• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Financial Fair Play

Atletico Madrid have one week to adhere to the spending limits set forth by the Spanish Professional Football League (LFP), or the reigning champions of La Liga could face a range of sanctions from the governing body.

Currently, the club’s first-team expenditures are above the limits permitted by the LFP. Should the Spanish side fail to rectify the issue, they could potentially be banned from making any new signings or face forced relegation (worst-case scenario).

Following the departures of Diego Costa, Filipe Luis and Thiabout Courtois to Chelsea, Los Colchoneros have signed seven players to date during the summer transfer window.

According to the Spanish publication, Marca, Atletico’s spending cap for their squad – calculated based on the idea that it should not exceed 70% of relevant revenue – is approximately £79.5 million. However, some 10% of this is allocated for the academy and bonuses, while a further 10% is reserved for the coaching staff. This leaves the club with roughly £64 million to spend on annual wages, income tax, image rights and costs related to transfer fees.

That is why the Spanish champions will spend the next few days attempting to offload some players in order to reduce the wage bill at the club.

Speculation is defender Toby Alderweireld in on his way out of Vicente Calderon and could be heading to Sevilla in order to replace Federico Fazio, who is bound for Tottenham Hotspur. AS Monaco have also shown an interest in the former product of the Ajax youth academy.

Atletico are also looking at deals which could see Emanuel Insua and/or Cristian Rodriguez leave the club. Insua has been linked with a switch to West Ham United, while Rodriguez had previously been targeted by Sunderland.

Should Atletico complete the transfers of at least two of these players, it would be enough to satisfy LFP’s limits and prevent any sanctions being leveled on the club.


http://worldsoccertalk.com/2014/08/27/atletico-madrid-face-possible-sanctions-for-first-team-expenditures/
 
I read earlier that the spending figures being judged do not include player sales, and not do sales count as income for the calculation either. Atleti's current net spend is -€6m but apparently that is too high? Go figure.
 
https://twitter.com/sportingintel/status/506594886637060096

BwfJXQBIIAAloup.jpg:large


@sportingintel: Transfer spend ballooning - and there's a wage boom yet to follow. Updated window £ & context: http://tinyurl.com/q2ufyr5
Bwd9Tq4IQAENTwl.jpg:large
 
The Football League has confirmed that QPR could be consigned to the Football Conference in the event of relegation from the top flight if they refuse to pay a huge fine incurred under its financial fair play rules.

QPR are expected to face a fine of up to £40m when they reveal their financial results later this year, covering the season they spent in the Championship following relegation from the Premier League.

The west London club posted record pre-tax losses of £65.4m for the year ending May 2013, when they were relegated from the Premier League. The losses for the last financial year, expected to be made public in December, are also expected to be sizeable.

QPR chairman Tony Fernandes has vowed to fight any fine imposed by the Football League, which would have to go to charity rather than the other clubs under an agreement with the Premier League over its solidarity payments.

But Football League chief executive Shaun Harvey said he was “satisfied” that it would be able to charge QPR for a breach of the rules while they were still part of the competition and that the ultimate sanction would be to refuse re-admission.

“Theoretically, that is the position but I would hope there would be resolution long before that option even had to be considered. The one thing for certain is that most clubs [in the Premier League] will become a Football League club again,” said Harvey, speaking at the Soccerex conference in Manchester.

“Now QPR will of course be hoping it does not happen for some considerable number of seasons. But the chances they will need to return to the Football League fold at some point in the future. Certainly, three of the current 20 clubs that are in the Premier League will be in the Football League next season.”

Clubs that remain within the Football League that breach the rules, introduced in 2012, face a transfer embargo. But those that win promotion are fined instead.

“Will we fight the fine? What do you think? After all we’ve been through, it’s my middle name – ‘Fight It’ Fernandes,” said the QPR chairman after the club won promotion.

“My view has been consistent, that it is very unfair for a club that has been relegated as the wage difference between the Premier League and Championship is impossible. There should be a time period for clubs to rectify their salaries.

“If we were in the Championship in two years with that wage bill it wouldn’t be right. I’m in favour of FFP but it is unfair for a club coming down.”

Premier League chief executive Richard Scudamore is also on record as saying the rules needed to be amended. But Harvey said there was little chance of them being altered before the FFP declarations had to be made on December 1.

“Unless the 24 clubs vote to change the rules, the rules as they are now will stay in place. I don’t suspect there is any form of rule change that would be considered or brought forward that would see the current circumstances we potentially face changing,” said Harvey.

He said that discussions with the Premier League were ongoing over trying to standardise their financial fair play rules.

“There’s a long-standing discussion that’s taken place between the Football League and the Premier League as to how to try to ensure that we have regulations that actually work for clubs regardless of which division they’re in,” he said.

“We do talk to them periodically about any number of issues and this features – being topical – relatively high on that agenda.”


http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/sep/09/queens-park-rangers-football-league-ffp
 
so QPR can now not afford to get relegated, ever, so will spend a ****load every year to make sure they don't yet will not ever be allowed into Europe either
 
Yep, complaining about the wage gap doesn't sit right considering they were spending over 100% of their income on it.
 
