no reason why any other club couldn't expand their turnover.

 

[braineclipse]

Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

the gap between the elite and the rest has already been created, and with FFP that gap can never ever be narrowed.

Do you think the gap would have been likely to be narrowed if not for the FFP regulations? Pre-FFP European football has been getting very polarized in the last 20 years with little to no signs of that trend reversing. I don't think FFP changes the picture much.

Had FFP regulations been in place since before Abramovich took over Chelsea i think we would have seen Spurs in the CL 3-4 more seasons in the last 5-6 years and I think the gap between us and the top would have been considerably smaller. If competition for third and fourth in the PL (as an example) can open up a bit more by restricting the amount of money rich owners can inject into clubs it could allow clubs like ours a chance to step up via a good run over a couple of seasons in the league.

 

[elltrev]

Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

Disagree with that entirely. Spurs have been naturally progressing for some time without a billionaire owner.


What is to stop other teams doing the same thing? Granted it won't happen overnight, but over 10 or so years with the right marketing strategy i see no reason why any other club couldn't expand their turnover.

We were the best-placed team to progress in the way that we have, because we had the biggest revenue outside of the Sky Four. We still spent a brick-load of money before we eventually broke into the top 4.

 

[Spursalot]

Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

We were the best-placed team to progress in the way that we have, because we had the biggest revenue outside of the Sky Four. We still spent a brick-load of money before we eventually broke into the top 4.

We spent a brick load of money that we made.


There are a number of clubs placed in the championship who have extremely large support that has waned due to their lack of Premiership football.


Clubs like Nottingham Forest and Leeds being perfect examples. It may take more years than it took spurs, but given effective management they could come through.


Southampton are a good example of this. They have one of the best academies in England, possibly one of the best in the world. Now that they are a Premier League club they can continue to nurture that talent rather than having higher league clubs pinching their potential superstars.

 

[jimmyb]

Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

We spent a brick load of money that we made.


There are a number of clubs placed in the championship who have extremely large support that has waned due to their lack of Premiership football.


Clubs like Nottingham Forest and Leeds being perfect examples. It may take more years than it took spurs, but given effective management they could come through.


Southampton are a good example of this. They have one of the best academies in England, possibly one of the best in the world. Now that they are a Premier League club they can continue to nurture that talent rather than having higher league clubs pinching their potential superstars.

Err......Southampton have been heavily bankrolled by billionaire owners over the past 3-4 seasons.

 

[Spursalot]

Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

Err......Southampton have been heavily bankrolled by billionaire owners over the past 3-4 seasons.

Yup. People are currently saying that FFP means no club will compete.


Southampton have had money pumped into their academy, and can compete. I see no problem with that. They've not gone out and spent millions on players or wages.


In fact it's probably a good thing for football overall. More money into academies means more quality players which will improve the sport.

 

[jimmyb]

Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

Disagree with that entirely. Spurs have been naturally progressing for some time without a billionaire owner.


What is to stop other teams doing the same thing? Granted it won't happen overnight, but over 10 or so years with the right marketing strategy i see no reason why any other club couldn't expand their turnover.

Spurs have progressed. No doubt.

But we've still come nowhere near winning anything major.

And even with the new stadium, I expect the financial gap to the likes of Man Utd to continue to grow (even if PL broadcasting revenues continue to be distributed relatively fairly). Sponsorship / commercial income will become an increasingly important area of football club revenues. And we are a million miles away from being able to compete with Man Utd on that front.

Likewise, the exploitation of a variety of modern media platforms.

 

[Spursalot]

Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

Spurs have progressed. No doubt.

But we've still come nowhere near winning anything major.

And even with the new stadium, I expect the financial gap to the likes of Man Utd to continue to grow (even if PL broadcasting revenues continue to be distributed relatively fairly). Sponsorship / commercial income will become an increasingly important area of football club revenues. And we are a million miles away from being able to compete with Man Utd on that front.

Likewise, the exploitation of a variety of modern media platforms.

We made the last eight in the most prestigious competition in Europe. If that's not major than i'm not quite sure what is.


Finances can change, football is played on the field though, not on a balance sheet. You can still compete as clubs like us, Everton and Arsenal have shown.

 

[jimmyb]

Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

Yup. People are currently saying that FFP means no club will compete.


Southampton have had money pumped into their academy, and can compete. I see no problem with that. They've not gone out and spent millions on players or wages.


In fact it's probably a good thing for football overall. More money into academies means more quality players which will improve the sport.

Southampton spent well beyond their means, on transfer fees and wages, over the previous few seasons. By far the best funded club in the lower divisions, when they were there.

Last year, loans totalling £33 million (from the late owner, Markus Liebherr) were converted into shares.

 

[jimmyb]

Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

We made the last eight in the most prestigious competition in Europe. If that's not major than i'm not quite sure what is.


Finances can change, football is played on the field though, not on a balance sheet. You can still compete as clubs like us, Everton and Arsenal have shown.

It's major, alright.

But we didn't come anywhere near winning it. Which was the point.

And, sure, we can still compete. Maybe even occasionally win stuff. But, long term, clubs with a massive, inbuilt financial advantage will win far, far more. Virtuous circle.