Spending cap

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Albert's Chip Shop said:
You must log in or register to see images


lol.

another rule.

bye Chelsea and spurs.

5x the TV revenue of the lowest team in the PL

can we get spending then?
Click to expand...
Apparently, if it goes through the final vote in June, it would replace current ffp rules from 2025-26 season. According to that Maguire football finance guy it would mean we can spend up to £550million per season on wages, signing fees and agent fees. This amount would increase or decrease in line with PL TV revenue received by lowest finishing club. Man Utd reaction suggests it would benefit us, as they reportedly were dead set against it. Man Utd, Man City and Villa voted against. Chelsea abstained.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kryptonite and Sheikh_of_Araby
Finally the PL does a system that is fair. Came out of the blue this one, but makes a-lot of sense. No surprise it was the two Manchester clubs that voted it down, glad it passed anyhow. Effectively this will be great benefit to those outside of the CL/Europe. Think Man U voted it down as they have big revenues outside of CL so rely on those for FFP, they will be ****ed now haha....
 
Sounds like good news for then.

But why "5x the TV revenue of the lowest team in the PL"? Who came up with that as a benchmark for spending? <laugh>
 
And I've said it before, but we really do need to cut some of the crap from the squad, not keep offering extended contracts to dead wood. Even if we get nowt for them, just trim the wage bill to make more room for spending (on the revenue vs fees & wages ratio).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Roland Deschain
Obi Wan said:
And I've said it before, but we really do need to cut some of the crap from the squad, not keep offering extended contracts to dead wood. Even if we get nowt for them, just trim the wage bill to make more room for spending (on the revenue vs fees & wages ratio).
Click to expand...

This. Cannot fathom a contract for Gillespie, or if they crack on with contracts for Dummett and Ritchie.
 
Roland Deschain said:
This. Cannot fathom a contract for Gillespie, or if they crack on with contracts for Dummett and Ritchie.
Click to expand...
Gillespie contract indicates one of our other keepers will likely leave in the summer. But yeah, Dummett and Ritchie, come on, time to move them on.
 
Prince Isak (GG) said:
I can’t fathom where the logic is re the 5x.

Does that mean FFP over 3 years is scrapped?
Click to expand...
I think the 5x is arbitrary. Keeps the spending cap high, while also implementing a spending cap.
Many clubs cant even afford to spend 5x their amount but it does allow clubs that don't generate the revenue to be able to spend as much as the "big boys" if they wish to, as all clubs will have the same spending cap. Only Chelsea supparsed this amount last time, most clubs wont get close, but allows the smaller clubs to spend big if they wish to.
Personally think its the best thing PL has done in a long time..... Finally some of the smaller clubs are having their voices heard above the cartel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Geordie Ginola and Judge Death
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back