Let's All Laugh At... Let's all laugh at Chelsea thread

[BehindEnemyLines]

Just when it looked like clubs were being forced to get their acts in order they vote to change the rules........and guess which was the only club that was run properly.

 

[Misfit]

They just have to wait until July and then they can bring players in. Basically they have to sell several players before June 30th and then they're free to spend again on July 1st. They could afford something like a 120 million loss in the next fiscal year and be in line with regulations.

Cheers. Right, it doesn't roll over. Resets until next June etc. Just about got my shrivelled nut around it now. I guess if they can sustain these losses they're complying with the 'sustainability' aspect. One would assume the relying on clubs spaffing big money on your players based on theoretical future form might bite them eventually though.

 

[Misfit]

Sigh. Natch. And no doubt they'll be as shit hot as ever on making sure all revenue streams are above board...

Doing it the right way will simply not be rewarded.

 

[KirstyG]

And just like that, they wriggle free. Just as I and many others suspected.

 

[Stamford]

There is no point to running sustainably now.

 

[Tucker]

And just like that, they wriggle free. Just as I and many others suspected.

There is no point to running sustainably now.

Why are you both assuming this lets them off the hook?

 

[Arden]

Why are you both assuming this lets them off the hook?

Because they’re a turd that won’t flush

 

[Pochemon94]

Why are you both assuming this lets them off the hook?

because this is only the beginning, if they fail this it'll be pushed to 90% and then 100%. The prem knows that if chelsea and others keep buying 100mil pound players, itll keep the league top in the world and thus keep the money flowing in from tv deals and sponsorships

 

[razor1981]

This isn't a loosening of the financial constraints, just a different way of measuring it. They're only changing it to more closely align with UEFA's FFP rules, and will actually give many clubs less leeway than they have under PSR.

Taking Chelsea as an example: although they managed to get under the PSR threshold this year, they would have failed badly on the squad cost ratio. Their wage bill in the 2022 accounts was £340m and amortisation costs were £160m. They played in the Champions League that year, yet their revenue of £481m didn't even cover their squad cost. They made a transfer profit of £123m, but even that only helped them get down to around a 90% ratio.

And this is BEFORE they went on their £1billion spending spree.

 

[Japhet]

because this is only the beginning, if they fail this it'll be pushed to 90% and then 100%. The prem knows that if chelsea and others keep buying 100mil pound players, itll keep the league top in the world and thus keep the money flowing in from tv deals and sponsorships

And yet one of the main reasons La Liga the Bundesliga are less popular globally is the ever growing disparity between the haves and the have nots. The EPL is just about hanging onto the idea that there can be upsets at any time and the competitive nature of it has made it the top league in the World.

 

[Tucker]

because this is only the beginning, if they fail this it'll be pushed to 90% and then 100%. The prem knows that if chelsea and others keep buying 100mil pound players, itll keep the league top in the world and thus keep the money flowing in from tv deals and sponsorships

But this has been done to align with uefa, and their ratios will be going down not up.

 

[Trix]

They just have to wait until July and then they can bring players in. Basically they have to sell several players before June 30th and then they're free to spend again on July 1st. They could afford something like a 120 million loss in the next fiscal year and be in line with regulations.

That's not how I understand it at all.

 

[ItsBoris]

That's not how I understand it at all.

I could be wrong but I believe a club is allowed a 105m loss over a 3 year period? Last two years they're at 120m and 90 m, which is why they need 105m in profit this year to reach the threshold.

But then for the following year starting in July, that 120 million loss from 3 years ago would drop off, and they'd have a 90mil loss and 105 mil profit, which would allow them a 120 mil loss in the coming year to stay below 105 mil loss over 3 years. That ofc assumes they reach the 105mil profit mark this year by the end of June.

There could well be more to it than that, but that's the TL/DR version I've seen explained in a few places.

 

[Trix]

I could be wrong but I believe a club is allowed a 105m loss over a 3 year period? Last two years they're at 120m and 90 m, which is why they need 105m in profit this year to reach the threshold.

But then for the following year starting in July, that 120 million loss from 3 years ago would drop off, and they'd have a 90mil loss and 105 mil profit, which would allow them a 120 mil loss in the coming year to stay below 105 mil loss over 3 years. That ofc assumes they reach the 105mil profit mark this year by the end of June.

There could well be more to it than that, but that's the TL/DR version I've seen explained in a few places.

It's due to the way they have amortised deals. They have already spent a huge chunk of that 120 mil you say they can afford to spend if not all of it.

People keep saying how they spent a billion pound in a year when they actually haven't done anything of the sort. What they did was spend a billion over the next 5-6-7 years. Meaning they'll have to come up with sizable revenue every year to offset that against PSR. Obviously that number will depreciate over time but with every purchase on top it will rise again.

 

[Nerine]

Let’s be honest. Nothing will be done. To Chelsea, to Newcastle, to Man City to Villa. To any of them.

 

[Bluto Blutarsky]

Let’s be honest. Nothing will be done. To Chelsea, to Newcastle, to Man City to Villa. To any of them.

Yeah, but Everton and Forest are sunk....

 

[aliyid]

I know this is a Chelsea thread but Sherwood is a class A ‘see you next Tuesday’ for asking this kind of question during a live TV interview

 

[dvdhopeful]

Sherwood in, 'being a wanker', shocker.

 

[Hazelton]

If there's one thing Chelsea have, it's players. About 500 of them.

 

[VoteMe4Prez]

If there's one thing Chelsea have, it's players. About 500 of them.

Tim 'nice but dim' Sherwood thinks they need about 10 more in the summer