Seems relegated teams like qpr aren't exempt from FFP?

[Happy Fox]

They'll have to pay the fine if they are promoted, they'll be hit with a transfer embargo if they don't.

 

Mike McCarthy â€@mikemccarthy29m

@StringerSport QPR might be better off not going up this season because, as a newly relegated club, a transfer embargo wouldn't apply.

[suffolk fox]

They'll have to pay the fine if they are promoted, they'll be hit with a transfer embargo if they don't.

 

Fair play see my earlier post they will still be able to pay the fine though. Hence why they are going all out for promotion this year.

[The Year Of The Fox]

Think about it Ffp is truly bollox they will be already getting parachute payments from the Pl as they were relegated last season. They will be promoted this season get the cash windfall again about 60 million plus tv revenue etc so it will not realistically effect them. It may do if they fail to get promotion but that aint gonna happen.

The only teams ffp will punish will be those not in the Pl. That is why under these silly rules the rich will get richer and the wannabees poorer.

My comment was mainly about you knowing QPR will go up. Noone actually knows obviously. I was looking at this thread in the hope of there being immediate restrictions to them thus ruling them out of the title race. Not so, but that still doesn't mean they're certainties to go up. Arry aint that good.

[Happy Fox]

It is interesting that the PFA seems so out of touch with reality 

 

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24937449?

 

Average salaries

• Premier League: £25,000 to £30,000 a week. Top earners: £250,000
• Championship: £4,000 to £5,000 a week. Top earners £8,000 to £9,000
• League One: £1,700 to £2,500 a week
• League Two: £1,300 to £1,500 a week

Source: PFA

[Soar Fox]

He also never handed out £100,000 a week contracts in the Championship.

Sven spent like a maniac, but QPR are on a whole other level.

Has he handed out £100,000 a week contracts?

I genuinely don't know, but looking at the players he's signed I doubt any of them would be anywhere near £100k a week.

His spending last January was absolutely suicidal though.

[sylofox]

 

Mike McCarthy â€@mikemccarthy29m

@StringerSport QPR might be better off not going up this season because, as a newly relegated club, a transfer embargo wouldn't apply.

 

lol they won't be newly relegated though

[Guest ttfn]

This is interesting, because it appears that my earlier reading of FFP was not what it should have been:

 

http://www.football-league.co.uk/page/FLExplainedDetail/0,,10794~2748246,00.html

 

 

Clubs relegated from the Premier League will not be subject to sanctions in their first season in the Championship as long as they have met their financial obligations under Premier League regulations. They would, however, be subject to the potential of a Fair Play Tax if they achieved promotion in their first season in the Championship whilst not complying with the FFP regulations.

So essentially, if QPR don't get promoted, they won't be punished. But if they do, then they will be punished. Which actually seems like quite a sensible idea given the huge drop-off in revenue between the top two flights.

Football League - I apologise. This is actually a bloody good implementation of this system. Just have the balls to follow through with it.

 

Once again Harry's fingers all over a financial shit-fest.

 

Say what you like about who signs the cheques at these places, but you'd have thought after what happened at Southampton and particularly Portsmouth he'd have the common sense to put his hand up and say "Are you sure about this Tony?". Maybe he has. But given that Redknapp himself has admitted to having a personal stake in profits on players bought and sold, it's hard to imagine him being too concerned about the possibility of him driving another club to financial ruin.

[Guest ttfn]

Any smart arse on the forum knows why it says over £18 million losses I thought it was meant to be £8 million?

You pay 100% over £18 million, with smaller increments for the losses of between £8-18 million.

 

Our 2012-13 season accounts won't look pretty, but I am 99% sure we'll be under £18 million loss in 2013-14, which frankly will be a minor miracle given where we were 18 months ago.

[Dan]

Fernandes should be locked up.

[Dan]

Really does put things into perspective. Remember that thread I created on here Thanking Pearson should he go? Some people don't realise what a great job he has done.

