• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Football Finance

Forums Unread posts
Dreambeliever said:
@Beamrider thoughts on Utd’s figures?

Any chance they are goosed?
Click to expand...
Not seen the detailed figures yet. I thought they were near to the edge last year and the loss in 2024 is bigger than the one that drops out. But they reckon they’re OK. Which means something stinks because they should be right in the shit. So they must have a deal with the PL on treatment of some of their costs.
I’ll comment more when I’ve seen the detail.
 
Hansern said:
So the hearing for the 115s starts on Monday then. We'll either be surprised by how the PL acts, or just as anticipated that they escape yet another time.
Click to expand...
Where did you see that? The change in government makes a big difference imo. Labour like to control EVERYTHING and have a few more footie fans than the Tories, so can see them making sure the mud sticks. It's the end of football otherwise isn't it?
 
Anyone else think FSG are waiting for these charges to play out before committing to the transfer market?

If Shitty are found guilty, the transfer bubble will burst and we can buy at more sensible prices. You can already see that starting now FFP is actually being enforced.

If Shitty win the case then FSG won't have wasted millions trying to compete against a petrostate.
 
Cleric said:
Anyone else think FSG are waiting for these charges to play out before committing to the transfer market?

If Shitty are found guilty, the transfer bubble will burst and we can buy at more sensible prices. You can already see that starting now FFP is actually being enforced.

If Shitty win the case then FSG won't have wasted millions trying to compete against a petrostate.
Click to expand...

I think that's wishful thinking.

City haven't been throwing money around PSG style for a while now. They don't need to, they've already built their empire. Now, much like Real, they can just hoover up top young talent.
 
I think we have already showed that we are willing to invest no matter what happens to City. Its just about the right player for us.

We've done a great job of signing young talent in locally of late, but you'd hope we would try to grab a few shit hot South Americans as well now that its easier to get a work permit.
 
Cleric said:
Where did you see that? The change in government makes a big difference imo. Labour like to control EVERYTHING and have a few more footie fans than the Tories, so can see them making sure the mud sticks. It's the end of football otherwise isn't it?
Click to expand...

It was reported in the Mail and Sky Sports among others. 🙂
 
Man City’s ongoing legal battles with the PL will take a significant step forward in the next fortnight - a verdict on their case against sponsorship rules in the top flight is due before the end of this month. Sources have suggested the hearing went well for Man City's legal team, and expect them to score some form of Victor in the [sponsorship] case.
@martynziegler
 
You know..... This could be quite fun to watch........ 100% guaranteed humiliation and ridicule no matter what the outcome. If I was a gambling man..... I'd say Citeh will get off..... If so just watch the fucking fall out from that..... Funny and sad. Then again I could be wrong and they'll rightly have the book thrown at them. Either way it'll be interesting.
 
Update on United. I've done a bit of Googling to see if I could get hold of the detail because I didn't follow how they were not in breach and I suggested above they might have done a deal on some of their costs. And it turns out that they have agreed with the Premier League that they can make an adjustment for Covid costs in 2021-22 (i.e. after restrictions were lifted) to the tune of around £40m, and a further agreement to add back costs related to Radcliffe's investment, on which they somehow spunked £45m (I'm guessing that includes costs on other takeover bids). So they're basically allowed total losses of £190m. Which stinks.
The fact they agreed an adjustment for 2021-22 suggests they may have been over the limit last year (I had them right on the edge, by my estimates) but they are definitely over this year.
I'm actually sympathetic on the takeover stuff - the Club shouldn't have paid that, it should have been billed to the holding companies - but the covid stuff is taking the piss, and they should be up before the beak, possibly 2 years running.
 
It's wild that we live in a world where we are disappointed that the mancs, who we just humiliated again, lost £190 million in a year, but weren't punished.
 
