How Financial Fair Play Was Justified
Vložit
- čas přidán 12. 09. 2024
- How financial fair play was justified.
Subscribe: bit.ly/TifoSubs... | 🔔Make sure to enable all push notifications!🔔
Watch the most recent videos: • Most Recent Videos | T...
In 1971, Peter Sloane published an article titled The Economics of Professional Football: The Football Club As A Utility Maximiser. It laid bare the ideological differences between the North American and European sporting cultures. In the United States, there had always been an assumption that sports teams should be ‘profit-maximisers’, and therefore be organised as ‘closed’ leagues to protect the sports clubs against the economic penalty of relegation. Conversely, in Europe, where leagues were ‘open’ and had promotion and relegation, ‘utility maximisation’ - the desire to prioritise sporting success - was the true objective. Profit, or underwriting losses, was only important insofar as it was necessary for a club’s long-term stability and survival. This economic concept is the bedrock behind the implementation of Financial Fair Play.
Follow Tifo Football:
Website: tifofootball.com
Twitter: / tifofootball_
Facebook: / tifofootball
Instagram: / tifofootball_
Join Tifo Football, for extra perks, by following this link:
/ @tifo
Listen to the Tifo Football podcast:
iTunes: bit.ly/TifoFootPod
SoundCloud: / tifo-football-podcast
Subscribe to Tifo Basketball at bit.ly/TifoBask...
Watch more Tifo Football:
Tactics Explained: • Tactics Explained | Ti...
Finances & Laws: • Finances & Laws | Tifo...
Tifo Football Podcast: • Tifo Football Podcast
Most Recent Videos: • Most Recent Videos | T...
Popular Videos: • Popular Videos | Tifo ...
Produced by Tifo Studios: Taking an illustrated look into the beautiful game.
Music sourced from epidemicsound.com
About Tifo Football:
Informative, illustrated football analysis. Home of WhiteboardFootball®.
Tifo loves football. We know there’s an appetite for thoughtful, intelligent content, for stuff that makes the complicated simple.
Our illustrated and live action CZcams videos address all aspects of the game, including tactics, history, and the business of football.
We provide analysis on the Premier League, Champions League, La Liga, Serie A, Bundesliga, World Cup and more.
Our podcasts interview some of the game’s leading figures. And our editorial covers football with depth and insight.
Tifo Football used to be uMAXit Football - we changed our name in November 2017 to better articulate who we are and what matters to us: making football accessible to its fans through story-telling and the expertise and insight of our team of writers and producers.
Tifo was nominated by the Football Supporters’ Federation for the ‘Best Online Media’ Award in 2017 and 2018.
We also make bespoke videos.
#ffp #manchestercity #uefa
“All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.”
I was just finnish reading Animal Farm, love this quote
Fuckin pigs
George is that you
Marinus Dijkhuizen
Equity, not equality.
Oh yeah from animal farm the commandments
Financial Fair Play is a excuse to keep the top clubs on top, keeping the smaller one on the bottom.
True
@@musaabid1055 irony since 'old traditonal club' fans think glory and money should only belong to them with an already established history
As the video stated, it's important to note that keeping the big clubs happy was also an important part of FFPs creation. FFP would be just as effective if it regulated debt instead of net spending. But by regulating net spending you make it harder for new PSGs, Man Citys, Leipzigs, and Hoffenheims to gain seats at the table. From the big clubs point of view, it's about protecting their own hegemony.
There are justifications for disliking club ownership by governments and corporations, however I don't see anything wrong with a Hoffenheim, where a boyhood fan took control of his club and lead them to glory. To me, fans who dislike Hoffenheim just don't want to see change to the status quo.
Only Tifo could have taught us this without complicating a single thing.
How these videos are still free is beyond me. Great content once again.
Since 2000, 12 different teams have won the NFL Superbowl and 9 in the NBA. Same time frame and the numbers are 5 in the Premier League, 5 in La Liga, 4 in BundesLiga and 5 in Serie A.
FFP is a poor attempt at cost control. Till you have a hard limit on wages and transfer window budget, FFP simply will not work because money can be "earned" in many ways.
American sports leagues like NFL and NBA have hard salary caps to make sure middle of the road teams actually have a shot at being competitive unlike soccer leagues in Europe. Without a hard cap, Everton and West Ham are forever mid table teams.
The point of FFP is not to control the competition
Is there to prevent teams from being bankrupt
And btw there is 10 teams who won nba since 2000
*Man City has left the chat*
izzojunior Nah we still here mate.
Interestingly if you watched the video the reasons financial fair play was implemented should mean Manchester City should be in the all clear, they are currently at little risk of going bankrupt and are strong financial. It is the ulterior motive of keeping the existing big clubs at the status quo is why uefa go after city and psg.
egghead 💯
@@egghead6048 Not true. The reason City is an issue is because you literally have a terrorist oil making regime pumping money into a club using backwards ways of doing so and inflating sponsorship contracts. That's called money laundering and it's illegal in most countries.
But who am I kidding you're a plastic so you'll ignore the human rights issues as long as your shitty no-history club keeps winning. L.
No
5:20 This Quote could easily describe the relationship between American banks and their Government; "...Where an entire [Finance Sector] operates on the verge of insolvency, chronically expending more than its earnings but being systematically rescued by external money injections..." Very interesting.
Not just American banks either
they also bail out members from other sectors deemed "too big to fail"
@@jonathanvillalba3214 like the car industry. And 10 bln a year subsidy to Boeing. Communism by the back door.
