Financial Fair Play: 'A third of owners considering selling club'

[Jordan]

Cov fan?

 

Not in the slightest, but I've taken an interest in the story. IMO everything that has gone on at Coventry City over the past few years has been a disgrace. 

 

Before FFP was implemented and called a farce by fans far and wide, the "fit and proper persons" test was what we all ridiculed. Somehow, the Football League allowed an amorphous venture capital fund seeking deliberately obscure ends (and taking massive risks to achieve those ends) to control Coventry City. 

 

Every club is different, but with just a few tweaks to the story, this could have been us. Leicester City has rung up big debts since they had their new stadium built and were also relegated from the Premiership. Leicester City had no choice but to relinquish control of their stadium to TIAA-CREF, who sold the bonds to fund the construction of the stadium. Leicester City and its assets (a spot in the Football League, its players, its staff, its trademarks, its training facilities etc.) were available to buy at slashed rates.

How do you know this?

 

It is a chilling vision.

 

Chilling isn't even the word--it's gruesome. Coventry City are being hanged, drawn, and quartered in public.

 

What Foxes Trust posted says it all. The Mirror often does print crap, but all they did there was quote people who were very much in the know.

 

If anyone wants to complain about football clubs being treated like commodities, Coventry City/SISU is perhaps the most extreme example.

 

These sorts of takeovers happen in many industry sectors, and they often involve lots of pain for many, but lots of profits for those than engineer the takeovers.

Have Coventry had any decent income for years? Their crowds have been absolutely turd, and on the decline for years.

 

Financial 'Fair' Play has failed already for me. When I heard it, I could completely see the logic behind it - it's a reactive system (which I'm not a fan of) but I think the portrayed end product, which was clubs not spending outside of their means, was a good one.

 

But, surprise surprise, it's been executed absolutely terribly. All it's done is frozen the market for most of the league, whilst four clubs have the license to take the piss. The fact QPR, Wigan & Reading receive a huge chunk of money each year for the next four years (correct me if I'm wrong) simply for being in the Premier League, is an absolute disgrace. How can you possibly have Financial 'Fair' Play & Parachute Payments both in practice? How can that possibly work fairly? One of them is in to stop clubs spending money they can't afford, whilst one of them is a cushion for over-spending, just who the hell allowed this to happen?

 

The other club is Watford. I don't blame Watford as a club for taking advantage (although I think their fans need to pipe down), but the fact they're allowed to effectively trump the rule where one person can't own more than one club simply because the clubs are owned by a family member each hands them a stupidly unfair advantage over the rest of the league. They can receive a team for a pittance from their owner's families' scouting pool and don't have to worry about FFP as a result. Technically, it isn't unfair, as anyone in the league can do it, but it's a very, very dangerous precedent to set out.

 

I know I need to be careful what I'm saying supporting Leicester, a club who've been involved in enough controversy regarding finances in the last 15 years, but that doesn't render this invalid. The rule has done nothing but strengthen any club who reaches the Premier League and put those who haven't at a dis-advantage, and as much as I thought the initial logic made sense, I back any protest against it.

 

You hit it on the head there.

 

FFP does make some degree of sense mostly in the other divisions, but the Championship and the League Two are really not equal.

 

The purposes of parachute payments and Financial Fair Play don't compliment each other.

[Happy Fox]

http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/Leicester-City-course-meet-new-financial/story-19658969-detail/story.html#axzz2c1VJnUIK

 

 

 

Leicester City are on course to meet the tough new financial regulations faced by Championship clubs this season, their chairman has stated. Chairman Vichai Srivaddhanaprabha admitted the new rules were having an impact.

 

"Every club in the Championship is faced with this challenge and we are no different," he said

"We are entirely committed to success, while ensuring compliance with Financial Fair Play. I have confidence that the club's management team will achieve these objectives."

But the chairman added he was confident for the coming season. He said: "We have a very good group of players, many of whom will have benefited from the experience of a tough full season in the Championship last year.

"It is a squad that was very close to achieving something special last season and one that has the potential to build on that."

 

[fleckneymike]

SISU crying foul over Financial Fair Play is a red herring that distracts from the real issues at hand.

 

They're complaining about the low income they receive, yet they're moving the club to Sixfields for three seasons, where they're going to earn peanuts. Sure, they're saving money on rent, but their income is about to plummet.

 

Coventry City wasn't earning any revenue on parking, concessions, etc. because that was part of the terms of their lease agreement. IIRC that all has to do with Coventry City selling its stake in the stadium when they were in massive debt under previous ownership.

 

SISU wasn't even interested in paying their rent at the Ricoh well before the events of this summer. SISU bought Coventry City for one reason: to buy the Ricoh Arena. When it comes to fielding a competitive squad, they have no interest in spending any more money than they absolutely have to. SISU want to bleed the ACL dry and buy the stadium for cheap. Stunts like not paying their rent and moving to Sixfields, or threatening to build a new stadium and leaving the ACL and Coventry with a white elephant, are tactics done in extremely poor taste first to get the ACL to drastically lower their demands, and then to lower the value of the stadium.

