• Current Donation Goals

richard

Chelsea Finances Thread

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Bob Singleton said:

The possible redefining of "related parties" is certainly interesting. It would certainly curb the spending power of City and PSG.

 

Last time it was the sheiks brother wasn't it ? Literally related.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ham   
35 minutes ago, Lump Of Celery said:

Supposedly UEFA are looking to revamp the FFP rules, can't find a English link to the original article in the Parisian but found these

https://www.mcfcwatch.com/2018/01/21/uefa-plot-financial-fair-play-2-0-with-manchester-city-chelsea-and-psg-targeted/

http://www.marca.com/en/football/international-football/2018/01/21/5a6479e822601d2a7c8b4577.html

PSG have clearly ruffled a few feathers last summer. The part which would affect us most would be the limit on the number of registered players but I can't see that being enforceable as it would discourage academies, something they have already brought in measures to encourage.

I'm liking the fake sponsorship clause. There was me thinking nobody had noticed what City were up to. 

We're only mentioned because of the number of players out on loan. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Bob Singleton said:

The possible redefining of "related parties" is certainly interesting. It would certainly curb the spending power of City and PSG.

Regarding the mooted idea of restricting the number of players at clubs, what about clubs like Barca who have B teams? I think clubs in league structures where there are no B teams (such as Premier League and Ligue 1) might have something to say.



 

It would result in every academy player when reaching the age of 18 having to be included in the first team squad or sold/released. Just not feasible and can't see why any club would bother with an academy if that was the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Lump Of Celery said:

It would result in every academy player when reaching the age of 18 having to be included in the first team squad or sold/released. Just not feasible and can't see why any club would bother with an academy if that was the case.

Well, firstly it's a suggestion to be discussed, so no need to panic just yet. Furthermore, under current UEFA rules, the age cut off in CL and EL squads is 21 not 18, so it wouldn't affect players like Tammy Abraham or Christensen even if it were in operation today. As I hinted earlier, it could favour clubs able to field B teams, in which case I can see arguments against the idea from those unable to do so.

At least UEFA have accepted that the original FFP rules weren't working and are at least trying to make changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Related parties - the rule is clear enough.  Moreover if the Accounting firm that set up the rules (and later advised City) did not know how to write clear rules about related parties they should be sued.  Related party clauses are in all kinds of legal agreements, and specifically in corporate tax law.
The issue is not re-defining related party rules, it is simply enacting it.

It is not clear to me whether FFP is legally binding - or at least whether it would collapse under EU competition law if challenged.  Or rather I think that it almost certainly would collapse, but few would be brave enough to challenge it, not least because I believe UEFA and FIFA have some pretty hefty sanctions if anyone challenges them in court (they may insist that the national FA throws the club out of its domestic league).
So amongst other things, that leads me to treat related party adjustments more as a way of covering up FFP legal shortcomings rather than  specifically the related party clauses (which is just a definition, easy to introduce up to the point where you decide on punishments).

The EUR 100m net transfer limit is surely a joke now.  Even if you ignore the super deals of Neymar and Mbappe, near EUR 100m deals are commonplace, and likely to be exceeded.  Besides it would just transfer more of the rent for a player from owner to player and agent.  The net effect being lower transfer fees, higher wages, and a big loss to all those clubs that rely on sales to bigger clubs for their income.

25 players.  I'm always suspicious of anything that has clearly not been explained properly, like the 25 players or VAR.  Invariably they mean it is a long way short of introduction (Yes VAR is in, and proving that poorly thought out projects end up poorly executed and fail to achieve much positive).

But Chelsea and City are not unusual, I gather Italian clubs can own up to 70 players.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/feb/13/sky-bt-sport-premier-league-tv-rights

 

So slightly less revenue from the TV deals in the future, and I can see that trend continuing; slight reduction in income but more games being televised. Of course there are still a couple of overseas rights packages yet to be finalised, but with the possibility of Amazon bidding now no longer the case, I can't see much of an increase in revenue from there.