I came for the football video but stayed for the unexpected wokeness.
@@StoutProper Communism for the rich!!!
Fair play tifo..excellent content👍🏻
@aljanat5 I agree. Financial Fair Play was necessary, but it's poorly done. Teams that are already rich will always find a way. Teams that are growing will be stopped by these regulations. There are many weird cases with FFP rules. Dinamo Zagreb earned a lot of money once, four years later they wanted to spend that money. That was a clash with FFP, because they spend more than they earned in last three years. Russian team Tosno was under heavy debt, they were relegated from top Russian division, but somehow won Russian Cup in the same season. That would mean a Group Stage of Europe League for them and enough money to pay debts, but because of the FFP, they weren't allowed to enter Europe League and now they are bancrupt; had to start a phoenix club in some lower division.
@aljanat5 Dinamo could have done that, but legal maneuvers should not be what FFP is about. FFP should be about bad loans, unmanageable debt, from Manchester Utd to Boston Utd, in football there is obviously a financial bubble, there is an opinion there that football is always growing so banks give such loans to clubs that actually can't be payed back. FFP should not punish teams that spend money they actually have.
I wonder who would be opposed to Tosno playing Europa League. It's in everybody's interest for them to have the money for paying debts and not go bancrupt.
It would be wise for Krasnodar or Arsenal (T) to raise their own talents, but you can't order clubs to be wise. If Western teams can have oil money, loaning, foreign talents, so can Eastern.
I love how guys manage to explain tricky concepts with great graphics and soothing narration. Keep up the good work, Cheers!!
UEFA: we’ll call it Financial fair play.
Man City & PSG: 😂😂🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Looks like you didn't understand the video.
@@bentiro7740 he understands it perfectly well, it's a bullshit system.
Where was FFP for Bury and Bolton this week?
FFP is a scam by the old elite keep their gravy train sweet.
I'm a City fan yes, and you probably think I'm being salty and that I think FFP was concocted to spite City and PSG?
Actually it wasn't, City and PSG aren't the real targets of FFP, City had been under Mansour's ownership long enough before FFP to be able to withstand it.
What it actually constitutes is a 'pulling up of the drawer bridge' to stop anyone else being able to compete with them (now 'us' I suppose).
It's the fans of other clubs who will never be able to compete financially no matter what happens that are the real victims.
As a city fan, not only did we win the jackpot, but we won the last ever one.
Imagine being a Derby fan back in the day, promoted 1 season, champions the next, there used to be hope. The big teams took that away, first with the TV money, then with the champions league money, and finally with FFP.
Imagine being a Derby fan these days, what's the best you can ever wish for?
UEFA now: 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Anyone coming back after the super league announcement?
Yeah it's kinda going to make the whole thing irrelevant.
Can you also explain how financial fair play works?
Well it didn't stop rangers or Bolton going under, just two examples..
Along the lines of don’t spend beyond your means (I think you get a window of time to make up for such spending before it becomes a problem).
In Chelsea’s case, they didn’t do this but I believe they signed underaged players to certain contracts.
@@sabrethemoment6799 oh they did but at the time no one cared because Russians were friends. Now Russians are the enemy again and abromvich cat get a visa suddenly there's an interest in them. You don't think Chelsea earnt ask that money they spent when abromvich took over do you? Don't be so foolish
@@sabrethemoment6799 you are correct
Guinness no doubt Roman originally spent beyond Chelsea’s means but making UCL almost every single year helped balance that out. The reason for the transfer ban is specifically to do with handling youth contracts.
I agree that regulations need to be in place, and not just in football. It's unfair how the taxpayer is the last in the queue to get paid, and it makes no sense how the banks, after gambling with money irresponsibly, got bailed out. In such a case, legislation should be in place not only to prevent organisations from acting irresponsibly, but also to make sure they can't get away with it.
However, there is also a hidden agenda in the fair play rules, and that is one to preserve the dominance of the currently established powers. If, let's say, a billionaire comes and actually wants to spend loads of money on the club, even if he doesn't generate profit from it. Give the warranties are given that he can pay whatever is needed if they decide to pull out, why is that a problem? Why are Manchester City punished?
Yes, they say it's to protect "competition" in football, but that is nonsense. If anything, such laws discourage billionaires from taking on mediocre clubs and turning them into rising powers.
Just for the record, I'm not arguing with the fact the the money invested both in Manchester City or Leicester is "dodgy money" and controversy surrounds those involved, but that's a different story.
The fact is, while pretending to promote financial stability, the fair play rules serve a hidden agenda of preserving the dominance of the currently established powers.
FFP came about because all of the traditional big clubs of Europe got worried when teams like Chelsea, Man City, PSG, started getting bought out by billionaires who could inject a ton of cash into the club and buy the big trophies, increasing the competition at the top table, the big clubs with the big histories like liverpool, man utd, barca, real, juve, milan, bayern, all got worried about losing their status and fan base, so they threatened to break away and form their own league, which prompted UEFA to do something about it, that's why FFP was introduced, it's all about keeping the big dogs big and the small dogs small, the result of FFP is that if you want to invest in a football club then you better invest in a club that is already huge, or you will never win anything, any team that gets close to breaking into that elite bracket these days just gets torn to pieces in the transfer market, and there's nothing they can do about it, as per Monaco, Ajax, Leicester
It's not why it was introduced, and if you support a club that became successful because of throwing money it, then I am truly concerned, as it is a rule intended on protecting your club, instead of your owners.