 

As I see it, SISU's plan is something similar to private equity firms orchestrating leveraged buyouts of struggling companies.

 

Spot on, no value in the side, huge value in the stadium and conference centre.

[yorkie1999]

If Cov hadn't sold Highfields road to property developers, instigated by the council, in the first place, they wouldn't have been suckered into becoming a cash cow for ricoh arena owners acl. 

[FrankieWorthoYaggedMyWife]

If Cov hadn't sold Highfields road to property developers, instigated by the council, in the first place, they wouldn't have been suckered into becoming a cash cow for ricoh arena owners acl. 

 

Who gives a fook - I just hope they continue to drop through the leagues

[Guest MattP]

If so many fans don't like football today, stop funding it. If 80% of people boycotted games and Sky TV for three short months in the middle of the season, I reckon enough damage would be done to get a good reaction.

Won't happen though of course, because most of the people moaning have no real conviction in their complaints.

 

If they offered a non-football package I would pay it. Every other sport Sky is involved in I think they have done a fantastic job.

 

Boxing and Cricket are my favourite sports so boycotting is quite simply not an option for me. As Bobby said in the Ashes thread, I'd pay double what I pay for the coverage of that if I had too.

 

People need to stop thinking everyone who pays for Sky Sports just sits there watching football 24/7.

[Dan LCFC]

Not in the slightest, but I've taken an interest in the story. IMO everything that has gone on at Coventry City over the past few years has been a disgrace. 

 

Before FFP was implemented and called a farce by fans far and wide, the "fit and proper persons" test was what we all ridiculed. Somehow, the Football League allowed an amorphous venture capital fund seeking deliberately obscure ends (and taking massive risks to achieve those ends) to control Coventry City. 

 

Every club is different, but with just a few tweaks to the story, this could have been us. Leicester City has rung up big debts since they had their new stadium built and were also relegated from the Premiership. Leicester City had no choice but to relinquish control of their stadium to TIAA-CREF, who sold the bonds to fund the construction of the stadium. Leicester City and its assets (a spot in the Football League, its players, its staff, its trademarks, its training facilities etc.) were available to buy at slashed rates.

 

Chilling isn't even the word--it's gruesome. Coventry City are being hanged, drawn, and quartered in public.

 

What Foxes Trust posted says it all. The Mirror often does print crap, but all they did there was quote people who were very much in the know.

 

If anyone wants to complain about football clubs being treated like commodities, Coventry City/SISU is perhaps the most extreme example.

 

These sorts of takeovers happen in many industry sectors, and they often involve lots of pain for many, but lots of profits for those than engineer the takeovers.

 

You hit it on the head there.

 

FFP does make some degree of sense mostly in the other divisions, but the Championship and the League Two are really not equal.

 

The purposes of parachute payments and Financial Fair Play don't compliment each other.

 

I just cannot get my head round the fact there are two rules in place, one of them being ironic enough to have the word 'fair' in its name, that completely contradict each other.

 

I really do think football in this country is beyond repair now. The only chance English football will ever get is if it was to start almost from scratch like the Bundesliga did when it had no choice. It looks like there'll be little chance of anything along those lines happening either - the money being bumped in just seems to increase every year.

 

As a side note, I'd love to see every leagues net spend for each season over the past ten or so years, the Premier League, the Bundesliga, La Liga, Serie A etc.. I'd love to see the overall net spend of the leagues, I think it'll make embarrassing reading for England.

[Swiss_tony]

I just cannot get my head round the fact there are two rules in place, one of them being ironic enough to have the word 'fair' in its name, that completely contradict each other.

 

I really do think football in this country is beyond repair now. The only chance English football will ever get is if it was to start almost from scratch like the Bundesliga did when it had no choice. It looks like there'll be little chance of anything along those lines happening either - the money being bumped in just seems to increase every year.

 

As a side note, I'd love to see every leagues net spend for each season over the past ten or so years, the Premier League, the Bundesliga, La Liga, Serie A etc.. I'd love to see the overall net spend of the leagues, I think it'll make embarrassing reading for England.

That's what happpens when you have 3 bodies running football in england who don't like each other.

if there was just one body there would be one set of rules.

see what's happening in scotland right now, is where england, god forbid, could be in 5-10years time.

[Dan LCFC]

No god forbid here. England will always generate enough footballing interest regardless. I can't help but feel the game here would have to take further steps back to improve.

[Swiss_tony]

the bubble will burst, mark my words.

[Super_horns]

Could you really see top European sides being banned from Europe if they don't meet the regulations?

 

That would be a real test as to how much UEFA want to enforce these new rules.

[Dan LCFC]

Completely agree with you there.