Jump to content

The General FFP /PSR / SCR Financial Regs Thread


Marka Ragnos

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, The_Steve said:

Let’s just sell some properties to a sister company like Chelsea did instead. 
 

It’s all a giant farce. 

Yh. No more playing nice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, The_Steve said:

Let’s just sell some properties to a sister company like Chelsea did instead. 
 

It’s all a giant farce. 

They just want to make it so there in no way into the top 4. 

Us and Newcastle in the top 4 has probably pushed them in full panic mode, probably with pressure from Uefa too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Pinebro said:

They just want to make it so there in no way into the top 4. 

Us and Newcastle in the top 4 has probably pushed them in full panic mode, probably with pressure from Uefa too.

You must be missing 15 clubs voted against 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Rightdm00 said:

I love our owners as well but they have zero desire or ability to compete against state funded owners. Newcastle is owned by the PIF which has a value of nearly a trillion dollars. A trillion. Our owners entire wealth is just a river stone in a lake compared to the PIF.  If you exclude the PIF and just take the networth of Newcastle's chairman alone, Yasir Al-Rumayyan, he is worth 10x as much as NSWE. 

Without FFP Newcastle would have already made Emiliano Martinez the world's first £100 million GK transfer. They would have bought Ollie Watkins, gave him 300k p/w and sat him on the bench behind Isak. 

FFP is the main reason the league has become more competitive, otherwise the top clubs would have snuffed out our top 4 challenge before it ever got off the ground. The only reason City has been so dominant is due to them completely ignoring the rules of FFP, hence the 115 charges they are currently facing. I fully believe if they had respected FFP, no way they build the squad they have now. 

FFP needs fixing, but spending caps are a proven way of increasing the competition level within a league. 

Agree with a lot of this but to be fair City spent a lot of the money before FFP came in to place so had already got themselves in a strong position. Same as Chelsea.
 

Yes they have broke rules but since Pep took over I think United have spent more on salary and players so whilst it’s great to be able to spend big. You have to have the right coaching setup and infrastructure too. They got it right in more ways then spending big on players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are people on here having a go at the PL? Today was a vote by the clubs who voted against increasing the losses that could be made. 

Clearly the clubs don’t want a competitive league. And they don’t want to give us or other clubs like us any help. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Got to think plenty of the sky 6 wouldn’t want that voted in giving middling clubs more leeway to get closer to them. Also the below middling clubs who dont want to spend as much also wouldnt vote for it as they would just see the clutch of clubs above them pull further clear. Expected result from the vote tbh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Herman22 said:

 

Clearly the clubs don’t want a competitive league. And they don’t want to give us or other clubs like us any help. 

Most clubs want competitive league. They just don't want to run their clubs at massive losses. Why would you expect for example a Bournemouth owner to wanting to shell out extra £30m from his own pocket to stay competitive on top of the losses he already needs to endure to stay in the league?

This was never gonna fly. And not because of top 6, but mostly because of midtable clubs that don't want to have to be run at even bigger losses than now.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Czarnikjak said:

Most clubs want competitive league. They just don't want to run their clubs at massive losses. Why would you expect for example a Bournemouth owner to wanting to shell out extra £30m from his own pocket to stay competitive on top of the losses he already needs to endure to stay in the league?

This was never gonna fly. And not because of top 6, but mostly because of midtable clubs that don't want to have to be run at even bigger losses than now.

They don't have to, they can continue to spend what they ado now, this just allows for more loses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, duke313 said:

They don't have to, they can continue to spend what they ado now, this just allows for more loses.

Yes, but that would put them at bigger disadvantage against teams like Forest, who would spend that extra £30m and potentially send them down. Why allow that? Where is the benefit in that to them? They would end up in situation either spend more or go down.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Czarnikjak said:

Yes, but that would put them at bigger disadvantage against teams like Forest, who would spend that extra £30m and potentially send them down. Why allow that? Where is the benefit in that to them? They would end up in situation either spend more or go down.

Fair enough.  I guess we're team City then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, leemond2008 said:

Just had a quick look and it says that us, Newcastle, Chelsea, Everton, Forest and Leicester are all in desperate need to sell players.

Surely there must be something going wrong if more than quarter of the league are facing this problem and 3 of the 6 teams have billionaire owners, its crazy, while the big boys at the top can pretty much spend whatever they want.

Chelsea and Forest have nobody to blame but themselves, they clearly took the piss. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the moment a lot of the fans don’t feel great about how the club is treating them off the pitch. I can imagine Purslow being a lot better at the internal politics of the Premier League than those currently at the club. They’re doing a terrible job of winning our hearts and minds so why would they be any better with other club executives?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Tony said:

At what point do you accept a points deduction over loss on player value ?

Not sure you do… points deductions are a joke but possibly quite devastating…

The only solution is for all clubs to agree to have a transfer window where they do not buy or trade at all… then there will be hundreds of people and whoever else rioting because they haven’t been able to benefit from transfer dealings. Then we’ll see how well FFP works. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How to they trial a new system while keeping the existing rules in place.

Is this how City will get out of their 115 cases 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, est1874 said:

words removed. Thanks for nothing from the other clubs, half of whom are also up against the same shit we are.

It's all so **** stupid. My arse does it help drive competition. Absolute bollix.

Two sides.

The club's which don't want us to pull away, and the clubs which don't want us to catch up.

Sandwiched in a sabotage cluster*CK 🤦🏽‍♂️

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...

exclamation-mark-man-user-icon-with-png-and-vector-format-227727.png

Ad Blocker Detected

This site is paid for by ad revenue, please disable your ad blocking software for the site.

Â