Whilst Sky and BT were in competition the price was always likely to increase. Now that they have a commercial agreement in place whereby Sky viewers can also get BT Sport and BT customers can get Sky Sports, it no longer makes sense to try and out-bid each other for "exclusive content" that is now no longer exclusive.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Bob Singleton said:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/feb/13/sky-bt-sport-premier-league-tv-rights

 

So slightly less revenue from the TV deals in the future, and I can see that trend continuing; slight reduction in income but more games being televised. Of course there are still a couple of overseas rights packages yet to be finalised, but with the possibility of Amazon bidding now no longer the case, I can't see much of an increase in revenue from there.

Whilst Sky and BT were in competition the price was always likely to increase. Now that they have a commercial agreement in place whereby Sky viewers can also get BT Sport and BT customers can get Sky Sports, it no longer makes sense to try and out-bid each other for "exclusive content" that is now no longer exclusive.
 

Good points.  Certainly TV revenue is not going up right now, and the boost from the entry of BT to the market is over.  But this is a 2019-22 agreement, and the next negotiations will not be for 3 more years.  What happens then might be quite different.  Perhaps Netflix and Amazon might make a bigger pitch.  Pay per view on those or new platforms might be much more common.  And perhaps over 3 years, copyright media might do better in the battle with stolen steams, giving BT, SKY more revenue from so leading to bigger bids.

So in the long run I suspect that this is more of a pause in the rise of TV revenues, rather than a change in direction.

Abramovich.  As an investor it has to be said his timing has been spectacular.  In football he apparently spent a fortune of FU money on a football club only to find it is actually worth more than he paid for it (something that can't be said, yet, about many later football investors who paid more and needed far far more to make themselves a top team).  In oil his timing has been even better.
In 2011/14 he/we made a hell of a lot of investments in players for the next decade.  A few got away cheap, but most of them made the team that won 2 PLs and is still doing well.  Since then we have cut spending/investment by a lot even while winning titles.
In 2015 TV revenues jumped by 71% for 2016-9
Over 2015-18 player prices jumped by (I guess) more than 71%
In 2018 TV revenues fall by 15% (so far, a bit more to sell).

Has RA timed the market right again?  
Will player prices fall now?
Luck or intelligence?

Edited by Droy was my hero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Droy was my hero said:

Good points.  Certainly TV revenue is not going up right now, and the boost from the entry of BT to the market is over.  But this is a 2019-22 agreement, and the next negotiations will not be for 3 more years.  What happens then might be quite different.  Perhaps Netflix and Amazon might make a bigger pitch.  Pay per view on those or new platforms might be much more common.  And perhaps over 3 years, copyright media might do better in the battle with stolen steams, giving BT, SKY more revenue from so leading to bigger bids.

So in the long run I suspect that this is more of a pause in the rise of TV revenues, rather than a change in direction.

Abramovich.  As an investor it has to be said his timing has been spectacular.  In football he apparently spent a fortune of FU money on a football club only to find it is actually worth more than he paid for it (something that can't be said, yet, about many later football investors who paid more and needed far far more to make themselves a top team).  In oil his timing has been even better.
In 2011/14 he/we made a hell of a lot of investments in players for the next decade.  A few got away cheap, but most of them made the team that won 2 PLs and is still doing well.  Since then we have cut spending/investment by a lot even while winning titles.
In 2015 TV revenues jumped by 71% for 2016-9
Over 2015-18 player prices jumped by (I guess) more than 71%
In 2018 TV revenues fall by 15% (so far, a bit more to sell).

Has RA timed the market right again?  
Will player prices fall now?
Luck or intelligence?

Very interesting points , maybe he is a genius after all ! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Droy was my hero said:

[SNIP]

Has RA timed the market right again?  
Will player prices fall now?
Luck or intelligence?

If they do and the FFP rules change as per UEFAs proposals (instead of not making a loss of more than €x over 3 seasons to not spending more than €100m net on players) then his luck/judgement will indeed have been superb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Job ad.  Any guesses who this might be?

Spot the error - (not just that this was sent out 2 hours ago)

 

Quote

Data Analyst 

Our client is an English football club based in Fulham, London. Founded in 1905, the club plays in the Premier League and has spent most of its history in the top tier of English football. They have won 3 Premier League Titles, 7 FA Cups, 4 League Cups, 1 UEFA Champions League and 1 UEFA Europa League. 

Position: Data Analyst 
Location: Fulham Broadway 
Job Type: Full Time, Permanent 
Salary: £Competitive 

Closing Date: 25th February 2018 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now