And finally anyone saying our club is hard to call hasn't done their research! Successive boards have cut player budgets and stated their commitment to FFP. The network moves a fair few players around and to have CAFC restrained from signing players (and extending contracts) for the sake of a small equity injection doesn't make sense. I don't think the CEO and head coach would be talking about acquiring quality players in January if there was any chance of an embargo.
This is no different, however, from saying that Charlton's owners have been unwilling to cover significant losses (although in practice the previous lot had to do so). As MF says, it makes little practical difference to RD whether any money he puts in is a loan or equity so we will be millions under the cap - what he is willing to invest within the cap is the question.
True.
The issue here is that RDs plan is heavily reliant on FFP restricting others club over spending and so not blowing us out the water.
With FFP we will still have a smaller budget but the gap will have closed. The hope then is that the academy, good coaching and European scouting can then bridge the gap.
That will be a difficult enough trick to pull off even under current FFP rules. If the required investment needed to compete increases because of new FFP rules RD may not be willing to up his investment in CAFC to match. It maybe that he is but right now we don't know hence why this is such an important vote for us.
And finally anyone saying our club is hard to call hasn't done their research! Successive boards have cut player budgets and stated their commitment to FFP. The network moves a fair few players around and to have CAFC restrained from signing players (and extending contracts) for the sake of a small equity injection doesn't make sense. I don't think the CEO and head coach would be talking about acquiring quality players in January if there was any chance of an embargo.
This is no different, however, from saying that Charlton's owners have been unwilling to cover significant losses (although in practice the previous lot had to do so). As MF says, it makes little practical difference to RD whether any money he puts in is a loan or equity so we will be millions under the cap - what he is willing to invest within the cap is the question.
Agreed! In fact two questions which will be answered soon enough: 1) will the majority of clubs hold firm on limits? 2) how much will CAFC invest in the January window?
Breakeven has been mentioned but never explained by the new owner. We are now in the top half of the table without extravagant spending but to push on from here is going to be harder and more expensive.
On the other hand, standing still is just a waste of time - why would M.Duchatelet and Staprix spend £20-25m on acquiring Cafc and funding losses just to play Huddersfield and Sheffield Wednesday year after year?!
No, I am hoping for some wins soon and the chequebook to come out in January - two quality players on top of what we already have won't be cheap but I estimate that just appearing in the play-offs adds 25% of the FAPL monies to the enterprise value of Cafc. Yes Staprix buy us for £14m and within 18 months might have transformed us into a club worth £40-50m. They have picked the Baton and are taking us forward on the next lap just as the last runner tripped and fell over. Now that's why I think they will acquire more quality, not just because 15,000 diehards want them to.
There are worrying rumours that the FAPL have been deploying a typically unpleasant mix of bribery and blackmail, by offering a modest increase in solidarity payments if the FL drop their compliance scheme. We will find out soon enough how many were ready to face the FAPL down. I'm not optimistic.
And finally anyone saying our club is hard to call hasn't done their research! Successive boards have cut player budgets and stated their commitment to FFP. The network moves a fair few players around and to have CAFC restrained from signing players (and extending contracts) for the sake of a small equity injection doesn't make sense. I don't think the CEO and head coach would be talking about acquiring quality players in January if there was any chance of an embargo.
This is no different, however, from saying that Charlton's owners have been unwilling to cover significant losses (although in practice the previous lot had to do so). As MF says, it makes little practical difference to RD whether any money he puts in is a loan or equity so we will be millions under the cap - what he is willing to invest within the cap is the question.
Agreed! In fact two questions which will be answered soon enough: 1) will the majority of clubs hold firm on limits? 2) how much will CAFC invest in the January window?
Breakeven has been mentioned but never explained by the new owner. We are now in the top half of the table without extravagant spending but to push on from here is going to be harder and more expensive.
On the other hand, standing still is just a waste of time - why would M.Duchatelet and Staprix spend £20-25m on acquiring Cafc and funding losses just to play Huddersfield and Sheffield Wednesday year after year?!
