rabidbeeWestYorksRoyalrabidbee One of Parry's comments before the parliamentary committee the other day was that the EFL would prefer to move from the current set up (losses of up to £39m over three years) to squad-cost ratios (I think he said limited to ~70% of turnover) which would enable the league to move from acting retrospectively (punishing a club for something it did three years ago) to acting prospectively (as he put it), for instance preventing the registration of any player that would take the club over the squad-cost ratio.
The whole session was interesting, and did contradict some of the received wisdom often spouted on here. The EFL are not terrified about an independent regulator, Rick Parry repeatedly demanded MPs hurry up and introduce one; they aren't worried they will lose their powers, Parry wants the regulator to take on responsibility for the owners and directors test, and for the financial sustainability rules (whatever they will be).
But it all ties into the PL settlement. I believe that, in addition to parachute payments, the PL are trying to require that the ratio would be 90% for relegated side as it's harder for them to get wages back under control. This just bakes in inequality even further. Then there is also uncertainty on how to allow for transfer revenue, which will be one off for accounting purposes compared with wages which will be tied into 2 - 3 contracts.
To be fair, how to ensure clubs are sustainable whilst not discouraging investment or undermining competing is a bloody difficult question. But obviously it shouldn't be up the the PL and EFL to mark their own homework.
Yeah. Parry discussed parachute payments a lot, whilst Masters looked very uncomfortable. I think he suggested that with parachute payments and player sales (typically £50m after relegation) relegated clubs can expect to operate on £110m a year, whilst other Championship clubs have £30m (this is all from memory). He also pointed out that in the last six years, two out of three promoted clubs were on parachute payments. He spent a long time discussing what they would prefer, which seemed a bit wishy-washy tbf (look more at what they need rather than an arbitrary figure).
I'm quite hardline on parachute payments. Sell your players to balance the books. If you're handing out big wages in the PL to players without resale value, you only have yourselves to blame.
Whereas as it is, parachute payments either subsidise PL quality players in the Championship or allow relegated clubs to blow their competition out of the water in the transfer market.
