Wolves 22/23 accounts

[wolvesjoe]

From what Martin Samuel keeps hinting in theTimes, there is strong pressure from premier clubs against the full adoption of the 70% cap.

The 85% cap figure is obviously what Samuel was hinting at.

It may well be a happy compromise for a club like Wolves, and give them the room to manoeuvre in the same way
we have for the last five years.

Take an income of around 200m, (which we will be close ot this year with a top 8 finish). That means the club is allowed
to spend £175m on players wages and amortisation charges. With wages around £125m level, then that leaves an amortisation
charge of £50m per season. That is somewhat below the current charge, but not excessively. It rather reaffirms the need for a carefully managed cycle of investment in and sales of players.

Current operational costs for a club like Wolves are around £40m per annum, which would give a total outlay of around £215m, leaving an allowable loss of £15m per annum.

All of this is only slightly more restrictive than the current system, and would not have the greatest of effects. Plus ca change.

 

[wolvesjoe]

So if you want to throw loads of money at it then you can, you can have the glory, just not the prize money?

How the hell is the idea that overspending brings a sporting advantage a 'baseless assertion' I mean why is anyone overspending if you aren't gaining a spending advantage?

This might get to be called the Saudi Arabia clause over time.

In other words, break the rules but just pay the fine.

There has apparently been huge lobbying from Saudi via Newcastle.

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

This might get to be called the Saudi Arabia clause over time.

In other words, break the rules but just pay the fine.

There has apparently been huge lobbying from Saudi via Newcastle.

Speeding fines seems to be the popular analogy. This is like saying drive as fast as you like, we'll make you pay a fine, but no points on your licence, you'll never get a ban.

 

[wolvesjoe]

Speeding fines seems to be the popular analogy. This is like saying drive as fast as you like, we'll make you pay a fine, but no points on your licence, you'll never get a ban.

Its hard to imagine it going through, however. The whole thrust of FFP from over 10 years ago has been to prevent another Man City/PSG scenario, where existing elite clubs were undermined. Eliminating the Benefactor model was the key motivation.

Will have to wait for more information re. this proposal as it flies in the face of what has gone before. It might help out in the shortterm sense of allowing a whole raft of clubs to get away with breaking FFP, (Chelsea, Villa and Newcastle at the top of the list), and putting the Premier League into a crisis, but then what happens to the precedent that has been set??

 

[Black Country Wanderer]

Its hard to imagine it going through, however. The whole thrust of FFP from over 10 years ago has been to prevent another Man City/PSG scenario, where existing elite clubs were undermined. Eliminating the Benefactor model was the key motivation.

Will have to wait for more information re. this proposal as it flies in the face of what has gone before. It might help out in the shortterm sense of allowing a whole raft of clubs to get away with breaking FFP, (Chelsea, Villa and Newcastle at the top of the list), and putting the Premier League into a crisis, but then what happens to the precedent that has been set??

There will be no precedent as its a new set of rules,back to square one

 

[wolvesjoe]

There will be no precedent as its a new set of rules,back to square one

But going forward, wont such a ruling just set a new precedent where clubs can
spend what they want, and then just pay a fine.

 

[wolvesjoe]

There will be no precedent as its a new set of rules,back to square one

That is what Samuel has been arguing, with the confidence of a man who insider links.

He argues that if we want to see the best players in the world, (mostly), then the Premier
league has to allow freer play to market valuations on players, without limits.

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

I can sort of understand that the PL has worked out that the money stolen from the Russian people by Abramovic and leached out of the UAE and now from the oppressive regime in Saudi has allowed clubs to buy the best talent. That's created a great league, which then gets the most TV money, which attracts more investment and so on. It's the great victory of the whole PL concept and nobody wants to shoot the goose that laid that egg. Please let's not pretend it's anything to do with sustainability or creating a level playing field though.

 

[wolvesjoe]

I can sort of understand that the PL has worked out that the money stolen from the Russian people by Abramovic and leached out of the UAE and now from the oppressive regime in Saudi has allowed clubs to buy the best talent. That's created a great league, which then gets the most TV money, which attracts more investment and so on. It's the great victory of the whole PL concept and nobody wants to shoot the goose that laid that egg. Please let's not pretend it's anything to do with sustainability or creating a level playing field though.

Thats a very pithy summary of how it has worked.

The 70% cap is likely to impede the spending power of the "top" group to partly increase a level playing field effect with
other powerful European clubs, so the Premier League needs to give its product some "wiggle space" financially.

 

[mcwolf]

looks like Chelsea are in the dodu ...

Chelsea could raise almost £300m by selling TEN players this summer.

Chelsea could rise almost £300million by selling 10 players with the Blues set for a major clearout this summer as they look to comply with the Premier League's Profit and Sustainability Rules.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[Bill McCai]

Good thread from Swiss Ramble. It does not paint a hugely positive picture for us based on the most recent accounts - but you have to assume post the Summer clearout we are in a much better position for next season should the PL coalesce around the UEFA style rules (at 85%). This Summer will help us understand if, for Fosun, 17th is the be all and end all - or we are looking to 'go again'.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1769642249153831116

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

Good thread from Swiss Ramble. It does not paint a hugely positive picture for us based on the most recent accounts - but you have to assume post the Summer clearout we are in a much better position for next season should the PL coalesce around the UEFA style rules (at 85%). This Summer will help us understand if, for Fosun, 17th is the be all and end all - or we are looking to 'go again'.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1769642249153831116

Yes, irrelevant for us as wages have been hugely reduced for 23/24 and surely we'll be fine. Again sneaking into Europe might potentially cause as many problems as it solves if we need to get under 70% rather than 85%. No way the Conference League would add 15% to our turnover, so we'd need to run a bigger squad off a smaller spend.