Search the Community

Sky Sports is reporting that new rues have been agreed but don't have all the details yet. They do however, suggest that: 1. There will be a limit on transfer spending/ wages based upon revenue (although they say that it will be different to the 70% agreed for UEFA - which will create some issues for the biggest clubs.) A lot will depend on what figure is chosen as the turnover limit, but it could make it harder for teams like Fulham/ Forest trying to buy survival. 2. More money to EFL and parachute payments to be reformed. Depends on how they are reformed. If it is too punitive, it could make it even harder for newly promoted clubs to attract players (bigger relegation deductions). 3. Negotiations to start with EFL about exact shape of the package, but obviously the PL will be dangling a big financial carrot to get the EFL to agree. All in all, should make football more sustainable and mean that all clubs have to adopt a self-funding model! 😉 (I wonder what we will argue about then - except which player is the fans' favourite target.) https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11661/12742070/premier-league-clubs-agree-new-financial-rules-with-efl-sides-to-be-offered-increased-payments#:~:text=The new financial rules mean,players' wages and transfer fees.

Parachute payments to be reduced as part of new financial arrangements in the Championship (behind paywall below). Main points: Broad support for a "new deal for football" Funding will be allocated to clubs based on where they finish in the League New system of cost control to prevent lavish spending. Parachute payments to be greatly reduced. Infrastructure grants for stadia and training grounds There is agreement on principles but the details remain to be finalised. Some premier league clubs want Championship clubs to commit to playing a fixed amount of under 23s (including loanees). Obviously the devil will be in the detail but key things to look out for will be: How much extra money the championship gets (dare I call it levelling up?) What the limitations will be on spending - particularly will it be the same as the UEFA 70% on wages and amortisation? How much will parachute payments be reduced? Impact on City - its hard to be certain without the detail but spending caps would favour us in the Championship as we have one of the biggest non TV revenues in the Championship. However, it will presumably make it even harder for newly promoted clubs to attract new players on longer term contracts as it will require bigger relegation reductions and most promoted team get relegated already. Perhaps promoted clubs will become even more dependent on loans and possibly more short-term deals like the Lingard one on out-of-contract mercenaries + more deals with automatic release clauses? Will be interesting to see what emerges over the next few weeks/ months. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/merit-based-funding-and-cutting-parachute-payments-championship-set-for-new-deal-zztqbkdgt

Sorry, but I think that it will be behind a paywall. Interesting article about the future of streaming. Every midweek game to be available Compulsory for every game in League 1 and 2 during world cup + bank holidays to be streamed. Only Saturday at 3pm is sacrosanct (for now) £10 charge is universal Becoming an important revenue stream (😃) for League One - e.g. it is thought that ITFC made £750,000 last year Teams selling the stream get the money - so if we buy an away fixture the money goes to City and not the host (smaller clubs understandably unhappy) Less of an issue atm for the Championship because of Sky and the red button service + much higher TV payments than league One but next deal could see big changes Lots of clubs leaving the ifollow service Some clubs worried about attendances - especially because of cost of living crisis Apple signed a 10 year deal to show every MLS game + Amazon have entered the Champions league market - both presumably a contributory factor to US interest in English clubs https://theathletic.com/3423113/2022/07/18/efl-ifollow-streaming-tv/?source=user_shared_article

It is also understood that funds promised by the 34-year-old to pay Derby wages for May have not arrived. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/61729900

Sorry to those without the Athletic. See other articles. Prince Abdullah is reported to have paid £5 million for it according to the Star - but that doesn't sound right to me (I know there was a protracted battle). Hopefully Shef will be along soon to clarify! 😃 https://theathletic.com/news/efl-reviewing-115m-takeover-of-sheffield-united-by-american-businessman-mauriss/RDzXz1QrMfQb/ https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/61177119 https://www.thestar.co.uk/sport/football/sheffield-united/henry-mauriss-meet-the-american-billionaire-who-wants-to-buy-sheffield-united-3663500

“In Europe, owners are not expected to make a profit—and criticized if they do. In the US, it’s set up for owners to make a return on capital. That’s a significant culture clash.” https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-05-18/epl-s-chelsea-arsenal-american-owners-reflect-new-league-money?sref=Xka7aNox

We are always told that we pay the lowest wages in the EPL: this is simply not true. We are one of the lowest without doubt, but if we ever manage to stay up, with staying up bonuses (that most similar teams have) our wages are competitive with several other EPL teams. Te latest evidence of this comes with the publication of Sheffield Utd's accounts. 1. Our wages in 19-20 (88.9 million) were £12 million pounds higher than Sheffield Utds - even though Sheffield Utd got their staying up bonus! 2. In 20-21 (an 11 month financial year for both of us), their wages were 56.5 million in the Premier League. Quite remarkably, our wages were 10 million pounds higher in the championship. 3. With this information it is possible to do an approximate comparison of the wages of the two teams excluding staying up bonuses. I have made adjustments for the 13 and 11 month years. Our adjusted wages in the Premier league were £82 million pa whilst Sheffield Utds (adjusted) were £61.6 million. My fag packet maths makes it therefore that rather than being the worst payers in the league, our premier league wages were 25% higher than Sheffield Utd's.

Seems like the Independent is a "Delia apologist" newspaper too suggesting that it's a structural issue in football finance when all the real experts on this board know it's all Delia's fault. 😉 Interesting quotation: “There’s a growing sense that we lost our way a bit as a club. It’s taken a lot of fun out of it. This season in particular everyone is fed up. There’s a real sense we don’t have a strong connection as fans with this team. [The owners] have sucked the life out of the squad, the spirit, unity, general sense of backbone all destroyed. We’re in a situation now where you feel they’re 11 blokes chucked out and let’s see what happens and inevitably they end up losing and everyone goes home miserable." Sound familiar? It's from a Watford fan. https://inews.co.uk/sport/football/norwich-fulham-football-purgatory-premier-league-finances-1615476

An interesting article for those of you interested in football finance. basically looks at how much clubs spend and how many points they get for it - points per pound so to speak. Speaks very interestingly about Brentford, but makes what I think is an important point about obtaining value: "The higher up football’s food chain you get, the harder it is to exploit inefficiencies: while there might be thousands of players who could significantly improve a Championship club, there might only be dozens who could do the same for a side near the top echelons of the Premier League. " This is the real challenge of the newly promoted clubs - there aren't that many players who will definitely improve them (a few hundred?) - and most of those that would, don't want to go to a newly promoted club. Well worth reading if you are interested in this stuff. I'm also pretty certain that the telegraph has got one of its graphics wrong - anyone spot it? https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2022/05/06/revealed-manchester-united-spent-57m-per-point-sir-alex-ferguson/