• 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

Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

English Premier League football club Manchester United are the world's first professional sports team to be valued at more than $3 billion, according to Forbes magazine.

A recent surge in the club's shares after a poor start when they were offered on the New York Stock Exchange last year has boosted Manchester United's value to $3.3 billion, a report on Forbes' website said on Monday.

The increase has United, English champions a record 19 times, comfortably ahead of the world's second-most valuable sports team, the National Football League's Dallas Cowboys, worth $2.1 billion.

Forbes put the surge in United shares down to brighter earnings prospects from new sponsorship deals and said the demand could continue given the team's potential for lucrative payouts in the EPL and Champions League.

United, who claim to have 659 million followers worldwide, are owned by the American Glazer family who retained a tight grip on the club after the flotation on the New York Stock Exchange.

United shares closed 41 cents lower at $16.48 in New York on Monday.

http://fourfourtwo.com/news/england/118608/default.aspx
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

Premier League Fulham are now clear of debt after owner Mohamed Al Fayed converted loans totalling more than 200 million pounds into shares in the club.

Al Fayed, the former owner of the Harrods department store, bought Fulham in 1997 and has seen them establish themselves in the Premier League.

"Following the previous season's announcement of record profits, the most significant development is the Club ending the financial year with no debt, having repaid any external indebtedness and Chairman Mohamed Al Fayed converting his previous loans to the Club into equity," the club said on their website.

Fulham made an operating profit of 1.2 million pounds in the 2011/12 season, down from more than five million pounds the previous year.

fourfourtwo.com/news/england/118651/default.aspx
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

So, Fulham are just given a £200m injection, just like that? What a joke.

Two hundred million pounds.

Imagine how many good players that should buy.



In other news, from the Leeds thread in case you missed it - going out of the FA Cup could help us financially IF it enables us to get into the CL

Tottenham Hotspur’s FA Cup exit on Sunday brought renewed suggestions that Andre Villas-Boas doesn’t ‘get’ English football. Perhaps not. But he might just get Champions League football instead, especially now that his team have been spared between one and four weekends of domestic cup action. Losing to Leeds could be the best thing that’s happened to Spurs all season.

Chelsea are drifting towards the end of the season like a broken down canal boat on a family holiday gone horribly wrong. No-one can be sure if Arsenal are a good team who occasionally play badly, or a bad team who occasionally play well.

The Manchester clubs might be out of reach, but third place is wide open. Never mind Harry Redknapp’s fourth place finishes, Villas-Boas will never get a better chance to finish third and move directly to the Champions League group stages. That, I’m heartbroken to say, is far more important than a day out at Wembley.

I don’t want football to be like this, obviously. I want football to be about glory and magical moments and the steps up to Wembley and a big day out. But it isn’t about that anymore. It’s about money.

Don’t believe me? Then why did John W Henry insist that he would have sacked Kenny Dalglish whether he’d won the FA Cup last year or not? Why did Chelsea disentangle themselves from Jose Mourinho in 2007, just a few months after he’d won the FA Cup and the League Cup?

Why is it, that for all the glorious giant-killing of the last weekend, we can’t avoid noticing that all of the leading clubs fielded weakened sides? Because the FA Cup doesn’t really matter, that’s why. It’s quite possible that Villas-Boas ‘gets’ English football rather more than his critics.

If it was down to me, I’d have automatic Champions League places for the Premier League champions, the FA Cup winners and the League Cup winners. I’d toss a play-off place to the league runners-up and everyone else could scrap it out in the Europa League.

That’s what you do if you want a game where glory means more than balance sheets. Sadly, they don’t let people like me make these decisions. There’d be too much whining about the possible damage to our co-efficients, as if that should ever be a consideration when it comes to rewarding actual, tangible success.

Arsene Wenger has said numerous times that finishing third is essentially like winning a trophy. It hasn’t made up for the lack of real trophies, but it doesn’t stop him being right.

