Football club finances / FFP

QPR kept most of their (very expensive and bloated) squad after relegation didn't they in the hope of bouncing back at the first attempt.

I fear if they miss out this season, they'll be in a bit of trouble.

Yeah, lots of speculation that they'll be in a lot of trouble. Transfer embargo if they aren't promoted, 50m fine if they are.

Kinda want them to be promoted now if that fine basically took out their prize money haha.
 
Sep 30, 2011
4,588
2,498
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Melbourne Victory, Blackburn Rovers
QPR kept most of their (very expensive and bloated) squad after relegation didn't they in the hope of bouncing back at the first attempt.

I fear if they miss out this season, they'll be in a bit of trouble.

On the other hand its clearly self inflicted, I think a lot of their players didn't even have relegation wage drop clauses when they were relegated. I haven't got much sympathy for clubs which deliberately overspend to the point where its unsustainable, if they miss out on promotion then they'll have to face the consequences.
 
On the other hand its clearly self inflicted, I think a lot of their players didn't even have relegation wage drop clauses when they were relegated. I haven't got much sympathy for clubs which deliberately overspend to the point where its unsustainable, if they miss out on promotion then they'll have to face the consequences.

Yeah think you're right about the relegation wage drop clauses as well - they were pretty ambitious and wanted to rocket up the table. Didn't Cesar say he was joining them to eventually win the EPL title or something?

I have no love for Fernandes or most of their players (who mostly appear to be mercenaries) but I would feel sorry for their fans who have to suffer the consequences of the poor management of the club.

Mike Ashley spent something like $30m to keep us afloat in the championship after we got relegated - served him right for his terrible decisions causing the relegation but ultimately, it's the fans who suffer (as Ashley added that to the debt the club owes him).
 
Yeah, lots of speculation that they'll be in a lot of trouble. Transfer embargo if they aren't promoted, 50m fine if they are.

Kinda want them to be promoted now if that fine basically took out their prize money haha.

Yeah, they'd definitely need it you'd think in order to stay viable as a club.

If they came up, you'd think Fernandes would try and move on as many of the past it players as he could and dig into his pockets again to try and strengthen the team to stay up. They might need 1-2 seasons in the EPL just to get a financial footing again!
 
The press are making out that QPR are about to get hit with a transfer embargo and fine. But as far as I know there are no penalties for breaking FFP in the championship this set of results.

But obviously a lot of work for them to do to get in shape for next season.

I'll see if I can find detail of their losses later this morning, but I would imagine amortisation of player purchases and wages are their two big problems.

And its not as simple as getting rid of high wage earners as that can lead to losses on player trading.
 

NYJetsfor2029

All Australian
Dec 11, 2008
992
287
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Notre Dame
It will be great for the Championship. There won't be as big a gap between rich and poor. Currently, if Fernandes wants to go spend 100mil in a season to get QPR promoted then he can do that. From this season he will no longer be able to. He can only spend what the club allows. Which is nowhere near that as most Championship clubs are similar. Obviously the likes of Yeovil, Doncaster etc will still struggle but they were going to regardless.

I agree that it will be great for the Championship but it might take a few years to sort itself out and a few clubs will probably follow Portsmouth in the time being.

You guys were talking about match day revenue before, and most financial observers are saying this will end up being the biggest factor contributing to promotion under FFP.

Hull's 7% match day contribution to revenue just illustrates how much a Premier League club with a small stadium will struggle to complete in the future.

Most are now saying now it's just a matter of time untill Wednesday and Leeds are back in the PL due to their large stadiums.
 
Looking at QPR, they made £40m in broadcast income in this set of accounts, that'll go down to no more than £5m in the next accounts. Parachute payments are around £20m from memory so income is still going to drop around £15m in the next set of accounts.

Drop in attendances (havent checked) will be covered to an extent by four more home games.

But the big things they need to do is cut the wage bill, and amortisation. At the moment that isnt really sustainable even if they get promoted.
 
The press are making out that QPR are about to get hit with a transfer embargo and fine. But as far as I know there are no penalties for breaking FFP in the championship this set of results.

But obviously a lot of work for them to do to get in shape for next season.

I'll see if I can find detail of their losses later this morning, but I would imagine amortisation of player purchases and wages are their two big problems.

And its not as simple as getting rid of high wage earners as that can lead to losses on player trading.

I think they are speculating based on, as you have gone on to discuss, the drop in matchday revenue, in television revenue, and the still quite high wage bill.
 
Sep 22, 2011
40,571
87,812
Your girlfriend's dreams
AFL Club
Essendon
It'll take a few years to sort itself out but I think it'll be good for the Championship. At that level it can only encourage more responsible attempts at promotion. The huge spending should happen after it's occurred.

The clubs it'll hurt the most are those ranked 7-16 in the premiership. Stops them from having any hope of taking the next step. Which I guess was the idea.
 
I don't think it will be good for the championship. Just like the premier league it will create the haves and have nots. Amongst the haves will be the relegated clubs that will get £45m in parachute payments over four years.

To put that into context a club like Derby, that I'd consider one of the bigger ones at that level earned £17.3m in total revenue at that level.

And they're expected to compete on a level financial footing with up to 12 clubs who are getting a headstart.
 
You also look at a club like Derby.

If they get promoted they will earn around £70-80m more in TV money, sponsorships, gate income, merchandise, prize money etc.

Even if they go straight back down they get the £45m helping hand.