FFP is quite a simple concept, people like to pretend it's a confusing anti-fairness rule when it really isn't. The concept is that if your club gets purchased by an owner, he can't spend money that the club doesn't have, and people think this is unfair, until you take into account the scenario where your owner sells the club, you now have a club which spends more money than it earns.
So, you've got a club that doesn't make money, requires a yearly cash injection of tens of millions on-top of the hundreds of millions you paid for the club - who in their right mind is going to buy that? This is exactly why FFP exists, so that in the event your owner sells the club, it is sustainable to the point that when a new owner comes in who will likely have less money than the likes of your saudi billionaires, your club doesn't have to sell of its players to get back into the green in terms of revenue.
The only purpose of FFP is to keep the big clubs always successful and challenging for honours while holding back smaller clubs who dare not invest or show any kind of ambition or risk the wrath of a points deduction. Think of the scene in the Matrix where Neo discovers that the machines are using humans as batteries to generate power. Bigger clubs swoop in for young talent and of course best players ,who must be sold to balance the books to keep the so called football authorities happy. Never again will England see a Jack Walker. A rich fan who bought the small club he supported and took took them to pinnacle of the English game, the big clubs and authorities never want to be challenged like that again. These big clubs ,In their own minds ,the spoils of war ( money and trophies) is theirs by divine right and FFP keeps them at the top from now until the rules are changed. Football has become very corrupt.
Mark Bryce
This is 100% true. People have a problem with man city mainly because of who the owner is and the source of his wealth. FFP basically makes it impossible to raise the level of a small club to elite status and makes all of the small clubs essentially farm teams developing players for the elite established clubs.
Spot on . As an arsenal fan it’s shameful that our club became the Lap dog crony capitalists for UEFA and started calling out big spending owners . The working classes obviously fell for the propaganda and the cognitive dissonance from arsenal fans is obvious : accusing city and Chelsea if buying titles , yet frustrated by the limitations of our self sustaining business model and desiring an owner pump money into transfers 🙄
The only way financial fair play will actually work is if there were genuine revenue sharing. Eg. All teams basically were forced to give their money into a collective and then split evenly between all teams.
Without revenue sharing FFP only in trenches the current hierarchy.
@@tonyzan5268 sounds like communism..
@@alone2break
It is. But financial fair play is simply entrenched class structure. Either let it be a completely free market or share revenue like Americans sports teams.
Hi Tifo ,I have a question
If financial fair play was introduced to stop clubs from going bankrupt because of over-leveraging and spending the money. Why isn’t an owner of the club allowed to spend his own money to the club as he/she is not taking any debt from anyone.
For example, why can’t elon musk with his net worth 200billion buy a football club worth 5-10billions and spend his own money 5-10billions in it’s development and renovation? You can’t tell him not to spend his own earned money to his own club if he wants to. Isn’t that like saying Tesla company can’t buy and invest in new technology with Elons money because other car company like toyota, honda, bmw car company doesn’t have similar level of rich owner and can’t compete with Tesla technology? Since,football has already become a business in last 30-40years.
Do a video on how QPR got away with breaking them rules
And rangers and Bolton. Just shows how ffp is only targeted at certain clubs for particular reasons
A lot of teams got away with it to be honest
But they didn’t. They were sanctioned in 2014.
@@russellward4624 they where find 10% of what they should of been
@@97Ahsan thanks telling me just found it interesting watch 👍🏼
Not even a Leeds fan, but Peter Ridsdale should be imprisoned. I spent 2 mins looking at his Wiki page to check if he was ever tried, and instead found a tale about a conman going from one team to another, leaving ruined football clubs and businesses in his wake. It baffles me how he is allowed to be a part of society.
And HMRC should get the rest of our £7million off Leicester.
Sounds like non league Steve king???
As a United supporter, I think FFP is a load of nonsense. It seems to protect the established order, clubs like United and other big clubs that make the most money. It's a barrier for smaller clubs to join the elite. If a club like city or Chelsea have the ambition and the money to buy an entire new team, to compete for trophies, then let them. It adds another club in to the mix. It stops the elite keeping all the trophies to themselves. Yet FFP seeks to punish these clubs, because their brand isn't as big, and therefore they're unable to gain the kind of market share that United has. So, in effect, if you've got a global following of fans that will buy all the branded tat the club sells (like Uniteds official water taps) then that's fine, you are allowed to spend as much money on players as you like, despite the club actually being in huge debt. Yet if you're city, with no debt, but a far less profitable brand, then you're going to get kicked out of Europe for having the nerve to sign players.
Should let the fans pick up the bill if a club goes into administration. Any other business that mismanages funds or fails to get with the times goes into administration gets liquidated never to be seen again. It's not fair on the tax payer.
As an Canadian who primarily watches American sports (nba, nfl and mlb) these rules seem extremely unfair to smaller teams. Correct me if I am wrong but if you base how much teams can spend on players based on their revenues/profits doesn’t that mean larger more profitable teams can have significantly higher payrolls and thus more talent?
How is a small team supposed to compete on a fair basis with a team like man united? In the us nfl the 32 teams share revenue almost equally and their is a salary cap (maximum payroll for players) and salary floor (minimum payroll for players). This ensures a relatively even distribution of talent and makes it so the way to become a better team involves finding better value. Eg. Scouting and drafting underrated prospects and developing and coaching them up.
To me the EPL seems so unfair.