No, I am hoping for some wins soon and the chequebook to come out in January - two quality players on top of what we already have won't be cheap but I estimate that just appearing in the play-offs adds 25% of the FAPL monies to the enterprise value of Cafc. Yes Staprix buy us for £14m and within 18 months might have transformed us into a club worth £40-50m. They have picked the Baton and are taking us forward on the next lap just as the last runner tripped and fell over. Now that's why I think they will acquire more quality, not just because 15,000 diehards want them to.
We'll see, but I think it would be more accurate to say the last runner was hopping on one leg for about 18 months . . .
There are worrying rumours that the FAPL have been deploying a typically unpleasant mix of bribery and blackmail, by offering a modest increase in solidarity payments if the FL drop their compliance scheme. We will find out soon enough how many were ready to face the FAPL down. I'm not optimistic.
The question is how much are they offering and whether 75% of the division are willing to sell two promotion places to the highest bidder. If you look at the top ten today, only Bournemouth and Forest have bought their way there. Too early to draw conclusions but one of the reasons that the Championship is so tight this season might be because the majority of clubs are operating within loss limits. The majority of games are draws at half time and maybe, just maybe the clubs like the idea of the best team winning promotion and not the richest owner. If these proposed changes are originating from Qpr and their refusal to contemplate paying penalties then they should be laughed out. Once again why would the majority listen to clubs like Forest, Cardiff and QPR who are trying to buy their way through at the expense of the rest of us? Let's see what they decide but it's quite handy that just seven clubs (25%+1) can vote for the status quo and block any proposals to dilute FFP. @Mundell Fleming and I identified way more than seven who comply and may want to see reducing losses to save money and restrict certain clubs.
There are worrying rumours that the FAPL have been deploying a typically unpleasant mix of bribery and blackmail, by offering a modest increase in solidarity payments if the FL drop their compliance scheme. We will find out soon enough how many were ready to face the FAPL down. I'm not optimistic.
Not a surprise but I remain optimistic that enough clubs will stand firm. If I'm right and it is only Championship clubs voting then they are less susceptible to such bribes to the League 1 and 2 clubs living hand to mouth.
What is unknown is how many are in breach and so more likely to want the rules changed.
They need 75% to change it so that means only 7 championship clubs need to hold their ground for the rules to stay as they are.
We're one, Brighton a second. Where is Yul Brenner counting them off when you need him?
"The existing Championship FFP framework will remain in place for the 2014/15 and 2015/16 seasons.
Any sanctions for accounts relating to the 2013/14 season will continue to take effect as intended (and in accordance with the amounts specified at the time).
The maximum deviation under the regulations will remain at £6m for 2014/15 and will increase to £13m in 2015/16, in line with the maximum loss (£39m over 3 seasons) permitted under the new rules.
"The existing Championship FFP framework will remain in place for the 2014/15 and 2015/16 seasons.
Any sanctions for accounts relating to the 2013/14 season will continue to take effect as intended (and in accordance with the amounts specified at the time).
The maximum deviation under the regulations will remain at £6m for 2014/15 and will increase to £13m in 2015/16, in line with the maximum loss (£39m over 3 seasons) permitted under the new rules.
There is an upside to this: 1) As Forest admit via their local rag that they face a player registration embargo, then the next question is what chance do they have of reducing losses to lower limits for this season? Perhaps they want to sell a player or two to CAFC before they find themselves restrained from signing academy players or offering extensions to their existing squad. 2) This actually places some urgency upon making CAFC more competitive asap for it it will inevitably become more expensive to compete in the top six in 2015-16 3) clubs relegated from the Premier league like Norwich and (hopefully) Qpr will no longer be exempt in their first season. Their loss are so staggering that they have no chance of complying even when allowed to count one year in three with higher FAPL limits 4) continuous assessment stops clubs like Leicester and Forest building losses which are not examined until six months after the end of the season.
Let's see how CAFC respond in writing and in the January window.
"The existing Championship FFP framework will remain in place for the 2014/15 and 2015/16 seasons.
Any sanctions for accounts relating to the 2013/14 season will continue to take effect as intended (and in accordance with the amounts specified at the time).
The maximum deviation under the regulations will remain at £6m for 2014/15 and will increase to £13m in 2015/16, in line with the maximum loss (£39m over 3 seasons) permitted under the new rules.
Don't think this is good news for us at all. Massive great big spanner in the works.
As it was this year though so still some clubs are going to get hit with an embargo
So predictable. Interested to see the size of the bribe.
