Everton banter 43491


Use our rumours form to send us everton transfer rumours.

(single word yields best result)

21 Jul 2018 10:07:59
Hi Eds, I’ve a question about financial fair play. My understanding is limited so hope you can improve it.

I thought that the whole point was to make transfers more fair across the leagues in Europe.

I also believe it’s based on club income. If this is the case, do clubs who finish higher in the league or get more tv income get bigger budgets to buy players?

{Ed002's Note - The purpose of FFP is to force clubs to spend within their means. There will always be an imbalance due to the amount of income clubs in different countries can generate - and there is a significant imbalance by country because English sides playing in the Premier League get vastly more income from media than clubs playing in other countries to. If you take Bournemouth as an example, their income from media rights (the oft quoted "TV money") is about £125M compared to say Juventus who earn less than £100M and a mid table Spanish side might earn £30M. Broadly it is based on income less allowable deductuctions. But there are separate rules governing how much money owners can invest in transfer fees and wages. It should be noted that at least one Everton fans thinks Everton have different rules to the rest of Europe for wages and it is something to do with Lukaku's sale (because that is what someone on Twitter told him).

So it will never make transfers more fair across Europe but will certainly reduce the number of clubs falling in to the problems that have beset the likes of Nottingham Forest, Leeds, Sheffield Wednesday and Portsmouth over the years where borrowing and spending too much led to debt, financial problems, tumbling down the leagues etc..}

Agree1 Disagree0

21 Jul 2018 12:20:01
I haven't been on for a while but feel I have to reply to ED02 as he has brought me into his reply 1st ED02 I never said I heard about wages and FFP on Twitter it was a podcast by a gent who does a lot work on local radio reg football finances and 2 what I said was or trying to say was the profit made from the sale of not just Lukaku but any player sales helps towards FFP when it comes to wages which is how I believed it worked I did say you could go listen and give us your view on it if you had time.

{Ed002's Note - He has been teasing you about it.}

21 Jul 2018 13:13:06
Hi Ed02 I have taken this from the financial fair play website it definitely says player trading

Premier League update their FFP rules

Posted by Ed Thompson on Monday, April 25, 2016

Premier League clubs have voted to continue their Short Term Cost Control (STCC) rules; updated rules will come into effect from next season (2016/ 17) and will apply for three-year duration of the next TV deal.  The STCC rules first came in three years ago and are designed to help ensure sustainability of the top-flight clubs by ensuring that clubs don't spend the TV deal on hugely increased wages.

Clubs will be able to increase their wage spend by £7m each season from 2016/ 17 to 2018/ 19 (an increase from the £4m a season during the current TV deal) . Clubs can exceed this £7m cap if they generate increased revenue from commercial income, player trading and Match Day income. The Premier League rules are explained here - however they are a little complicated and this diagram should help explain how the rules will work for next season:

{Ed002's Note - I am going to stop providing anything useful to the Everton supporters as you are becoming a real nuisance and simply sharing your lack of knowledge of this matter. Would you like to share with us all the "increased revenue" from "player trading" Everton had last season?

I truly recommend that you step away from something you clearly don't understand, and nor will you ever. But as you have said, I know nothing and could learn from this bozo who has told you the sale of Pogba allows Everton to spend what they want on wages.}

21 Jul 2018 13:57:50
your saying I don't understand but it clearly states there that player trading plays a part in wages ffp and nobody mentioned Pogba (not sure what that is all about) I will leave it now as you don't like it when someone disagrees with you even when they show evidence that backs it up have a nice weekend ed.

{Ed002's Note - Sorry Lukaku - not Pogba. You original comment was dribbling about how this guy had told you that Lukaku's sale allowed Everton to spend what they want on wages. You then made accusations about my lack of knowledge. So, tell me about all of the "increased revenue" from "player trading" Everton had last season that allows Everton to do this?

The bottom line is more likely you simply not understanding any of this at all, or your invisible friend is just teasing you as a gullible football fan - or perhaps he is also as dumb as a box of rocks.}

21 Jul 2018 14:15:51
try reading it back ed I said it helps towards wages FFP not let's us do what we want selling Barkley and Lukaku at high profits helps towards keeping us in wages ffp guidelines and it was you who got insulting with me as you have called me quite a few names now l. I was having a discussion with you about it and I haven't said I know everything about it but by reading up and listening to other people yourself included I try to learn about it you seem to take it personally when someone disagrees with you but can't admit that maybe someone else knows a little bit about these things as well.

{Ed002's Note - It was nonsense, complete and utter nonsense. You have no grasp at all about it - none whatsoever. But as you think I know nothing I will accept that and you can deal with all of those questions from now. You might want to inform the club who by your recknoning have also misled UEFA with their annual accounting for FFP - as they reported something entirely different. I am sure they will be pleased with what you have to say.

