UEFA Ffp

[1884Man]

Are Chelsea buying a load of new expensive players ATM?

[CosbehFox]

28 minutes ago, UHDrive said:

Many clubs including Chelsea/Everton and West Ham to a degree have far more expenditure over both of your points and are carrying on with their business. Ffp and Everton in particular have been stretching these limits far greater than we or other clubs have yet they still invest heavily in the squad. Imo it's the investment that's the problem not the wage structure and in any case lcfc are on the pinnacle and will significantly reduce our wage bill with outgoing players over the next 3 windows so again that's even less of an excuse not to invest in the squad.

Im not defending it. Just explaining it.
 

Our wages to turnover is or was until very recently the highest in the league. In our currently ‘investment’ model, the two criteria are the ways they could satisfy FFP for UEFA. 
 

 

[CosbehFox]

32 minutes ago, SouthStandUpperTier said:

Would be interesting to see how Forest stack up against UEFA's FFP rules if they were to win the Carabao Cup and qualify for European competition (not that I think they will though).

It was a question mark for Wolves when they went up and then followed it with European qualification 

[Foxes1]

I have always thought (and if I'm wrong OK) that if say you spend 100 million on a player and he signs a 5 year contract then only 20 million goes towards FFP for the 1st year and then 20 million for each of the following 4 years. 

[dannythefox]

I still don’t understand how Everton, Leeds, West Ham, Wolves etc can buy players at silly money and we’re stuck with half a team that will leave for free come the summer. The club is in a sorry state and Maddison will be gone come summer as well. 

[st albans fox]

3 minutes ago, Foxes1 said:

I have always thought (and if I'm wrong OK) that if say you spend 100 million on a player and he signs a 5 year contract then only 20 million goes towards FFP for the 1st year and then 20 million for each of the following 4 years. 

Correct 

plus the annual wage 

[st albans fox]

You need to look at clubs and their journey

 

all of our players are on at least their second contracts after promotion and hence on a higher salary

 

in addition, we’ve been buying players who wanted to be paid 70/80k per week + 

 

plenty of clubs who were promoted in the last two or three seasons will still have players on their old deals. and they’ve probably been buying players who are ok earning 50/60k per week. 

 

We have a fat squad who are nearly all earning plenty of dough ……I reckon cags must be one of the lowest earners we have 

 

[Dahnsouff]

6 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Correct 

plus the annual wage 

Amortisation - the magicians friend!  

[CosbehFox]

14 minutes ago, dannythefox said:

I still don’t understand how Everton, Leeds, West Ham, Wolves etc can buy players at silly money and we’re stuck with half a team that will leave for free come the summer. The club is in a sorry state and Maddison will be gone come summer as well. 

All of these bar Wolves have bigger stadiums and make more match day money. More merchandise sales too. 
 

Leeds coming from a small wage bill in the Champ and generally buy young players from

smaller clubs. 
 

St Albans make a good point that most of our players are on their second contract 

[Vestan Pance]

7 hours ago, honeybradger said:

Why are we even considering UEFA regulations at the moment? We're not finishing in Europe any time soon

I don't think we are, the reason we're not spending is because we've overpaid on wages which has left us with players we can't shift, infact the only way we can shift them is to let them run their contacts down. We're likely to see debts of £350m in the next set of accounts, debts that King Power won't bail out, so even if the squad wasn't full of crap we can't get rid of, we still wouldn't spend significant amounts. Nothing to do with FFP.

The blind faith shown in Rodgers has backfired bigtime.

Edited 15 January 2023 by Vestan Pance

[The boy Linacre]

6 hours ago, st albans fox said:

You need to look at clubs and their journey

 

all of our players are on at least their second contracts after promotion and hence on a higher salary

 

in addition, we’ve been buying players who wanted to be paid 70/80k per week + 

 

plenty of clubs who were promoted in the last two or three seasons will still have players on their old deals. and they’ve probably been buying players who are ok earning 50/60k per week. 

 

We have a fat squad who are nearly all earning plenty of dough ……I reckon cags must be one of the lowest earners we have 

 

I Have to say haven't invested time and so don't really understand the mechanics of FFP BUT yes we have created a lot of problems for ourselves but our biggest purchases aren't much more than £30m Slimani, Perez but sadly we have a good tranche of players that are actually pretty useless and paid a lot Vestergaard, Bertrand £65k & £80k pw, even Praet decent but never really given a solid run is on £80k pw.  Soumare on £80k, how can you take player with that salary premier league unproven. 

Time also to bin Evans off on £80k to £100k pw, or negotiate do to £40k/£50k per week he;'s a sick note now.

I actually think IF we do stay up we have to start turning down deals on salary ask and just be more mercenary on contract pay.

We've got an expensive squad that actually lacks a lot of quality or desire.  Time to get harder in negotiations etc if we survive.

[RedSoxUK]

It just doesn't add up. Of

 

Net spend among the lowest in the PL, yet with CL, and two European runs and with it high placing PL positions. Sure some big earners, but nothing out of the ordinary.

 

Everyone else can spend but we can't, no I don't buy it at all. The image of us spending 300m less than Newcastle, West Ham and Aston Villa in the last three seasons should be a warning to us all that something is just not right.

 

[Vestan Pance]

15 minutes ago, RedSoxUK said:

It just doesn't add up. Of

 

Net spend among the lowest in the PL, yet with CL, and two European runs and with it high placing PL positions. Sure some big earners, but nothing out of the ordinary.

 

Everyone else can spend but we can't, no I don't buy it at all. The image of us spending 300m less than Newcastle, West Ham and Aston Villa in the last three seasons should be a warning to us all that something is just not right.

