This morning, UEFA warned the billionaire clubs that is starting to aim it's scope on their finances. They will be applying forensic levels of scrutiny on their sponsorship deals which UEFA says there are already provisions preventing inflated deals... such as Man City's £400M sponsorship deal with it's owners own airline company. Truth be told if they then failed FFP both of those owners of Chelsea and Man City would jump ship quicker than a Italian captain on a cruise liner, and then both clubs become a Leeds. That could be good for Swans, and other Prem teams, because that is two spaces above us freed up!
Agree, however this comes down is good news for us. Sanction, threat of sanction, and forensic audits is going to keep clubs operating on the darker side of the rules in check and level the playing for all others.
Bigger clubs will always have better resources because of their local demographic, crowd size, worldwide appeal and history. But for too long have the Abramovich's of the world so tilted an already unlevel playing field it's turned the Premier League in particular into a bloated monster where players and agents are paid ridiculous fees and salaries, thereby destroying the 'lesser' clubs' ability to compete. It's happening now in Russia. Welcome news for clubs that are run prudently like the Swans.
tbh if they want 2 spend it on theyre own business,why cant they invest heavily in it and what has it got 2 do with anybody else................tiz the world u live in lads sorry .......my view is good luck 2 the man city fans they deserve some glory in my eye`s.......still 30,000 watching them a few years back in the lower divisions so i take my hat off 2 them
This will test the resolve of some but i doubt it will affect the likes of city and PSG. Honour is a big thing in that part of the world and they will probably enjoy finding many different ways around the rules. An easy example around inflated one off sponsership deals would be to form 20 companies and sponser the maximum amount x 20 ! nothing wrong with calling the companies anything they want either. Im sure the legal people of these oil rich people will find at least a hundred better and differnt ways ..and im sure UEFA will let it happen as they art exactly the most moral entity in the world are they ..
aussie i can assure you that the way sam did his spending is not needed in football.....he led us fans 2 believe it was his money he was spending and not putting us in debt at all>>>>>>that type of person should be banned totally from the game because they are nothing but filth...............but if the owner is spending his own fortune for his own excitement then i dont see any problem with it tbh>>>>>let me tell you if i were in theyre position and had money 2waste i`d want the best playing at my club and all aussie your response is typical of a fan who aint got no chance of winning anything of any substance,and yes that maybe purely based on the fact you cant compete financially but thats the way of the world im afraid..........get real ffs
"your response is typical of a fan who aint got no chance of winning anything of any substance" Really? How do you know that? We have a Cup Final coming up. Do you? Or did the League Cup cease to be something "of substance" the second Cardiff failed to win it? My response is "typical" of a fan from a smaller club who is sick to the back teeth of having the rich boys in the Premiership skim the cream of the players and managers because they are offering stratospheric wages. I accept that bigger clubs have bigger revenue and that's always an attraction because they offer bigger wages. In turn, Prem clubs are richer than the lower leagues. That's the way of things. But within the Premiership there is a cabal of clubs with rich owners who give teams an unfair advantage. Look at QPR. 18,000 crowds yet they can afford Chris Samba on £100,000 a week. Ye$ we know the rea$ons he $aid ye$ to that. But whatever the case, the rules are coming in whether you like it or not. I happen to think it'll go some way to levelling the playing field.
aussie its the same cup u boys said was mickey mouse last year .......tbh apart from the day of playing one of the top flights most decorated team in a final,i did agree with you boys last year.....tiz mickey mouse and even more so this year with two small clubs contesting it the big clubs will always be big clubs aussie.......and clubs like ours will never be anything other than small..............look at our fan numbers its fking shocking tbh......ok yes the plastics have jumped on board but they be soon gone if we both dropped divisions. my problem with this rule is why cant they spend theyre own money on theyre teams drive for success>>>>>surely thats fair if they want 2 waste thy fortune its totally up 2 them and hardshit for the poor boys. aussie lets not talk morals in football dude,your club hasnt got the best backrounds has it ......and before you say it neither has mine........but hey ho lets go
I never said the League Cup was mickey mouse and neither did a lot of Swans fans. I just hoped you didn't win the ****ing thing. As for morals, when we were in administration - a perfectly legal move - it was regrettable that people didn't get money they were owed. That's a risk in business and a risk in particular for anyone doing business with a fooball club. It was a question of going out of existence or paying so many pence in the pound. The lesser of two evils. A sad state of affairs but morally a no brainer. Now if you want to talk morals, how about selling season tickets in advance on the back of empty promises? Or how about ripping the heart and history out of a club just because of Asian superstition?