Sadly, you're probably right. As far as the bribe from the Premier League is concerned it won't help the owners of clubs in the Championship. It will simply get spent on wages. The winners, yet again, are the players.
What's interesting about this is why the Premier League cares. Why has the odious Richard Scudamore intervened and handed out more TV money to clubs not playing at the elite level? He must think its in the interests of the Premier League, and it's TV deal in particular, for wealthy owners of clubs in the Championship to be able to fund sizeable losses, enabling the acquisition of expensive players, probably from abroad, hence raising standards in his "feeder league".
If that's right the level cynicism and complete lack of interest in genuine financial stability is breathtaking.
I suspect that Roland Duchatelet is appalled. I doubt he'll ever be willing to fund the kind of budget necessary to compete once the new rules kick in. I wouldn't be surprised if he decides to look for a buyer. Here we go again.
I suspect that Roland Duchatelet is appalled. I doubt he'll ever be willing to fund the kind of budget necessary to compete once the new rules kick in. I wouldn't be surprised if he decides to look for a buyer. Here we go again.
That is my fear.
He bought the club on the basis that FFP was going to level the playing field at least a little.
"Following the Championship’s decision, The Board of The Football League has been given a mandate by its clubs to complete a new financial solidarity arrangement with the Premier League in accordance with that currently under discussion between the two leagues".
I've said since the start I couldn't take the FPP stuff seriously as it was obvious come the crunch that bigger clubs would find loopholes or it will be adjusted.
Football (in this country) is a financial whore with the morals to match, and that won't be changing anytime soon
The difficulty for me is, and always has been that RD is a statistical financial bod and he is not not someone who understands the corrupt world of football. I agree with AFKA, they were always going to find brown envelopes to house the loopholes.
At the end of the day, if you understand all of this, even if FFP wasn't there, i don't think RD will splash more cash than he needs to, to break even or make a profit
"A Football League statement confirming the new regulations did not directly address concerns relating to parachute payments. Among the issues raised at a meeting of the Football League and Championship clubs in April was that Premier League parachute payments could distort competition when allied to the FFP rules. Clubs relegated from the top flight receive £60m in payments over four years, a figure increased from £48m in 2013. The statement did, however, say that the Football League board had been given a "mandate by its clubs to complete a new financial solidarity arrangement with the Premier League".
What has actually happened Seth is this. Scudamore has told the FL clubs that he doesn't like their FFP rules, and might make life difficult for them by reducing solidarity payments if they don't change it. However if they do,then the solidarity payments can be increased. Now the FL have done their bit they can go and "negotiate". I'm just struggling to understand what negotiating cards they hold.
How much more does it take before supporters understand that the whole stinking edifice whereby Richard Scudamore on behalf of 20 various and usual foreign businessmen dictates the money that "flows" to football in general, needs to be dismantled?
Firstly the "bribe": there is nothing announced today save for the Championship saying they will go out to bat against the FAPL re payments. As far as I recall these are a "charitable donation" and the FAPL threatened to withdraw this a while back if clubs didn't vote for the new academy proposals.
Perhaps there is a proposal to increase the amount and/or to turn it into a more solid arrangement but at present it's "only" £2m a year so hardly enough for a typical £20m turnover club to rollover and sacrifice the chance of promotion.
Some love a conspiracy and some refuse to recognise that the FAPL wouldn't be nearly as successful at what they do if it were run by some quango stuffed full of old school farts from the county FA set up.
The only reason Staprix paid £14m for CAFC was for a ticket and a chance to participate in one of the largest sports media deals in the world.
The last owners sold up when they couldn't afford to fund the next step up and CAFC will be worth a lot more as a club just by arriving in the top six.
Some worry about M.Duchatelet selling but why sell up now with only half the job done, especially when three or four competitors will be handicapped in January. The prize of FAPL money is still the same at £85m pa, just that the stake money to be in the game every year has doubled from £6m to £13m. That's for next season. We all know that building up losses doesn't guarantee success. And is very messy if you miss the cut. It's hard to judge without knowing the voting or precise losses for last season but I would venture that this is another step towards premier league 2. If CAFC want to play then they have to win through. Moan all you want but many think we are just two quality players away from being a real challenger. That can be fixed in January within 12 months of the takeover. So this might just be a bump on the road. Sportsclubstats.com is finally up again and that site gives us a 20% chance of making the play offs. Win at Reading and beat Millwall now that our squad is almost fully fit and watch that chance grow.
the threat from Scudamore, plus promise of bribe for compliance, is real enough but for obvious reasons you won't find anything in print about it. I just urge you to accept that it is not something I dreamt up.
