PSG and FFP

[Editor]

So Uefa start investigating PSG. No surprise there. This is surely going to be the most defining moment in FFP history though. Either PSG, as I expect, will get away with a slap on the wrist or they will face hefty sanctions such as a ban from the CL. Only something like that would harm them. Fines are pointless.

If they get away with anything less than a ban, it is essentially a subtle nod to every other European club to do as you please as long as you have capable enough accountants, which would in turn raise the question of the point of having a set of rules which can be bypassed so easily.

It’s going to be an interesting one to follow either way!

_____________________________

React below 👇

*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted

[nine nine nine]

Ed, UEFA had to make a move but I think PSG will get away with the Mbappe loan to buy deal purely because currently there’s not a rule to cover it in place so whilst it’s not in keeping with the philosophy of FFP ( that’s me politely saying they’re taking the p***) ? PSG probably haven’t broken any rules simply because they’re not in place yet because UEFA somewhat understandably perhaps never forsee iho

UEFA will surely look to close that loophole from here.

The Neymar deal averages out at circa £40m a year over the length of his 5 year contract and PSG have achieved sales of circa £50m in the summer window so that should be ok with that one too……. unfortunately.? Cheers 999

• This reply was modified 6 years, 7 months ago by nine nine nine.
• This reply was modified 6 years, 7 months ago by nine nine nine.

_____________________________

React below 👇

*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted

[Editor]

9, it would seem crazy that Uefa hadn’t accounted for that type of an attempt at getting around the rules. It seems like such an obvious thing to do.

I’m no finance expert but, assuming Mbappe signs next summer for a similar fee which, for arguments sake, works out at another £40mil per year over his contract. That would be £80mil a year for the two. They’ve done well to sell for £50mil this season but how sustainable is it to expect to sell for £70mil/£80mil each season?

_____________________________

React below 👇

*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted

[Chucky McChuckface]

Wouldn’t the flaw in both your argument be selling 80m worth of players next season to cover the Naymer/Nmappe transfers be the buying clubs will also be paying the 70/80 million over the length of the contracts? Even accounting for the “x” amount per year, PSG would have to be selling hundreds of millions of pounds worth of players…

Let’s face it, PSG are laughing in the face of the FFP rules, and there is nothing the UEFA will actually do about other than make some noise and put their hand out for their own %, although they will call it a “fine”…. 🙂

_____________________________

React below 👇

*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted

[whoisbeni]

Looks like PSG have found a loophole in FFP even before Chelsea and City found it -, which takes some doing.

_____________________________

React below 👇

*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted

[Chucky McChuckface]

I wouldn’t even say that Beni, I’m thinking PSG are banking (see what I did there?) on UEFA not having the kahunas to actually do anything about it. They’ll pay the fines without even breaking sweat, simply using the energy it would take us mere mortals to rummage down the back of the sofa. UEFA ain’t gonna kick them out of the CL…..

PSG are simply extracting the Micheal…. pure and simple, just as Chelsea are making a mockery of the loan system for their own needs.

• This reply was modified 6 years, 7 months ago by Chucky McChuckface.

_____________________________

React below 👇

*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted

[Editor]

Chucky, no I don’t think that’s the case. As I understand it, player sales (however the actual fee is structured) are accounted for fully in the year they’re sold. If that’s the case, you could buy a £100mil player over a 5 year contract and fund it by selling players for £20mil each year over the next 5 years. Don’t quote me on that though!

• This reply was modified 6 years, 7 months ago by Editor.

_____________________________

React below 👇

*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted

[Nike19]

I think based on that calculation Ed, the 100m isn’t the actual registered transaction, but it’s whatever the agreed instalment is. Obviously, the lower the better in spite of it taking longer to complete the down-payments (the club stays within financial fair play).

I actually heard off a colleague from Liverpool (whether this was just a tongue-in-cheek comment) that Mascherano fee had only just been paid off which is hard to believe given the time he was purchased and the fee of 24 mil (if I’m right in saying so).

As a side, I’m led to believe also this perhaps was ‘the’ reason why the Coutinho deal didn’t go through because of what Liverpool were demanding.

_____________________________

React below 👇

*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted

[Chucky McChuckface]

Steady Eddy… if that’s the case, then the idiots who came up with the rules are retarded. Anybody bought is spread over the length of the contract, anybody sold counts all up front. Stupid. No other word for it. Not shooting the messenger, just the message! 🙂

The more this whole FFP crap goes on, the more I think UEFA don’t have an interest, just some BS type of PR campaign. Coming up with rules that anybody with an IQ equal to Donald Trump can walk around? What it is the point if it’s not just a PR campaign?

_____________________________

React below 👇

*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted

[Nike19]

Would be interesting if a limit time frame was officially regulated by authorities, though as you say chucky, they’re not really the slightest bit bothered. If the 2 clubs involved work out a deal between them, then so be it.

It does make me wonder what would the case be if there was a sudden turn of events and a club was to go financially bust.

