You're right. It's just meant to make sure that the so-called 'well run' elite of big clubs (as beloved by the corrupt officials of FIFA and EUFA) stay at the top of the pile forever and that they have plenty of cannon-fodder in the form of under-funded rivals. This whole business is anti-competitive and in any other walk of life simply would not be tolerated. More importantly it kills off the dreams of smaller clubs and their supporters (even if these days that dream mostly consists of hoping for a sugar daddy to buy in). If these rules were really for the good of football as a whole then they would set the same investment cap for ALL clubs. As it is we now have the worst of all worlds. The only good news is that I fully expect to see this nonsense to be swept away in the courts as soon as they try to enforce it.
The value of our squad is only what someone is willing to pay after they have made their due diligence and taken into account the following: How much they believe a said player can improve on their squad How big their own budget is for transfer and wages The financial state of the Seller We've seen many a team's assets raped due to them entering into a parlous state - Anyone remember Leeds turning down 30M for Harry Kewell only to have to sell him for 6 less than 12 months later. Hell, we have a history of it as well, don't you remember the 6M offer we got for Trevor Sinclair? Only to turn it down to receive 1 1/2M the same timeline later. There is a damn good reason why playing staff values are not an acceptable asset on your books - that is because the value of it as about as accurate as the contents of a drunk gambler's wallet as he enters into the local Ladbrokes for an afternoon betting on Cheltenham which has heavy going after monsoon downpours!! (You have to understand racing to fully get that analogy - which while I'm at it for those that dont know, the very best tipster by a country mile is on Not606 with the excellent username Stick as in go and Stick that blue flag .....). But anyway 10, 20, 40? What's that when we race up towards 200 of debt? - Maybe Tone should be following some of Stick's tips.
Agree with Aaaaagh on FFP, weighted to favour clubs with big turnovers, I would imagine very difficult to enforce. And with Danish on player values, though just for reference Transfermarkt has our squad value of players in contract after 30 June at £42.85m. I think they overvalue in general, this puts Remy at £10.5m (I don't think this is an overvaluation) and assumes you could get £6.6m for Adel and £4.4m for Granero. So that's 50% of our fantasy player valuation in 3 players. Austin and Phillips only other £4m players, their value I would assume could go up with a crack at the prem. The rest are (comparatively) peanuts.
you're absolutely right of course. the figures they're talking about are so huge they're almost meaningless to me. Far more concerned about what sort of midfield we're gong to stick out against Charlton and what sort of performance we can expect.
These kinds of lists will never be accurate because there's a lot more to it. But it's still not a good situation and there are too many English clubs in the list!!
Just realised the value of our players and property doesn't count for FFP anyway, its just turnover - gate takings, TV money, merchandise sales etc, not sure if sponsorship is included vs debt (presumably excluding debt due to property development). This will give us an horrendous figure this year as income plummets due to much smaller TV fees and lower ticket prices. The next set of accounts to be published will only take us into last season.
It's also wrong. We had £70M+ in debts in our last accounts, so we should be on the list when 10th is only $72M. FFP is (very briefly) designed to curb over spending in future. Existing debts aren't a problem, as far as the rules are concerned it's only the interest (as it's an expense) and how other losses are funded that are important (eg UEFA for its competitions currently allows 15M Euros loss over 3 seasons, but increases it to 45M if it's done through shares rather than loans). Obviously the figures are constantly moving as well because they're phasing things in, so even this time next year it'll be different as more parts of it are applicable. The fact there are different rules in different divisions is an issue. This site is quite a good guide though: http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/financial-fair-play-explained.php