Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
YankeeCanary

Premier League Clubs - Discussion On Spending Limits

Recommended Posts

Wouldn''t it be great to be a fly on the wall in these discussions?

 

 

 

Premier League news

Clubs to discuss spending limits

September 5, 2012

By Press Association

Premier League chairmen will be presented Thursday with a range of possible financial controls to limit spending by top-flight clubs.

The league''s top executives have produced a discussion paper on financial controls for the chairmen to consider which could eventually lead to clubs being forced to break even every year -- or face sanctions.

It would mean a serious blow to clubs such as Manchester City and Chelsea who have returned significant losses in recent years.

There is strong support at other clubs for such controls -- Wigan chairman Dave Whelan on Wednesday said measures to cut spending were needed urgently, while Manchester United originally sparked the move at the league''s meeting earlier in the summer.

No decision will be made on any measures Wednesday -- instead two groups of 10 clubs, each with clubs mixed up to reflect size and region, are to be formed to discuss the options in more detail.

Whelan''s own club Wigan have also operated at a loss -- the Latics returned a net loss for the year ending May 2011 of £7.2million ($11.45 million) -- but even he is in favor of the controls.

Whelan told the Press Association: "This proposal has come from Manchester United -- I think City haven shaken them up a little bit -- but I think there should be some controls on spending.

"Some clubs are spending way more than they can afford and get into trouble -- look at Portsmouth.

"The Premier League is so big and powerful and there is so much money around that the clubs try and chase it. Something has to be done so we will support these measures."

United''s chief executive David Gill has been one of the driving forces behind European clubs accepting UEFA''s financial fair play rules for clubs in the Champions League and Europa League to only spend what they earn, and he wants the Premier League to follow suit.

The Football League have also introduced a similar system into the Championship and Gill believes the top flight should bring in similar measures.

Gill said last week: "A lot of clubs would be happy just to introduce the financial fair play regulations into the Premier League now, some wouldn''t, but that''s a debate that has to have happened. And it will happen.

"If you look at it we''ve got financial regulations in the league below us, the Championship, and the competition above us, the Champions League, so we need to do it.

"The Premier League being the best league in the world, the most commercially effective league in the world, I think there''s a real opportunity to introduce some sensible rules that effectively improve and enhance the long term or medium term financial stability."

At least 12 of the 20 top-flight clubs ended the 2010-11 season in the red with Manchester City''s losses of £197 million ($313.4 million) dwarfing even Chelsea''s £68 million ($108.2 million) and Liverpool''s £49 million ($77.9 million).

Critics of financial fair rules argue that it will forever favor those clubs such as Manchester United and Arsenal who make a profit and rule out wealthy benefactors such as Roman Abramovich and Sheikh Mansour putting money into clubs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting - thank you YC.

Something like this, if it could ever be implemented must work in our favour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting - thank you YC.

Something like this, if it could ever be implemented, must work in our favour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
", while Manchester United originally sparked the move at the league''s meeting earlier in the summer."I guess when you have 62 million worth of debt repayments to meet every year, and your next door neighbours have more money than they know what to do with, it''s time to smell the coffee.Only 20 years too late, some might say...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Spending limits on both transfer fees and wages should have been globally implemented donkey''s years ago, but instead the situation was ignored which lead to the huge gulf between a few super rich clubs and those who have big investment (if not super rich) - and everyone else.The problem is that it has to be addressed globally or many players will simply ''follow the money'' to wherever sensible rules aren''t in place and they can get 200k a week and call it a pittance...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can''t see it happening given most premiership clubs are heavily subsidised by their benefactor owners. Under FFP clubs still allowed 15m losses a year, and to subsidise academy and infrastrucure so we would remain at a substantial financial disadvatage to the majority of clubs in premier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still say it has to be a blanket process!

 

It has to be related to the division and not to the clubs turnover.

 

I would like to see a 20 million wage cap on all top divisions.

 

We have the 25 player registered, I would like to go one step further and senior players who don''t get registered are free to go to another club.

 

Image and top up bonus payments to be included in the 20 million punds thus stopping big clubs being able to by-pass rules.

 

I would also increas the relagtion to 5 teams and include the 4-5th team from bottom in the play off process, spreading the wealth of the clubs more evenly.

 

Would that not even the division even more, you would still have the best players goingt to the clubs who play in Europe but the rest of the clubs would even out.

