The end of financial 'fair' play?

[BoyBlue_1985]

The funny thing is, PSG aren't even in the Deloitte Football Money League 2012.

So how the f*** are PSG going to buy all these players, pay thier wages, and stay within the FFPR.

Not only that, but the Ligue 1 revenues are dwarfed by the Premier League.

Let Mr Platini explan this one. Then again, why would he upset and go against a French team?

I assume that people are aware that a certain Laurent Platini, son of Michel, is employed by Qatar Sports Investments, a company owned by the Qatar Investment Authority that's the holding entity for the QIA's investment in PSG: http://blogs.thescore.com/footyblog...rising-force-in-french—and-european—football/.

It doesn't matter a jot in FFP as Platini is not the head of the committee that controls it and the moment it shows leniency towards someone it will crumble like the wobbly pack of cards it already is.

 

[Mike D]

So let me get this right...

Upwards of £30m per annum for Champions League participation.

£40m a year from our Etihad deal.

£12m a year kit deal with Nike.

Oh, and £70m a year minimum re new Premier League rights.

Added to ticket sales, other sponsors, and prior to revenues from new leisure development...

We are pushing £200m a year in revenue?

And even before that Platini will let us lose another £37m over two years.

Is this the end of FFPR and what concerns we had for it as a club? Goodness knows what new Champions League Tv rights be worth next time.

It's a beautiful thing, innit!

The whole thing about fair play is that its flawed, and when somebody does eventually challenge it, the whole ideal will come crashing down.

 

[jrb]

What we all know anyway.

But how refreshing to hear it coming from the Chief Executive of Everton.

bit by bit Platini's plan will crumble.

Businessdesk North West.

Everton chief questions UEFA Financial Fair Play crackdown

EVERTON FC chief executive Robert Elstone has questioned UEFA's Financial Fair Play rules, arguing they will make it harder for other clubs to challenge the existing elite.

Mr Elstone, who continues to search for new investment for Everton, said the near £1bn spending spree by Abu Dhabi's Sheikh Mansour - which took Manchester City from mid-table to Premier League champions in four years - has been "good for football", despite being attacked by many in the game.

He told a Procurement in Sport forum in Manchester organised by Optimum Procurement that Manchester City's emergence had helped the Premier League secure a 70% increase in its broadcast revenues from BSkyB and BT.

"I think Manchester City's emergence has been good for football in terms of the talent and the players thay have brought into the league. I think it's one of the reasons the new domestic TV deal with Sky and BT is 70% higher than the previous one.

"I think clubs should be allowed to run their business as they see fit - it's been the way it has been done for 130 or so years and now in one fell swoop you can't.

"It basically now ingrains the positions of the top clubs and means no one else will be able to challenge that order."

Mr Elstone told business leaders at the event at Lancashire Cricket Club that the new television deal would be worth around £19m per year more to Everton - on domestic right alone.

"I hope we see similar growth in international too - the Premier League is a phenomenal success and one of this country's biggest exports.

"On any one Saturday it generates £60m and has grown 1,355% since the formation of the league 20 years ago."

He also called for talks between his club and city rivals Liverpool over a new stadium - which both clubs need if they are to grow commercial revenues.

"We are open to talks (with Liverpool) I have said it before and that position remains."

In terms of funding a new stadium, he called for Liverpool City Council to make it a priority, but conceded funding will be tough given the financial climate in both the public and private sector.

"We will need some support in terms of finances from the public sector or a third party, some kind of leg-up."

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

What we all know anyway.

But how refreshing to hear it coming from the Chief Executive of Everton.

bit by bit Platini's plan will crumble.

Businessdesk North West.

Everton chief questions UEFA Financial Fair Play crackdown

EVERTON FC chief executive Robert Elstone has questioned UEFA's Financial Fair Play rules, arguing they will make it harder for other clubs to challenge the existing elite.

Mr Elstone, who continues to search for new investment for Everton, said the near £1bn spending spree by Abu Dhabi's Sheikh Mansour - which took Manchester City from mid-table to Premier League champions in four years - has been "good for football", despite being attacked by many in the game.

He told a Procurement in Sport forum in Manchester organised by Optimum Procurement that Manchester City's emergence had helped the Premier League secure a 70% increase in its broadcast revenues from BSkyB and BT.

"I think Manchester City's emergence has been good for football in terms of the talent and the players thay have brought into the league. I think it's one of the reasons the new domestic TV deal with Sky and BT is 70% higher than the previous one.

