Could Leicester and QPR be relegated to League one? By Tony Attwood Sometimes emails to Untold ask why we spend so much time on FFP when the real issue is who Wenger is about to buy. One reason is that this is Untold â Untold deals with the stuff others ignore â and if ever there was something that is largely being ignored by the media it is FFP. And what makes FFP so fascinating is that there is not one but four different FFPs (one for Uefa, one for the Premier League, one for the Championship and one for Leagues 1 and 2). They are all different, and in many ways most of them seem quite unstable. I donât think anyone is quite sure what will happen â but things will happen, and that is what I am trying to chart here. In a sense FFP is the financial equivalent of transfer rumours. We donât quite know what will happen, but can be sure something will happen. Premier League clubs spent £722m on transfers in 2012/13 which was 28% up on the £564m spent in 2011/12. So this suggests that not everyone is taking notice of the new FFP regulations, and that there is a real sense of âweâll worry about that when we get to it.â Certainly in the Championship, this seems to be the case. Under FFP any Championship club that exceeds an £8m loss for the 2013-14 campaign when their accounts are submitted by 1 December this year is subject to a punishment. For 2012-13 QPR showed a loss of £65m, and will probably make the same for the past season, which means they will have a bill of £30m-£35m. But the Premier League has now said that it will not help the Championship collect the money on clubs that get fined but get promoted. In response Tony Fernandes told the Guardian âWill we fight the fine? What do you think? After all weâve been through, itâs my middle name: âFight itâ Fernandesâ. This has led some to suggest that the Championship will sue Leicester and QPR, and they might. But they could also issue the bill to those clubs, and apply a hefty interest rate, and then deduct the sum due from the clubs when they finally return to the Championship as they surely will. Or even ban them from the Championship and send them down to League One â quite viable since the club would have been in breach of Championship regs by not paying the fine. That would really hit QPR and Leicester where it hurts for it would mean that just as they lose all the income from the PL TV deals and while they are still paying Premier League wages, they find themselves playing League One clubs. Also it would scupper Fernandesâ scheme of dragging the whole thing out through the courts. He would then be appealing against QPR being banned from the Championship. That case would take a year or two to see through the courts â during which team QPR would have to apply to League One â if League One actually wanted them. If you want to know how that looks, look at Rangers in Scotland. As I say, the Championship has yet to decide what, if any, fines will be imposed, and we have had Leicester supporters here already speaking in a way very reminiscent of Man C supporters, in that hiatus between the imposition of the fines and their acceptance of them. But although we have seen Man Cityâs and PSGâs âthey wouldnât dareâ policy towards Uefa it looks like most clubs now seem to be considering rather more carefully at exactly what the four different versions of Financial Fair Play now in existence actually mean. Of course you wouldnât know it if you just focussed on the frantic âLiverpool to buy everyoneâ approach of the press at the moment, and it is possible that Liverpool have decided they can find a way around FFP, but overall the effect is there. But it is clear that editorial policy is that FFP regulations and transfer tales are not allowed to be mentioned in the same article. Indeed in the case of Liverpool, discussion of the issues of where the money is coming from, not only for transfers but also for their new stadium, seems to be vetoed. Interestingly both Tottenham and Liverpool await planning permissions, while refraining to give much of a clue as to where the money is. Liverpool also donât seem quite clear on the level of disruption there will be to crowd numbers while the new stadium is built â something that will affect their income considerably. So it is muddled. So muddled that unless you are really into FFP you wouldnât actually know that in May the Championship clubs had a vote to change their own FFP rules in a number of ways. None of the votes got the majority needed â so in one sense yes, it is a non-story, but it shows just how much is going on in FFP â and how little of it is reported, and how concerned some of the clubs are getting. There is another equivalent here I am reminded of. When Arsenal voted to become a professional club in 1891. The issue was, would the London FA and the Kent FA ban their members from playing Arsenal? That issue was far more important than who Arsenal signed at that moment â although the telling of the tale got mangled. For years Arsenalâs own publications said the club was banned and nearly went bust. In fact the other clubs voted not to ban matches against Arsenal, and the club flourished for the next 15 years. If you want to read the story details are in âWoolwich Arsenal, the club that changed footballâ â see below). Meanwhile whatâs interesting with the PL model is that it focuses on wages, and wage increases have slowed down although the Deloitte Sports Business Group report shows that they are still running at record levels. But in the Championship half the clubs spent more on wages than they actually earned in total from all sources, basically because they wanted one of the three spots that gives them a year in the Premier League. QPR under Arry spent 129% of their total income on wages. It is interesting in passing to see just how diverse the Championship is. Peterborough Utd spent just £6m on wages. As opposed to half the clubs that like QPR spent more on wages than they actually earn. But Championship revenue is in decline â it fell by £39m in the season under revue. Clearly this is not viable â both from an FFP point of view, and from the view of the long term stability of the club. One day the wealthy owner pulls out, and then the club has nothing. It suggests that if the money launderers donât get hold of the club then the reckless gamblers will. Either way disaster lies ahead. Overall playersâ wages for all clubs in the four divisions increased to over £1.7 billion, a 6% rise. It simply canât continue like that.
