rbr 1,247 Posted March 27, 2010 Share Posted March 27, 2010 http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/article7078254.ece 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewarty 1,878 Posted March 27, 2010 Share Posted March 27, 2010 For the folk who prefer not to click the link... English football’s super-rich owners, including Roman Abramovich and Sheikh Mansour, face drastic curbs on their influence under Uefa proposals. The extent of the crackdown on “financial doping”, championed by Michel Platini, the Uefa president, is laid bare in a 60-page document seen by The Times. In it, Uefa sets out its detailed plans to force clubs towards break-even, allowing them to spend only what they earn. Owners would be allowed to inject cash to cover losses for a transitional period, but the amounts will be restricted and closely monitored. Over the initial three-year period of regulation up to and including 2015, owners would be allowed to cover losses totalling "45 million (about Ã?£40 million). The “acceptable deviation” from break-even would then fall to Ã?£30 million over three years and then less, with the amount to be determined. Related Links Platini’s plan to end spending of Premier League giants Uefa’s plan will help avoid another Portsmouth Fans may pay price of Platini’s daft proposal Multimedia EXCLUSIVE: Revealed - details of Platini's plan PATRICK BARCLAY: Something had to be done In other words, an owner such as Sheikh Mansour would eventually be permitted to put less than Ã?¤10 million a year into Manchester City on average, unless the money is spent on infrastructure or the youth team, which have no limits on investment. That compares with City’s most recent loss of Ã?£89.69 million. While Platini has talked for months about introducing “financial fair play”, the working draft has brought those proposals into sharp focus. The European Club Association continues to haggle with Uefa for concessions. It is arguing for a five-year accounting period, rather than three, and for owners to be allowed to invest extra funds through equity rather than debt. Platini is determined to bring in regulations that will mark a watershed in the English game. While the proposals will be phased in over several years, many clubs will have to make significant changes — drastic in the cases of Chelsea and City — if they are not to fall foul of the new regulations and face a possible ban from European competition. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbr 1,247 Posted March 27, 2010 Author Share Posted March 27, 2010 For the folk who prefer not to click the link... Ok I admit I was a wee bit lazy , too busy switching between the game and this site , cheers Stewarty :) 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewarty 1,878 Posted March 27, 2010 Share Posted March 27, 2010 Its an interesting idea but it seems pretty flawed from the limited information the article offers. If you try to put limitations on how much somebody wants to invest in a football team, they will find ways of legitimately working around it. It would be like tax avoidance. No matter how much companies and individuals are taxed, those who want to, will find ways of legitimately avoiding it. What would stop the owner of a club also becoming its main sponsor and giving the club a bumper flexible deal each season to add to the money that is invested? Perhaps the way to address this in part would be to introduce solvency rules, similar to those imposed on banks. E.g. clubs must have a certain percentage of reserves to cover their liabilities. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbr 1,247 Posted March 27, 2010 Author Share Posted March 27, 2010 Platini has been working on this for months and has the backing of some major players in UEFA , lets face it the power that the EPL has , it was only a matter of time before something was done to reign them back. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny 0 Posted March 27, 2010 Share Posted March 27, 2010 The biggest transfers in the world are in Spain and Italy. 45M and Sammy Eto'o for Zlatan. 56M for Kaka. 80M for Ronaldo. Platini just doesn't like the success of the EPL despite the fact that the biggest price an English club has ever paid for a player is still Man City's 34M for Robinho. Furthermore, in the top 10 highest paid players in the world, only 2 are from English clubs - Tevez and Lampard. The rest are all Italy and Spain. I don't deny there's money flowing in England, but it's a cheek and a lie to say it's far worse in England than anywhere else. And if these proposals are universal and directed at Spain, Italy and the rest as well as England, then that article is very misleading. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbr 1,247 Posted March 27, 2010 Author Share Posted March 27, 2010 The biggest transfers in the world are in Spain and Italy. 45M and Sammy Eto'o for Zlatan. 56M for Kaka. 80M for Ronaldo. Platini just doesn't like the success of the EPL despite the fact that the biggest price an English club has ever paid for a player is still Man City's 34M for Robinho. Furthermore, in the top 10 highest paid players in the world, only 2 are from English clubs - Tevez and Lampard. The rest are all Italy and Spain. I don't deny there's money flowing in England, but it's a cheek and a lie to say it's far worse in England than anywhere else. And if these proposals are universal and directed at Spain, Italy and the rest as well as England, then that article is very misleading. Danny this is more to do with clubs spending outwith their incomes , something we have been paying the price off for a good few years , if Real Madrid make �£100 million in profit then they can spend that , the trouble is the Chelsea's ,Man City's where they are making massive losses every year , remember the Epl owe more than �£3 BILLION 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted March 27, 2010 Share Posted March 27, 2010 Man u Chelsea Liverpool are all 700-900 million in the red. These rich owners are not pumping money into the club they are just covering the debt they are allowed to borrow. With these teams getting 50-70 mill from TV revenue it will be difficult enough for us to compete with them but the clubs with a small fan base as Portsmouth, Fulham etc should be back in our financial pond. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny 0 Posted March 27, 2010 Share Posted March 27, 2010 Danny this is more to do with clubs spending outwith their incomes , something we have been paying the price off for a good few years , if Real Madrid make �£100 million in profit then they can spend that , the trouble is the Chelsea's ,Man City's where they are making massive losses every year , remember the Epl owe more than �£3 BILLION Have you any notion of the quite gigantic debt Real Madrid are in? If they make 100M in profit then rather than that being spent on improving their club, it should be going to clear up their debts which are something like �£500M. That doesn't quite fit with this whole plan. Either that or I'm missing something. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted March 27, 2010 Share Posted March 27, 2010 Here are a couple of reports to give you an idea club by club. Sorry they are too big to copy you will have to press the link. http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/the-debt-league-how-much-do-clubs-owe-1912244.html http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009/jun/03/english-premier-league-debt 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.