 

Well my ideas, not sure they would all work and certainly some clubs would hate them!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don''t think anything seriously ground breaking will ever be done.  Simply because as we all know top football is no longer working man''s sport.  It''s a multi-billion pound business.  And the rich owners with bottomless pockets will argue that their club is their business and they can run it how they bloody well want. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe it is very necessary now, especially with the new improved Premiership TV Deal. In the crazy world of football finances an increase in revenue means a bigger increase in spending and greater debt. I can see more clubs going the way of Portsmouth/Rangers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nice to see a top club effectively coming out and backing Financial Fair Play, albeit for purely selfish reasons.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is not clear to me from reading that is how what might end up being proposed for the Premier League is going to be different from Financial Fair Play, which is coming in anyway. Obviously FFP only applies to clubs that want to qualify for Europe. So I can see that, for example, there could end up with a disparity between Man Utd, who will - roughly speaking - have to balance the books, and QPR, who won''t, provided they are just happy to stay in the Premier League. But there shouldn''t be a disparity between Man Utd and Man City.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interestingly (or not) Abramovich was one of the main men behind getting the Finacial Fair Play rules implemented along with Platini. Chelsea have spent a large amount of money this summer - but the value of winning the Champions League is roughly £60m so they probably haven''t spent that much more than the income from that.

 

Maybe it wasn''t that interesting in hindsight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In an ideal world, clubs should be restricted as to what they can spend by limiting it to their business income ie - inome from gate receipts and commercial sales and tv money.   If this was the case the larger clubs in terms of support will still probably rise to the top - and smaller clubs will still find it hard to compete with them - but not to the same extent as it is now.   

 

 

It won''t happen, but it won''t stop a lot of people wanting it to happen.     Like most sport, football is now taken over by the "super rich".  

 

 

Its also the way society is going. The rich are getting richer - at the expense of joe bloggs.   Who is making the most out of the recession?   Not joe bloggs - its the people who have money who can take advantage of situations to cash in on other peoples misfortune that are doing well.    Thats why the people at the top don''t seem to relate to us joe public - its not that they can''t relate to us - its that it is not in their interest to relate to us.  

 

 

 

The super rich who take over football clubs do the sport no favours imo.   I hope we always have a club who keeps its feet on the ground.  We are being well run at the moment and are a benchmark for other clubs to follow imo.   Those that seek a saviour in terms of money will generally find that they will lose out in the long term - in terms of money and soul.    Ask Portsmouth.   The good thing there though is the fact that the real fans will now rebuild the club within the context of the town itself and perhaps they can regain something of what they once were.   We are lucky at norwich - actually, its not luck, its because  the club has retained its soul by not selling out to just anyone because they happen to have a bit of money.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is there are always going to be ways around these rules which basically make them ineffective. I can''t remember the figures, but Man City had their new sponsorship deal (Believe it was stadium and shirts) from a company owned by the same people that own the club. So they can put any figure they like on this, call it £500m a year if they wanted, this is extra income they can then use on towards the FFP. The owner hasn''t lost out, effectively just transfered money from his bank to one business to another. This makes the clubs books look in the black and they can carry on spending.

 

Something must be done, and quickly. I just think we are in too deep now for any rules to be bought in place which won''t be favourable to some clubs and not others, and therefore will be giving others an "unfair advantage" so will never take effect. What we really need is either Abromavic or someone of their ilk to get bored and leave, watch their old club implode and fall from Champions league regulars to relegation candidtaes, or a Rangers situation in the premier league. Only then will people sit up and take notice. Pompey were high profile, but just not high enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I generally agree with Lakey''s post.

I know sport is business but elements of sport must remain. Not allowing a club to have any debt is a sound basis for this, and creates a more level playing field.