Anyway. Sven isn't to blame our chief executives are, they are the money men when it comes to transfer and contracts not Sven. If you think he is you've been playing to much Football Manager.

 

So why has that ridiculous spending stopped now that he's gone?

 

There's a common denominator where Sven's involved - it's him.

[Karljohn]

Lazy journalism, shit paper. Parachute payments will bridge the gap.

[Dan]

Parachute payments are a disgrace. Completely reactive procedure put in place to do nothing but cushion the absolutely absurd spending by clubs who can't actually afford it. Getting rid of them would've done more to change attitudes towards finance from clubs than FFP.

 

I'm no lover of Oyston and Blackpool but from a business perspective, he was very sensible when Blackpool went up.

[sylofox]

So why has that ridiculous spending stopped now that he's gone?

 

There's a common denominator where Sven's involved - it's him.

We don't know who spent it.

 

Sven may have.

He may have handed over a list and said I want them.

He may have handed a list and said I would like them.

 

But one thing is for sure our owners spend that money with no regaurd for the future and the upcoming FFP rules.

 

They did not have a budget they did not care and the bussiness plan must have been written on shite roll and flushed.

[Bert]

This is interesting, because it appears that my earlier reading of FFP was not what it should have been:

http://www.football-league.co.uk/page/FLExplainedDetail/0,,10794~2748246,00.html

So essentially, if QPR don't get promoted, they won't be punished. But if they do, then they will be punished. Which actually seems like quite a sensible idea given the huge drop-off in revenue between the top two flights.

Football League - I apologise. This is actually a bloody good implementation of this system. Just have the balls to follow through with it.

Once again Harry's fingers all over a financial shit-fest.

Say what you like about who signs the cheques at these places, but you'd have thought after what happened at Southampton and particularly Portsmouth he'd have the common sense to put his hand up and say "Are you sure about this Tony?". Maybe he has. But given that Redknapp himself has admitted to having a personal stake in profits on players bought and sold, it's hard to imagine him being too concerned about the possibility of him driving another club to financial ruin.

Hardly Redknapp. All the other clowns before him.

[sylofox]

Hardly Redknapp. All the other clowns before him.

And not his fault at pompey either.

That was all down to the owners and the buying and selling of the club.

[Stadt]

But Harry Redknapp is a footballing grim reaper, imagine the dream partnership of Peter Ridsdale and Redknapp?

[Mack]

But Harry Redknapp is a footballing grim reaper, imagine the dream partnership of Peter Ridsdale and Redknapp?

 

Oh yeah, he really ****ed Spurs up!?

[Dan]

We don't know who spent it.

 

Sven may have.

He may have handed over a list and said I want them.

He may have handed a list and said I would like them.

 

But one thing is for sure our owners spend that money with no regaurd for the future and the upcoming FFP rules.

 

They did not have a budget they did not care and the bussiness plan must have been written on shite roll and flushed.

 

Sven isn't nearly as bad as QPR (which speaks absolute volumes about QPR), but do you not find it slightly co-incidental that the reckless spending stopped once Sven left?

 

I do wonder if the Thais watched that Millwall game and thought... 'wow, what the hell have we done, we're in a complete mess here and we're going to have to completely restructure the club', Sven is going and we're bringing in a manager who knows what he's doing financially.

 

But that doesn't absolve Sven of the blame. Redknapp & Hughes in this situation, as well as Sven in ours, do not deserve defending. It does not take a rocket scientist to work out that some owners make some ridiculous mistakes financially.

 

To the Thais' credit. They do appear to have learned.

[Guest ttfn]

I just can't believe anybody can sit there with a straight face and not heap a huge, steaming lump of blame on Redknapp for the Pompey debacle.

 

Let's ignore, for a second, the absolutely ridiculous bonuses he was getting for profits made on player sales (making the acquisition of risky players from Europe and Africa personally attractive for him), but with the amount of money he spent, Pompey should have been competing for the Champions League places. 