You regularly claim that "some" wish to see the FAPL "run by some quango stuffed full of old school farts from the county FA set up". Assuming you mean me, let me tell you once and for all that you misrepresent my view, and I kindly ask you to pack it in.
What I want is to see English football run by an organisation which has the same remit and power, and shows the same competence, strategic vision, and delivery of football excellence and customer satisfaction as that held and shown by the DFB (German Football Association).
Ah, Premier League 2. You do realise that this was deemed to be inevitable - and imminent - 20 years ago, do you? Maybe I'll find you the texts, Seriously Red, if I can be bothered.
As for the last owners selling up when they "couldn't fund the next step up", I'm afraid they couldn't fund the status quo, which was more to the immediate point.
But I'm so glad sportsclubstats.com is back. How did we live without it? And is it as reliable as Oohaah?
I agree with AFKA, they were always going to find brown envelopes to house the loopholes.
This isn't simply about those clubs in the Championship struggling with FFP finding a way out. Indeed, it appears they will still be subject to sanctions, this season and perhaps next season too.
The Premier League's intervention is much more significant and serious than a simple lobby and cave in. As @PragueAddick has stated, Dicky Scudamore simply didn't like the Championship's version of FFP. As I noted above, the key question is why not.
An important implication of FFP was that it undermined the benefactor model where a very wealthy owner could buy a club in the Championship and spend what was necessary to achieve promotion to the promised land. That was the point, of course, because this behaviour led to a destructive arms race and the Championship became a financial graveyard.
However, I have little doubt that Scudamore wants Russian, Arab and American billionaires to acquire clubs in the Championship in the belief that they can buy promotion. These owners can be expected to continue to spend if and when promoted. That's good for the Premier League.
What would not be good for the Premier League would be a cadre of owners like Roland Duchatelet who were financially prudent and who may choose not to splash the cash on promotion. Scudamore doesn't want Roland Duchatelet and his ilk. He wants Tony Fernandes and Bournemouth's owner, for example, rolling the dice.
This move protects the Premier League against the risk of a bottom third comprised of profitable yoyo clubs who aren't trying to compete with the big boys. Potentially, it returns the Championship to a financial nightmare where a number of clubs, it remains to be seen how many, run big losses in the search for promotion, because they are willing and able to do so, while the remainder, who are not willing to play that game, yoyo between the Championship and League One, still losing money but more modestly.
It stinks. As I said above, it's hard to see why anybody sensible would want to own a Championship club. I'd be surprised if Roland doesn't now think very hard about whether to sell. Ironically, we're now more attractive to a crazy billionaire.
Comments
The issue here is that RDs plan is heavily reliant on FFP restricting others club over spending and so not blowing us out the water.
With FFP we will still have a smaller budget but the gap will have closed. The hope then is that the academy, good coaching and European scouting can then bridge the gap.
That will be a difficult enough trick to pull off even under current FFP rules. If the required investment needed to compete increases because of new FFP rules RD may not be willing to up his investment in CAFC to match. It maybe that he is but right now we don't know hence why this is such an important vote for us.
In fact two questions which will be answered soon enough:
1) will the majority of clubs hold firm on limits?
2) how much will CAFC invest in the January window?
Breakeven has been mentioned but never explained by the new owner. We are now in the top half of the table without extravagant spending but to push on from here is going to be harder and more expensive.
On the other hand, standing still is just a waste of time - why would M.Duchatelet and Staprix spend £20-25m on acquiring Cafc and funding losses just to play Huddersfield and Sheffield Wednesday year after year?!
No, I am hoping for some wins soon and the chequebook to come out in January - two quality players on top of what we already have won't be cheap but I estimate that just appearing in the play-offs adds 25% of the FAPL monies to the enterprise value of Cafc. Yes Staprix buy us for £14m and within 18 months might have transformed us into a club worth £40-50m.
