[Football] The ticking Profit and Sustainability (FFP) timebomb...

Creaky · Jan 16, 2024

dazzer6666 said:
Rules are the same but the number is different

Indeed but seems a little unfair to promoted teams.

In the Championship the permitted loss is £39m over a 3 year period, (average of £13m/annum).

The PL rules for P&S assume however a newly promoted club has lost £22m a year for each of the first two of a three year period.

Considering a newly promoted squad needs greater investment than an established one in order to compete it strikes me as unreasonable to then potentially reduce the amount they can spend.

Kinky Gerbil · Jan 16, 2024

Creaky said:
Indeed but seems a little unfair to promoted teams.

In the Championship the permitted loss is £39m over a 3 year period, (average of £13m/annum).

The PL rules for P&S assume however a newly promoted club has lost £22m a year for each of the first two of a three year period.

Considering a newly promoted squad needs greater investment than an established one in order to compete it strikes me as unreasonable to then potentially reduce the amount they can spend.

There is investment, then there is buying 23 players.....

Stat Brother · Jan 16, 2024

The Premier League’s biggest net spenders over the last five years

MSN

www.msn.com

20. Brighton & Hove Albion - £92.3m profit

Yep, the best-run club in the country have actually made nearly £100m in pure profit from transfers since they earned promotion to the Premier League. And they built a new stadium. And seem to have gotten even better every single year. It’s getting boring just how efficient they are at absolutely everything, but it doesn’t seem likely to end any time soon. Give it five more years and they’ll be champions of Europe after selling their entire squad at a mark-up twice over.

PILTDOWN MAN · Jan 16, 2024

Creaky said:
Indeed but seems a little unfair to promoted teams.

In the Championship the permitted loss is £39m over a 3 year period, (average of £13m/annum).

The PL rules for P&S assume however a newly promoted club has lost £22m a year for each of the first two of a three year period.

Considering a newly promoted squad needs greater investment than an established one in order to compete it strikes me as unreasonable to then potentially reduce the amount they can spend.

They had operating loss of over 60m in the 2 years prior to promotion and then bought 5 players a day for a month.

Creaky · Jan 16, 2024

PILTDOWN MAN said:
They had operating loss of over 60m in the 2 years prior to promotion and then bought 5 players a day for a month.

That's is as maybe in the case of Forest, I don't know what their FFP financial figures were.

I was simply making the point that the P&S rules for promoted clubs favours the established PL clubs.

The P&S rule assumes that a promoted club has made a loss of £44m in the two years prior to promotion - i.e. that all promoted clubs have breached Championship FFP limits.

PILTDOWN MAN · Jan 16, 2024

Creaky said:
That's is as maybe in the case of Forest, I don't know what their FFP financial figures were.

I was simply making the point that the P&S rules for promoted clubs favours the established PL clubs.

The P&S rule assumes that a promoted club has made a loss of £44m in the two years prior to promotion - i.e. that all promoted clubs have breached Championship FFP limits.

Where is that in the rules. I don't doubt it but never seen it until you mentioned it

Justice · Jan 16, 2024

Creaky said:
Indeed but seems a little unfair to promoted teams.

In the Championship the permitted loss is £39m over a 3 year period, (average of £13m/annum).

The PL rules for P&S assume however a newly promoted club has lost £22m a year for each of the first two of a three year period.

Considering a newly promoted squad needs greater investment than an established one in order to compete it strikes me as unreasonable to then potentially reduce the amount they can spend.

I actually agree with the rules here, managers should trust the squad that got them promoted more. Add three or four in key positions or to replace loans if you had any.

Green Cross Code Man · Jan 16, 2024

Justice said:
I actually agree with the rules here, managers should trust the squad that got them promoted more. Add three or four in key positions or to replace loans if you had any.

Yep, that is what kept us up for a few years, great team spirit and the efforts of Dunk especially. Team spirit is a wonderful thing, but it's fragile and can dissipate very quickly.

PILTDOWN MAN · Jan 16, 2024

Justice said:
I actually agree with the rules here, managers should trust the squad that got them promoted more. Add three or four in key positions or to replace loans if you had any.