 

Unless you assume that Redknapp was given a completely unlimited budget (which I personally find unlikely) then he has to take some of the blame for the way in which his budget was spent. Some players (Defoe, Crouch, Johnson) were excellent, if obvious, signings and helped the club to the FA Cup. Others - Nugent and Utaka to name but two - were so poor for Pompey (initially under his management) that they often couldn't get in the squad, let alone in the team. Had these players been playing for free, the £13 million wasted on their transfer fees would have demonstrated dreadful management. But a number of the [mediocre] players signed by Redknapp were also given long contracts on anything from £30k-£80k per week, which meant that when (given that so many of the players he had signed on these tasty contracts were bang average) Pompey were inevitably relegated, they were stuck with a wage bill that was barely sustainable in the Premier League, in the Championship.

 

Now he's at QPR, and having signed (since January) another dozen or so players, QPR are stuck with a wage bill that was barely sustainable in the Premier League, in the Championship. Coincidence?

 

Interesting piece on his time at West Ham by Jacob Steinberg, who now writes for the Guardian:

 

http://www.whoateallthepies.tv/west_ham_utd/36294/harry-redknapp-is-english-footballs-wrecking-ball.html

 

It's interesting to make the contrast between Pearson and Redknapp actually.

 

Redknapp's role at QPR this season SHOULD be similar to what Pearson did at Hull. Trim the squad, bring through some young players and prevent the club from going kaput. But whereas Pearson gave those young players the experience on which Steve Bruce built to get Hull promotion last season, Redknapp has spunked another £10 million in transfer fees and £300k plus-a-week on wages on signing messrs Dunne, Jenas, Simpson, Kranjcar, Austin, Phillips and Assou-Ekotto whilst Brazil's number 1 rots in the reserves, all the while picking up a wedge of at least £50k a week.

 

Likewise Pearson has come in and slashed the wage bill here and got us higher in the league than QPR after a third of a season. He also kept Southampton up on a metaphorical shoestring and Carlisle up on what was probably quite literally a shoestring budget.

 

Meanwhile Redknapp's clubs are almost always in a worse financial position when he leaves them than when he takes over. Daniel Levy knew this, so he sacked him and brought in somebody who he felt he could trust with the club's finances. Whether or not Redknapp has decided the budget at the clubs he's been at, it is apparent that he decides who is bought and sold within that budget, and for every "wheeler-dealer success" there are 2 or 3 flops who've cost the club little in transfer fees but a lot in wages.

 

What Pearson did at Hull was an option available to Redknapp. He didn't take it. He is either as thick as he claimed to be in court or he's actively negligent. I've got 2 mates who are season ticket holders at QPR (and another who has been priced out) and I'd be gutted for them if they lost their club or they plunged down to the fourth tier like Pompey.

[sylofox]

Sven isn't nearly as bad as QPR (which speaks absolute volumes about QPR), but do you not find it slightly co-incidental that the reckless spending stopped once Sven left?

 

I do wonder if the Thais watched that Millwall game and thought... 'wow, what the hell have we done, we're in a complete mess here and we're going to have to completely restructure the club', Sven is going and we're bringing in a manager who knows what he's doing financially.

 

But that doesn't absolve Sven of the blame. Redknapp & Hughes in this situation, as well as Sven in ours, do not deserve defending. It does not take a rocket scientist to work out that some owners make some ridiculous mistakes financially.

 

To the Thais' credit. They do appear to have learned.

lets hope they have for our and the clubs sake.

 

But come on lets not treat sven like a murderer 98% of managers given an open cheque book like he was would spend it.

 

On the other hand we have one that don't spend.

But should we go up he's gonna have to learn pdq otherwise the season will be over by xmas.

[Dan]

I just can't believe anybody can sit there with a straight face and not heap a huge, steaming lump of blame on Redknapp for the Pompey debacle.