I love your videos. They are really informative, thank you for doing them. Whilst I see the benefits of FFP, you can't get around the fact that it totally contradicts European trade law. Like it or not football clubs are registered businesses and in any other business you are allowed to invest your own money.
If UEFA really wanted to help clubs, financially and maintain a competitive environment, they should have focused on debt rather than investment. I.e. Clubs who have debt are not allowed to purchase players if their annual net income can support the acquisition.
FFP is a sham and has always been their to make the rich richer and the poor poorer. Look at the evidence. The richest five clubs in the world pre FFP (based on net income) were Man Utd, arsenal, Bayern Munich, Real Madrid and Barcelona. They are still in the top six with Man City breaking into the top 5 because of initial investment and running their club and business efficiently.
Look behind the smokescreen UEFA have put in place. If you can only spend what you make then Man Utd will always be the wealthiest football club no matter what! Is THIS 'fair?' They invested heavily at the right time at the birth of the premier league and just so happened to have the greatest manager ever, plus an amazing CEO in Peter Kenyon. Unless investment is allowed in other clubs no one will get near! Man City are only getting closer (income wise) because of their massive initial investement pre FFP. Oh and who was in charge of the early operations and an infamous backer of FFP? David Gill, the ex CEO of Man Utd. The 'big 5' support FFP because they don't want to lose what they've got and a European Superleague is much more likely to happen under FFP btw.
Basically FFP is a great idea in theory and while it has had some great results, regarding financial stability, the long term implications are quickly becoming apparent. It could've been done, legally, maintaining a competitive environment that carried the desired result they proficised.
So what you're saying is it's fine for rich owners to pump teams full of money but team's who take out loans and pay them back can't do anything until they've paid it back? How is that fair? So people taking out loans and mortgages or even business's who take out loan's can't spend any money on anything else till they pay it back you do know like any other business, Company's are allowed to take out loans and pay them back over a period of time.
Plus you do know Madrid, Barca are fan owned club's and are self sufficient with the president being voted in and not being able to invest his own money into the club. Sure in the past Madrid and Barca have had certian help but they're self sufficient clubs only relying on commercial gain and on the pitch success. Same with Bayern the fans own 81% of the club so i don't see your point plus it's in the rule of the bundesliga have to be majority owned by fans. The 50+1 rule.
"Unless investment is allowed in other clubs no one will get near!" So you think making football unregulated and making team's spend millions IF NOT BILLION's just to stay with in the big 4-6 is fine if not with in the league at all?? Did you not see how many club's wen't under? Sure Debt is a problem but if the team can pay it off over time what's the problem? You speak of investment's but don't care about Billionaires spending money and righting it off?
"Man City breaking into the top 5 because of initial investment and running their club and business efficiently."
Lol what? So the over 1.1 BILLION the owner has spent over 10 years and the countless undermining of the rule's is Man City running their club efficiently? The fact not ONCE since 2008 has the club made a PROFIT in the transfer window but yet some how it's efficient? Or the fact majority if not all the sponsorship's by Man City are inflated there's a reason why FIFA, UEFA, FA AND the Premier league are investigating them, If you care so much about debt shouldn't the owners investment count as debt?
The LoudAssasin you're clearly passionate about this and that's great! I didn't say it was ok for owners to pump money into clubs, without protecting the interests of other stakeholders in each association. I totally agree something should've been done to help struggling clubs but it must be legal and have no hidden agenda. I only offered another solution but I'm not the decision maker in UEFA.
Regarding your point about Man City not making a profit in the TM. You're correct but they are a profitable business now and have been for the past five years. There is a book called 'killing the game' by author Daniel Slack-Smith which I found really insightful and a particular section is dedicated to FFP and sees it from the club's side. It just looks at another side to it. The City Football Group is now valued at over 3 billion dollars (not an exact figure) so I think they are very profitable in my opinion but agree that it's not in the transfer market.
Madrid and Barcelona are fantastic and I love that they are owned by the fans. Unfortunately I cannot see this being the case in English football in the modern era since the birth of the premier league but I'd love to see it happen. Like you eluded to though, they have had major help along the way in huge tax rebates and exploited loop holes from the Spanish government. You surely can't agree that this is fair?
The fact is FFP is a contradiction of European trade law and in my personal opinion while football clubs are registered businesses, they must be able to speculate to accumulate or stagnation in the market will inevitably occur.
The FFP is a great idea not only in theory but also in reality. You spend what you produce, makes a lot of sense. There are so many examples of clubs which vanished because the owner left or went in jail. Like in Romania, they put 8-9 owners in jail, and clubs suffer. Rapid Bucharest, 3rd most powerful club there went bankrupt. Look at Sporting Lisbon financial issues. You only look at big clubs. You give example man City. They had financial loses every single year. You think that oil money comes and will always come there but what if one day the sheik dies or simply he decides not to play with his toy anymore, because that's Man city for him? Who's gonna pay all the debt acquired in the last 10 years? Leeds is a great example in the video. Remember Portsmouth, playing FA Cup final, buying players with 40 million, hiring top managers on high salary? Where are they now?
If you want to see the ultimate FFP model in football look at Germany.
Bayern München's position in the Bundesliga is unhealthy and unchallenged - the Der Spiegel piece about City was in part about München's annoyance that City swooped in and bought two players - Sané and De Bruyne, that they presumed they would get first refusal on.
Tony Neculai i agree FFP is working in certain ways. Like I said in both of my previous comments, there has always been hidden motives at work and the evidence is clear. I agree that something should be done but it MUST be legal. FFP isn’t.
