So essentially it's the maximum of either 85% revenue generated, OR 5x the bottom PL club's revenue, whichever is the lower value?
I don't know but this is coming in for 25/26. I suspect it'll be either as bad or worse. It's not just a case of being able to spend 500 million on players unfortunately ...it's wages signings everything including agent fees.
Newcastle haven't fought back against anything.... I get the impression Newcastle have accepted the situation.
Allowed Chelsea to exploit the loophole because too many clubs felt the new rule was too broad. So just to confirm - the PL will effectively allow Chelsea to sell hotels TO ITSELF to satisfy PSR regulations, but won't allow an independent Saudi organisation to pay "too much" to sponsor Newcastle's training ground. I understand the point against City's case, but the PL has repeatedly shown ridiulous levels of incompetence, with anti-competition largely aimed at ONE club - ours. The media are a ****ing joke in all this - sensationalising this third-party story with "ooooooh, we can't have clubs getting more money" yet have repeatedly turned a blind eye at shocking fees, wages, agent fees, etc., with many - TalkSport, Sky Sports - revelling in escalating fees and massive salaries whilst gushing about City's football, or Madrid's success, and so on. They've always done it - Man U in the 90's when they just out-bought and out-spent everyone after the Blackburn shock, Chelsea's blood money flowing like wine. Even now, you really have to dig around to find out about Chelsea's loopholes because not one publication dares expose it. Football's on its' knees, the fans are powerless, the PL incompetent and the media doesn't know where to turn. Fawn over City, or are they cheats? Expose Chelsea, or fawn over Palmer and their next (£1bn) generation? ETH out, or sympathy for the manager? Third party rules bad, but Chelsea's loophole we should ignore?
Has the Chelsea hotel sale actually been approved by PL as revenue to offset against losses? If so its mad that club expenditure on infrastructure doesn't count as a cost for PSR but an infrastructure sale does count as revenue for PSR. Could explain why Man City are in the process of building a hotel and have completed a concert venue at the Etihad Campus. Expect their shares in these to be transferred to a wealthy Arab next time they suffer a loss.
They can't reject it as it's not against any rules. They tried to bring rules in but didn't get it passed at the AGM, so the PSR this accounting year can include these loophole payments. They may never get the vote passed as those doing development work, like us, City, Villa, Man U, are going to need those caveats.
Does anyone remember the days when: - You didn't know or care what someone was being paid? - You had no idea, nor gave a toss, about your club directors? - nobody gave two ****s about law or accounting?
I have to presume that, as they didn't get the majority to close the hotel / training ground loophole, that other clubs must be looking to expose it themselves - otherwise they'd just say "**** Chelsea" and have it closed... As Chelsea have got away with it, other clubs want a piece of the pie.
We should sell the SELA Stack to SELA, and then they can gift it to us as a New Stadium Development present down the line.
