Foxin_Mad Posted 8 July Share Posted 8 July 48 minutes ago, st albans fox said: And they easily cover those interest payments because they generate many hundreds of millions in commercial income it’s just basic business debt is fine if you have a lot of income They dont need to have that debt though. Basic business is also if you want to invest 50 million and make a loss for 3 years to make your business more successful you can, but PSR stops this. So really only the historical big clubs who could grow commercial revenue when restrictions didn't exist can compete. Seems legit 'Fair' to me! 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orangecity23 Posted 8 July Share Posted 8 July I'd allow any fake sponsorship you like, but with a max value capped at whatever Man Utd have conned some chumps into paying. So if "fox leisure" want to pay us 90 million a year to make our kits, then that is tickety boo. Alternatively, if the league want to deem what fair value is for sponsorship deals, then whatever they say about us or a small club should cap the amount that Coca-Cola Chester united and pepsipool can actually spend on their squad out of their squilluon pound official logistics/car/face cream/VPN partner deals. 90 million for your kits? Cool. You get to spend 10 million from that. Spend the rest on fixing your leaky roof or on a spiffy new waistcoat for Uncle Bulgaria Radcliffe when he's wombling free about Carrington harassing the minimum wage staff about not home working and why he deserves a free stadium. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrysalis Posted 8 July Share Posted 8 July 8 hours ago, Foxin_Mad said: They dont need to have that debt though. Basic business is also if you want to invest 50 million and make a loss for 3 years to make your business more successful you can, but PSR stops this. So really only the historical big clubs who could grow commercial revenue when restrictions didn't exist can compete. Seems legit 'Fair' to me! FFP is effectively a legalised cartel, not sure why albans is defending it. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamble92 Posted 8 July Share Posted 8 July 9 hours ago, Foxin_Mad said: They dont need to have that debt though. Basic business is also if you want to invest 50 million and make a loss for 3 years to make your business more successful you can, but PSR stops this. So really only the historical big clubs who could grow commercial revenue when restrictions didn't exist can compete. Seems legit 'Fair' to me! You only had to hear Radcliffe's interview to see how they interpret their own clubs. We owe them everything for the brand of the Premier League being like it is in their eyes. It's even more unbelievable in the case of Spurs, Man City and even Chelsea that they just through circumstances at that specific time become one of those big clubs and now they'll seemingly forever be protected by rules like this to keep them there. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sly Posted 9 July Share Posted 9 July If we lose the appeal, do we go all Manchester City and send it to the court of arbitration for sport? Can you imagine the fallout if they overturned it and classed it as restriction of completion! Forest, Everton etc would have a field day! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted 9 July Share Posted 9 July With KDH going in last year's accounts it would seem we are compliant for 2023/24. As it stands we've added to our amortisation for 2024/25: Golding initial £3m on 5 year deal (£600k on the books) Decordova Reid £0 Okoli £13m on 5 year deal (£2.6m on the books) Assuming Fatawu ~£14m on 5 year deal (£2.8m on the books) We still have Daka, Souttar, Kristiansen, Faes, Soumare, Hermansen, Coady, Winks, Mavididi and Cannon transfer fees on the books also. Id say that's around £20m-£25m per year. All guesswork but assuming our wage bill is in a better position with Amartey, Soyuncu, Kasper, Albrighton, Barnes, Maddison, Evans, Praet, Iheanacho PL wages all off the books we might have room for 1 more signing without any outgoings this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosbehFox Posted 9 July Share Posted 9 July 49 minutes ago, Sly said: If we lose the appeal, do we go all Manchester City and send it to the court of arbitration for sport? Can you imagine the fallout if they overturned it and classed it as restriction of completion! Forest, Everton etc would have a field day! PL membership strikes out the ability to use CAS for such matters 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicesterpool Posted 10 July Share Posted 10 July What happens if clubs like ourselves everton, forest who faced points deduction refused to play our fixtures... effs up premier league. I know its automatic forfit of points to opposition team and possible fine. But it would muck up sky sports and bt schedule. Like imagine, man city v leicester an hour before kick off its announced leicester refuse to play. Everton v Chelsea selected for sky, everton refuse to play. Id be interested to see the outcome. Tv companies would pressure the premier league get these games on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGoldenGod Posted 10 July Share Posted 10 July 16 minutes ago, Leicesterpool said: What happens if clubs like ourselves everton, forest who faced points deduction refused to play our fixtures... effs up premier league. I know its automatic forfit of points to opposition team and possible fine. But it would muck up sky sports and bt schedule. Like imagine, man city v leicester an hour before kick off its announced leicester refuse to play. Everton v Chelsea selected for sky, everton refuse to play. Id be interested to see the outcome. Tv companies would pressure the premier league get these games on. I suggested something similar as a protest a month or so back but got criticized for even suggesting it. Put it this way, if we get hit with a 12 point deduction, its over, insurmountable! Wouldn't even be worth playing the games. 