The statement "For 2012-13 QPR showed a loss of £65m, and will probably make the same for the past season, which means they will have a bill of £30m-£35m." shows how little this "reporter" knows. Only a very small amount of checking would have made him realise that our loss for 2013/14 is likely to be substantially less than 2012/13, because we offloaded a substantial number of very high earners (Remy,Tarbs, Granero, Mbia etc etc) in 2013/14 and replaced them with much lower earners.We also didn't spend anything like as much on transfer fees. So my(uneducated) guess is that the loss for 2013/14 will probably be "only" £20-30 million, thus reducing the potential fine dramatically.
"QPR under Arry spent 129% of their total income on wages." thats a very precise figure considering the accounts for the last year arent published for the next 6 months.
Don't bother. It doesn't. Any journo who cannot spell the word "review" comes from the Murdoch school of journalism. They clearly don't teach them English so don't expect them to investigate properly.
I thought you got a years grace after relegation to get your house in order and adjust to the new financial constraints..... so we would not worry till next year but have gained promotion... so no fine I am thinking. The other figures used were from the premier league and as the article suggests are a seperate entity from the championships own rules, so why would these figures be used to work out the wages in the championship. Journalism is not what it used to be.
To the cnuts who run football like a bloody money machine ... you little ****pigs die: [video=dailymotion;x14v9ji]http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x14v9ji_public-image-ltd-the-order-of-death_music[/video]
Clearly another click bait article to get ad revenue. The FL cant touch us, the PL cant do something that was done under FL control.
I think we may still have been paying a chunk of some of the loanees salaries, and our income will have dropped hugely as well. The accounts won't be pretty, but FFP won't hurt us, its doomed. That was exactly the thing I spotted Thats one way forward
...Having read the whole thing, I conclude that the above is the only worthwhile half-sentence in the whole article.
A complete load of guesswork and wrong facts. He doesn't even know that improvement/expansion and building of stadium is exempt from the FFP.
That article marks a new low in media reporting. The bit highlighted in red, tells me he really doesn't like us or Leicester very much.
There is another equivalent here I am reminded of. When Arsenal voted to become a professional club in 1891. The issue was, would the London FA and the Kent FA ban their members from playing Arsenal? That issue was far more important than who Arsenal signed at that moment – although the telling of the tale got mangled. For years Arsenal’s own publications said the club was banned and nearly went bust. In fact the other clubs voted not to ban matches against Arsenal, and the club flourished for the next 15 years. If you want to read the story details are in “Woolwich Arsenal, the club that changed football” – see below). Sensationalist writing in order to sell a crap, boring book about Arsenal by the looks of it. Dreadful stuff.
One thing they could do to help clubs in the championship and perhaps the rest of the football league is sell rights to championship games in a serious package, I.e. Giving the rights to show a lot more games, exclusively. A package that is similar to the premier league one, which allows the same amount of games to be shown. It would also be nice if bbc or itv picked it up. Not only would it tap into a source of potential money but would also bring more awareness to the lower leagues and advertise the league, potentially bringing more supporters and money at the gates.
Sky would just pay over the odds to keep it off FTA TV as they are complete bastards. The only thing they could do was to make it FTA only, I think it would lead to better supported clubs too as kids would be more likely to see smaller teams on TV.
But if they made it a complete package where they buyer had to play a lot of games then they might not go for it, thus leaving it to someone who is serious about it.
I just think of the last time, ITV digital and Murdoch paying people to hack the encryption destroying the competition. They will do anything to keep their monopoly.
Where is our usual Leicester clown then? Why hasnt he commented on this ? or is he too busy helping Upson cross the road