Just like Forest did

Creaky · Jan 16, 2024

PILTDOWN MAN said:
Where is that in the rules. I don't doubt it but never seen it until you mentioned it

Everton and Nottingham Forest confirm Premier League PSR breaches

The two clubs have each confirmed to the Premier League that they are in breach of the League’s Profitability and Sustainability Rules

www.premierleague.com

A Club will be in breach of the PSRs if its PSR Calculation over the relevant period results in a loss in excess of £105 million (with that threshold reduced by £22million for each season that the relevant Club has been in the Championship during the relevant period)
- Due to Nottingham Forest spending two seasons in the Championship within the three-year assessment period, the maximum loss for the club is £61million

PILTDOWN MAN · Jan 16, 2024

Creaky said:
Everton and Nottingham Forest confirm Premier League PSR breaches

The two clubs have each confirmed to the Premier League that they are in breach of the League’s Profitability and Sustainability Rules

www.premierleague.com

A Club will be in breach of the PSRs if its PSR Calculation over the relevant period results in a loss in excess of £105 million (with that threshold reduced by £22million for each season that the relevant Club has been in the Championship during the relevant period)
- Due to Nottingham Forest spending two seasons in the Championship within the three-year assessment period, the maximum loss for the club is £61million

So it's 13m each season then in the EFL 35-22=13 13+13+35=61m

Weststander · Jan 16, 2024

PILTDOWN MAN said:
So it's 13m each season then in the EFL 35-22=13 13+13+35=61m

Little wonder you bamboozled the breweries :bowdown:

.

PILTDOWN MAN · Jan 16, 2024

Weststander said:
Little wonder you bamboozled the breweries .

Especially BTU's, APV, specific gravity, SRM (using a Cuvette and a spectrophotometer at 430nm and a logarithmic scale).

At the end of the day. What does it taste like? Nice. Good.

Kinky Gerbil · Jan 31, 2024

Forest looking at getting 3 in over next day, they don't seem concerned about any punishment.

Kinky Gerbil · Feb 2, 2024

Reading some bits online, seems Everton are on the verge of going under and 777 are keeping them afloat by already putting money in.

Kinky Gerbil · Feb 13, 2024

Result of Everton appeal due this week, going to be interesting.

Any real back tracking gives the go ahead for cheats to over spend.

Nobby Cybergoat · Feb 13, 2024

Kinky Gerbil said:
Result of Everton appeal due this week, going to be interesting.

Any real back tracking gives the go ahead for cheats to over spend.

It will be very interesting.

The ideal message to send out, is that the result is the result and appeals are only going to work if you have genuine new evidence.
Relegation places are up for grabs, so we can't have legal appeals going on through the summer.

Psychobilly freakout · Feb 13, 2024

Nobby Cybergoat said:
It will be very interesting.

The ideal message to send out, is that the result is the result and appeals are only going to work if you have genuine new evidence.
Relegation places are up for grabs, so we can't have legal appeals going on through the summer.

I would add if the appeal is upheld, further point deductions are added to prevent clubs wasting time and avoiding relegation if that is the case, when they are as guilty as hell.

Wardy's twin · Feb 13, 2024

People say man city's case is complicated, yep it is 115 charges so why not just take the most serious and start with that one and get a decision. Then move on to the next one. 10 points now would ensure they don't win the PL and that could be followed by more deductions as they process the next one.

Nobby Cybergoat · Feb 13, 2024

Wardy's twin said:
People say man city's case is complicated, yep it is 115 charges so why not just take the most serious and start with that one and get a decision. Then move on to the next one. 10 points now would ensure they don't win the PL and that could be followed by more deductions as they process the next one.

Great shout. I just wonder how interconnected the charges are.

I can't think how infuriating this must be for their current title rivals

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Football] The ticking Profit and Sustainability (FFP) timebomb...

Well-known member

Im The Scatman

Well-known member

The Premier League’s biggest net spenders over the last five years​

20. Brighton & Hove Albion - £92.3m profit​

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Dangerous Idiot

Wunt be druv

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Im The Scatman

Im The Scatman

Im The Scatman

Well-known member

HellBilly

Well-known member

Well-known member

Share this page

The Premier League’s biggest net spenders over the last five years

20. Brighton & Hove Albion - £92.3m profit