They have picked the Baton and are taking us forward on the next lap just as the last runner tripped and fell over.
Now that's why I think they will acquire more quality, not just because 15,000 diehards want them to.
If you look at the top ten today, only Bournemouth and Forest have bought their way there.
Too early to draw conclusions but one of the reasons that the Championship is so tight this season might be because the majority of clubs are operating within loss limits. The majority of games are draws at half time and maybe, just maybe the clubs like the idea of the best team winning promotion and not the richest owner.
If these proposed changes are originating from Qpr and their refusal to contemplate paying penalties then they should be laughed out.
Once again why would the majority listen to clubs like Forest, Cardiff and QPR who are trying to buy their way through at the expense of the rest of us?
Let's see what they decide but it's quite handy that just seven clubs (25%+1) can vote for the status quo and block any proposals to dilute FFP.
@Mundell Fleming and I identified way more than seven who comply and may want to see reducing losses to save money and restrict certain clubs.
What is unknown is how many are in breach and so more likely to want the rules changed.
They need 75% to change it so that means only 7 championship clubs need to hold their ground for the rules to stay as they are.
We're one, Brighton a second. Where is Yul Brenner counting them off when you need him?
http://www.football-league.co.uk/news/article/2014/20141106-championship-financial-fair-play-rules-rg-2066799.aspx
Any sanctions for accounts relating to the 2013/14 season will continue to take effect as intended (and in accordance with the amounts specified at the time).
The maximum deviation under the regulations will remain at £6m for 2014/15 and will increase to £13m in 2015/16, in line with the maximum loss (£39m over 3 seasons) permitted under the new rules.
Read more at http://www.football-league.co.uk/news/article/2014/20141106-championship-financial-fair-play-rules-rg-2066799.aspx#wz8L0hxUP7rcZhMY.99
Don't think this is good news for us at all. Massive great big spanner in the works.
As it was this year though so still some clubs are going to get hit with an embargo
1) As Forest admit via their local rag that they face a player registration embargo, then the next question is what chance do they have of reducing losses to lower limits for this season?
Perhaps they want to sell a player or two to CAFC before they find themselves restrained from signing academy players or offering extensions to their existing squad.
2) This actually places some urgency upon making CAFC more competitive asap for it it will inevitably become more expensive to compete in the top six in 2015-16
3) clubs relegated from the Premier league like Norwich and (hopefully) Qpr will no longer be exempt in their first season. Their loss are so staggering that they have no chance of complying even when allowed to count one year in three with higher FAPL limits
4) continuous assessment stops clubs like Leicester and Forest building losses which are not examined until six months after the end of the season.
Let's see how CAFC respond in writing and in the January window.
What's interesting about this is why the Premier League cares. Why has the odious Richard Scudamore intervened and handed out more TV money to clubs not playing at the elite level? He must think its in the interests of the Premier League, and it's TV deal in particular, for wealthy owners of clubs in the Championship to be able to fund sizeable losses, enabling the acquisition of expensive players, probably from abroad, hence raising standards in his "feeder league".
If that's right the level cynicism and complete lack of interest in genuine financial stability is breathtaking.
I suspect that Roland Duchatelet is appalled. I doubt he'll ever be willing to fund the kind of budget necessary to compete once the new rules kick in. I wouldn't be surprised if he decides to look for a buyer. Here we go again.
He bought the club on the basis that FFP was going to level the playing field at least a little.
Now that is gone.
We shall have to wait and see how he reacts.
Bumpy ride again
Bernie Ecclestone would be proud.
Football (in this country) is a financial whore with the morals to match, and that won't be changing anytime soon
http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11688/9552172/the-championship-clubs-have-agreed-to-change-their-ffp-rules
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/29940463
"A Football League statement confirming the new regulations did not directly address concerns relating to parachute payments.
Among the issues raised at a meeting of the Football League and Championship clubs in April was that Premier League parachute payments could distort competition when allied to the FFP rules.
Clubs relegated from the top flight receive £60m in payments over four years, a figure increased from £48m in 2013.
The statement did, however, say that the Football League board had been given a "mandate by its clubs to complete a new financial solidarity arrangement with the Premier League".