I believe your Man City comments are unfounded if I’m honest. ‘A toy’ is a view that is outdated, especially with the investment, success and importance the city football group now has which is intertwined with the future of Abu Dhabi. Seriously read the ‘killing the game’ book that I mentioned before. It gives a totally different perspective to the city takeover and may change your opinion. If it doesn’t it’s just an interesting read.
Also, like I mentioned before Man City have been a profitable business for 5 years and the CFG is valued at over 3 billion dollars. Yes they would be nowhere without oil, but they now don’t rely on it at all. They invested in a business in order to make it profitable. FFP contradicts this model that’s used in business worldwide.
Great video Tifo! Could you perhaps explain how occurrences in countries other than Britain influenced UEFA in making FFP? This video mostly used examples from Britain, and I’m curious how events in Spain, France, etc influenced things as well.
Imo FFP should allow clubs in the same league the opportunity to spend the same amount to $. It is more unfair to allow Manchester clubs to spend 5x more than a Watford or Newcastle without allowing those clubs the opportunity to match spending. Not sure what is the answer but competition should be encouraged
Good video tifo,you explain everything.
Video Idea:How do leagues earn money(in depth)
TV Licence
advertising
@@zonk4817 yeah but how do they know how many are watching it on tv or streaming it online?? And how do they earn when most of the channels telecast the match for free of cost.
@@rounak471 They rent out the license to stream the games. I
Barcelona, Real Madrid, United, PSG & Man City, every time they get in competition to buy a player, other players transfer' fees and salaries overinflate across other parts of Europe.
If you asked me a few years ago that a player will cost 140m like Coutinho, I would have assumed you are insane.
City haven’t paid more than 60m for a player.
@@trubass23 Its not like they are buying just 1 players. They are buying 5-6 players each transfer window.. which adds up to clubs breaking their transfer records for 1 or 2 players.. dont be naive
@@trubass23 1 bil pep's city lol you must be joking
Billy Jeans that doesn’t have any influence on player value inflation. City may have spent a lot in total, but the players were all acquired at reasonable prices.
@@trubass23 fuck your reasonable prices spending 264 million gor 5 defenders?lol fuck off
Bonus Karl Pilkington in this video.
Ownership of teams / clubs by players / unions would be better goal of soccer / sport and at the same time more capitalistic / profitable as it emphasizes ownership by those doing work. Investors / investor groups would probably also have more success financing the whole league together rather than just one team, where they could influence and present the sport as a whole, and most likely get more return on investment.
HMRC is not owed money by clubs, it makes demand for taxes. Taxes are arbitrary and imposed using threats of violence, whereas debts are obligations defined in contractual agreements or the result of harm. "Taxpayer" funding of football club does happen, but the cause is corrupt government.
Funny to hear the mention of a Super League in 2008, just for it to almost become real in the pandemic. I guess it's a theme we will continue to see, as global economic crises arrive, the threat of a Super League will return.
Financial Fair Play would be great if UEFA actually enforced it. They just bend over backwards for Manchester City and PSG
We got monnney
@@shirwahassan1346 arab money
@@anwartahernuman7675 love dat monnnnneeey
regulation is not very clear, since it is implemented pretty recent and the 2 lame clubs have enough money to hire the best lawyers in the world to help them trick FFP. But you know Karma is a bitch, and with all that money washed in last 10 years they couldn't even reach semifinal of Champions League, let alone win it. Money is not everything in football :)
Pfft I think some of didn't understand the video. When did Tifo mention Man City? Pfft
This dudes voice is so soothing.
FFP is there only to keep the big clubs ahead of the game. If season after season my club earns more and can spend more(through being successful on the field), how can anyone ever catch up?
For example if Liverpool generates way more money than Burnley, according to FFP, they can spend way more.
This means Liverpool will be able to afford far better players can Burnley.
This means since Liverpool has way better players than Burnley, Burnley won't be able to compete with Liverpool on the field.
This means since Liverpool still succeeded than Burnley on the field, they will make more money that season.
This means since they make more money, they will be able to buy far better players than what Burnley can buy in the next season (according to FFP).
So you see, the cycle continues year after year forever.
The big teams remains big and the small teams remains small.
FFP was created just to keep the big teams big and keep the small teams small.
Genuine question here, what would you propose as a better system to prevent clubs with rich owners from abusing their cash
It was certainly justified but UEFA's application too punishing overspenders has been shown to be flawed via only fines to PSG and Manchester City.
Deep Mind X yes
@Deep Mind X no
@Deep Mind X all you do is ask loaded question, misrepresent data and act like a total fucking prick.
Just shut the fuck up dude, you have no idea what you're on about.
City spends the most. Fuck city. Fuck their owners that are okay with having slaves. Fuck all of that.
Fuck Real Madrid too, but for different reasons. Reasons that are at least justified from their standpunt.
Also, you have no clue how FFP works. This is Real's own money being spend anyway. I hate Real too, because they're a symbol of the issue with the system, but I hate the system for that.
@Deep Mind X because I hate dumb people. They make me so fucking salty. I fucking can't stand that there's so many idiots. If you're proud because you're one of them, feel free to keep saying I'm salty. Just know that you can't really say much more than that. Because you're fucking dumb. All you can do is ask dumb questions. You can't really defend what you're saying.
@Deep Mind X Haha you are so bad at this. I mean, be happy with your trophies, but at the end of the day, you know when you read these comments, you know fully well that you're a fucking idiot hahaha.