well tbh its outsiders(mostly jacks for some reason) who seem 2have the most problem with our owners>>>>>like you said it was the lesser of two evils>>>>>going bust or having a new owner with ideas of the future.......hey who am i 2 argue business with a billionaire init u can say what you like some of you boys put the cup last year where it was>>>>>nothing but a reserve run out for most teams
So UEFA has some power over the big clubs, but what about Premier clubs who are off European pace. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this will have no bearing on teams like QPR as and Cardiff. Do you think they are bothered about a ban from Europe. They just want the Prem money and so far the Prem has no fair play agreement....just Championship /league clubs. All the more reason promotion is critical for Abers franchise fc!
our promo push is on track i cant understand why they cant spend theyre own money if they want 2>>>>.why should they be held back by clubs like wigan and swansea because they havnt got the same pot of cash 2 burn
could you imagine the billionaires all fking off.........we be back into the 1070`s 80`s again>>>>>>>>no star players from over seas,just your plain old luke moores of this world>>>>>classy init>>>but thats what u get for your money
I'm surprised you don't understand the consequences to clubs when the rich man gets tired of his plaything, or a clubs spending is actually built on bad credit? These regulations have the future of all clubs and their fans at heart and only those blinded by the wealth of the sugar daddies seem to not be able to see it.
like any business dude surely they cant hold some back because of a few bad eggs who cant control its finances.............if it goes tits up it goes tits up>>>>its no big deal is it really ....ffs its just a football club if it was my families future on the line i wouldnt take the carrot>>>>but im more than happy 2 go the full hog mog with a football club>>>>>>even if we go bust we can come back,in what division,that doesnt bother me either uefa and fairplay .......ballboys 2 that
Both FIFA and UEFA support the profit initiative because for those clubs that are spending via loans there is a stronger prospect of club survival, but when it comes to Sugar Daddy clubs the rich benefactor can jump ship at any time leading to insolvency of the said club. Whilst some may think it should be up to the club to spend if it has the money, then I agree and and so will everybody else but that is not the same a club spending it's owners money. There is no argument against a club like Man Utd spending £25M-£30M on a player because the club itself makes that cash in profit, but when having a club like Man City spending £25M-£30M on a player when the club itself makes a £100M loss is a dangerous game for the Man City club. There is always a chance a benefactor could move on and leave a club, it's staff and it's fans without anything. For this reason the sponsorship contingency is now to see sponsorships coming from sources outside of the benefactors influence, such as his own companies sponsoring his own team. Current deals will have to remain as it is contracted by EU law but next time Etihad will not be able to sponsor Man City, instead they have to let others approach them and thus the market rate is restored and all incoming cash is not leveraged. That increases financial stability for all clubs.
I kind of agree with Rubber - if a guy wants to burn his money on a football club - then that's his choice. The Premiership is way more of a global moneymaking phenomenon than the old division 1 was. Look how much coverage we get! Part of this is the influx of these rich owners, who bring the top players here via huge salaries, which in turn lead to huge TV deals all over the planet and then large sponsorship deals because of this coverage. Take away all the money, and the top players will go elsewhere. TV revenue will drop and so will interest. However, there should be some sort of limit. Just spitballin' here : a team can spend up to it's limit - which is means tested. They are allowed to spend over it, but the amount they go over this limit has a percentage that they have to pay into a fund attached to it. eg. They spend an extra 25 million on top of their allowance - there is a 30% fee on this - meaning they would have to put 7.5 million into a fund. At the end of the season, all teams who have spent within their means get a share of this fund - maybe equal/maybe dependant on league position - could be added to the usual bonus for final league position. The percentage could be whatever really - but the more serious we are about fair play, the higher the percentage could be. If Man Utd, Man City, Chelsea and QPR all spend way over their limit, there could be several million extra for each team in the pot. Just version 1.0 of an idea...... What do you think ?