What has actually happened Seth is this. Scudamore has told the FL clubs that he doesn't like their FFP rules, and might make life difficult for them by reducing solidarity payments if they don't change it. However if they do,then the solidarity payments can be increased. Now the FL have done their bit they can go and "negotiate". I'm just struggling to understand what negotiating cards they hold.
How much more does it take before supporters understand that the whole stinking edifice whereby Richard Scudamore on behalf of 20 various and usual foreign businessmen dictates the money that "flows" to football in general, needs to be dismantled?
Perhaps there is a proposal to increase the amount and/or to turn it into a more solid arrangement but at present it's "only" £2m a year so hardly enough for a typical £20m turnover club to rollover and sacrifice the chance of promotion.
Some love a conspiracy and some refuse to recognise that the FAPL wouldn't be nearly as successful at what they do if it were run by some quango stuffed full of old school farts from the county FA set up.
The only reason Staprix paid £14m for CAFC was for a ticket and a chance to participate in one of the largest sports media deals in the world.
The last owners sold up when they couldn't afford to fund the next step up and CAFC will be worth a lot more as a club just by arriving in the top six.
Some worry about M.Duchatelet selling but why sell up now with only half the job done, especially when three or four competitors will be handicapped in January.
The prize of FAPL money is still the same at £85m pa, just that the stake money to be in the game every year has doubled from £6m to £13m. That's for next season.
We all know that building up losses doesn't guarantee success. And is very messy if you miss the cut.
It's hard to judge without knowing the voting or precise losses for last season but I would venture that this is another step towards premier league 2. If CAFC want to play then they have to win through. Moan all you want but many think we are just two quality players away from being a real challenger. That can be fixed in January within 12 months of the takeover.
So this might just be a bump on the road. Sportsclubstats.com is finally up again and that site gives us a 20% chance of making the play offs. Win at Reading and beat Millwall now that our squad is almost fully fit and watch that chance grow.
COYA!
the threat from Scudamore, plus promise of bribe for compliance, is real enough but for obvious reasons you won't find anything in print about it. I just urge you to accept that it is not something I dreamt up.
You regularly claim that "some" wish to see the FAPL "run by some quango stuffed full of old school farts from the county FA set up". Assuming you mean me, let me tell you once and for all that you misrepresent my view, and I kindly ask you to pack it in.
What I want is to see English football run by an organisation which has the same remit and power, and shows the same competence, strategic vision, and delivery of football excellence and customer satisfaction as that held and shown by the DFB (German Football Association).
As for the last owners selling up when they "couldn't fund the next step up", I'm afraid they couldn't fund the status quo, which was more to the immediate point.
But I'm so glad sportsclubstats.com is back. How did we live without it? And is it as reliable as Oohaah?
The Premier League's intervention is much more significant and serious than a simple lobby and cave in. As @PragueAddick has stated, Dicky Scudamore simply didn't like the Championship's version of FFP. As I noted above, the key question is why not.
An important implication of FFP was that it undermined the benefactor model where a very wealthy owner could buy a club in the Championship and spend what was necessary to achieve promotion to the promised land. That was the point, of course, because this behaviour led to a destructive arms race and the Championship became a financial graveyard.
However, I have little doubt that Scudamore wants Russian, Arab and American billionaires to acquire clubs in the Championship in the belief that they can buy promotion. These owners can be expected to continue to spend if and when promoted. That's good for the Premier League.
What would not be good for the Premier League would be a cadre of owners like Roland Duchatelet who were financially prudent and who may choose not to splash the cash on promotion. Scudamore doesn't want Roland Duchatelet and his ilk. He wants Tony Fernandes and Bournemouth's owner, for example, rolling the dice.
This move protects the Premier League against the risk of a bottom third comprised of profitable yoyo clubs who aren't trying to compete with the big boys. Potentially, it returns the Championship to a financial nightmare where a number of clubs, it remains to be seen how many, run big losses in the search for promotion, because they are willing and able to do so, while the remainder, who are not willing to play that game, yoyo between the Championship and League One, still losing money but more modestly.
It stinks. As I said above, it's hard to see why anybody sensible would want to own a Championship club. I'd be surprised if Roland doesn't now think very hard about whether to sell. Ironically, we're now more attractive to a crazy billionaire.