Football Governance Bill (Independent Regulator)

KS55 said:
1. The test of whether the smaller clubs are protected will be the regulation of debt, which is what gets them into trouble.
2. The German 51 is a bit of a myth:
a) Some clubs are exempt from the rule.
b) The biggest clubs find a way round it. Bayern, for example, is 51% owned by a large sports conglomerate ‘club’ which in theory belongs to its members.
But its three main sponsors own 25% of the club between them and sit on its board. In practice Bayern is controlled by commercial interests, not by its 51% fan base.
Click to expand...
RB Leipzig only had about 17 members, most of whom were senior Red Bull employees. Leverkusen are owned by the chemical company Bayer. Volkswagen own Wolfsburg.

That's before we come to Hoffenheim, based in a village of 3,272 population. They are owned by a software magnate Dietmar Hopp.
 
Last edited:
This is "CM Punk, the thread"

really-cm-punk.gif

The amount of turkeys voting for Christmas is absolutely astonishing.

"Well I think public control is WRONG?!?!"

So stop using the NHS then. And empty your own bins. And pave your own roads. Buy taxis rather than trains to the next away game. Cretins. Exhausting.
 
JGL07 said:
RB Leipzig only had about 17 members, most of whom were senior Red Bull employees. Leverkusen are owned by the chemical company Bayer. Volkswagen own Wolfsburg.

That's before we come to Hoffenheim, based in a village of 3,272 population. They are owned by a software magnate Dietmar Hopp.
Click to expand...
And the great ownership model means either Bayern Munich or Bayern Munich win the league almost every season.
 
United are fucked. :-)

The new independent football regulator has published plans for a licensing regime that it says "will go further than anything currently in place by assessing the full financial picture of a club".

For the first time, all 116 clubs across the top five divisions of the men's game in England will be required to hold a licence to compete from 2027-28.

Being granted one will depend on submitting financial plans, meeting corporate governance standards, and consulting directly with fans on key matters.

Under its proposals, the IFR would have the power to cap clubs' spending, and require them to reduce their debt.

www.bbc.co.uk

Football clubs will have to prove financial health before being granted licence under IFR plans

All 116 clubs in England's top five divisions will have to prove they are financially healthy before being granted a licence allowing them to compete, under plans released by football's new watchdog.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
 
jrb said:
United are fucked. :-)

The new independent football regulator has published plans for a licensing regime that it says "will go further than anything currently in place by assessing the full financial picture of a club".

For the first time, all 116 clubs across the top five divisions of the men's game in England will be required to hold a licence to compete from 2027-28.

Being granted one will depend on submitting financial plans, meeting corporate governance standards, and consulting directly with fans on key matters.

Under its proposals, the IFR would have the power to cap clubs' spending, and require them to reduce their debt.

www.bbc.co.uk

Football clubs will have to prove financial health before being granted licence under IFR plans

All 116 clubs in England's top five divisions will have to prove they are financially healthy before being granted a licence allowing them to compete, under plans released by football's new watchdog.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
Click to expand...
" Ocean Finance on the phone" !!
 
The clubs with the most debt aren't highly geared and won't be touched.

You generally need debt to grow business.

The bloke in the interview didn't have a clue on action they would take, and was only concerned about clubs going to the wall since 1992. At least he has found out most clubs lose money, and therefore shouldn't fall into the trap of thinking you can just for an owner to sell, as there is usually no one buying. Panjab Warriors anyone?

I have already written them off as an effective body, and they don't start until 1st November.
 
Corky said:
The clubs with the most debt aren't highly geared and won't be touched.

You generally need debt to grow business.

The bloke in the interview didn't have a clue on action they would take, and was only concerned about clubs going to the wall since 1992. At least he has found out most clubs lose money, and therefore shouldn't fall into the trap of thinking you can just for an owner to sell, as there is usually no one buying. Panjab Warriors anyone?

I have already written them off as an effective body, and they don't start until 1st November.
Click to expand...

Give them a chance.

They are independent of the PL and PL clubs. Hopefully.
 
While it would be nice for the rags to be fucked, I suspect the Glazers would sell to some stupidly rich Saudi for a couple of billion and money wouldn't be a problem.
 
Man_City_Loyal said:
Will this effect our club/national sides in European/International competitions?
Click to expand...

You mean with the amount of government interference? Without whitewashing anything that's what it amounts to doesn't it?

Saying that I honestly believe this is just another level of people who will be on the take, no faith in their aims or their intentions.
 
mexico1970 said:
You mean with the amount of government interference? Without whitewashing anything that's what it amounts to doesn't it?

Saying that I honestly believe this is just another level of people who will be on the take, no faith in their aims or their intentions.
Click to expand...

Yeah thats the one, sure UEFA/FIFA said somwething about government interferance.
 
jrb said:
United are fucked. :-)

The new independent football regulator has published plans for a licensing regime that it says "will go further than anything currently in place by assessing the full financial picture of a club".

For the first time, all 116 clubs across the top five divisions of the men's game in England will be required to hold a licence to compete from 2027-28.

Being granted one will depend on submitting financial plans, meeting corporate governance standards, and consulting directly with fans on key matters.

Under its proposals, the IFR would have the power to cap clubs' spending, and require them to reduce their debt.

www.bbc.co.uk

Football clubs will have to prove financial health before being granted licence under IFR plans

All 116 clubs in England's top five divisions will have to prove they are financially healthy before being granted a licence allowing them to compete, under plans released by football's new watchdog.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
Click to expand...

Great that it fucks united and don't really have any agenda with this question, but it does make me wonder;

How will this affect the clubs farther down the pyramid? I imagine under an increased level of scrutiny, already financially struggling clubs would have to find additional money to pay auditors, accountants, etc. I'm pretty financially illiterate so it may not be a concern at all, but the thought did occur.
 
Well personally I maybe believe possibly the football landscape has changed more permanently.

  • Previously we had a self governed PL that allowed utd to have near-unlimited debt, that allowed ffp to be setup attacking all of the top 6 clubs rivals. We had special clauses for certain teams but not others. Court cases against anyone not utd/ars/lfc.... All overseen by a chief exec who was practically chosen by utd and lfc.

  • UAE pay the English govn a visit, multiple visits, remind them of the investments in the UK. Talk about the issues with the PL threatening to jail the royal family of Abu Dhabi.

  • The govn go hell for leather to setup an external regulator. Amongst other things, the external regulator says that debt is now a problem.

Whilst I have just joined dots together that is the way that business and politics interact, usually they have the media on side too to convince everyone that black is white, but the media are working on behalf of the PL who obviously say "external regulation is bad" (They mean bad for the powerhouses of English football)


(Shocking looking at the list of stuff that self regulated dodgy stuff the PL do), I know that's how successful business some times ends up - protecting the overall income stream but when it starts to actually prevent clubs investing despite having the money its become obscene.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top