Beamrider said:
Update on United. I've done a bit of Googling to see if I could get hold of the detail because I didn't follow how they were not in breach and I suggested above they might have done a deal on some of their costs. And it turns out that they have agreed with the Premier League that they can make an adjustment for Covid costs in 2021-22 (i.e. after restrictions were lifted) to the tune of around £40m, and a further agreement to add back costs related to Radcliffe's investment, on which they somehow spunked £45m (I'm guessing that includes costs on other takeover bids). So they're basically allowed total losses of £190m. Which stinks.
The fact they agreed an adjustment for 2021-22 suggests they may have been over the limit last year (I had them right on the edge, by my estimates) but they are definitely over this year.
I'm actually sympathetic on the takeover stuff - the Club shouldn't have paid that, it should have been billed to the holding companies - but the covid stuff is taking the piss, and they should be up before the beak, possibly 2 years running.
Click to expand...
read it all!

So does that not set a precedent for every other club to offset a few million losses in 21-22? Or are Utd claiming the Trafford variant of the virus was worse than the rest of the world?
 
tombrown said:
read it all!

So does that not set a precedent for every other club to offset a few million losses in 21-22? Or are Utd claiming the Trafford variant of the virus was worse than the rest of the world?
Click to expand...
I think it (sort of) sets a precedent. The caveat is because this was all done behind closed doors so there isn't a written decision that other teams can point to. So legally, there isn't a precedent, but equitably there should be. But I fundamentally disagree with the PL's decision. The PSR rules allow a huge amount of leeway in the £105m limit, precisely to accommodate these kinds of things. If clubs decide to dance too close to the fire then it's their fault if they get burnt.
As I understand it, this all came to light about a month ago when a lower league chairman spotted something in United's financials that referenced it. I haven't been able to track down the relevant wording. But the suggestion was that United had claimed that they had suffered a big drop-off in earnings in the after-math of covid and had successfully argued that was due to covid or related restrictions.
This was apparently reported in the rag that shall not be named, which is why we didn't see it at the time. A report in the slightly lesser rag that can just about be name (the Daily Mail) makes reference to it and also highlights, fairly I think, that the Blue Shite could feel aggrieved. They made a similar claim in relation to loss of USM income after Usmanov was sanctioned, and it was thrown out by the panel along the lines of "you should have had a contingency plan". The key difference here is that United's concession was allowed behind closed doors by the PL, Everton's was denied publicly by the appeal panel.
My position on it is that both clubs should be treated the same, by which I mean United shouldn't be given the concession, just as Everton weren't. I believe that Everton's was the correct decision, and I'm not saying that just because I can't stand either club.
 
Beamrider said:
Update on United. I've done a bit of Googling to see if I could get hold of the detail because I didn't follow how they were not in breach and I suggested above they might have done a deal on some of their costs. And it turns out that they have agreed with the Premier League that they can make an adjustment for Covid costs in 2021-22 (i.e. after restrictions were lifted) to the tune of around £40m, and a further agreement to add back costs related to Radcliffe's investment, on which they somehow spunked £45m (I'm guessing that includes costs on other takeover bids). So they're basically allowed total losses of £190m. Which stinks.
The fact they agreed an adjustment for 2021-22 suggests they may have been over the limit last year (I had them right on the edge, by my estimates) but they are definitely over this year.
I'm actually sympathetic on the takeover stuff - the Club shouldn't have paid that, it should have been billed to the holding companies - but the covid stuff is taking the piss, and they should be up before the beak, possibly 2 years running.
Click to expand...
Thank you! Surely after their signings they’ll be in trouble this year too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MomoWASright
115 vs the world
2 3 4
Replies
117
Views
3K
StevieM
StevieM
Squiggles
    • Love
Premier League | Week 1 | Other Games Thread
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Replies
255
Views
3K
darkstarexodus
darkstarexodus
Squiggles
Weekends Other Games 31-8-24
2 3 4 5
Replies
138
Views
2K
Mamma Mia
Mamma Mia
Squiggles
    • Like
Other PL Games 24-25/08/2024
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
156
Views
2K
CueEye
C
singlerider
    • Like
  • Poll Poll
First true test of Slot's mettle?
Replies
25
Views
662
Woland
Woland
Back
Top Bottom