Could you guys do how FFP works, please? Including bans/penalties for breaches and stuff
Awesome vid, always been impressed with the tenth and diversity of content on this channel.
RIP vichai he was a brilliant owner and paid all our debts off, helped the local area and won us the prem.
I hope all teams have owners that care like he does
Can you please go into how Financial Fair Play actually hurts smaller clubs next video? Clubs like Milan and Roma had to sell so many players whereas if they kept them, they could be completing for titles and CL football.
Pray for Portsmouth, we never get a mention
I was thinking of at least 3 of the 40+ clubs that went into administration. Portsmouth was first to come to mind lol
Leeds got a 15 point deduction
Any chance of a video explaining the pro's and con's of an all-Ireland league?
5:58 NO WAY!!
The problem has never been Football clubs over-spending, it has been the constant bailouts that have greatly reduced the downside risk of over-spending. Remove the bail-outs and allow clubs to go into bankrupcy / Liquidation and you will see owners less likely take on the high risk moves. If you want an FFP that is balanced, then pass a rule making owners / Officers personally liable for a % of the company spending (even just the taxes as those are supposed to be remitted separately) when their own money is on the line i think you would see a much more conservative attitude towards spending.
But, to me, FFP is just a stick that the big clubs use to protect their revenues. The disparity between revenues on the Top and Bottom of the leagues as well as CL revenues create an incentive for clubs to try and boost their position though FFP makes it very hard to do that without incurring penalties (Man City).
Jonathan2342 can’t work. Fans will always move to the new club that is created after a club goes down. Technically not the same club, but everyone knows it’s the same. Kinda Like Glasgow Rangers or for a more extreme example, to what happened to Wimbledon and MK Dons.
Top Draw content !! I like the way you connected things from soccernomics to what the guys from London school of economics said.
These guys love soccornomics, a lot of their videos are based on chapters from that book
UEFA: *intensifies FFP*
Man. City & PSG: *Oil up*
MLS: did somebody say ‘oil’?
Man City won the Premier League with oil money and Liverpool won the Champions League with Coutinho money
Liverpool have a higher wage bill than City...How do you explain that
Yep. You didn't understand the video. Clearly.
Absolutely quality content. It would be nice to know what role the other big leagues and clubs played in this history though, for example the Spanish League with big spenders such as Barcelona and Real Madrid, and also the Italian League with Juventus' relegation for match fixing and Roma having to sell their youth players to register to the following season.
One of the best content produced about the theme... congrats!
*Financial Fairplay exsists*
Man City: I’m about to end this whole mans career
The system was put in place to prevent teams from going bankrupt, Man city are one of the few clubs with no debt. But but but... They must be ruining the league
P$G too
Financial fair play rules exists
Meanwhile PSG spending over half a billion dollars on 2 players in a farmer's league : We bought the uefa officials. Problem solved.
PSG does not break the rules. It bends them. The same guy who owns the club also have sponsorship deals with PSG (not literally the same guy. But the money comes from the same source). So the money comes from a different "pocket".
Since there is no rule on how much money a sponcer can pay, and since having sponsers are a legit way clubs can increase costs without violating ffp... I know, it's imoral.
Manchester City, PSG disliked and called to ban this video.
Are you sure? Na mate
Yeah you didn't understand what went on in the video.
You skipped the most important part of FFP. The part where it was supposed to focus on club debt, which is the biggest factor in a club going into administration. And the g14 clubs threatened to break away and form a super league. So uefa caved and changed FFP to the draw bridge that keeps any club from breaking into the old money club.
Who is here after the news of City losing their spot in CL and risk of league 2 drop?
wel that is no longer happening
Glasgow Rangers as of 2020 haven’t balanced their books in over 5 years and are accumulating debt constantly with over £68 million pounds spent on players being amortized and debt of over £20million on the books , needing another £25 million just to see the 2020 season out yet they are still allowed to play in European Competitions , their business model is exactly what caused them to go into administration not too long ago owing over £ 100 million which has never been repaid but they still maintained ownership of their stadium and all training facilities worth millions, where’s the financial fair play in that behaviour?
Is it just me who feels that this isn't how football was supposed to be? I mean the whole point with team sports is to represent your city/neighbourhood/workplace/etc. while competing against others. For pride of the local community and for the health benefits that come from exercising. First wrong step, IMO, was the creation of the footballing profession. When you put a wage into the equation, you end up with higher quality players, sure, but also with a lack of passion, pride and loyalty. It becomes just another gig. They become just like the rest of us. I mean what's the point of supporting a team if they don't represent you? What's the point of playing for supporters who you have no connection to whatsoever. But imagine supporting a football team who your relative play for, or your neighbour, or your co-worker. Or at least someone who comes from the same part of the fucking country as you. Speaks the same dialect. ANYTHING.
Of course most people aren't gonna support their local club, if they have no way of becoming successful. We all want to at least dream, right? But many people aren't allowed, All because of the footballing economy with the owners and investors polluting the water. The rich are running the entire sport. Should your football club be doomed because you don't have any rich supporters or because it's not attractive to Arabic dictators? This is why people glory hunt. They become customers instead of supporters.
The clubs lack of moral fiber and are always looking for loopholes to get one over. It's getting worse as they are becoming more and more desperate. First because of how football clubs in most countries are run, like companies. Secondly because of the TV money, Champions League money, etc. Then they started to price out the working class from the stadiums, they got rid of the proper football stands. Clubs started to cater to rich tourists rather than their own local supporters who have supported them for several generations. But they never owned the club, like they do in Germany or Sweden. There, the supporters own 51% of the club at all times. It protects some aspects of the club at least. But still, clubs like RB Leipzig and Östersunds FK are finding loopholes to exploit. There will always be corruption if you protect the soul of the game.