And yet again you have failed to tell me what this "inreased revenue" was for "player trading" last season. The club have decalred their figure - let's compare it to the one you and your little friend have come up with.}

21 Jul 2018 14:37:55
Bluey79 Sorry Sir but I am struggling to see what it is you are saying here.
We may have sold Lukaku for more money than we bought him for but that does not mean we will have a surplus of money from the sale. In all likelihood we would not of been paid £90m in one lump sum, the payment would be spread over a number of seasons, the same as the majority of deals these days. I believe the industry standard is 3 seasons.
That means we would of been paid appx £30 million. Out of that money we would be paying Chelsea the final payment (£9m) of his signing. Also tax and agent fees, we are now down to about £12m from his sale. This season we will receive the second installment out of which we will have a tax bill of appx £15m less legal tax deductions that are normal in all businesses. So last season we spent £191m on new arrivals that does not mean we paid that amount out, that is the amount committed with agreed sales, we would of paid out appx £65m. So Last season if we only include lukaku we received £30m and laid out £65m that shows a defecit of £38m, then -£35m this season and again next. Based on this you can see we have no Lukaku money and we never will.
If last season we did not purchase any new players, same this and next season then we would be showing a profit and we would have extra money to use for wages, but even that would come with restrictions that are in place with the FFP rules.
In a nutshell we spent more on players last season than we did on payments for sales, Lukakus money has partly funded that.

{Ed001's Note - you have also failed to take into account the loan fees for the loans that would have been taken out to make initial payments. The standard practice when buying a player is to take a short term loan, which requires paying back, usually within about 30 days if I remember correctly. It usually costs a significant sum to do so, but clubs do not tend to have large sums of cash at hand or in the bank to make payments. Don't worry I am sure BLUEY79 will explain exactly how that works too, as he is an expert on the financial aspects of running EFC....}

21 Jul 2018 15:04:31
You are absolutely right Ed001 I had failed to take the loan fees into account. I was always under the impression that the first agreed instalment was due within the 30 days but I accept I could be mistaking that with the Loan payment.

{Ed001's Note - no you are right, that is why they take a loan to make the initial payment and then they have to repay that loan which comes with a high rate of interest. I think it was my mix up on the 30 days, that it was the initial payment had to be made within 30 days, hence the requirement for financing from a specialist company, rather than the repayment of the loan. The repayment terms are stringent though, I remember when it was explained to me that I found the rates of interest eye-watering.}

21 Jul 2018 15:22:18
why do people challenge ed002 so much? the guy knows his stuff, so many persons across the sites see it as some badge of honour to challenge him on his knowledge, and let's have it right the fella is right 99% of the time he's not perfect 100% of the time and for them rare times he says something that doesn't come off you get clowns jumping on him saying haha i knew u was wrong some 13 year old on Twitter told me and he knew because he lives by the ground.
get a grip bluey mate if you don't agree with the eds and dnt like how they respond to posts go read another forum or suck it up and grow up.

21 Jul 2018 15:31:53
Now I know why the eds hate talking finances. minefield and i imagine most (including me ) struggle to understand the intricacies. I'll stick to the technical appraisal of the team 😂.

21 Jul 2018 16:30:44
Is Bluey79 on a mission to stop us receiving information from the Eds? I said last time that he should suck up the fact he's wrong and be grateful to have the correct knowledge going forward but it's like he is either to stubborn to accept that or deliberately wants to provoke an argument.
Someone said Richarlison will get most dribbles at the club this year, but I bet Bluey beats that hands down, frothing at the mouth as he frantically types in yet another irritating reply.
My advice to Bluey79, give up flower. You're wrong!

21 Jul 2018 16:59:36
WorcesterEFC no not at all but I even put a piece from the financial fair play website to show what I was saying is correct but after your last post you clearly have a issue with me so I will leave you alone

Grumpy all I said was by selling Lukaku and Barkley at a massive profit helps keep us within wages financial guidelines but that it didn't give us freedom to pay whatever we wanted so with that ed and a few fans decided to start having a go with a certain ED calling me names I even asked the ed to go have a listen and give me his thoughts yet again he called me names if I believe something to be correct I won't just agree with him for the sake of it.

{Ed002's Note - You are whining and bitching but have yet to explain in any way or form about what this "increased revenue" from "player trading" is - how much increased revenue did Everton get? Let's see some numbers and not just this really embarrassing bitching.}

21 Jul 2018 17:18:38
no ed your embarrassing and you do not like it when somebody disagrees with you we sold Lukaku and Barkley Barkley cost us nothing and Lukaku cost us 28 million and we sold them both at a massive profit which helps towards wages FFP as we have increased revenue by trading players I have not said once we can spend what we like in the original post i said we still need to be careful you only see what you want to see and you can't back down now because that would prove your incorrect I don't have to show figures because we all know we made a massive profit on those players and I was not just refering to this season I used them as an example.

{Ed002's Note - Complete and utter bull. You don't understand at all. And as far as you are concerned the club is now guilty of false accounting as well you really are a glifnard of the first order. You are wasting your time but certainly I will not provide the Everton supporters with answers to anything other than pure transfer related information.}

21 Jul 2018 20:40:29
Going back to the original post: cheers Ed002, think I get it now. Certainly hope we don’t end up doing a Forest/ Leeds etc.

21 Jul 2018 22:25:33
I really don't understand why people want to know the ins and outs of financial matters anyway. Who cares if a player costs £1 or £100 000 000. Or if they are paid 10k a week or 250k a week. Seriously as fans does it matter? As long as the players give 100% for the club that's the only important stat surely. Leave the finances to the guys that run the club. Rant over.



Log In or Register to post

Remember me

Forgot Pass