 

Our wages were 105% of our turnover, before any other costs, so we have built up huge debts.

 

King Power is not pumping money in like the guys at Newcastle and Villa.

 

This soon adds up to a club that cannot spend significant money on transfers.

[Lesta Legend]

7 hours ago, Chelmofox said:

Forest spent wisely? They bought anything that moves and are paying Lingard 200k a week.  

They sacked their head of recruitment they did not spend wisely 😂 

[CL Fox]

If you're interested in this you might be interested in our next pod - we had Keiran Maguire on this evening discussing exactly this.

 

Out tomorrow morning on Spotify and Amazon.

[Rusko187]

9 hours ago, 1884Man said:

I don't understand totally this but apparently that's the reason we have not bought any new players.

 

Fifty per cent of clubs are losing money and this is an increasing trend. We needed to stop this downward spiral. They have spent more than they have earned in the past and haven't paid their debts.

 

We are stuck because of the financial rules. 

 

Top is attempting to balance out books.

 

( I've discussed a lot of what has been said on here over the last two weeks with a lifelong city fan of 40 years)

Wouldn't worry about UEFA for a while, no chance we'll be seeing Europe anytime soon

[lcfc old boy]

11 hours ago, The boy Linacre said:

I Have to say haven't invested time and so don't really understand the mechanics of FFP BUT yes we have created a lot of problems for ourselves but our biggest purchases aren't much more than £30m Slimani, Perez but sadly we have a good tranche of players that are actually pretty useless and paid a lot Vestergaard, Bertrand £65k & £80k pw, even Praet decent but never really given a solid run is on £80k pw.  Soumare on £80k, how can you take player with that salary premier league unproven. 

Time also to bin Evans off on £80k to £100k pw, or negotiate do to £40k/£50k per week he;'s a sick note now.

I actually think IF we do stay up we have to start turning down deals on salary ask and just be more mercenary on contract pay.

We've got an expensive squad that actually lacks a lot of quality or desire.  Time to get harder in negotiations etc if we survive.

where do you find how much money the players earn, because if they are true is it any wonder we are in a mess , what must the annual wage bill come out at, and to think they but season tickets up and tried to stop people going in the ground with water at the start of the season, someone help me here how much extra revenue did the price increases bring in.

[Gamble92]

IF this was the issue then wouldn't they just say that?

[CosbehFox]

11 hours ago, BSLBPod said:

If you're interested in this you might be interested in our next pod - we had Keiran Maguire on this evening discussing exactly this.

 

Out tomorrow morning on Spotify and Amazon.

This answers most people's questions - really, really good podcast 

[RedSoxUK]

2 hours ago, Gamble92 said:

IF this was the issue then wouldn't they just say that?

Yes. And the only thing we have from board / Top is this. Just highlighting a few things in here now it's mid Jan. The net spend comment (lol)... I can't trust them at all of this is the genuinely one of the main reasons they are giving. The "space" comment makes sense and we do need to shift players but with so many being shifted anyway in the summer it doesn't add up, surely you take the risk now and get extra in knowing next season we're freeing up the spaces and wages. Note not one comment here indicates over spending, or having high wages, but they likely wouldn't say that anyway.

 

--

 

"First and foremost, Leicester City’s overall financial position is entirely secure and underpinned by my ongoing personal commitment and that of my family. The Club is as safe in our hands as it has been every day for the last 12 years. It’s our commitment to that responsibility that drives every decision we make.

 

Sometimes, that commitment means making difficult, short-term decisions that protect the Club’s long-term interests, such as our approach to this summer’s transfer window. Due to an increase in our net spend over recent seasons, some measures were necessary to ensure we manage our compliance with the game’s sustainability regulations. While we continue to build our wider revenue streams to compete with the established elite in the long-term, our short-term means of offsetting such expenditure is generating profits through player trading. We did that successfully for five straight summer windows before 2021, where we opted to make further investments in the squad without a significant sale. This summer, we couldn’t risk unbalancing that equation further, so we decided space would need to be made in the squad before new additions could be brought in."

 

[turlo]

Kieran Maguire clarified FFP position on this podcast yesterday. FFP was a bit of a challenge but not a major issue for us as there is more wiggle room due to the impact of COVID - clubs were allowed great losses in the FFP calculations

 

The biggest issue he highlighted was our wage bill increasing at a greater rate than our revenue, resulting in the club making loses year on year leaving less funds for transfers. He mentioned our wage bill had increased by 100m since 2016

 

 

 

 

[sacreblueits442]

21 hours ago, Chelmofox said:

And Chelsea are doing this how?

...I  would assume the big boys have the capacity,  we are at our limit in both!!!

  If we could get a new sponsor willing to pay £100m per year for shirt sponsorship, then we are in, either that or we continue to trim any excess fat.

[Captain...]

21 hours ago, Dahnsouff said:

Amortisation - the magicians friend!  

How does that work with selling players? Didn't we demand money up front for Maguire? If we hadn't could this year's instalment count towards this year's revenue?

 

How about Fofana?

 

Having a portion of the Vesty, Soumare, Daka etc sales apportioned to this year's books. Does that fvck us over?

Edited 16 January 2023 by Captain...

[Dahnsouff]

5 minutes ago, Captain... said:

How does that work with selling players? Didn't we demand money up front for Maguire? If we hadn't could this year's instalment count towards this year's revenue?

 

How about Fofana?

 

Having a portion of the Vesty, Soumare, Daka etc sales apportioned to this year's books. Does that fvck us over?

Not sure, Maguire was all up front I thought, and if we agree to installments I too would like to know if we have options on when we recognise each installment!!