A Question...

[Smudge3920]

With the 49'ers as minority partners...Are they (49'ers) allowed to buy players for the club ? or does that breach FFP?...

[1964white]

Don't know

[faaip]

Don't see why not, if a sponsor can pay for Rooney then a part owner can add money to a transfer pot..

[faaip]

The issue would be finding a player that MB deemed worthy of starting fairly quickly and he doesn't know that till they've been bought and he sees how they adapt to the system and fitness levels..That's a rare beast indeed especially at striker and in centre mid..I think we could spend the whole lot on a striker with a 1 in 2 strike rate and assists galore and we'd still start Paddy

[Smudge3920]

Don't see why not, if a sponsor can pay for Rooney then a part owner can add money to a transfer pot..

I was thinking the same ... then I read this... Now I am confused ...

Third party ownership
One area of concern for English clubs is the practice of third-party ownership.[42] Under this model, companies or wealthy individuals buy a percentage of a young player in the hope that if his value increases in the future they will make a profit based on their percentage. The advantage for clubs is that they can make big savings from not having to pay the full transfer value of a player and can also make other financial gains, that is, from selling on a player's image rights. Following the problems caused by the sale of Carlos Tevez and Javier Mascherano to West Ham United in 2006, third party ownership was banned in the Premiership, although it is widely used in South America and Europe and is permissible under FFP. Following the introduction of FFP, the Premiership unsuccessfully lobbied UEFA to review the situation to avoid English clubs being disadvantaged,[57] and in October 2011, the leading sports lawyer Jean-Louis Dupont told the BBC that the Premier League's third-party ownership rules were not legitimate and that a legal challenge to overturn them would have a "very, very good chance of succeeding".[58]

On 4 February 2013, UEFA confirmed that it intended to ban third-party ownership of players, stating, "We think this should be the case all over the world, certainly all over Europe. If FIFA will not do it, we will certainly do it as far as Europe is concerned."[59]

[Irish Ian]

I think we are well under FFP

[Smudge3920]

I think we are well under FFP

Lots of lost revenue with the lockdowns...FFP states players can only be bought from certain sources of revenue, not sure how much we got for promotion to prem ...but we spent 100Mill + so wont be much of this years left...sure is complicated.

[gessa]

From what I've been reading around other places.
It seems, the Sky/PL money was to be used for player signings, contracts etc. The redevelopment of ER and surrounding land was going to be done using the predicted £40m revenue created by matchday profits. We've had no matchday income so the 49's money will be used for this with some spare, next years signings will come from next season's PL and Sky money, obviously if we stay up, or should I say once we've achieved our goal of staying here.

[Fridge]

I think we are well under FFP

Yep I think so too

[Smudge3920]

Yep I think so too

Be good if we are...trying to find it ...when do we get the next lot of tv money...its ok being under but if we dont have the cash ...