Roberto di Matteo said that the best thing about Chelsea winning the Champions League was that it enabled Chelsea to qualify for the Champions League. You may remember that, it was the day you glanced over at cricket and wondered if it might be more a rewarding use of your time.

It’s horrible, it’s rancid, it’s vomit-in-your-mouth-and-swallow-it-back-down-again-while-trying-not-to-cry awful, but it’s the truth. It’s modern football.

Tottenham earned £25.3m in TV and prize money from their last Champions League campaign. They’d pick up approximately £3.5m in prize money if they won the FA Cup.

With a Champions League run, you can buy better players, you can pay your good players better wages, you can convince your stars to stick around and you can lure new ones in. By pouring money all over it, UEFA have turned the Champions League from a competition into a way of life. Inside the velvet rope, clubs can grow fat and happy. Outside, they can only dream of what might be.

Now…tell me again that Villas-Boas doesn’t ‘get’ English football.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

What a shame we don't have owners who will back us like City Chelsea and now it seems Fulham.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

JPG_357 said:
What a shame we don't have owners who will back us like City Chelsea and now it seems Fulham.
Click to expand...

Now?

He's been bankrolling Fulham for longer than the combined years that Abramovich and Mansour have been at Chelsea and City.

Just not to quite the same eye catching extent.

The fact that he has only recently converted his loans into equity is a mere technicality. He was never going to call in those loans.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

All Al Fayed has done is convert loans to equity. The money's already been accounted for. No new moneys coming in.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

It's the money that got Fulham promoted and has kept them out of relegation trouble since. Not exactly fair on the other teams.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

Maybe but in reality it changed nothing. Al Fayed would never have called upon that debt.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

Superted said:
Maybe but in reality it changed nothing. Al Fayed would never have called upon that debt.
Click to expand...

It didn't change anything NOW, but it has done over the years. This is just to comply with FFP. Fulham happen to be one of only a few clubs to oppose bringing that to the PL.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

I'm not sure it makes much difference for FFP. The FFP rules do nothing to stop a club from keeping large debts or to stop a Glazer or H&G type takeover. Ironically it allows speculators to load debt on the club for no reason other than enriching themselves, but blocks an owner injecting money for players and other football related purposes.

In Fulham's case Al Fayed would be limited in what he could inject each year, but he could have kept the debt.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

AFAK, Fayed has pumped a lot of his own money into Fulham. Much more than ENIC have pumped into us. May be wrong, of course.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

He put the money in as loans, though. I don't know if it was interest free. If he has cleared the debt that means £200 million, which must be considerably more than the club are worth.

Enic have also put money in in exchange for equity. However, I suspect there investment (ca £120m?) is a lot less than they could sell the club for. They should make a nice profit, whereas Al Fayad is unlikely to get his money back (unless Mike Ashley has a twin brother).
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

Premier League clubs have voted to introduce spending controls including financial fair play and restrictions on salary increases, West Ham's co-owner David Gold has confirmed.

Full details of the agreement will be announced by the Premier League later on Thursday, but Gold said that the proposals for controls had received the backing of the majority of top-flight chairmen.

He said: "We have all voted and it was overwhelmingly supported, not by all the clubs – some are a little concerned – but the vast majority of the clubs voted in favour."

www.guardian.co.uk/football/2013/feb/07/premier-league-clubs-spending-controls
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play - Now Voted In By The Premier League

City fans evidently not too concerned about the new spending controls, judging by the mood on Bluemoon. They're generally of the opinion that it is the likes of Villa, Everton and Saudi Sportswashing Machine that will be screwed by these rules, not them.

"A campus and series of developments that are akin to printing money hand-over-fist. Soon, everyone will see and it will seriously blow minds, as well as any concerns over FFPR. I'm always bemused by people envisaging our owners are sat on their hands, waiting to be put back in their corner.Nobody puts City in the corner."

