How are some clubs getting round FFP

When you look at us having to cut our cloth to manage FFP it beggars the question how do the likes of Wolves, Derby, Wednesday etc manage to shell out big bucks on transfers and wages when they are not on any parashot payments. I think they are due for a shock on the scale of the QPR situation.
The comming months could be very interesting for these clubs especially if they don't manage to get promoted, Woles especially.

Multinational Companies linked, owned or associated to club ownership, paying ^5000% over the going rate for sponsorship. Fifa can't do nothing.

Multinational Companies linked, owned or associated to club ownership, paying ^5000% over the going rate for sponsorship. Fifa can't do nothing.

I am confused y your post in two ways.

Which clubs are you specifically referring to when you say they are receiving " 5,000% over the going rate for sponsorship"? With the examples you might give in response where do you get this data from?


When you say "FIFA can't do nothing", do you mean they can't do anything or that they can't continue to do nothing?

Good lord, where to start?

1) its not 'can't do nothing', its 'can't do anything' or 'do nothing'
2) its the football league who are responsible for the governance of the football league not FIFA.
3) Any sponsorship deal has to be appropriate and within the realms of acceptability, money cannot simply be attributed via sponsorship without appropriate retribution.

As QPR gave found, the League are seized of the need to follow through, but the rules are based on a 3 year cycle, so can only assume the likes of Wolves are confident they will be promoted this timescale

It's also noticeable that Derby are being more prudent as witnessed by the sale of Will Hughes and their willingness to offload Bryson from their wagebill.

Multinational Companies linked, owned or associated to club ownership, paying ^5000% over the going rate for sponsorship. Fifa can't do nothing.

I am confused y your post in two ways.

Which clubs are you specifically referring to when you say they are receiving " 5,000% over the going rate for sponsorship"? With the examples you might give in response where do you get this data from?


When you say "FIFA can't do nothing", do you mean they can't do anything or that they can't continue to do nothing?

Accepted, poor English. I did mean they can't do anything. 5000% would be paying 50 times over the odds of a sponsorship deal. Man City, PSG, Chelsea. Have sponsorship well beyond what was possible before powerful financial ownership.

Clubs are finding new ways to get around sponsorship issues regarding ffp. For example we are seeing clubs sell naming rights to training grounds, shirt sleeve sponsors etc

Just because it is reported that teams like wolves have paid £15mill for a player doesnt mean it is in one hit. Staged payments are common and in many cases players are sold again before the payments are complete in case of a relegation. That is possible because of the three year rule.
The PSG deal with Mbappe is a perfect example of that.

There are so many loop holes in FFP that it makes it pretty easy to push the boundaries.

Good lord, where to start?

1) its not 'can't do nothing', its 'can't do anything' or 'do nothing'
2) its the football league who are responsible for the governance of the football league not FIFA.
3) Any sponsorship deal has to be appropriate and within the realms of acceptability, money cannot simply be attributed via sponsorship without appropriate retribution.

As QPR gave found, the League are seized of the need to follow through, but the rules are based on a 3 year cycle, so can only assume the likes of Wolves are confident they will be promoted this timescale

It's also noticeable that Derby are being more prudent as witnessed by the sale of Will Hughes and their willingness to offload Bryson from their wagebill.

Derby have openly come out and said they are having to cut costs for FFP as they've pushed their 3 year cycle to the limit.

I'd expect it's similar with Wednesday.

Wolves have only started spending big, so have 3 seasons in effect to get it right unless they go way over the top.

Football authorities have stopped over payment of sponsorship after man c got 400m for sponsorship of stadium by etiad! Payments are to be in line with exceptable commercial rates or they will investigate, they also stopped owners or family of owners putting more than a small percentage of money into a club again to stop abuse of ffp wether its been adeared to is questionable. But looking at championship clubs something doesn't add up with amounts being paid for players , but ffp is over 3 yrs or so cycle so maybe it will catch up on wolves ect in time

Point to note also is that you can't compare prem to FL as the rules vary between the leagues

Norwich being an example starting to cut back and this season spent no money

When you look at us having to cut our cloth to manage FFP it beggars the question how do the likes of Wolves, Derby, Wednesday etc manage to shell out big bucks on transfers and wages when they are not on any parashot payments. I think they are due for a shock on the scale of the QPR situation.
The comming months could be very interesting for these clubs especially if they don't manage to get promoted, Woles especially.

Wolves made a profit in both 2014/15 and 2015/16 seasons (they were the only Championship club to make a profit that season.

Derby lost £24.8m in total over the same two seasons so may struggle to comply over the three year FFP cycle.

Sheffield Wednesday lost just over £14m over the same two year period so should be OK on FFP