We dont know what the multiplier is yet
-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
We dont know what the multiplier is yet
I'm not that in favour of it but at least clubs will have a known budget to operate in so therefore wont theoretically fall foul of it.
Perfect for ENIC of course. Stadium generates the funds without them having to invest extra cash in. They can also then point to not being able to as there is a set limit.
It feels like a step further than PSR. Wont be linked to revenue directly so not as adventageous for us.
Plus it is meant to cover all annual expenditure. So wages, transfer fees and agents fees. I can't see it being around long on that basis. Clubs will get too tired of it or the multiplier will be increased.
We've got over £250m a season leeway - really doesn't stop us from investing at all
All it stops is City, Utd, etc raising their spending to ridiculous levels, it will make the league less-uncompetitive long term
Kaveh says the 85% of revenue rule will still be in place for 2025/26
Got a feeling nobody knows.
Explained: Premier League clubs vote for spending cap
Sky Sports News chief reporter Kaveh Solhekol explains what Premier League clubs have been voting for in terms of spending caps.
Kaveh says the 85% of revenue rule will still be in place for 2025/26
Got a feeling nobody knows.
Explained: Premier League clubs vote for spending cap
Sky Sports News chief reporter Kaveh Solhekol explains what Premier League clubs have been voting for in terms of spending caps.www.skysports.com
Yeah I just saw that - would make sense if it were both, otherwise guess how much Newcastle are spending immediately...
so if we used Leeds as the example ( last team to finish last ) they had £17.4 from broadcast revenue and I am guessing maybe £80-100m in commercial revenue. Which means £117.4 x 5 equalling a possible out lay of £587m per season.
All that means is Newcastle, Shity, Chelsea etc will spend to that threshold. Spurs won’t spend anywhere near that threshold and everyone else won’t be able to afford to spend anywhere near that level.
So much for Mr Chairman’s dream that Profit and Sustainability rules would bite hard on others enabling us to catch up.
Hopefully this is not as much of a farce as it appears to be.
The 85% of revenue rule looks more severe than the anchoring.
Even then you need to get your calculators out as transfer fees are amortised over the contract lenght.
Problem with all these rules is everything gets so complicated nobody knows whats happening.
Looks to me that all clubs will have no difficulty keeping to the new rules. Not sure how bonuses will be affected as it is easy to add up basic wages and transfer fees but any bonus will need to be allowed for and if higher than expected although the club will earn more it could exceed cap. All it will stop is a new owner massively buying his way to big spending.
Present system has caught some teams out but think there will be less punishments issued under new system.
Present system has caught some teams out but think there will be less punishments issued under new system.
It's x5 the lowest broadcast money - which is just over £100m
I guess spurs fans will never need to worry
I think the 'anchoring' idea has been bought in primarily to cut off Chelsea from just selling some more hotels to circumvent the % of revenue rules - it's also means that Newcastle and City can do as many intercompany sponsorships as they want but will the advantage on the pitch will be restricted.
That's what you meant, isn't it?