"Genuinely, I suspect Khaldoon was objecting to this for the good of the league and for the good of the wellbeing of the smaller clubs. I think we have shown consistently that we are a class act and will try to do "the right thing". I doubt for one moment Khaldoon and our board were remotely bothered by these rules, but other clubs should be very very afraid of the long term consequences."

"In broader terms whilst disappointed from a wider footballing perspective as it is a shame that no-one else can experience what we have, I'd much rather be on the inside of the tent tinkling out than be a supporter of Everton, Villa and Saudi Sportswashing Machine. The greatest tragedy for them is that they probably don't realise that their owners today signed a death warrant on their aspirations as supporters."
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play - Now Voted In By The Premier League

What I've heard is there will be a salary cap coming in. Each teams wage bill to be limited to its current amount plus a capped percentage increase.
So the likes of City and United will be allowed to have a larger wage bill than us.

Makes no sense to me tbh.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play - Now Voted In By The Premier League

Modric THFC said:
What I've heard is there will be a salary cap coming in. Each teams wage bill to be limited to its current amount plus a capped percentage increase.
So the likes of City and United will be allowed to have a larger wage bill than us.

Makes no sense to me tbh.
Click to expand...

If I've read it correctly, there will also be an implementation of the 'break-even' rule being adopted by FFP, which means clubs that are currently hundreds of millions of pounds in the red (read; City) will need to break even before increasing their wage bill, at a risk of significant sanctions.

Sure, they can point to the 400 million Etihad deal and say 'look, we're in the black', but that deal stinks to high heaven, and UEFA's already making noises about it, so how well that will fly with the PL is still a matter of debate.

I must add, though, that the 'break-even' rule that the PL clubs have just agreed to will be significantly watered down from the UEFA version, allowing injections of owner equity to cover a lot of losses, so how well it will work will still be an issue to observe.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play - Now Voted In By The Premier League

DubaiSpur said:
City fans evidently not too concerned about the new spending controls, judging by the mood on Bluemoon. They're generally of the opinion that it is the likes of Villa, Everton and Saudi Sportswashing Machine that will be screwed by these rules, not them.

"A campus and series of developments that are akin to printing money hand-over-fist. Soon, everyone will see and it will seriously blow minds, as well as any concerns over FFPR. I'm always bemused by people envisaging our owners are sat on their hands, waiting to be put back in their corner.Nobody puts City in the corner."

"Genuinely, I suspect Khaldoon was objecting to this for the good of the league and for the good of the wellbeing of the smaller clubs. I think we have shown consistently that we are a class act and will try to do "the right thing". I doubt for one moment Khaldoon and our board were remotely bothered by these rules, but other clubs should be very very afraid of the long term consequences."

"In broader terms whilst disappointed from a wider footballing perspective as it is a shame that no-one else can experience what we have, I'd much rather be on the inside of the tent tinkling out than be a supporter of Everton, Villa and Saudi Sportswashing Machine. The greatest tragedy for them is that they probably don't realise that their owners today signed a death warrant on their aspirations as supporters."
Click to expand...

It's not quite as dramatic as that but, in broad terms, I pretty much agree with what that Bluemoon poster wrote.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play - Now Voted In By The Premier League

DubaiSpur said:
If I've read it correctly, there will also be an implementation of the 'break-even' rule being adopted by FFP, which means clubs that are currently hundreds of millions of pounds in the red (read; City) will need to break even before increasing their wage bill, at a risk of significant sanctions.

Sure, they can point to the 400 million Etihad deal and say 'look, we're in the black', but that deal stinks to high heaven, and UEFA's already making noises about it, so how well that will fly with the PL is still a matter of debate.

I must add, though, that the 'break-even' rule that the PL clubs have just agreed to will be significantly watered down from the UEFA version, allowing injections of owner equity to cover a lot of losses, so how well it will work will still be an issue to observe.
Click to expand...

I doubt that UEFA will be able to prove that there's much wrong with the Etihad deal. And I doubt that they will be able to prevent City from earning huge amounts from their redevelopment of a large swathe of east Manchester either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back