New PL financial controls | Clubs agree squad spending cap 'in principle'

[BerkshireBlue]

I imagine it's in The Times.

everywhere reports 4.5 to 5x if it's 4.5 times we have very little transfer budget, especially as agents fees were about £50m

 

[BerkshireBlue]

Can you please stop quelling the rumour mill by posting facts, it's not as fucking interesting.

yeah it would be great if he could produce evidence

 

[halfcenturyup]

it's 4.5 times the TV revenue of Luton so circa £450m to be spent on transfers,wages,agents etc. Our wage bill alone last year was £425m (granted large bonuses are in that figure) so say our wage bill is £400m it only gives us £50m to spend on transfers and agents. It massively impacts us

Well, we don't know yet, do we? Wages, amortisation and loss (profit) or less on sale have to be 70% of revenue for UEFA anyway and we will be comfortably within that. So let's wait to see what "multiple" is included in the rule book first, and what is included in "spend".

Don't forget players will leave and take their amortisation with them, and the academy will still sell players.

No need to panic. Yet :)

 

[mexico1970]

yeah it would be great if he could produce evidence

We genuinely can't change what money is doing to the game and the shit it attracts to the administration that brings all these pointless rules to the table.

Some idiot thought "Let's bring this rule in" and there were other useful idiots who decided "Yeah let's do that", without asking a fan or a representative of a fan who pay to watch it.

 

[RiversideBlue]

Clubs should spent only what they earn, that would encourage owners to run their clubs properly , doesnt need to tie us to what the others do

If we'd spent only what we earned, when we were taken over, we'd still be shit.

 

[domalino]

everywhere reports 4.5 to 5x if it's 4.5 times we have very little transfer budget, especially as agents fees were about £50m

This is from the Times Exclusive.

Official Premier League figures for last season show the bottom club, Southampton, were paid £104million in TV money. A cap of six times that figure would be £624million, just more than the £619.5million total of City’s spending.

https://archive.ph/Q5uJa#selection-2821.0-2821.229

Can you stop flapping now?

 

[BerkshireBlue]

Well, we don't know yet, do we? Wages, amortisation and loss (profit) or less on sale have to be 70% of revenue for UEFA anyway and we will be comfortably within that. So let's wait to see what "multiple" is included in the rule book first, and what is included in "spend".

Don't forget players will leave and take their amortisation with them, and the academy will still sell players.

No need to panic. Yet :)

I'm not panicking I'm just saying we can't sign anyone until we sell players

 

[domalino]

yeah it would be great if he could produce evidence

I have produced evidence, but FWIW, why am I required to provide evidence disproving somehting you've provided absolutely fuck all evidence for?

You've come into the tread proclaiming the club is going to have to have a fire sale and provided zero evidence or sources for that.

 

[argyle]

everywhere reports 4.5 to 5x if it's 4.5 times we have very little transfer budget, especially as agents fees were about £50m

Kieren Maguire saying if it's capped at 4.5 then us and Chelsea would have to restrict spending.

 

[BerkshireBlue]

This is from the Times Exclusive.

Official Premier League figures for last season show the bottom club, Southampton, were paid £104million in TV money. A cap of six times that figure would be £624million, just more than the £619.5million total of City’s spending.

Can you stop flapping now?

that's just an example ffs. the PL want it to be somewhere between 4.5 and 5 times