I posted many moons ago that I believe tv money should be split, as such the club getting its share for the club appearing and the players getting their share direct from the tv companies based on £ per minutes played. This would help stop a lot of players getting inflated wages for not playing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Any sponsorship has to be agreed by UEFA at a acceptable market rate, so have the means to block Ethiad sponsoring Man City for say 200million a season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As others have rightly stated it''s a situation that should''ve been addressed many moons ago.The worlds best surgeons who save peoples lives don''t warrant such huge salaries, let alone a bell who knocks a ball around for a couple of hours a week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Shyster"]As others have rightly stated it''s a situation that should''ve been addressed many moons ago.The worlds best surgeons who save peoples lives don''t warrant such huge salaries, let alone a bell who knocks a ball around for a couple of hours a week.[/quote]I dunno about this FFP stuff, sounds like socialism to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Infidel Castro"][quote user="Shyster"]As others have rightly stated it''s a situation that should''ve been addressed many moons ago.The worlds best surgeons who save peoples lives don''t warrant such huge salaries, let alone a bell who knocks a ball around for a couple of hours a week.[/quote]I dunno about this FFP stuff, sounds like socialism to me.[/quote]How strange that the biggest capitalist country in the world (U.S.A.) run their major sporting league (N.F.L.) in a very socialistic way. Yet here we are in social democratic Europe and it''s a capitalistic free for all.Rum old do intut?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Shyster"]As others have rightly stated it''s a situation that should''ve been addressed many moons ago.The worlds best surgeons who save peoples lives don''t warrant such huge salaries, let alone a bell who knocks a ball around for a couple of hours a week.[/quote]

I didn''t have you marked down as a socialist, Shyster, because that''s what these new regulations, Euro regulations at that, amount to.

At the moment we have the best, the most exciting league in the world. We have the best players and every top manager wants to play here and coach here.

Let''s not kid ourselves they come here for the cuisine or the climate. They come because the big bucks are here. It''s simple demand and supply. What''s wrong with that? Without the big spenders we wouldn''t have the best football in the world here. So what if the occasional club crashes and burns. They''re all capable of making choices without some nanny Euro-quango telling them how they can spend their money.

Leeds overspent and paid the lesson but are still in existence. Southampton went bankrupt at around the time that we nearly did but are now back in the Premiership.

If Portsmouth get their act together then they will ressurecct, but if they don''t then tough- there''s no divine right for Portsmouth to be a league club and anyway their absence creates a place for another club to join the league.

I like the present system. It creates an exciting league. It brings in huge amounts of money, it is a big export earner.

The FFP rules on the other hand are devised by Europeans jealous of our football sucess and will introduce a system that will see a drift back to the continent of the world''s best players and coaches, thereby ending English domination of Euro club competitions.

And if you think Norwich stand to gain from FFP you are seriously mistaken for two reasons.

Firstly, the big Premier League clubs will continue to stay at the top because even with FFP they will still have a far greater income than a club such as ourselves. FFP will cause a price and wage deflation in English football but in relative terms the big clubs will continue to outbid us for talent as they have always done since league football began over a hundred years ago.

Secondly, we will suffer from FFP in the long term because once the big money has gone out of English football so will all the big names. And that makes premier league football less marketable on the global stage. And Norwich are direct beneficiaries of the current popularity of English football around the world.

So from Bahrain to Brisbane they might be tuning in to watch Macini and the Man City All Stars win the league but Norwich City are financial winners, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Infidel Castro"]Someone remind Rock The Boat which country the best two players in the world play in[/quote]
The two best players don''t make the best league. I don''t pay to see Rooney at Carrow Road, I pay to see Manchester United.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="VegasCanary"][quote user="Infidel Castro"]Someone remind Rock The Boat which country the best two players in the world play in[/quote]
The two best players don''t make the best league. I don''t pay to see Rooney at Carrow Road, I pay to see Manchester United.
[/quote]He didn''t say it was the best league though, he said it had the best players and dominates European competitions. Neither of which are true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Infidel Castro"][quote user="Shyster"]As others have rightly stated it''s a situation that should''ve been addressed many moons ago.

The worlds best surgeons who save peoples lives don''t warrant such huge salaries, let alone a bell who knocks a ball around for a couple of hours a week.
[/quote]

I dunno about this FFP stuff, sounds like socialism to me.
[/quote]

If football was considered to be normal business there''d be a monopolies commission enquiry. The idea of FFP is to create a fairer level of competition in order that  football is not so much decided by money but by good management just as it used to be.  Then Norwich can truly compete just as medium-sized clubs such as Nottingham Forest, Derby, Villa, Leeds and Liverpool etc did in the 70s and 80s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="paul moy"]

If football was considered to be normal business there''d be a monopolies commission enquiry. The idea of FFP is to create a fairer level of competition in order that  football is not so much decided by money but by good management just as it used to be.  Then Norwich can truly compete just as medium-sized clubs such as Nottingham Forest, Derby, Villa, Leeds and Liverpool etc did in the 70s and 80s.