This is why we don't have any passion or personalities in football anymore. This is why the English stadiums are becoming quieter and quieter. This is why we don't see many incredible underdog stories anymore. Entire countries have no hope of ever competing in the Champions League because they can't afford to keep up with the economy of the big four European countries. For the sake of a few decent dribbles and greed.
Football seems dead. World Cup in Qatar, Super League discussions (like the 'big four' countries haven't been given enough advantages) and the blood and oil money from both east and west. Is this what we really want?
Plz make a video on marcelo gallardo plz... The most successful river plate coach
I'm not sure if this is true but apparently when PSG signed Neymar, the club wrote up his contract to say that he was being transferred on a long term (or permanent, I'm not sure) loan plus cash deal so that they could somehow avoid financial fair play.
Leeds were given a 15 point deduction, not 10
A lot of people don’t understand FFP in here clearly 😂
Man City seemingly don’t either 😂
Richard England hahaha ur hilarious man
Was actually a 15 point deduction for Leeds....but top video as usual
A wage cap per player, transfer cap per player and a cap on agent fees would make much more sense
Yes exactly leagues would be more competitive as well
You're not worth more than minimum wage for life, I'll go to FIFA to get approval.
Daily Cyberdemon so you disagree or are you just rambling like a maniac?
@@deanmohan Just putting your arbitrary childish 'logic' to a level I felt necessary.
Daily Cyberdemon so you’re happy enough to let transfers hit 100s of millions while agents drive them up and the viewers/fans are the ones left funding it until the bubble pops?
i think, Fifa (the game) have Financial Fair Play since the beginning, I always cannot spend more than I earned.
What I learned is that in the long-run, clubs investing in young talents are financially better than those buying established superstars, ie Ajax, Borrusia Dortmund, Southampton, Athletico Bilbao, Benfica and recently Liverpool
So the american system is much more sustainable and causes less loss to the taxpayer but it doesnt create the same quality on the pitch. This makes alot of sense. Great Vid, Tifo!
The first two are mostly correct, but "it doesn't create the same quality on the pitch" may not be. Remember, in the USA the MLS is about the #5-6 professional sport by some distance. Without a world-class demand (audience), you can't have a world-class league, and in the US football isn't that big of a deal yet.
The NFL, the NBA and the NHL have a similar financial system as the MLS and they are by far the best leagues in their sports because there is a cultural demand for them.
I don’t think so. You should watch John Olivers video about stadiums. In America the owners often threatens to leave if the city doesn't pay for a new stadium, and all the revenue should go to the club / franchise. Imagine a club like Burnley moving to London so the owners can get more £££
That system only works in a country. Not a whole Continent like Europe. Many fans have said an American system wouldn't work.
If The UK start using the FFP of Bundeshliga or La Liga it will be just another portuguese league in English Speaking model
Love your videos!
I’m not interested in long contacts, whether a clubs got a new owner, profits or any other excuse. They should make it simple. You are not allowed to spend more that 300 million in a season period. Then they would be no loopholes.
Fantastic video. Very insightful! 👏🏼
People focus on the world 'fair' Sadly FFP was not designed to make football 'fair' in the sense of making the clubs more equal on or off the field.
I am personally not a fun of financial fair play,,, ts like denying a chance to the"clubs" to develop....
More like denying the rich kid to play with a toy he already has
You can tell who did and didn’t actually watch the video in the comments 😂
Yep
totally. or watched but didn't understand the message but blurts out whatever they want anyway
Sure, but are you having fun cheering for a company run with blood money?
Thanks Tifo. When r u guys going to do something on the Raptors win?
Question - Let's say Burnley were to sign Cristiano Ronaldo for $100M. And then they actually made $100M on the Burnley/Ronaldo shirt/jersey sales. Would that be "okay" according to FFP? in effect, if you sign a very popular player, then if they manage to bring in enough revenue their pay can balance out...
Another example might be Pulisic. He isn't the greatest player in the world, but he's popular in America which is a very large market. So we want to watch him play on TV and I'd bet a lot of jerseys were sold, etc.
On the other side, a club might sign a good player who is not popular, and so they can't pay a lot for them, because they don't bring in extra money.
Glazer needs to watch this before he ruins the club even further.
Yep at least some understands
MbKD the glazers and Woodward will kill united. There needs to be a protest to stop them.
Great video and awesome research. Keep it going, I’m loving the Tifo channel more and more now!
5:42 my god thats along sentencee
Romania U21 tactical review coming? Obviously stunned England and deserve some attention
Make a video about Everton "Cebolinha" of Gremio.
He is the best player in South America. 22 years old, and he is shinning in Copa America, taking over the 'Neymar Role' in Brazil's team.
Alan Sugar....."Buy my shitty computers and electronics please"
Perhaps somewhat ironically FFP would turn the UCL into a de facto European super League by ensuring nobody can realistically break in
Who's here after Manchester City was banned?
Nah mate
John Ward lol basically. Wonderful video explaining it but woo boy, how goddamn lacking has it been.
not banned
can u guys please make a video on the failure of Ipswich town’s tactics and signings? i never see any ipswich content from anywhere so Id love to se it from my favorite channel!
Chelsea and Manchester City "What's financial fair play"
Craig Barlow chelsea?
