Everton, our summer transfers and short term cost control regulations

[Toffeeslam]

So typical Everton. We wait a lifetime for a billionaire to come along and we still have to sell one of our 'stars' in order to meet FFP requirements. However we should only be sailing in choppy waters for the next 12 months, as I have every confidence in our new owner to negoiate significantly better commercial deals for the club, but I don't think we will see significant 'growth' until we are in our new stadium.

There is no FFP regulation on infrastructure so in theory we can plough money into the new stadium and training facilities also wgat we do to tart up goodison park too.

With the playing staff we will have to be a little careful until we undo suntan Bob's work in the commercial area and sponsorship deals.

there is nothing stopping us ramping up the commercial activities to boost revenue as that falls under infrastructure.

i yhink thats right

 

[The Esk]

there is nothing stopping us ramping up the commercial activities to boost revenue as that falls under infrastructure

Except currently they're outsourced and we'll need to unwind those arrangements first.

 

[evertonfootballclub]

Let's get one of those fake sponsorship deals like City have with Emirates.

 

[The Esk]

The full rule book will likely give indications of penalty or sanction in the event of a breach.

The tribunal will only consider mitigation. However, the rule book will state what the punishments for certain offences are. As a frame of reference for the tribunal.

The Premier League Handbook is the rule book mate.

 

[bizzaro]

The Premier League Handbook is the rule book mate.

Thats like saying the London Gazette is the Statute book mate.

The handbook is a brief reproduction for publication. Not the official rulebook.

It it were the premier league would reference 'the premier league handbook' not the rulebook when talking about disciplinary matters.

 

[Toffeelover]

If we sign players and/or extend contracts could we do the wages angle as starting at X amount and building up year on year.
Example starting at 5 mill, year 2 7 mill, year 3 9 mill with the proviso that should the player be sold we make up the wages as a thank you bonus to arrive at the agreed contract level of wages.

 

[The Esk]

The handbook is a brief reproduction for publication. Not the official rulebook.

No, sorry mate, these are the rules. Each club is bound by the following, nothing more:

 

[bizzaro]

No, sorry mate, these are the rules. Each club is bound by the following, nothing more:

View attachment 25466

Mate - its got its own contents page and index within the handbook.

Basically they reproduced most of it there.

Not all of it. Since its a private member rulebook.

 

[The Esk]

Mate - its got its own contents page and index within the handbook.

Basically they reproduced most of it there.

Not all of it. Since its a private member rulebook.

Where does the rest of the rulebook exist? The rules clearly define the agreements and regulations under which the clubs and PL are bound, and each of those regulations are in the public domain in full.

 

[mlyons]

I think @The Esk is being a little optimistic in thinking we would potentially add that much in wages. We've got 24 over-21 players under contract for next season right now, which means we can only add one senior player before shipping out other contracts. Even if you assume Koeman is going to lead a clearout of guys like McAleny, Garbutt, Rodriguez, and McGeady, it would still take some pretty massive contracts being given out to push the wage bill up to £100 million mark, given that we're probably around £70 million at the moment (based on being at £75 million last season less Pienaar, Howard, Osman, and Hibbert but factoring in contractual wage increases for some other players).

I would imagine we can probably have a £92 million wage bill without running foul of Premier League rules (£82 million allowed based on last season's wages plus £10 million in increased revenue through sponsorships and accounting legerdemain). Even with a giant new contract for Lukaku, I don't think we'll make enough expensive signings to really worry about pushing past that level.

 

[The Esk]

I think @The Esk is being a little optimistic in thinking we would potentially add that much in wages. We've got 24 over-21 players under contract for next season right now, which means we can only add one senior player before shipping out other contracts. Even if you assume Koeman is going to lead a clearout of guys like McAleny, Garbutt, Rodriguez, and McGeady, it would still take some pretty massive contracts being given out to push the wage bill up to £100 million mark, given that we're probably around £70 million at the moment (based on being at £75 million last season less Pienaar, Howard, Osman, and Hibbert but factoring in contractual wage increases for some other players).

I would imagine we can probably have a £92 million wage bill without running foul of Premier League rules (£82 million allowed based on last season's wages plus £10 million in increased revenue through sponsorships and accounting legerdemain). Even with a giant new contract for Lukaku, I don't think we'll make enough expensive signings to really worry about pushing past that level.

I understand what you are saying mate, and I appreciate the logic.

However I'm trying to reflect the scale of Moshiri's ambition also.

Here's the wage levels (2015/16) of us and our peers:

Chelsea £216 million
Man U £203 million
Man City £194 million
Arsenal £192 million
Liverpool £152 million
Spurs £111 million
Everton £75 million

Now clearly we are not going to reach even Liverpool's levels in the very near future given the current constraints on our non broadcasting income. However I believe Moshiri will want to close the gap as much as he possibly can, hence my views that the wage spend will be significantly higher than current or permitted levels next year (assuming no increase in revenues).

 

[MichaelEFC96]

Can't we just show a club in China a video of Kone's hattrick against Sunderland and tell them we want loads?

 

[Efcjake]

Thats like saying the London Gazette is the Statute book mate.

The handbook is a brief reproduction for publication. Not the official rulebook.

It it were the premier league would reference 'the premier league handbook' not the rulebook when talking about disciplinary matters.

Page 6 of the Premier League Handbook, the table of contents:

 

[Tin-Tin]

Except currently they're outsourced and we'll need to unwind those arrangements first.

Do you think its a foregone conclusion that he's (Stones) is gone? I understand why we could possibly need to get rid thanks to your post but surely Moshiri wont want to sell one of the most sought after youngsters in football?

Is there no way that we could do what City did and Moshiri 'sponsors' us through one of his or his associates companies? Then get his money back over the next few year so its sort of like a loan.

Basically im asking if there's any way around these FFP rules that lets us spend and keep Stones?

 

[The Esk]

Do you think its a foregone conclusion that he's (Stones) is gone? I understand why we could possibly need to get rid thanks to your post but surely Moshiri wont want to sell one of the most sought after youngsters in football?

Is there no way that we could do what City did and Moshiri 'sponsors' us through one of his or his associates companies? Then get his money back over the next few year so its sort of like a loan.

Basically im asking if there's any way around these FFP rules that lets us spend and keep Stones?

Yes there's always ways to fudge rules, but looking pragmatically Stones is the easiest option, and the most readily remedied - particularly as his heart seems set on a move to City anyway.