_____________________________

React below 👇

*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted

[nine nine nine]

Ed, I guess UEFA never thought that a club would be crazy enough lend a player costing £166m to another club for a season.

nb, all transfer fees are spread and amortised over the period of the players contract for accounting purposes.

beni, Chelsea have always complied with FFP they sell to buy £89m net spend this summer which doesn’t take into account the circa £60m taken for Oscar last January and any fee still to come in for Costa probably circa £40/50m.

banjo, Chelsea utilise the loan system as revenue generator which is completely within the rules. If UEFA were to change the loan system rules and currently I’m not sure there’s an intention to do that Chelsea would comply with whatever rules UEFA come up with.

• This reply was modified 6 years, 7 months ago by nine nine nine.
• This reply was modified 6 years, 7 months ago by nine nine nine.

_____________________________

React below 👇

*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted

[Chucky McChuckface]

9,nine,nein…. never once said Chelski were breaking the rules me ‘auld cyber chum, and by the sounds of it, PSG aren’t actually breaking any rules either. But I would certainly say both clubs are making a mockery of the rules as when the rules were made, the rule-makers didn’t quite envisage the “bending” of the rules that is occurring. I don’t think the phrase “revenue-generator” was ever mentioned once when they sat down to write these “loan” rules, do you? Honestly?

_____________________________

React below 👇

*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted

[Anonymous]

They’ve found a loophole, but it’s one that has been used hundreds of times by other teams. I’m sure No one ever tried it for one of the most valuable players in the world. It’s only now that the big teams are missing out on players and there’s a new financial power bullying their way like they always have that they are kicking up a fuss. as said before This system has been in place for years and used hundreds of times. There is nothing wrong with it.

Interestingly the image shows the net spend of the champions league clubs (arranged by their groups) with regards to transfers over the last 5 seasons.

_____________________________

React below 👇

*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted

[nine nine nine]

banjo, Chelsea have been employing the loan system as a way of developing players outside of the club for a long while now and there’s been no move by UEFA to amend the rules it’s a very well managed system with the loan players constantly assesed and communicated with by the club which benefits Chelsea, the loan players and the club’s that they are loaned to.

However UEFA moved immediately to investigate PSG’s dealings in the transfer market this summer.

_____________________________

React below 👇

*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted

[Nike19]

Steering this slightly away, we’ve seen certain clubs buy a player to stop competitors buying him only for him to be largely on the bench and thereafter loaned. That player is then aged and snapped up by a lesser club to give his playing career a rebirth, and then bought by a so-called more better club as a step up – I’m thinking Scott Sinclair.

Although financially, the generating large sums from the loan system might be a smart business move, what sort of a precedent (hypothetically speaking) does this set for any up and coming youngster wanting to join a top football club like Chelsea?

The shelf life of a manager and the way the industry is as cut-throat as ever means more pressure to bring in and field finished articles/players that immediately hit the ground running.

This doesn’t in my view breed a great deal of hope for those in the academy wanting to be recognised and given the opportunity to break into the first team.

• This reply was modified 6 years, 7 months ago by Nike19.

_____________________________

React below 👇

*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted

[nine nine nine]

Whether what PSG have done with the Mbappe loan to buy deal is for good or bad I think it’s unlikely that they’ve done anything wrong as the rules stand but I do expect UEFA to close that particular door at the end of their investigations.

But good luck to PSG in being smart enough to have done what they have it will be good to see another major force in Europe as they surely will be.

_____________________________

React below 👇

*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted

[Big Jim]

So called FFP. I dont think I will be partaking.

_____________________________

React below 👇

*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted

[Chucky McChuckface]

9,nine,nein…. sorry cyber chum, if your sole reason for arguing Chelski’s current abuse, although clearly not breaking, of the loan rules and using them as a “revenue-generator” (your words, not mine!) is simply the morally fine up standing citizens at UEFA headquarters not investigating Chelski, then your argument is weaker than school custard my cyber chum.

Just to be clear, nobody is saying Chelsea are breaking the rules, we’re saying (or at least I am! 🙂 ) having 50 plus players out on loan purely for the purpose of trying to flog them is taking the piss, especially when your club went out and bought 5 more “seasoned” pro’s to go straight into the first team. I’m sure I posted an article about Chelsea’s current longest-serving player at the other place, a player who’s been at Chelsea for 8 seasons now and has played as many games for the club as I have because no mug will buy him.

_____________________________

React below 👇

*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted

[Nike19]

My money’s on Drinkwater to be loaned out come the end of this season 😉 🙂

_____________________________

React below 👇

*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted

[Editor]

Interesting picture that Paxton!

I don’t have a problem with clubs spending as they please. I just look forward to watching this all unfold. I’m not a fan of FFP but I’m even less of a fan of a form of FFP that is easily bypassed with clever accountants. It just makes a mockery of the whole thing.

999’s probably right in the sense that the most likely outcome of this is that Uefa find a way to close that loophole. I don’t really see the point in that though. If a club wants to find a loophole badly enough, I’m convinced they’ll always be able to. It’ll just turn into a real life version of one of those fairground games where you go to hit the mole and before you know it, another one pops up and you’re constantly trying to whack them as they pop up over the board.

_____________________________

React below 👇

*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted

[Author]

Posts