Manchester United, Arsenal and Chelsea are poised to receive a cut of Emirates Marketing Project’s Financial Fair Play fine after European clubs deemed the money should be split among themselves.

As revealed in Telegraph Sport in May, Uefa has drawn up plans for City’s fine of up to £50 million to be distributed to their rivals.

The European Club Association has since firmed up that proposal, revealing on Tuesday that the first tranche of that money should go to teams which qualified for the Champions League and Europa League last season.

Those clubs include United, Arsenal, Chelsea, Tottenham Hotspur, Swansea City and Wigan Athletic, all of whom stand to gain around £212,000 each from a pot of around £20 million collected from City and other sides who breached FFP.

A similar sum will be distributed to clubs who comply with the FFP rules in this season’s European competitions.

The chairman of the ECA, Karl-Heinz Rummenigge, said: “It was an agreement between Uefa and the clubs that it was money belonging to the clubs.”

Clubs will also have a chance to argue any changes to FFP rules at a meeting with Uefa on Oct 13.

Uefa president Michel Platini said in a speech to the ECA yesterday: “The framework for Financial Fair Play must be dynamic, it must evolve constantly, which is why I have convened an important round table on the subject with your representatives at Uefa headquarters on Oct 13.

“We will see whether any imperfections can be ironed out and whether there is room to further improve the system.”


www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/...arded-slice-of-Manchester-Citys-FFP-fine.html

Hah, we should be getting most of it. Without them buying their way in we'd have seen more CL participations.
 
Manchester United, Arsenal and Chelsea are poised to receive a cut of Emirates Marketing Project’s Financial Fair Play fine after European clubs deemed the money should be split among themselves.

As revealed in Telegraph Sport in May, Uefa has drawn up plans for City’s fine of up to £50 million to be distributed to their rivals.

The European Club Association has since firmed up that proposal, revealing on Tuesday that the first tranche of that money should go to teams which qualified for the Champions League and Europa League last season.

Those clubs include United, Arsenal, Chelsea, Tottenham Hotspur, Swansea City and Wigan Athletic, all of whom stand to gain around £212,000 each from a pot of around £20 million collected from City and other sides who breached FFP.

A similar sum will be distributed to clubs who comply with the FFP rules in this season’s European competitions.

The chairman of the ECA, Karl-Heinz Rummenigge, said: “It was an agreement between Uefa and the clubs that it was money belonging to the clubs.”

Clubs will also have a chance to argue any changes to FFP rules at a meeting with Uefa on Oct 13.

Uefa president Michel Platini said in a speech to the ECA yesterday: “The framework for Financial Fair Play must be dynamic, it must evolve constantly, which is why I have convened an important round table on the subject with your representatives at Uefa headquarters on Oct 13.

“We will see whether any imperfections can be ironed out and whether there is room to further improve the system.”


www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/...arded-slice-of-Manchester-Citys-FFP-fine.html

Hah, we should be getting most of it. Without them buying their way in we'd have seen more CL participations.

So they're going to fine teams that fail the FFP rules and give that fine to other teams, which will then count as income to offset their overspending in FFP, oh Lord.
 
Sounds like UEFA are trying to implement a "luxury tax" system similar to that used in the NBA.

Wish they'd fine the heck out of Real Madrid so couldn't afford to keep poaching our best players!
 
Sounds like UEFA are trying to implement a "luxury tax" system similar to that used in the NBA.

Wish they'd fine the heck out of Real Madrid so couldn't afford to keep poaching our best players!

While they turn out a profit each year that won't happen.
 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29140959

Manchester United profits plunge 84%

Manchester United has reported a sharp fall in annual profits despite record revenues for the year.

The football club said net income plunged 84% for the year to 30 June to £23.8m, from £146m a year ago.

Manchester United said its 2013 net income benefitted from a tax credit of £155.2m, which it received from "US deferred tax assets".

Had it not received that tax credit, the club would have made a loss of £8.8m in 2013.

The club said revenue increased 19% to £433.2m, compared with £363.2m a year earlier.

Manchester United said it expected revenue in 2015 to fall to between £385m and £395m suggesting its failure to qualify for the Champions League for the first time in 20 years may be to blame.

The club said underlying profits were £130.1m for the year to 30 June, compared with £108.6m a year earlier.

It said it expected annual profits would fall next year to between £90m and £95m.

The results also showed that David Moyes and his back room staff received a total of £5.2m in compensation following the former Manchester United manager's sacking in April after less than a year in the job.
'Track record'

Ed Woodward, executive vice chairman of Manchester United, said: "With Louis van Gaal at the helm as manager, and the recent signing of some of the world's leading players to further strengthen our squad, we are very excited about the future and believe it's the start of a new chapter in the club's history.

"Louis' footballing philosophy fits very well with Manchester United and he has an impressive track record of success throughout his career, winning league titles with every club he has managed."