[/quote]To be honest mate, I''m all for FFP, I was just trying to wind up Shyster, but that seems a bit redundant now an actual mentalist wingnut has turned up ranting about Euro-quangos better than I could ever parody.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Rock The Boat"][quote user="Shyster"]As others have rightly stated it''s a situation that should''ve been addressed many moons ago.

The worlds best surgeons who save peoples lives don''t warrant such huge salaries, let alone a bell who knocks a ball around for a couple of hours a week.
[/quote] I didn''t have you marked down as a socialist, Shyster, because that''s what these new regulations, Euro regulations at that, amount to. At the moment we have the best, the most exciting league in the world. We have the best players and every top manager wants to play here and coach here. Let''s not kid ourselves they come here for the cuisine or the climate. They come because the big bucks are here. It''s simple demand and supply. What''s wrong with that? Without the big spenders we wouldn''t have the best football in the world here. So what if the occasional club crashes and burns. They''re all capable of making choices without some nanny Euro-quango telling them how they can spend their money. Leeds overspent and paid the lesson but are still in existence. Southampton went bankrupt at around the time that we nearly did but are now back in the Premiership. If Portsmouth get their act together then they will ressurecct, but if they don''t then tough- there''s no divine right for Portsmouth to be a league club and anyway their absence creates a place for another club to join the league. I like the present system. It creates an exciting league. It brings in huge amounts of money, it is a big export earner. The FFP rules on the other hand are devised by Europeans jealous of our football sucess and will introduce a system that will see a drift back to the continent of the world''s best players and coaches, thereby ending English domination of Euro club competitions. And if you think Norwich stand to gain from FFP you are seriously mistaken for two reasons. Firstly, the big Premier League clubs will continue to stay at the top because even with FFP they will still have a far greater income than a club such as ourselves. FFP will cause a price and wage deflation in English football but in relative terms the big clubs will continue to outbid us for talent as they have always done since league football began over a hundred years ago. Secondly, we will suffer from FFP in the long term because once the big money has gone out of English football so will all the big names. And that makes premier league football less marketable on the global stage. And Norwich are direct beneficiaries of the current popularity of English football around the world. So from Bahrain to Brisbane they might be tuning in to watch Macini and the Man City All Stars win the league but Norwich City are financial winners, too.[/quote]

FFP would eventually be worldwide as it is controlled by an international football body, so of course it would benefit a club of Norwich''s size. Clubs that fail to adhere to FFP rules will be banned from international competition so would not be attractive to top players. Again, that would benefit us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Rock The Boat"][quote user="Shyster"]As others have rightly stated it''s a situation that should''ve been addressed many moons ago.

The worlds best surgeons who save peoples lives don''t warrant such huge salaries, let alone a bell who knocks a ball around for a couple of hours a week.
[/quote] I didn''t have you marked down as a socialist, Shyster, because that''s what these new regulations, Euro regulations at that, amount to. At the moment we have the best, the most exciting league in the world. We have the best players and every top manager wants to play here and coach here. Let''s not kid ourselves they come here for the cuisine or the climate. They come because the big bucks are here. It''s simple demand and supply. What''s wrong with that? Without the big spenders we wouldn''t have the best football in the world here. So what if the occasional club crashes and burns. They''re all capable of making choices without some nanny Euro-quango telling them how they can spend their money. Leeds overspent and paid the lesson but are still in existence. Southampton went bankrupt at around the time that we nearly did but are now back in the Premiership. If Portsmouth get their act together then they will ressurecct, but if they don''t then tough- there''s no divine right for Portsmouth to be a league club and anyway their absence creates a place for another club to join the league. I like the present system. It creates an exciting league. It brings in huge amounts of money, it is a big export earner.

The FFP rules on the other hand are devised by Europeans jealous of our football sucess and will introduce a system that will see a drift back to the continent of the world''s best players and coaches, thereby ending English domination of Euro club competitions.

