QPR agreed to this ?

[LoftusRoadLad]

http://www.teamtalk.com/queens-park-rangers/8341423/PL-chairmen-agree-controls

The 20 Premier League chairmen have agreed in principle for clubs to have to break even, despite some opposition at a meeting on Tuesday.

[Sminky]

With wages at 183% of turnover I wonder whether when it comes to Tony Fernandes whether he intends to do a Frank Butcher and burn the stadium in an insurance job ... or when he is showing the Premier League the books he is thinking of saying "Now if we turn this graph upside down, our turnover is 183% greater than our wages"

[Kirill]

This should be interesting.

[vespa]

Its going to take more than a little creative accountancy ,this one

[Sminky]

None of our players have a decent sell on, I was shocked to hear Granero only has a release clause of £5.5m. I know he hasn't ripped trees up at Loftus Road but he is worth more than that.

[dave58]

http://www.teamtalk.com/queens-park-...agree-controls

The 20 Premier League chairmen have agreed in principle for clubs to have to break even, despite some opposition at a meeting on Tuesday.

The big clubs will love it because of the massive turnover they have will only cut the rest of us adrift even more? in. That I don't include Chelscum because like us they rely. So much on the Russian's extra cash he throws in the same as we do .with T.F.& the Mittal's
For the smaller clubs It will be like turkeys voting for Xmas we are unsustainable as a prem club with gates of no more than 18.000
Our wage bill alone is probably not covered by gate receipts,

[stanistheman]

None of our players have a decent sell on, I was shocked to hear Granero only has a release clause of £5.5m. I know he hasn't ripped trees up at Loftus Road but he is worth more than that.

It would seem low if QPR paid £9m, but I think the fee paid was up to that figure with add-ons QPR, so perhaps £5.5 was the 1st Part in which case they don't lose out.

[stanistheman]

The big clubs will love it because of the massive turnover they have will only cut the rest of us adrift even more? in. That I don't include Chelscum because like us they rely. So much on the Russian's extra cash he throws in the same as we do .with T.F.& the Mittal's
For the smaller clubs It will be like turkeys voting for Xmas we are unsustainable as a prem club with gates of no more than 18.000
Our wage bill alone is probably not covered by gate receipts,

QPRs gate receipts probably don't even cover the match day squad's wages let alone the other players, manager, coaches and other staff.

[MYU]

Why not have a wage cap instead?

[CroydonCaptainJack]

It is all about the TV rights monies these days. As a % of QPRs income that would be much higher than gate receipts

[TBLOCKRANGER]

I would guess nothing controversial as don't the clubs soon have to comply with UEFAs Financial Fair Play Regulations, which to my understanding means clubs partitipating in UEfA competitions don't just have to monitor their wages but have to break even. Don't know when they have to do this by but presume its either next season or the one after.
I would guess if UEFA are implementing the rules then national footballing bodies such as the premiership here will need to implement it at a local level, almost like if the European Court making a ruling in law then the UK government need to comply with it at a national level. As a club if as an ambition we wish to play in Europe say in 5 to 10 years time then I suppose we need to comply, suppose that's TFs bigger picture of getting a new stadium, building up the academy and overseas investment such as the recent tour of the far east.
Might be good for the game as may reduce gulf between big teams and small teams and also control wages. Going to be a lot of clever accounting. What I find strange is how owners of clubs pump money into a club by also being the official sponsor, we do this plus City, is the sponsorship money the owners own money propping up the club such as a loan or is it construed as independent income generation?
Hopefully with TF and Amit on board we are in safe hands plus of course Arry and the boys

[Shrine]

if we stay up the TV rights from next year will make us break even

[LoftusRoadLad]

They must know what their doing if they've agreed to it. They are probably looking beyond the new stadium for extra revenue.

[Bigears]

It dosnt say what the agreement is or what principles behind it are. It could be that they agree that:
At the end of each year every club needs to break even and that the Owners have the rights to pay of any excess in debt?
-It could be that they agree to say 50% in addtional to turn overs
-They may not include building of the stadium or training facilities
-It could include the net asset value of the club (Training ground, land values)

Until the details are released there is no way of knowing if it is going to handicap the smaller clubs and create a bigger gap between the rich and the poor.

My gut feeling is that it will as Man U etc.. are scared that potential other new owners like Man City / Chelsea can come in and start to pump money in and stop their domination.

The issues needs to be addressed, because too many wealthy owners are playing with clubs, spending money the club dosnt have and it going bust owning millions.

They then hide behind corperate laws etc.. and dont lose a penny themseves, but the ones that are getting hurt are the small business, employees etc... These people are literaly playing with peoples lives without a care in the world.

[Del]

The whole fair play rule everyone goes on about will have loopholes as would this. The likes of PSG, Man City, Chelsea don't generate enough income to break even.... City just announced about £100m negative this financial year, half of last years £200m.... so they're £300m from breaking even in 2 years.


When it comes to it the rich owners will get around it by putting money in the club in a way it is on the books and factored as income. Most likely sponsorship.