"I think clubs should be allowed to run their business as they see fit - it's been the way it has been done for 130 or so years and now in one fell swoop you can't.

"It basically now ingrains the positions of the top clubs and means no one else will be able to challenge that order."

Mr Elstone told business leaders at the event at Lancashire Cricket Club that the new television deal would be worth around £19m per year more to Everton - on domestic right alone.

"I hope we see similar growth in international too - the Premier League is a phenomenal success and one of this country's biggest exports.

"On any one Saturday it generates £60m and has grown 1,355% since the formation of the league 20 years ago."

He also called for talks between his club and city rivals Liverpool over a new stadium - which both clubs need if they are to grow commercial revenues.

"We are open to talks (with Liverpool) I have said it before and that position remains."

In terms of funding a new stadium, he called for Liverpool City Council to make it a priority, but conceded funding will be tough given the financial climate in both the public and private sector.

"We will need some support in terms of finances from the public sector or a third party, some kind of leg-up."

We've been good for football? I thought we were ruining it. I wish they'd make their minds up, it really is most confusing.

 

[LoveCity]

Finally the brass of a club like Everton recognises the sham that is Financial Fair Play. Everton are one of those clubs who could be one big takeover away from being a big force again (and being able to keep academy players like Rooney and Barkley) but these rules will cripple them even if Qatar went and bought them out tomorrow.

 

[Pam]

This is withering on the vine before it even gets started. There will be more clubs than Everton saying this and sooner rather than later. Fuck off, Twattini, you attention seeking whore and put your own house in order whilst you're about it.

 

[Marvin]

Everton's bosses maybe opposed to FFPR as they are trying to sell the club, and the regulations reduce the value of clubs outside the Champions League. If you're not in it now, it will be even harder in the future

 

[St Helens Blue (Exiled)]

Can someone correct me perhaps as again I am no expert on FFP-Prestwich blue put me straight on how a signing is worked out for the accounting purposes so thanks for that however if I remember rightly as part of FFP isn't the owner allowed to put in around circa 30 million per annum into the club which can be counted towards revenue. Apologies again if I am incorrect but I am sure I read this somewhere.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Can someone correct me perhaps as again I am no expert on FFP-Prestwich blue put me straight on how a signing is worked out for the accounting purposes so thanks for that however if I remember rightly as part of FFP isn't the owner allowed to put in around circa 30 million per annum into the club which can be counted towards revenue. Apologies again if I am incorrect but I am sure I read this somewhere.

With players, you charge the initial fee over the life of the initial contract. So if we sign a player for £25m on a 5 year contract, we "amortise" £5m a year as an expense. The value of the player in the accounts then reduces by that amount each year. After 3 years that player would be "worth" £10m as we'd have charged 3 lots amortisation of £5m. If we sell him, then the difference between the sale proceeds and his book value is the profit or loss on that sale. However if he signs a new 5 year contract at that point then we charge the remaining £10m over that 5 years, which works out at £2m a year, etc.

In FFP you are allowed to make a loss of €5m but any losses above that, up to the maximum permitted loss in any monitoring period, has to be covered by the owner via putting the cash in to cover up to €40m of the €45m aggregate loss permitted in the first few years.

 

[St Helens Blue (Exiled)]

Can someone correct me perhaps as again I am no expert on FFP-Prestwich blue put me straight on how a signing is worked out for the accounting purposes so thanks for that however if I remember rightly as part of FFP isn't the owner allowed to put in around circa 30 million per annum into the club which can be counted towards revenue. Apologies again if I am incorrect but I am sure I read this somewhere.

With players, you charge the initial fee over the life of the initial contract. So if we sign a player for £25m on a 5 year contract, we "amortise" £5m a year as an expense. The value of the player in the accounts then reduces by that amount each year. After 3 years that player would be "worth" £10m as we'd have charged 3 lots amortisation of £5m. If we sell him, then the difference between the sale proceeds and his book value is the profit or loss on that sale. However if he signs a new 5 year contract at that point then we charge the remaining £10m over that 5 years, which works out at £2m a year, etc.

In FFP you are allowed to make a loss of €5m but any losses above that, up to the maximum permitted loss in any monitoring period, has to be covered by the owner via putting the cash in to cover up to €40m of the €45m aggregate loss permitted in the first few years.

Cheers PB......