Journalist rubbishes Leeds FFP claims

13 Jan 2022 08:29 am, by Ellandback1


Good Morning. It's Thursday 13th January, and here are the latest headlines from Elland Road...


Journalists rubbishes Leeds FFP claims

Recent reports suggesting Leeds hands are tied due to financial fair play have been rubbished by Beren Cross. The Leeds-Live journalist even suggests that the Whites could spend near on £100m before having to worry about FFP issues.

I read the report around the FFP issues, but it's not something I've come across myself. Kieran Maguire, a very well regarded expert in football finances, put something some research in November on how much each club had to spend in January and he calculated Leeds United had up to £99m to spend before running into FFP issues. If there were monetary issues, one of the modern trends with permanent transfers is to now declare a permanent signing, when the small print might say the first year of the deal is technically a loan before becoming permanent in year two of the contract.

FFP is calculated over a three year period and according to Maguire, Leeds are currently £99 million away from hitting any difficulties with regards to FFP. There are at least 7 clubs in the League with less head room than Leeds. This would have to be split accross the next three transfer windows but it does give Leeds plenty of wiggle room to invest this January and come summer. But of course, having the FFP leeway does not necessarily mean that Leeds have the cash to do deals. Leeds are big net spenders with hardly any player sales over the last few seasons. It may be that if they want to invest big, they still have to sell.





Leeds lining up bid for Fofana

Leeds are believed to be lining up a bid for Ivory Coast International Seko Fofana according to the Daily Mail. The 26 year old midfielder currently applies his trade with Ligue 1 outfit Lens, but started his career at the Etihad, before they sold him on to Udinese in 2016 for £2.5m. It is believed a fee of around £14m would be enough to tempt the French outfit. It seems Leeds may have joined the party too late. Burnley, looking to replace Chris Wood, have already held talks with Lens about his availability, whilst Newcastle have also been strongly linked.





Contract talks with Raphinha are ongoing

Contract talks between Leeds Utd, Raphinha and his agent Deco, are on going according to Leeds journalist Beren Cross. The inspirational Brazilian International has two and a half years left on his four year contract, yet the Whites are keen to secure the value of one of their biggest assets, and would like to tie him down for an additional couple of years. Cross even suggests that Raphinha's price tag could soar even higher if he has a good World Cup in December!

Contract talks between Leeds and Deco, Raphinha's agent, are ongoing. There is confidence a deal can be struck and the Brazilian will move onto terms which accurately reflect his status at the club and in the league. Raphinha is not making life difficult for anyone in any way around this deal. Naturally, I cannot predict the future or what Raphinha's camp may choose to do, but the noises are positive and it would suit all parties to sign a new deal and secure his value.

Evidently, there is going to be plenty of interest in him this summer, whether he signs a new contract or not. It will be two full seasons under his belt and clubs will feel they can tempt him away after proving himself at this level in a new country. Leeds will of course only sell at the price they are happy with. Whether that's in the summer, next January or summer 2023 remains to be seen. Do not overlook what the World Cup may do to his value if he's still a Leeds player by then.



View all Showing latest 5 comments of 41...

faaip wrote on 13 Jan 2022 11:50 pm

weasel wrote: Thu Jan 13, 2022 11:22 pm I think people get carried with FFP an dhow much a club can spend. FPP is about how much a club can actually go into debt, how much more they can spend than they have coming in. It is no way to run a business. Becasue the club can go say £100m into debt suddenly we should? And then next year another £100m into debt because we can. It is just a ridiculous notion.

It makes no financial sense to keep spending more than the income we get for being in the premiership just to stay in the premiership.

FFP is just a way that the established rich clubs could keep in control. The likes of Man U, Arsenal and LIverpool who have built up the worldwide fan base could easily spend more than other clubs and still make hug profits. They would do this and continue to qualify for the cash cow champions league too. As suchthe rich clubs kept makign money and kept themselves in the driving seat. All of a sudden Abrahmovic pops up and upsets things, then Man City and the established clubs sh*t themselves so they invent FFP to stop Abrhamociv and Dubai from spending as much cash as the want. The farce where Man City were charged because they'd basically invented a sponsor company so they could pump extra income into the club. This wasn't a club piling debt on itself thay it couldn't sustain this was a club that was happy to simply throw money in. FFP isn't protecting Cit from going bankrupt it is stopping them from becoming too successful. FFP couldn't give a f*ck about Derby Countys, Sheff Weds goin bankrupt because owners racked up debts chasing the premierhship dream.