Chris_OG The Abramovich years since 2005 ...It's why Chelsea are under investigation and have a transfer ban yes Chelsea .
Emmanuel Amalu Chelsea have been breaking FFP since Abramovich arrived lol .....Chelsea owe Abramovich 1.4 billion in debt if he left the club would be in serious trouble , Abramovich signings tapping up players he's always broke the rules lol .
One of the reasons they had to sell Hazard is because Chelsea have been selling players to get the debt down , Stamford Bridge cannot operate the same as Arsenal's Emirates stadium who still are in debt till 2031 paying 17m a year but have always played by FFP ...The reason Kroenke can't invest much is Arsenal needs to be in debt first It's a way around FFP the owner takes on the debt and is allowed to invest 100's of millions , Real Madrid and PSG do this with outside investment , Arsenal are a self sufficient club debt free ...The Emirates debt is only to the banks .
Emmanuel Amalu fair enough .
I'm not familiar with all the complicated rules of ffp but some things confuse me.
like why chelsea was hit with a transfer ban while man city never actually suffered any consequences. everytime they appealed a transfer ban successfully and go away.
Chelsea have appealed it so it's not active yet and Platini's ffp are looking to impose a ban on both transfers and Europe on city
Financial fairplay only benefits big teams and takes down teams that are less financial powerfull .
Very informative !
Wow. This is really informative. 😯👌
*Cries in Leeds United*
Tifo football I'm an Arsenal fan I wanted to ask you if you can do a video on Mesut Ozil and Granit Xhaka because there's controversy on them as players
The Bosman ruling really ruined football huh?
Yes, very much so. before the Bosman ruling, teams outside big leagues and smaller teams in the big leagues had a genuine chance at success in the Champions league on a consistent basis
@@DabDabGoose I don't think that is the main reason why teams outside big leagues and smaller teams had chances at success in Champions League. The change in format of Champions league is the main reason as in the past only champion from each country would be there, so then you had only 1 team from the strongest 5 leagues. Now you have 19 teams from the strongest 5 leagues :), hence harder for smaller teams to go far. Concentration of best players in same teams due to abolish of minimum number of foreigners in a team had also a huge factor, also politics and globalization. In the past, players from specific countries couldn't play in club teams outside their country. Ex- iugoslavian, romanian, ex-sovietic countries etc. Steaua Bucharest - 1985-1990 they won CH League, lost also a final after. No Romanian player could leave the country to other clubs, hence best players played in Romania, championship was strong, they could compete with top teams. Imagine how much weaker would become all big clubs if you take out all the foreigners, or keep only 3 in squad, how it was in the past...
That helps for sure, the way the champions league is now is purely to make money, if your not in the top 10 leagues and you win the title you still have to win like 3 or 4 games just to get in the group stage now, where as a 3rd place team in a top league gets instantly in the group stage it makes no sense.
UEFA makes more money if more teams from top leagues are in the Competition so they milk it dry.
The bosman ruling essentially made wages like they are today, with less compettion in that regard teams wouldn't pay players as much and then more teams can be within their means when they have superstars which makes it easier to hold on to them. Teams like Ajax did extremely well in this system because they have one of the best youth systems in the game so when they made a superstar they could keep them.
@@DabDabGoose Yeah but that is globalization, concentration of the best in 1 place. I think that Champions league is build in a way not only to produce money but also to include the strongest teams around. Let's say you put the winner of the 14th or 15th league in the world directly in the groups, and they play against Real, Bayern and Tottenham. They'll be happy if they make a draw here and there. Their football level is too low. You know, money comes mainly from TV -deals in the domestic leagues, for example team placed on 17 in Premiere league got 107 million GBP. They can easy buy all the players from the Champion of top 14th or 15th league, which actually happens. I think CH. League is build well from a pure top performance football competition - It is 1-2 levels higher than World Cup as you really have the best of the best playing each other.
@@tonyneculai4576 it's to make money the more big teams they can cram in there the more they make simple.
At the end of the day you should have to earn your way into the competition by doing well in your league rather then aiming for a 4th place trophy so you can play in the CL it's a joke.
*Manchester City has left the chat*
With the treble
Someone's fishing for likes.
Ah no
Difficult to understand it when you are russian 'cause of the sophisticated language, but as for me that is really interesting if u wanna understand how football works
Very informative.Thank you.
In other words....they are copying MLS salary budget. Not per say the same but in some way similar. And it does bring financial stability to clubs.
Man City : **Exists**
FFP : Am I a joke to you
Emmanuel Amalu 😂 posted before I even saw it
There’s quite a few loopholes around FFP
they got rid of it now
Real madrid out here like ffp? What's that?
ffp out here like man city,psg ?? what is that
?
They make as much money as they spend
@@yugenzthevanayagam5507 ik it's just a joke
@Run Robben Run #RRR Via sponsership which is one of the owners business's, thus everything is stacked on the owner staying at Man city, if he leaves that club will collapse on itself.
We actually follow FFP, seems you don't know how FFP works. PSG and Man City are the ones breaking rules.
Great video shame it will probably be too complex for most city fans to understand.
If Leeds reached the Champions League semi final in 2001 how did they fail to reach the Champions league in 2000/01? Doesn't make sense.
Please can you stop putting up so many suggested video tags during the video; considering how much of the screen you use for your presentations its really annoying.
The fact that tax payers partially fünf these teams but are unable to afford tickets for the games is the pure Definition of madness and professional looting