drew
Drew
The PL are involved because the fines apply to promoted clubs who are then members of the Premier League and no longer members of the Football League. The FL therefore need the co-operation of the PL to impose fines.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Somebody please explain FFP
- Thread starter Sloughseagull
- Start date
The PL are involved because the fines apply to promoted clubs who are then members of the Premier League and no longer members of the Football League. The FL therefore need the co-operation of the PL to impose fines.
portslade seagull
Well-known member
This will never happen, it will go to court before any clubs pass any money over to the league
brighton_girl87
New member
- Jul 18, 2006
- 2,319
Is that the one you said looked smudged?
Puppet Master
non sequitur
- Aug 14, 2012
- 4,055
yeah they like start off normally at the end towards his nose then as they go outwards just go CRAZY and the growth is just all over his forehead, all down his eyelids, cheeks, everywhere! So gross.
Was this the new sponsorship deals from the owners, similar to Man City's new sponsorship deal with their owners.
It's the obvious way round it. The FL say they will investigate any deals which appear to be 'dodgy' but what realistically can they do about it.
Sponsorship deals etc were mentioned. The details are hazy as I had this conversation on NYE.
Dorset Seagull
Once Dolphin, Now Seagull
So if we end up being the only club that meet the FFP criteria does that mean that we will be unable to sell any players because all the other clubs will not be able to purchase them? Also presumably all the unhappy players at all the other clubs will be pretty pissed off as there will only be 1 club in the transfer buying market ( ie Us ) so they will have to stay put? Plus our negotiating power in transfer dealings will be staggering as all the other teams will be trying to offload unhappy high earners to us and only us.
Have I got that right because it has massive implications for players on longer contracts and if this scenario were to happen, and seems possible as we appear to be the only club taking it seriously, it opens up all sorts of other issues.
Have I got that right because it has massive implications for players on longer contracts and if this scenario were to happen, and seems possible as we appear to be the only club taking it seriously, it opens up all sorts of other issues.
SeagullSongs
And it's all gone quiet..
portslade seagull
Well-known member
All the times there are loop holes FFP is a complete waste of time as sooner or later all clubs will be bypassing it
Firstly, loans do cost money, there are portions of wages of course, but some loans also require fees. Some clubs insert clauses that mean you pay more if you don't play them.
Secondly, the budget is ambiguous. We see "Ulloa signs for £2m, on a four year deal", and think "ooh, the club spent £2m in that transfer window". Whereas under FFP, that fee is spread out over the course of the contract, so we only "spent" half a million on him last season, and have spent half a million on him this season and in each of the next two.
Given that interpretation of "budget" it would appear our budget for the last two seasons (which was slightly increased this season) isn't actually near £5m, and so having spent most of it on Ward, Chicksen, Upson, Agustien, Conway, Lita, Andrews, with new contracts for Lopez and El Abd, (was maksimenko in the last window or the one before?) and taking the budget as significantly less than £5m, covering wages, signing on fees, loan fees, agents fees, transfer fees, there being not much left isn't that surprising.
Creaky
Well-known member
This - and BHAFC are not immune from using such loopholes - e.g. rent free use of stadium and interest free loans.
drew
Drew
We can sign out of contract players and overseas players.
Seagull on the wing
New member
But they don't baulk at parachute payments...which to my mind is a reward for failure...
Machiavelli
Well-known member
Why just the eyebrows?
Machiavelli
Well-known member
How come? This is the amount we've lost over the past two seasons. Barber keeps on saying that he's made savings of £2m in operating costs since then. Also factor in that gate receipts have gone up by a few thousand (with all those extra pies and pints sold), we have better sponsorship deals, and we're in all likelihood flogging more sh!t.
Machiavelli
Well-known member
Bloom said in his xmas missive that he had planned to reduce the playing budget by 6%, but Barber's good work, etc, meant that it was staying the same as last year. This leads on to the question of whether all of this has been spent (you mention all the players coming in, but you could equally construct one of all those that left in the summer -- I'll leave you to do this, you're far more proficient at such things than I). The club had to react to the injury situation and brought in Conway and Lita. At the start of the season, the club would probably have reserved a portion of the budget for this transfer window, alongside contingencies. It's just whether the latter has already eaten into the former. The Argus did report the other day that it would be difficult to sign Conway. The question on this is whether it's the case, or if it's just a negotiating strategy.
Those are not FFP loopholes. There is no rule nor justification for compulsory rent on stadium use, nor should the league set interest rates on loans.
Sometimes you sound like an undercover palace fan ( joke )
Last edited:
KZNSeagull
Well-known member
We cannot stick to a capped loss of 8m long term - 8m this season, 6m next and 5m thereafter.
FFP is being met with a lot of cynicism. I hope that the FL stick to their guns and implement it properly, as agreed by the FL clubs.
It is also work in progress, so clubs that think that they have found loopholes should not be allowed to get away with it and the rules will adapt. We will have to wait a year to see whether it is a non-starter or not, but something has got to be done, whether it is FFP in it's current form or something else. It is a real test of the FL's resolve and they have to see it through.
FFP is being met with a lot of cynicism. I hope that the FL stick to their guns and implement it properly, as agreed by the FL clubs.
It is also work in progress, so clubs that think that they have found loopholes should not be allowed to get away with it and the rules will adapt. We will have to wait a year to see whether it is a non-starter or not, but something has got to be done, whether it is FFP in it's current form or something else. It is a real test of the FL's resolve and they have to see it through.
Dorset Seagull
Once Dolphin, Now Seagull
That isn't the issue as we could sign anybody it's more about who we would sell our players to if nobody in the Championship was allowed to buy players