I look at it like investment in plant and equipment. Or building a new stadium. Spend money you don't have to build an asset (plant/machinery/stadium/playing squad) that will lead to greater income in the future.

Of course its got to be done responsibly, but making losses is not necessarily a bad thing for businesses.

But I think FFP is a bit confused in that it's promoted as something there to save clubs from themselves. But the rules are more about protecting bigger clubs from smaller clubs that extend themselves.
 

Stratton_Gun

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 4, 2010
17,944
15,737
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Manchester United
Taxed from Facebook!!! Great read!!!

"Ed Woodward deserves a lot of credit. As 76 clubs are facing investigation by EUFA over their breaches of the FFP Rules, Manchester United are busy signing the biggest sponsorship deal in history to prove they are the biggest sports franchise in the world.

Social media forums are full of failed accountancy students trying to make a case why missing out on the Champions League will mean Armageddon for United, however, fact would seem to be an inconvenient truth for these trolls of the financial world. The truth is that Manchester United's finances could not be better and that is down to the genius of one man; Ed Woodward.

Yes, the same Ed Woodward who was castigated for last summer's transfer debacle has managed to secure some of the most lucrative sponsorship deals in history. Next season the Chevrolet deal kicks in with United earning up to £50 a year from the deal, however, the daddy of all deal has just been signed between Manchester United and Nike, to the tune of £600m. That dwarfs that of nearest contender Real Madrid's paltry £300m deal.

This will mean that United will have an extra £100m a year from just these two deals. This all ignores the myriad of other new deals already in the pipeline and all done by Ed Woodward.

So, as the sun sets on financial cheats like Manchester City, PSG, Monaco etc, United can look forward to an even more rewarding financial future and moreover, one which has been secured by their own efforts."
 
Don't worry that we're 7th in the league and have David Moyes as our figurehead. Woody just signed a new deal with Aeroflot. Celebrate like its 99 all over again.
 
Oct 5, 2009
53,178
42,438
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
West Adelaide Bloods, Man City.
great read indeed. amusing that someone genuinely believes all that rubbish.

Social media forums are full of failed accountancy students

my favourite line.

followed up with

The truth is that Manchester United's finances could not be better

delightful
 
Don't worry that we're 7th in the league and have David Moyes as our figurehead. Woody just signed a new deal with Aeroflot. Celebrate like its 99 all over again.
Pretty sure we are 6th... :p
 

Shoei

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 26, 2011
9,223
7,443
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Arsenal
Taxed from Facebook!!! Great read!!!

"Ed Woodward deserves a lot of credit. As 76 clubs are facing investigation by EUFA over their breaches of the FFP Rules, Manchester United are busy signing the biggest sponsorship deal in history to prove they are the biggest sports franchise in the world.

Social media forums are full of failed accountancy students trying to make a case why missing out on the Champions League will mean Armageddon for United, however, fact would seem to be an inconvenient truth for these trolls of the financial world. The truth is that Manchester United's finances could not be better and that is down to the genius of one man; Ed Woodward.

Yes, the same Ed Woodward who was castigated for last summer's transfer debacle has managed to secure some of the most lucrative sponsorship deals in history. Next season the Chevrolet deal kicks in with United earning up to £50 a year from the deal, however, the daddy of all deal has just been signed between Manchester United and Nike, to the tune of £600m. That dwarfs that of nearest contender Real Madrid's paltry £300m deal.

This will mean that United will have an extra £100m a year from just these two deals. This all ignores the myriad of other new deals already in the pipeline and all done by Ed Woodward.

So, as the sun sets on financial cheats like Manchester City, PSG, Monaco etc, United can look forward to an even more rewarding financial future and moreover, one which has been secured by their own efforts."

So how much is going to be pocketed by the Glazers? They are allowed to pay themselves 50% of he consolidated Net Income of the club every year.
 
Firstly, a transfer ban isnt among the list of sanctions available to UEFA.

Secondly, clubs in breach of the £45m limit, and with improving trend of results are allowed to deduct pre 2010 contracts from our figures. Which we will.

David Gill seems to have taken on FFP, and I think we've already put in a complaint to UEFA about some of his comments. So I'm sure he'll be angling to give us the greatest punishment possible but I'm not overly concerned.
 
Dec 22, 2009
62,366
36,505
South End, AAMI Park
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Matildas/Socceroos/LFC/MVFC/RCStrasbourg
Firstly, a transfer ban isnt among the list of sanctions available to UEFA.

Secondly, clubs in breach of the £45m limit, and with improving trend of results are allowed to deduct pre 2010 contracts from our figures. Which we will.

David Gill seems to have taken on FFP, and I think we've already put in a complaint to UEFA about some of his comments. So I'm sure he'll be angling to give us the greatest punishment possible but I'm not overly concerned.

If your mob got punished and PSG didn't it would be farcical. PSG are by far the worst offenders when it comes to FFP. City are going in the right direction where PSG don't give a * about what they spend, they just organise outrageous "sponsorship" deals to cover them. City have at least some accountability these days.
 
I don't think either will get any sort of meaningful punishment if they get punished at all.

I kind of hope they rule out the Etihad sponsorship as a related party transaction. Will be funny if they do as by their own definition it isnt anything of the sort.

And it will show UEFA and David Gill are prepared to circumvent their own rules to have a go at particular targets.
 
Also add that the right to challenge a punishment as stated in the article only exists if a club rejects the settlement offer and it goes to tribunal.

So if UEFA fine a club £10k, and the club acceps the fine theres nothing anyone else can do about it.
 
Back