And if you think Norwich stand to gain from FFP you are seriously mistaken for two reasons. Firstly, the big Premier League clubs will continue to stay at the top because even with FFP they will still have a far greater income than a club such as ourselves. FFP will cause a price and wage deflation in English football but in relative terms the big clubs will continue to outbid us for talent as they have always done since league football began over a hundred years ago. Secondly, we will suffer from FFP in the long term because once the big money has gone out of English football so will all the big names. And that makes premier league football less marketable on the global stage. And Norwich are direct beneficiaries of the current popularity of English football around the world. So from Bahrain to Brisbane they might be tuning in to watch Macini and the Man City All Stars win the league but Norwich City are financial winners, too.[/quote]

 

This is a domination that has, since the start of the PL, seen English clubs win the Champions League four times while Italian clubs have won it five times and Spanish clubs six times?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Rock The Boat"][quote user="Shyster"]As others have rightly stated it''s a situation that should''ve been addressed many moons ago.

The worlds best surgeons who save peoples lives don''t warrant such huge salaries, let alone a bell who knocks a ball around for a couple of hours a week.
[/quote] I didn''t have you marked down as a socialist, Shyster, because that''s what these new regulations, Euro regulations at that, amount to. At the moment we have the best, the most exciting league in the world. We have the best players and every top manager wants to play here and coach here. Let''s not kid ourselves they come here for the cuisine or the climate. They come because the big bucks are here. It''s simple demand and supply. What''s wrong with that? Without the big spenders we wouldn''t have the best football in the world here. So what if the occasional club crashes and burns. They''re all capable of making choices without some nanny Euro-quango telling them how they can spend their money. Leeds overspent and paid the lesson but are still in existence. Southampton went bankrupt at around the time that we nearly did but are now back in the Premiership. If Portsmouth get their act together then they will ressurecct, but if they don''t then tough- there''s no divine right for Portsmouth to be a league club and anyway their absence creates a place for another club to join the league. I like the present system. It creates an exciting league. It brings in huge amounts of money, it is a big export earner. The FFP rules on the other hand are devised by Europeans jealous of our football sucess and will introduce a system that will see a drift back to the continent of the world''s best players and coaches, thereby ending English domination of Euro club competitions. And if you think Norwich stand to gain from FFP you are seriously mistaken for two reasons. Firstly, the big Premier League clubs will continue to stay at the top because even with FFP they will still have a far greater income than a club such as ourselves. FFP will cause a price and wage deflation in English football but in relative terms the big clubs will continue to outbid us for talent as they have always done since league football began over a hundred years ago. Secondly, we will suffer from FFP in the long term because once the big money has gone out of English football so will all the big names. And that makes premier league football less marketable on the global stage. And Norwich are direct beneficiaries of the current popularity of English football around the world. So from Bahrain to Brisbane they might be tuning in to watch Macini and the Man City All Stars win the league but Norwich City are financial winners, too.[/quote]

This is a joke right? Satire or irony of something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"We have the best players and every top manager wants to play here and coach here"

 

absolute nonsense, if not why are they not all here ?

 

"thereby ending English domination of Euro club competitions"

 

in your rather mad delusions, maybe - not in the real world

 

"It creates an exciting league"

 

It doesn''t, It has created a stagnant league where the top five or six places are contested by the top clubs and the rest cling on in hope of the riches ... nothing else

 

"big clubs will continue to outbid us for talent as they have always done since league football began over a hundred years ago"

 

so how come clubs like us not only finished near the top, but actually won the title, over those previous years ?

 

What you are trying to defend is a glorified freak show that is beginning to fall apart. This is well recognised by most - and the above story is about how to deal with it BEFORE in caves in on itself.

 

Something that is so reliant upon one variable (TV coverage) is not in a very safe place. Not only for the now obvious fact of having the tail wagging the dog but the real worry that as technology moves a pace it could well become obselete, leaving clubs with massive unsustanable debts. That would, were it to happen, cause a domino affect with lower league clubs who are owed transfer money also in fanger of collapse.

 

To see the ''money men'' and genuine football fans coming to together suggests that this problem is nearing tipping point. You may wish for some souless and bland circus that depends so much on hype - however I suggest the rest of us want a game where everyone has a chance and the winner is not the one with the most corrupt money launderer using them.

 

There is a famous City cartoon of a Norfolk Dumpling and a Citizen looking down on Wembley after the defeat in the ''59 cup semi final, saying " it should have been us, bor".

 

I don''t want what you want.

 

I don''t want those two, and the rest of football, looking up at the top table, saying "it''ll never be us, bor"

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...