Everton have beaten the elitist FFP trap

Wednesday 19 July 2017  26 Comments  [Jump to last]

Everton have beaten the elitist trap set by Financial Fair Play and are no longer doomed to stay in mid-table for ever.

Everton's summer business has shown their desire to break the glass ceiling. Previously they were a club for whom the Champions League was out of reach. Now they are able to invest in their playing squad and go to the next level. The end of UEFA's Financial Fair Play rules has allowed them to compete again at the top of the league.

An Article by Martin Samuel in the Daily Mail.

» Read the full article at Daily Mail


Reader Comments (26)

Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer


Steve Bingham
1 Posted 19/07/2017 at 08:10:55
Absolutely love it.
Colin Glassar
2 Posted 19/07/2017 at 08:24:33
So is FFP still in force or has it been scrapped? I've always said it was the biggest scam ever. Designed by the super rich to maintain their status and keep everyone else away from the table. Merci Platini, you petit merde.
John G Davies
3 Posted 19/07/2017 at 08:28:16
Impossible to enforce, Colin. UEFA pitting their wits against people with the power of the Man City, Chelsea owners were always on a loser from the off.
Chris Williams
4 Posted 19/07/2017 at 08:41:55
I thought FFP was in place still but in a more relaxed form. Didn't it get challenged at some point so it was watered down to a degree?

It is certainly good news that Everton is benefitting now, and the synchronicity of this, Moshiri and the professionalism, vision, ambition and energy that has been introduced will hopefully bear fruit. There has been a clear step up in approach this window, and hopefully this momentum will continue to build.

It will of course take time to achieve I suspect, maybe a bit longer than many would like, given that we have a lot of improving to do, while a lot of the top six tend to bring in comparatively few, but very high profile and expensive players each season. We're not at that stage yet, maybe next season?

The really pleasing aspect though is the feeling of getting in amongst them and actually competing on a playing field that , while not yet quite level, has less of a gradient. It is often the tendency of the 'haves' to protect themselves against the 'have-nots' or the 'have less'.

Matt Traynor
5 Posted 19/07/2017 at 08:45:21
Colin, it was a clusterfuck, to use the technical term. Man City tried to claim nearly £1bn in allowable expenses for the development of the academy area around the Etihad – UEFA rightly told them to sling it. City were also claiming all sorts of "sponsorship" deals from Sovereign Wealth Fund companies of Abu Dhabi – companies that would have no business sponsoring an EPL club – another means for money to be funnelled in.

Our lovable neighbours successfully claimed almost £100m in allowable expenses for the failed Stanley Park stadium move – even though a brick was never laid.

The idea was sort of right, but the execution became a loophole bonanza for legal and accounting firms. Ironically the model adopted by Football League clubs seems to be working – for now – although wage creep is seeing £40k+ / week salaries there as well.

Darryl Ritchie
6 Posted 19/07/2017 at 09:40:46
The FFP rules, when combined with the Champions League and the money the top clubs earned from it, made the chances of any other club bettering their position almost impossible.

It was a "Catch-22" situation. The football world will be lot a more interesting with it not being a factor. I think you will see a lot more clubs being sold to very wealthy men, because they will see the way clear to profit from their investment... no restrictions on how much they can spend.

Thomas Lennon
7 Posted 19/07/2017 at 09:55:17
Strange article. It states that FFP is now finished – which it isn't as far as we all know. Then it contends Everton have 'beaten' FFP where in fact we are trading well within the rules. Finally it claims Everton are spending freely but then actually states that the Lukaku deal has (so far) funded all capital purchases if not wages – so sell to buy remains in place up to now.

Everton can spend all of the Lukaku money and extra sponsorship (£15 million?) on player costs (I assume that means wages and capital spend) so crucially we can push well beyond the £4 million wages increase allowed under FFP.

We are NOT allowed to use TV revenue for wage increases. Here's a thought – TV increases go on capital spend, Lukaku money (and others) goes on wages. We can then maintain that the following year using TV money – I think!

Selling players is funding our re-emergence as a CL challenging power rather than the demise of FFP.

nb: If we are able to increase wages spends to £200 million (current spend £105 million so not likely but we have 3 years to do this) we will be on a par with LFC, well above Spurs last season (though of course they will also increase spending) and truly part of the top group of clubs for the first time since... the early 1990s?

This is of course all a nonsense specifically in the Premier League. The huge increases in TV money allow us to spend on everything except wages?? The idea was to allow spending on infrastructure but do they not think this principle is doomed from the start?

http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/financial-fair-play-explained.php

Steven Scaffardi
8 Posted 19/07/2017 at 09:59:51
One of the most astonishing things from this article is this part:

Want to know the utter lunacy of the loan system? The longest serving professional player at Chelsea is a goalkeeper called Matej Delac, who signed for the club in September 2009.

Delac has played a total of 154 games across nine seasons for Inter Zapresic, Vitesse, Dynamo Ceske Budejovice, Vitoria de Guimaraes, Vojvodina, Sarajevo, Arles-Avignon and Excel Mouscron. He has never played for Chelsea.

I've never even heard of this guy and he's been at Chelsea for 8 years!!

David Ellis
9 Posted 19/07/2017 at 12:12:17
Thomas (#7),

The FFP merely requires clubs to be profitable. The real restriction comes from the Premier League Rules (Short Term Stability rules) which cap increases of wages to £4m per year, but there is an exemption for profits on player sales and increases in commercial revenue (it being designed merely to stop the increases in TV money from being blown on wages as opposed to other forms of revenue).

As you say the restriction is only on wages – not on transfer fees – but it's the totals that count rather than saying one particular stream of cash was used for one particular usage. You end up with a formula based on the increases in the various bits of revenue and then this gives you a cap by which you can increase wages over the baseline for that season. The baseline only goes up £4m per year and you have to re-do the calculation each season.