Full details are here:
http://ir.manutd.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=133303&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1965576&highlight=


It's going to be interesting to see how they meet the Premier League's rules with regard to wages in the year to 30 June 2015. Last year their wage bill increased by £34m to £215m. Under PL rules, their wages are only allowed to increase, compared to 2012/13, by the increase in "Club Own Revenue" (which excludes PL TV money) plus £4m per annum. They are anticipating a £40m+ fall in revenue in 2015 which should only leave room for a very modest increase in wages - which seems at odds with their summer signings.
 
Same old ManU, always buying silverware...

Would be ironic if the FFP rules are enforced against them, considering those rules were drawn up to ensure that clubs like ManU and Real Madrid could continue to financially dominate their domestic leagues as they have over the decades in which they have repeatedly set transfer records and paid the highest wages...

@sportingintel: Recommended @DTGuardian column on #mufc spending not being new & any lament for a home-grown utopia is misplaced http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/sep/13/manchester-united-not-sold-soul-bought-big
[tweet]510911533057343489[/tweet]
 
he's right, people will start calling pot & and kettle but these rules didn't exist when he first joined Chelsea
 
Liverpool are 'very relaxed' amid suggestions they may have almost £7million of Champions League prize money withheld due to breaches of UEFA Financial Fair Play regulations.

Liverpool are due to receive the money next month, after qualifying for the first time in five years - but in order to meet Financial Fair Play regulations clubs must not lose more than £35.4m over a period of two seasons.

Emirates Marketing Project and Paris St Germain both exceeded that figure and suffered significant penalties.

Liverpool's losses for the 2012-13 financial year were £49.8m, plus £41m losses for the 10-month period through to May 2012.

However, clubs can use investment in youth development and club infrastructure to offset those figures and Liverpool believe they would have a strong case to present to UEFA should they be investigated.

Clubs can also use projected revenues when arguing their case and Liverpool figures for the current year are expected to be very healthy.


www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/...ims-lose-7m-Champions-League-prize-money.html
 
Liverpool will be named as one of several clubs under investigation by Uefa for possible financial fair play (FFP) breaches this week.

It is understood that an announcement by the European governing body is expected to be made as early as Thursday.

Liverpool, Monaco, Inter Milan and Roma - who were all absent from European competition last season and have recently submitted their accounts to Uefa - are due to be asked to provide further information on their finances to the Club Financial Control Body (CFCB).

No financial sanctions will be imposed at this stage however - though a provisional sanction to withhold Champions League money is possible as a next step in the process and the CFCB will hold talks and ask for more information from all the clubs involved before making any such decision.

Liverpool made a loss of £49.8 million for the 2012-13 season, and £40.5m for the 10-month period before that.

The Merseyside club will hope to avoid any sanctions by writing off a big chunk of losses as allowable stadium expenditure - the 2011-12 accounts reported that £49.6m was associated with Liverpool's stadium costs, £35m coming from former co-owner Tom Hick's aborted plan to build a new stadium on Stanley Park which new owners Fenway Sports Group had to scrap.

Uefa's FFP rules say losses must be no more than £35.4m over the 2011-12 and 2012-13 seasons, but allow expenses such as on youth development and stadium costs to be written off.

Emirates Marketing Project and Paris Saint-Germain were the clubs hit hardest by Uefa last season for breaching FFP rules - they were each fined £49m and handed restrictions on transfer spending and a reduction in Champions League squad size.

Uefa remain confident that legal action against its FFP rules will be defeated and that a crucial European Commission decision in its favour will be made in the next fortnight.

Emirates Marketing Project's independent supporters' club has joined the legal action being taken by Belgian agent Daniel Striani, which was lodged with the European Commission and the Belgian courts in May 2013.

A statement from MCFC Supporters Club, which has almost 15,000 active members and 168 branches worldwide, said: "Far from implementing a true 'financial fair play', this rule is in fact a prohibition to invest that prevents ambitious owners to develop their clubs, that therefore shields the established European elite from being challenged (this elite being unsurprisingly the main sponsors of the Uefa rule) and that, consequently, puts additional financial pressure on supporters (higher prices and lower quality).

"With this Uefa rule, it is now almost impossible for any ambitious investor to take over a 'sleeping giant' and to turn them into the next Emirates Marketing Project or Paris St Germain."


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/liverpool/11119531/Liverpool-to-face-Uefa-financial-fair-play-investigation.html
 
The Merseyside club will hope to avoid any sanctions by writing off a big chunk of losses as allowable stadium expenditure - the 2011-12 accounts reported that £49.6m was associated with Liverpool's stadium costs, £35m coming from former co-owner Tom Hick's aborted plan to build a new stadium on Stanley Park which new owners Fenway Sports Group had to scrap.

That's not quite right from 'The Telegraph' - the £49.6m cancelled stadium costs were in the 2010-11 accounts which is the year before the first year taken into consideration under FFP. If Liverpool had been in European competition last season they would have been subject to the FFP tests in relation to 2011-12 and 2012-13, which I believe they would have failed. However, they will now be able to include in the assessment the 2013-14 accounts, which are expected to be significantly better, and they'll probably escape any punishment.
 
Back