New UEFA limitations on Club spending from 23/24 (1 Viewer)

[Happy_Martian]

" Clubs are expected to be allowed to spend 90% of their income in 2023-24, reducing to 80% in 2024-25 and 70% a year later "

It won't affect the top six Prem clubs again with their TV and merch sales but I can foresee that those in the Champ and below are going to have problems improving their teams to be able to get promoted and then surviving in the higher league.

Uefa introduces 70% squad cost rule as part of new financial regulations

Uefa introduces new financial regulations which will limit clubs' spending on wages, transfers and agents' fees to 70% of their revenue.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

---

[Sky Blue Pete]

Just embeds the status quo

 

[Sky Blue Harry H]

Think it will give the PL relegated teams (assuming parachute payments remain) a stupidly unfair advantage. Unfair competition?!

 

[napolimp]

And you'd better not break the rules, or you'll get a 3 point suspended deduction and a slap on the wrist.

 

[Legia Sky Blue]

Think it will give the PL relegated teams (assuming parachute payments remain) a stupidly unfair advantage. Unfair competition?!

There must also surely be an exception to newly promoted teams to the PL, as they are hardly going to be able to compete on a budget based on their previous season in the Championship. Imagine that scenario for us if say we had somehow got promoted this season, but next season could only spend what we had earned this season. I somehow suspect SISU might actually love that scenario, but on the pitch we would be lucky to hit 10 points.

 

[oldskyblue58]

All heavily focussed on European competition it would seem to me

Haven't really seen the detailed regs on this but based on CCFC 2021 financials the following seems to be the result

Turnover 11.8m so 70% is 8.26m (Fulham £119m at 70% 81.2m)

Wages 13.1m (Fulham 113m)
player purchases (inc agents fees) 3.5m (Fulham £51m)
player sales (1.6m) (Fulham (5.5m))

net amount 15m (Fulham 158.5m)

CCFC annual overspend of 6.74m . (Fulham 77.3m already well over the 3 year limit )

leaving our owners another £10m each year they can put in if they choose to, and still be within the rules. Anyone care to bet on that happening ?

I think all the above indicates is that these measures do not really address sustainability. What it does address is the increased power of the big clubs and in effect creates a European super league by default.

in a sense it doesn't change much for CCFC, we had to spend more than turnover on wages & players simply to hang in let alone progress. Because of the low amounts then we should be well short of the 3 year rule. But it would seem to put a glass ceiling on our ambition, under these owners or even new ones. Whereas a team like Fulham could breach the rules, reap the rewards and be comfortable suffering any consequences knowing they are going to get a share of Premier League wealth on a regular basis even just bouncing between the divisions (the threat of european competition ban seems a bit hollow for them).

For every other team not benefiting from Premier League relegation payments it hinders rather than encourages ambition and makes the playing field decidedly lopsided it seems to me

L1 & L2 have already got salary % at these sort of UEFA levels it is in the Championship the real divide will seem to be, largely due to the premier league payments (a major problem in terms of levelling up). In terms of current finance then the CCFC model is largely how every team should run (without the interest charges to owners of course). If the governing bodies were truly serious about it then there would be no 60m euro rule it would be much lower and sustainability would mean what we all understand it to - living within a teams means.

I wonder if the loss each year is based on the published financials or is some other calculation?

of course i could be reading it wrong?

 

[tisza]

Going to be agents taking this to EU courts for sure. Also limiting transfer fees usually punishes clubs down the "food chain"