 

Let's ignore, for a second, the absolutely ridiculous bonuses he was getting for profits made on player sales (making the acquisition of risky players from Europe and Africa personally attractive for him), but with the amount of money he spent, Pompey should have been competing for the Champions League places. 

 

Unless you assume that Redknapp was given a completely unlimited budget (which I personally find unlikely) then he has to take some of the blame for the way in which his budget was spent. Some players (Defoe, Crouch, Johnson) were excellent, if obvious, signings and helped the club to the FA Cup. Others - Nugent and Utaka to name but two - were so poor for Pompey (initially under his management) that they often couldn't get in the squad, let alone in the team. Had these players been playing for free, the £13 million wasted on their transfer fees would have demonstrated dreadful management. But a number of the [mediocre] players signed by Redknapp were also given long contracts on anything from £30k-£80k per week, which meant that when (given that so many of the players he had signed on these tasty contracts were bang average) Pompey were inevitably relegated, they were stuck with a wage bill that was barely sustainable in the Premier League, in the Championship.

 

Now he's at QPR, and having signed (since January) another dozen or so players, QPR are stuck with a wage bill that was barely sustainable in the Premier League, in the Championship. Coincidence?

 

Interesting piece on his time at West Ham by Jacob Steinberg, who now writes for the Guardian:

 

http://www.whoateallthepies.tv/west_ham_utd/36294/harry-redknapp-is-english-footballs-wrecking-ball.html

 

It's interesting to make the contrast between Pearson and Redknapp actually.

 

Redknapp's role at QPR this season SHOULD be similar to what Pearson did at Hull. Trim the squad, bring through some young players and prevent the club from going kaput. But whereas Pearson gave those young players the experience on which Steve Bruce built to get Hull promotion last season, Redknapp has spunked another £10 million in transfer fees and £300k plus-a-week on wages on signing messrs Dunne, Jenas, Simpson, Kranjcar, Austin, Phillips and Assou-Ekotto whilst Brazil's number 1 rots in the reserves, all the while picking up a wedge of at least £50k a week.

 

Likewise Pearson has come in and slashed the wage bill here and got us higher in the league than QPR after a third of a season. He also kept Southampton up on a metaphorical shoestring and Carlisle up on what was probably quite literally a shoestring budget.

 

Meanwhile Redknapp's clubs are almost always in a worse financial position when he leaves them than when he takes over. Daniel Levy knew this, so he sacked him and brought in somebody who he felt he could trust with the club's finances. Whether or not Redknapp has decided the budget at the clubs he's been at, it is apparent that he decides who is bought and sold within that budget, and for every "wheeler-dealer success" there are 2 or 3 flops who've cost the club little in transfer fees but a lot in wages.

 

What Pearson did at Hull was an option available to Redknapp. He didn't take it. He is either as thick as he claimed to be in court or he's actively negligent. I've got 2 mates who are season ticket holders at QPR (and another who has been priced out) and I'd be gutted for them if they lost their club or they plunged down to the fourth tier like Pompey.

 

Agree with every word. Redknapp is a complete disgrace to the sport. The thought of him managing the national team makes my skin crawl.

[Dan]

lets hope they have for our and the clubs sake.

 

But come on lets not treat sven like a murderer 98% of managers given an open cheque book like he was would spend it.

 

On the other hand we have one that don't spend.

But should we go up he's gonna have to learn pdq otherwise the season will be over by xmas.

 

An open cheque book which he used to pay well over the odds for Championship players and his old Man City mates - with not a single bit of a gameplan about them.

 

It absolutely stuns me how badly he did.

[The Horse's Mouth]

And not his fault at pompey either.

That was all down to the owners and the buying and selling of the club.

[Corky]

If Redknapp doesn't get that squad, with the resources he's had available, promoted, it will be the biggest failure at this level in living memory.

 

Any decent manager would finish in the top two with the QPR squad, Redknapp is supposedly a great so should have no problems.

[Dan]

I agree there, I think it'd be worse than Sven at Leicester and quite comfortably too.

 

I'd absolutely love them to not go up.