4 extra wins on top of the wins we'd usually need to stay up, crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClaphamFox Posted 10 July Author Share Posted 10 July 25 minutes ago, TheGoldenGod said: I suggested something similar as a protest a month or so back but got criticized for even suggesting it. Put it this way, if we get hit with a 12 point deduction, its over, insurmountable! Wouldn't even be worth playing the games. 4 extra wins on top of the wins we'd usually need to stay up, crazy. We are not going to be hit with a 12-point deduction. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ealingfox Posted 11 July Share Posted 11 July Life under Big Johnny Rudkin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted 11 July Share Posted 11 July 6 minutes ago, ealingfox said: Life under Big Johnny Rudkin The mixture of currencies in that tweet makes me doubt the validity of it. Apparently we've already offered him €4.6m and are now increasing it more? When he's only demanding €4m? I know we're a bit incompetent at contracts but I doubt even we'd do that 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trav Le Bleu Posted 11 July Share Posted 11 July 23 hours ago, ClaphamFox said: We are not going to be hit with a 12-point deduction. Ok, 15 point deduction 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trav Le Bleu Posted 11 July Share Posted 11 July 23 hours ago, ClaphamFox said: We are not going to be hit with a 12-point deduction. 30 minutes ago, Trav Le Bleu said: Ok, 15 point deduction Joking aside, what would be the maximum points you could deduct from a team and not make them just think, "soddit, we've got no chance," and just throw in the towel, thereby heavily affecting the league's balance? I think 10 has to be the absolute maximum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coolhandfox Posted 11 July Share Posted 11 July (edited) 2 hours ago, Trav Le Bleu said: Joking aside, what would be the maximum points you could deduct from a team and not make them just think, "soddit, we've got no chance," and just throw in the towel, thereby heavily affecting the league's balance? I think 10 has to be the absolute maximum. We will get 8 maximum, but 6 more likely. Edited 11 July by coolhandfox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazyKopCorner Posted 11 July Share Posted 11 July 5 hours ago, ealingfox said: Life under Big Johnny Rudkin FM I wish I could negotiate at work with Jonny R - I only got a measly 7% pay rise this year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AKCJ Posted 11 July Share Posted 11 July 5 hours ago, ealingfox said: Life under Big Johnny Rudkin Think it's quite clear that this FosseHub fellow doesn't know his arse from his elbow and isn't to be listened to. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trav Le Bleu Posted 11 July Share Posted 11 July 9 minutes ago, AKCJ said: Think it's quite clear that this FosseHub fellow doesn't know his arse from his elbow and isn't to be listened to. So... Are you saying... FosseHub is.... Jon Rudkin! 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FoxesWalk Posted 11 July Share Posted 11 July I hate this league. The top level of club football is in such a dire state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st albans fox Posted 11 July Share Posted 11 July 11 minutes ago, FoxesWalk said: I hate this league. The top level of club football is in such a dire state. Incredible and no doubt will be waved through just like the hotel sale …… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trav Le Bleu Posted 11 July Share Posted 11 July Wait.... We have a women's team... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danizen Posted 12 July Share Posted 12 July 9 hours ago, Trav Le Bleu said: Wait.... We have a women's team... But if we did it, it would be a step too far. The league would have to clamp down on things like this....if we did it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st albans fox Posted 12 July Share Posted 12 July 9 hours ago, Trav Le Bleu said: Wait.... We have a women's team... If Chelsea can justify 200m for theirs then we could probably manage 20m for ours. I’m not sure how much of the 200m is considered clean profit though. Could be that we wouldn’t be much better off if we sold ours in the same way as they did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted 12 July Share Posted 12 July Chelsea are grim and taking the piss with this PSR nonsense. Makes a complete mockery of the rules. They will also get away with it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claudio Fannieri Posted 12 July Share Posted 12 July Hopefully these blatant floundering of the rules make it so farcical that it aides our defence and we end up with minimal deduction or that our case is dismissed and both Forest and Everton are awarded their points back from last season. These actions whilst not a direct breach are making an utter mockery of the system. I would imagine a very good sports lawyer such as a Nick DiMarco would drive a bus through it. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts