[Football] The ticking Profit and Sustainability (FFP) timebomb...

[Rookie]

Bloody Chelsea!

Have to hand it to Chelsea, just here taking the piss in broad daylight

 

[Springal]

If it’s permissible and at fair market value don’t really see the issue. Our stadium is owned by a different entity right ? How much do we pay that entity to use it

 

[Hiheidi]

If it’s permissible and at fair market value don’t really see the issue. Our stadium is owned by a different entity right ? How much do we pay that entity to use it

Aren't the profit and sustainability rules in place to make sure owners don't spend recklessly, leaving a club in a bad situation - surely selling off vital assets (such as a training ground) could leave some clubs in a bad situation.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

Have to hand it to Chelsea, just here taking the piss in broad daylight

They've done the transaction. They've submitted that in the accounts.

But as far as i'm aware there has been no confirmation that this transaction or the hotel transaction has been effective for the purposes of circumventing PSR.

Presumably these kind of obvious loopholes would have been accounted for in the PSR rules. If they aren't there, the rules are dead

 

[Springal]

Aren't the profit and sustainability rules in place to make sure owners don't spend recklessly, leaving a club in a bad situation - surely selling off vital assets (such as a training ground) could leave some clubs in a bad situation.

But also for some clubs in the EFL it’s provided short term cash flow when needed.

 

[Hiheidi]

They've done the transaction. They've submitted that in the accounts.

But as far as i'm aware there has been no confirmation that this transaction or the hotel transaction has been effective for the purposes of circumventing PSR.

Presumably these kind of obvious loopholes would have been accounted for in the PSR rules. If they aren't there, the rules are dead

The guy that found the training ground sale - Stefan Borson (who used to advise Man City, so knows about what goes on in such clubs) - says the rules have changed for this current season to say that a club would be in breach if no genuine commercial negotiations took place for such transactions.

 

[Dibdab]

Doesnt the approach Chelsea are attempting still breach Uefa rules? Therefore they are screwed if they get in Europe anyway?

 

[SeagullinExile]

Not the PL, but top flight football was invented long before Sky! Leeds City were in the old first division when they were kicked out (for financial shenanigans). Those nice chaps at Arsenal (just above half way in division 2) were invited to take their place, and gratefully accepted. This is how they have managed to be in the first division/PL without ever having to go through the inconvenience of earning promotion.
So grateful they were that after a few years, for the sake of decency, they gave the Leeds City manager whose actions had enabled them to waltz into the first division a job. As their manager.
Shysters, the lot of 'em!

It’s commonly believed that Arsenal entered the old 1st Division instead of Spurs because Sir Henry Norris bribed his way there.

Once cheats, always cheats.

 

[Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo]

Not the PL, but top flight football was invented long before Sky! Leeds City were in the old first division when they were kicked out (for financial shenanigans). Those nice chaps at Arsenal (just above half way in division 2) were invited to take their place, and gratefully accepted. This is how they have managed to be in the first division/PL without ever having to go through the inconvenience of earning promotion.
So grateful they were that after a few years, for the sake of decency, they gave the Leeds City manager whose actions had enabled them to waltz into the first division a job. As their manager.
Shysters, the lot of 'em!

Leeds City weren’t in the old first division when they went out of business. They were in the second division, Port Vale took over their fixtures. This happened in the 1919-20 season (the first season after WWI) by which time Arsenal had already been admitted to the First Divison.

 

[Stato]

Yes, it had nothing directly to do with Leeds City. Arsenal went into the top division because the league was expanded to 22 teams. 20 were already in. Tottenham and Chelsea were the bottom two from the previous completed season. Chelsea became the 21st because their relegation was controversial given that the Man Utd v Liverpool game that sent them down was seen by some as a fix. Despite being 6th in the second division in the season before the war suspended things, Arsenal won the vote of members to be the 22nd member. There were rumours as to the reasons why.

 

[Surrey Phil]

You have to say Chelsea's antics to avoid FFP are so questionable, it is actually now just hilarious!!

 

[nwgull]

If it’s permissible and at fair market value don’t really see the issue. Our stadium is owned by a different entity right ? How much do we pay that entity to use it

It's owned by Community Stadium Ltd, which is a wholly owned subsidiary of BHA Holdings. BHA holdings also owns BHA FC, BHA WFC and BHA Foundation. The accounts that are published each year and that El Pres comments on are those of BHA Holdings Ltd. I'd imagine that the accounts scrutinised for purpose of FFP are those of BHA FC.

I know land value in surrey is at a premium, but I'm sceptical as to whether 100m for a training ground on green belt next to the M25 will be seen as fair market value, to be honest.

 

[SeagullinExile]

Corruption in Football - West Putney - A Walk on the Wild Side - PocketSights

Here’s a little info on Norris’s antics back in the day, dodgy as f***. So dodgy in fact, that he ended up with a lifetime ban from football.

 

[BBassic]

I'm sorry, what?

Asked by Damian Collins why the league had not rejected the 777 offer outright, amid uncertainty over the group’s finances and problems at its other clubs, Masters said his scope was limited. He said the league could approve a deal or leave it unapproved but could not reject it and that it was up the seller or proposed buyer to take a deal off the table or meet the league’s demands.

Premier League reiterates ‘very clear’ stance on 777 Partners Everton takeover

Richard Masters has said the Premier League has been clear with 777 Partners over the conditions it must meet to complete a takeover of Everton

www.theguardian.com

The Premier League cannot reject ownership offers?

 

[AZ Gull]

I'm sorry, what?

Asked by Damian Collins why the league had not rejected the 777 offer outright, amid uncertainty over the group’s finances and problems at its other clubs, Masters said his scope was limited. He said the league could approve a deal or leave it unapproved but could not reject it and that it was up the seller or proposed buyer to take a deal off the table or meet the league’s demands.

Premier League reiterates ‘very clear’ stance on 777 Partners Everton takeover

Richard Masters has said the Premier League has been clear with 777 Partners over the conditions it must meet to complete a takeover of Everton

www.theguardian.com

The Premier League cannot reject ownership offers?

Seems about right to me

In order for a takeover to be completed, certain conditions have to be met. Until and unless those conditions ARE met, the takeover won't be approved. If the existing club owner is determined to try and force that takeover through anyway, the process just drags on and on. What do you expect the Premier League to do, in those circumstances?

 

[BBassic]

Seems about right to me

In order for a takeover to be completed, certain conditions have to be met. Until and unless those conditions ARE met, the takeover won't be approved. If the existing club owner is determined to try and force that takeover through anyway, the process just drags on and on. What do you expect the Premier League to do, in those circumstances?

Oh I've no idea.

Just seems odd to me that the Premier League don't have a veto or something for certain potential owners who seem, on the surface, dodgy as f***.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Oh I've no idea.

Just seems odd to me that the Premier League don't have a veto or something for certain potential owners who seem, on the surface, dodgy as f***.

Well effectively they DO. If they don't approve it, it can't go through - so in essence 'not approving' it, IS 'vetoing' it.

 

[BBassic]

Well effectively they DO. If they don't approve it, it can't go through - so in essence 'not approving' it, IS 'vetoing' it.

True.

It's a bit like leaving someone you don't like on 'unread' though for me. I'd prefer a nice, hearty "feck off ya chancers"