Anyway, the gains from players sales (after depreciation) are so enormous we don't need to worry about these rules, at least for now, and in particular once we have the new stadium our commercial revenue should significantly increase and this will all be available for wages.

As to the principles, it doesn't really stack up to me but I do see the Premier League rules as an attempt to prevent all the increases in TV money disappearing in wage inflation and not benefiting the clubs at all (which is what has happened over the last 20 years). It should lead to better investment in infrastructure, academies, post retirement care etc and community involvement by Premier League clubs and football clubs making a profit and paying some tax.

Although this article in the Mail is highly confusing and inarticulate it is very positive and sending the message that we are back and breaking the glass ceiling is exactly the message we need the mainstream media to hear and repeat. It's definitely seeping through now.

Dermot Byrne
10 Posted 19/07/2017 at 12:20:40
"clusterfuck" – what a superb term. New to me and I love it. About as useful as '"we're all in it together"!
John Pendleton
11 Posted 19/07/2017 at 14:26:50
Doesn't really matter what financial system you have in place, selling players for £90m a pop will always help. I just see future non-TV income streams improving dramatically under this regime and that's where we need to be to compete in this race.
Paul Mackie
12 Posted 19/07/2017 at 14:36:35
If anyone can come up with a way around FFP, it's probably a billionaire accountant...
John Pierce
13 Posted 19/07/2017 at 21:46:12
The article is beyond the own author's comprehension. He has no idea how FFP and the PL sustainability rules work.

Everton haven't beaten anything. We've to date operated well within the rules. In fact, most clubs operate within the rules as far as I know? Have UEFA been handing out fines left right and centre for non-compliance?

The biggest issue for most clubs is they are simply not big enough or have trading profits large enough to grow their brand.

It is as was forever thus, the bigger teams are big for a reason. Perhaps Chelsea and Man City managed to nip in there pre-regulation. but it's the same as it's always been.

Michael Williams
14 Posted 19/07/2017 at 22:35:06
According to The Guardian, Everton have a net spend on this summer's transfers of £7 million because of the Lukaku money.
Dermot O'Brien
15 Posted 19/07/2017 at 23:43:46
Why did I even click on the link? Fucking Daily Mail... A nonsense article written in the style of an eejit.
David Barks
16 Posted 20/07/2017 at 01:23:39
Dermot,

What are you complaining about exactly?

For all the thousands and thousands of posts on this site and others that talk about a media bias and lack of respect that Everton gets, this article basically talks about Everton being back to one of the top clubs in England. The article talks about Everton – instead of being on the outside looking in – they are now a club competing at the top again.

So, what's the problem?

Ernie Baywood
17 Posted 20/07/2017 at 03:50:43
So, if it is positive to us, then you're happy with it, David?

It's a nonsense article – regardless of which clubs it is positive about.

Dermot O'Brien
18 Posted 20/07/2017 at 08:40:41
David, I agree, it is good to have the media talking about us competing at the top. Apart from that, I don't see anything to get excited about.

We've spent as much as we've sold but the article implies that now without FFP we are spending money all over the place to get back to the top. We are breaking even at the moment. (We will spend more of course to replace Lukaku and strengthen other areas.)

Also, a comment like "They have designs on being the next Tottenham" doesn't sit well with me. We have designs on being runners-up? Oh goodie!

What most annoyed me though was that I was reading this when I should have been asleep!

Stan Schofield
19 Posted 20/07/2017 at 14:09:00
Either I don't understand FFP, or this Mail article is rambling waffle.
Stan Schofield
20 Posted 20/07/2017 at 14:16:11
Dermot @10: I believe 'clusterfuck' is used in American action films to mean 'a right old dog's dinner'. It's difficult to imagine Gerard Butler saying 'this is a right old dog's dinner' as he's about to take out an entire terrorist ring in 'London has Fallen'.
David Ellis
21 Posted 20/07/2017 at 16:31:44
Dermot

You wouldn't be happy with us finishing 2nd? Seriously, this would be huge out-performance.

Dermot O'Brien
22 Posted 20/07/2017 at 22:07:00
David, I would be very happy with second or any top four spot over the next few seasons. But I hope that it is not our long term goal, to qualify for Champions League. It has to be our goal to win the league and dominate.

Being the next Spurs is a good start, I suppose, but being the next Man Utd (Fergie era) is where we all want to be.

Dermot O'Brien
23 Posted 20/07/2017 at 22:32:36
David, I would very happy with second or any top four spot over the next few seasons. But I hope that it is not our long-term goal, to qualify for Champions League. It has to be our goal to win the league and dominate.

Being the next Spurs is a good start, I suppose, but being the next Man Utd (Fergie era) is where we all want to be.

Ian McDowell
24 Posted 23/07/2017 at 21:41:07
Financial Fair Play won't hold up in any court. Everton and others should pay lip service to it and crack on with their business. Imagine telling a business it can't invest over x million pounds each year.
Terence Connell
25 Posted 25/07/2017 at 09:40:22
'Clusterfuck' is such a useful word – especially when contemplating Europe and Middle East issues, and I use it all the time. I first heard it said by a CIA character in the film "Burn After Reading".

The new stadium should be a real game changer for us in the coming years.

Anthony Hawkins
26 Posted 02/08/2017 at 12:13:30
Everton sold Lukaku too soon. We could have got at least £150m for him!

Neymar to PSG is the pinnacle of beating FFP. It will also have a massive impact on the price of all other players. If it goes through, the average player will now cost £30m and Coutinho is about to go for a ridiculous price.

Add Your Comments

In order to post a comment, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.

» Log in now

Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and Talking Points submissions across the site.