New PL spending rules
- Thread starter kirsikka
- Start date
DJ
Moderator
Clubs in Europe will have to stick to 75% to keep UEFA happy.
It’s also all accounted for annually rather than the current 3 year cycle.
Will make things particularly difficult for anyone winning promotion from next season. Unless there’s going to be a caveat for that.
Premier League spending cap rules explained: What might clubs be allowed to spend from the 2025/26 season?
Premier League clubs voted for new spending rules from the 2025/26 season; clubs would only be able to spend a maximum of 70 to 85 per cent amount of their revenue, there may also be anchoring rules in place; Man Utd, Man City and Aston Villa voted against new rules, Chelsea abstained
Last edited:
Let's pretend for a minute that table's a bit slow on the uptake when it comes to this sort of thing. Could someone do a "Janet and John" type explanation of what effect this will have on us : )
If it levels the playing field a bit for us and pisses of clubs like the Manchester twins, I'm very much in favour of it.
If it doesn't negatively impact us but upsets the "Super duper six or seven", I think I can tolerate it : )
If it in anyway makes things worse for us, it's obviously awful and heads should roll : (
I need to know where to set my emotion-o-meter between last minute winner at White Hart Lane and last kick loser at the Emirates
: )
If it levels the playing field a bit for us and pisses of clubs like the Manchester twins, I'm very much in favour of it.
If it doesn't negatively impact us but upsets the "Super duper six or seven", I think I can tolerate it : )
If it in anyway makes things worse for us, it's obviously awful and heads should roll : (
I need to know where to set my emotion-o-meter between last minute winner at White Hart Lane and last kick loser at the Emirates
: )
kirsikka
UTC Legend
There are two sets of new rules. This one has no impact on us as things stand now. However, what it does mean is that as the Self-important Six try to grab an ever bigger share of the tv money in addition to their Champions League money about to shoot up, they won't be able to spend it. If they want to spend more they'll need to ensure the clubs near the bottom get more rather than less. Which goes against everything they've tried to do for the last 20+ years so is an interesting development.
However, that's on the proviso that this rule hangs around for a number of seasons because, as it stands, none of them are particularly affected by it right now. Apart from probably Chelsea.
The other new rule where clubs are only able to spend 85% of their turnover will very much impact a club like us if we're in the 'investment' stage of the cycle in trying to build the club up. It'll make it harder for clubs to move between the groups in the PL and could stratify the division even further as the years go on. There will always be outliers but in general.
However, a lot will depend on implementation, punishments, any watering down etc.
However, that's on the proviso that this rule hangs around for a number of seasons because, as it stands, none of them are particularly affected by it right now. Apart from probably Chelsea.
The other new rule where clubs are only able to spend 85% of their turnover will very much impact a club like us if we're in the 'investment' stage of the cycle in trying to build the club up. It'll make it harder for clubs to move between the groups in the PL and could stratify the division even further as the years go on. There will always be outliers but in general.
However, a lot will depend on implementation, punishments, any watering down etc.
DJ
Moderator
Our revenue for 2022/23 was £143 million.
Under the new rules for 2025 we can only spend 85% of all revenues on player-related costs, which include transfer fees, agents fees and wages.
In 2022/23 we spent £127.5m net on transfer fees, £16million on agents and £100 million on wages.
Under the new rules for 2025 we can only spend 85% of all revenues on player-related costs, which include transfer fees, agents fees and wages.
In 2022/23 we spent £127.5m net on transfer fees, £16million on agents and £100 million on wages.
Audenshaw Cherry
UTC Legend
DJ
Moderator
Basically, we’d be restricted on transfer fees to be paid (if we don’t sell to counter balance) and we shouldn’t be spending £16million on agent fees.
DJ
Moderator
If you’re the owner of one of the big boys your answer would be yes as all of a sudden your club is going to be making a profit.
I think they want to have a big spending spree but aren't able to.
DJ
Moderator
Explains why Aston Villa voted against as they are currently in the worst “shape” and will need to cut some budgets or get creative with some accounting.
Man City are well under the threshold, but of course there’s questions over how creative their accounts are.
Whilst we are over the threshold, we’re not miles over. If we restrict transfers fees for new players, or sell players we’ll be fine. That’s the crux, fiddling around the edges won’t make a dent in things.
Man City are well under the threshold, but of course there’s questions over how creative their accounts are.
Whilst we are over the threshold, we’re not miles over. If we restrict transfers fees for new players, or sell players we’ll be fine. That’s the crux, fiddling around the edges won’t make a dent in things.
DJ
Moderator
Looking at the accounts comparisons…
Accounts - June 2023
Well, if Bill's astute enough to become a 1.6 Dollar Billionaire, I'm willing to accept he and his accountants know enough about FFP to differentiate between their assets and their elbows : ) Bill owns the train now and he's driving it. He knows his destination, we'll either get there or it'll...
bournemouth-forum.vitalfootball.co.uk
So for example, we click our fingers and we have our sparkling new Brentford-a-like stadium.
Match day revenue could increase by £7million. Commercial could also increase by £7million.
It still wouldn’t add up to a Hamed Traore transfer fee, plus his £2.3 wages or whatever cut of the £16million spent on player agents that Traore’s agent took.