If Leeds spent as much as we could without breaking FFP rules we would just be piling debt onto the club. Radrizanni/49ers wouldn't want to simply wave that away if things went wrong. If it went wrong there would be an almighty fire sale which would likely result in the club going into administration or even folding.
That's how they're doing it ..with hugs... MB needs to hug players more often

Sorry .. ;-)

weasel wrote on 13 Jan 2022 11:22 pm

I think people get carried with FFP an dhow much a club can spend. FPP is about how much a club can actually go into debt, how much more they can spend than they have coming in. It is no way to run a business. Becasue the club can go say £100m into debt suddenly we should? And then next year another £100m into debt because we can. It is just a ridiculous notion.

It makes no financial sense to keep spending more than the income we get for being in the premiership just to stay in the premiership.

FFP is just a way that the established rich clubs could keep in control. The likes of Man U, Arsenal and LIverpool who have built up the worldwide fan base could easily spend more than other clubs and still make hug profits. They would do this and continue to qualify for the cash cow champions league too. As suchthe rich clubs kept makign money and kept themselves in the driving seat. All of a sudden Abrahmovic pops up and upsets things, then Man City and the established clubs sh*t themselves so they invent FFP to stop Abrhamociv and Dubai from spending as much cash as the want. The farce where Man City were charged because they'd basically invented a sponsor company so they could pump extra income into the club. This wasn't a club piling debt on itself thay it couldn't sustain this was a club that was happy to simply throw money in. FFP isn't protecting Cit from going bankrupt it is stopping them from becoming too successful. FFP couldn't give a f*ck about Derby Countys, Sheff Weds goin bankrupt because owners racked up debts chasing the premierhship dream.

If Leeds spent as much as we could without breaking FFP rules we would just be piling debt onto the club. Radrizanni/49ers wouldn't want to simply wave that away if things went wrong. If it went wrong there would be an almighty fire sale which would likely result in the club going into administration or even folding.

WhiteRose wrote on 13 Jan 2022 07:17 pm

It’s the problem with having a disparate set of shareholders all with different amounts of the pie. Why would lowy put 100million in if it garnered more benefit to those with more shares. Most rich owners seem to lend money to clubs rather than gift it, look at Chelsea they technically owe abramovich 1.5billion, scum are much the same. I understand it’s not great to build up debt against the club but without it you just need to be a selling club and last few seasons we haven’t sold anyone of great value hence the pickle we are now in.

Carrick Dave wrote on 13 Jan 2022 04:19 pm

faaip wrote: Thu Jan 13, 2022 11:57 am It was always just about survival first few seasons, Lets not forget we were away for a lot longer than Villa, 16/7 years without the massively inflated payouts you get in the premiership hurts

Fans need to adjust expectations and get behind the team. If we can stay up this and next season we should have a platform to push on.
This is how I feel too. We will probably be striving to achieve mid-table year on year for the foreseeable future - exactly like this current season.

Consolidation and gradual improvement may make us look over our shoulder less as time goes on, but the gap between 12th and 17th is never great, and a few rogue results or bad VAR decisions might mean us going down again.

One thing is certain, we will need to start selling at some point in order to fund any progression. It looks like the money to improve the squad isn't coming from the 49ers anytime soon. Radz has now nothing left to sell unless he bales out completely, and the money he gets then leaves the club for good. And if he is intending to relinquish ownership why would he put in his own cash in the meantime? So to generate funds to buy players we'll be looking to the sale of Kalvin and/or Rapha in all likelihood.

White Riot wrote on 13 Jan 2022 04:18 pm

Eireleeds1 wrote: Thu Jan 13, 2022 4:05 pm It would seem you know a lot more about football than you're letting on :tup:
Too true :ok: