Trending Topics

      Next match: West Ham v LFC [Premier League] Sat 27th Apr @ 12:30 pm
      London Stadium

      Today is the 25th of April and on this date LFC's match record is P25 W9 D9 L7

      Financial Fair Play Regulations

      Read 29248 times
      0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
      Red Rob 60
      • Forum Ian St John
      • ***
      • Started Topic

      • 448 posts | 43 
      Financial Fair Play Regulations
      Aug 09, 2012 10:28:55 am

      A lot has already said about FFP and our owners have already stated that they believe these regulations will be a significant factor in the development of football in the future. Of course, it's also fair to say that a significant number of commentators and fans remain sceptical that the regulations can be implemented effectively as larger clubs either ignore the regulations themselves or explore loopholes to exploit.

      Either way the subject has already been identified as key issue particular in relation to the club's financial strategy and John Henry gave an interview to the Tomkins Times which has now been published on their site which I've reproduced below.


      As part of FSG’s wider self-sustainability drive for LFC and in line with the FFP regulations, do such aims mean that in the coming transfer windows starting with this one, all wage and transfer expenditure needs to be self-generated?
       
      The mandate of financial fair play in Europe is for clubs to live within their means. Recently I was told that half of the clubs in the top divisions within Europe are losing money and 20% are in straits of varying degrees. It’s up to LFC to invest properly in players going forward so that the club can not only be sustainable but a powerhouse. This club should be able to significantly increase its revenues.
       
      Without UEFA publishing sanctioning guidelines as yet for clubs who breach the FFP regulations, it appears there will be a raft of sanctions for clubs breaching the FFP regulations including fines, points deductions and limiting player squad sizes etc. Is it wrong that clubs may still make serious losses over 2 or 3 years (i.e. over €45m) and not be excluded from the Champions League? Is a fine or points deduction enough of a deterrent? Are LFC engaging with UEFA to clarify how sanctions will be imposed? How much of a hard line stance needs to be taken?
       
      There are a lot of clubs within the league that support financial fair play. We believe the league itself may have to adopt its own rules given that clubs seem to be ignoring UEFA’s rules, which may be porous enough to enable clubs to say that the trend of huge losses is positive and therefore be exempt from any meaningful sanctions.
       
      Does staying at Anfield impede a stadium rights naming deal? If costs can be offset with such a deal, this could give the club a clear FFP advantage too?
       
      A naming rights deal at Anfield could occur, I suppose, if the partner were right. We haven’t pursued it.
       
      Most fans assume that, commercially, Liverpool were starting from a  very low base when you took over. How much more scope is there to increase commercial revenues compared to where we are today? Is it reasonable to expect double digit, year-on-year commercial growth for a number of years to come?
       
      This club should be able to significantly increase its revenues. But it won’t be easy. I believe we have the right people in place to accomplish this. But I don’t see it happening at the local level – the vast majority must come from our global agenda.
       
      With the Premier League broadcasting deal being potentially worth over £100m for the winners come the 2013-14 season, does the Premier League become more important as a revenue generator than the Champions League?
       
      There are various ways to generate revenues. A big club has to hit on all cylinders so to speak. Champions League, Premier League, commercial – everywhere that makes sense. As evidenced by Manchester City’s success and that of Chelsea and Manchester United, you have to have sufficient resources to replenish and improve your squad annually in the Premier League. You don’t have a choice.
       
      In an ideal world, success would be possible in at least both competitions but just as the Carling Cup and to an extent the FA Cup has been somewhat demoted in importance by the financial gains on offer in the Premier League and Champions League, is there a case for diverting finite resources (players’ playing time) to the competitions that can guarantee the greatest returns?
       
      No. You don’t compete for money; you compete to win. Winning the Carling Cup last year was huge for the club just as making it to the final of the FA Cup was huge. Supporters are the backbone of Liverpool Football Club  and they’ve been through a lot over the last few years. Our players knew what those cups meant to the supporters last year. In some ways they were the only thing we were playing for last year because the league performance was so disappointing.
       
      Our goal is to win the Premier League. It’s not going to happen this year, but that is what we are building for – first and foremost. That’s only going to happen if our league performance turns around substantially.
       
      You’ve said it is vital to increase revenues and improve youth development if Liverpool are to compete. This raises two questions. Firstly, do you see it as necessary to match the revenue of rival clubs before Liverpool can compete, or does the introduction of players through the youth system mean this will not be necessary?
       
      It’s a massive challenge given where we’ve been. Winning the Premier League entails all of that if you want to build a sustainable, powerful club. We will do that.

      http://tomkinstimes.com/2012/08/exclusive-john-henry-qa/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheTomkinsTimes+%28The+Tomkins+Times%29

      Reprobate
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 11,055 posts | 436 
      • Avatar by Kitster29@Deviantart.com
      Re: Financial Fair Play Regulations
      Reply #1: Aug 09, 2012 10:42:09 am
      We believe the league itself may have to adopt its own rules given that clubs seem to be ignoring UEFA’s rules...

      So we are to hope that the FA and/or Premier League impose sanctions against the likes of ManUre, Chavski and Citeh?

      Yeah, ok  :-\
      Semple
      • Forum Legend - Dalglish
      • *****

      • 7,854 posts | 149 
      • Ireland's Finest Scouser. Henderson supporter.
      Re: Financial Fair Play Regulations
      Reply #2: Aug 09, 2012 10:47:52 am
      We believe the league itself may have to adopt its own rules given that clubs seem to be ignoring UEFA’s rules...

      So we are to hope that the FA and/or Premier League impose sanctions against the likes of ManUre, Chavski and Citeh?

      Yeah, ok  :-\

      ;D

      In all honesty, I don't think United spend that much. Difference between United and say the likes of City and Chelsea is that United tend to have spread their big buys across a number of seasons.
      waltonl4
      • Forum Legend - Shankly
      • ******

      • 37,585 posts | 7139 
      Re: Financial Fair Play Regulations
      Reply #3: Aug 09, 2012 10:58:59 am
      ;D

      In all honesty, I don't think United spend that much. Difference between United and say the likes of City and Chelsea is that United tend to have spread their big buys across a number of seasons.
      Utd have 30,000 more punters every game that in itself isnt fair compared to us or someone like Wigan who struggle to get 15,000.
      Real Madrid use Gov money ,tax payers money so in theory they too would be fu**ed.
      Most Italian top teams may struggle.
      Its a worthy challenge but in the end these clubs will not give up their positions and its a case of who blinks first .
      it would be perfect for us but we know it just will not happen.
      Red Rob 60
      • Forum Ian St John
      • ***
      • Started Topic

      • 448 posts | 43 
      Re: Financial Fair Play Regulations
      Reply #4: Aug 09, 2012 10:59:10 am
      ;D

      In all honesty, I don't think United spend that much. Difference between United and say the likes of City and Chelsea is that United tend to have spread their big buys across a number of seasons.

      True as their net spend figures show. The Glazers seem to have put an end to the free spending era at United and Ferguson looks to have been paid off or to be happy to agree to a more "prudent" fiscal regime which places more emphasis on an efficient transfer strategy and more effective use of squad assets.

      It is most certainly City and Chelski who are going to experience the greatest challenge in the Premiership under FFP and who consequently will have the greatest interest in breaching those regulations or difficulty in complying with them.

      That or they will have to make better use of the assets at their disposal through improved management which I believe has been weak to date.
      George Lucas
      • Banned
      • *****

      • 6,615 posts | 57 
      • JFT96
      Re: Financial Fair Play Regulations
      Reply #5: Aug 09, 2012 11:03:39 am
      ;D

      In all honesty, I don't think United spend that much. Difference between United and say the likes of City and Chelsea is that United tend to have spread their big buys across a number of seasons.

      Debt also comes into FFP , that's where clubs like Utd, Madrid and Barca come into problems with FFP.

      It's not going to happen. FFP will be a non starter
      waltonl4
      • Forum Legend - Shankly
      • ******

      • 37,585 posts | 7139 
      Re: Financial Fair Play Regulations
      Reply #6: Aug 09, 2012 11:06:09 am
      True as their net spend figures show. The Glazers seem to have put an end to the free spending era at United and Ferguson looks to have been paid off or to be happy to agree to a more "prudent" fiscal regime which places more emphasis on an efficient transfer strategy and more effective use of squad assets.

      It is most certainly City and Chelski who are going to experience the greatest challenge in the Premiership under FFP and who consequently will have the greatest interest in breaching those regulations or difficulty in complying with them.

      That or they will have to make better use of the assets at their disposal through improved management which I believe has been weak to date.
      Haven't City done some "iffy" deal with a related company over naming rights .
      Germany seem to be pretty ok with it but who watches German football throughout the world.
      The main target is the EPL which Uefa in the guise of PLatini think is too strong and too rich.
      Semple
      • Forum Legend - Dalglish
      • *****

      • 7,854 posts | 149 
      • Ireland's Finest Scouser. Henderson supporter.
      Re: Financial Fair Play Regulations
      Reply #7: Aug 09, 2012 11:07:52 am
      True as their net spend figures show.

      Debt also comes into FFP , that's where clubs like Utd, Madrid and Barca come into problems with FFP.

      These are very important factors in which I did not consider. I have no idea about United, Chelsea or Man City's overall spending and debt. That said, Whiskey Nose w**ker seems to run a right ship at the
      Mancs. Whether that is a result of having his hands tied behind his back by the Glazers, I don't know.
      George Lucas
      • Banned
      • *****

      • 6,615 posts | 57 
      • JFT96
      Re: Financial Fair Play Regulations
      Reply #8: Aug 09, 2012 11:08:49 am
      These are very important factors in which I did not consider. I have no idea about United, Chelsea or Man City's overall spending and debt. That said, Whiskey Nose w**ker seems to run a right ship at the
      Mancs. Whether that is a result of having his hands tied behind his back by the Glazers, I don't know.

      Well the scum are well over £500 mil in debt.
      Red Rob 60
      • Forum Ian St John
      • ***
      • Started Topic

      • 448 posts | 43 
      Re: Financial Fair Play Regulations
      Reply #9: Aug 09, 2012 11:50:48 am
      These are very important factors in which I did not consider. I have no idea about United, Chelsea or Man City's overall spending and debt. That said, Whiskey Nose W**ker seems to run a right ship at the
      Mancs. Whether that is a result of having his hands tied behind his back by the Glazers, I don't know.

      Take a look at net spend figures over the last five years in the EPL: Man Utd are 8th.

      Man City        £395m
      Chelsea         £235m
      Stoke            £83m
      Aston Villa      £61m
      Liverpool       £53m
      Spurs             £50m
      QPR               £33m
      Man Utd         £26m


      http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/en/premier-league/transferentwicklung/wettbewerb_GB1.html

      United do have debt elsewhere as George points out.
      Red Rob 60
      • Forum Ian St John
      • ***
      • Started Topic

      • 448 posts | 43 
      Re: Financial Fair Play Regulations
      Reply #10: Aug 09, 2012 11:53:17 am
      Well the scum are well over £500 mil in debt.

      I don't know the figures but I had understood that a lot of that debt is loans from the Glazers which are being used to siphon profits rather than having them distributed.

      Presumably, they are in a postion to restructure if necessary but I can't say for certain.
      Bier
      • Guest
      Re: Financial Fair Play Regulations
      Reply #11: Aug 09, 2012 12:03:43 pm
      Not sure if those Forbes figures are correct, but they rated Manchester United as the most valuable club in the world at about 1.4 billion pounds, despite their debt. So that debt doesn't seem to be a real issue.
      George Lucas
      • Banned
      • *****

      • 6,615 posts | 57 
      • JFT96
      Re: Financial Fair Play Regulations
      Reply #12: Aug 09, 2012 12:10:28 pm
      That's how much their club is valued. But they do have debts in terms of purchase loans over £500mil which goes against FFP. In FFP you are allowed a figure of working debt and any debt on building stadiums.
      Red Rob 60
      • Forum Ian St John
      • ***
      • Started Topic

      • 448 posts | 43 
      Re: Financial Fair Play Regulations
      Reply #13: Aug 09, 2012 12:12:25 pm
      Not sure if those Forbes figures are correct, but they rated Manchester United as the most valuable club in the world at about 1.4 billion pounds, despite their debt. So that debt doesn't seem to be a real issue.

      Still a lot uncertainty and I note that half the £332m raised would be offset to pay part of the £437m debt. The rest goes to the Glazers and I think some to staff who have presumably been granted options (doubtless on a more modest scale).

      Anyone like to have their owners?

      http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/aug/08/manchester-united-share-flotation

      Red Rob 60
      • Forum Ian St John
      • ***
      • Started Topic

      • 448 posts | 43 
      Re: Financial Fair Play Regulations
      Reply #14: Aug 09, 2012 12:15:58 pm
      That's how much their club is valued. But they do have debts in terms of purchase loans over £500mil which goes against FFP. In FFP you are allowed a figure of working debt and any debt on building stadiums.

      Well if the valuation holds up on Monday that debt looks like coming down to something like £271m and the question for FFP is what capacity they have to restructure.

      I suspect that they will not struggle to comply with FFP in the same way as say Chelsea and City who would need massive capital injection or some otherway round it.
      Bier
      • Guest
      Re: Financial Fair Play Regulations
      Reply #15: Aug 09, 2012 12:19:21 pm
      FFP says nothing about already existing debt I think though? It only focusses on what happens from now on.
      Red Rob 60
      • Forum Ian St John
      • ***
      • Started Topic

      • 448 posts | 43 
      Re: Financial Fair Play Regulations
      Reply #16: Aug 09, 2012 12:25:37 pm
      FFP says nothing about already existing debt I think though? It only focusses on what happens from now on.

      Yet to date both Chelsea and City's strategy seems to have been spend in order to obtain competitive advantage which would suggest a change in behaviour.

      Chelsea's net to date for 2012/13 is £66.5m and that might not be over.

      Granted City have been quiet but I don't expect that to last. We might be expecting a substantial donation from them ourselves shortly if they follow through on Agger £40m+.
      Red Rob 60
      • Forum Ian St John
      • ***
      • Started Topic

      • 448 posts | 43 
      Re: Financial Fair Play Regulations
      Reply #17: Aug 09, 2012 12:38:04 pm


      The Idiot’s Guide to UEFA Financial Fair Play: What Does it All Mean?

      In 2009, UEFA with the strong personal campaigning of Michel Platini, agreed to get the ball rolling on Financial Fair Play (FFP), thus meaning that from this season onwards, it is effectively in motion. At its core, FFP establishes a set of parameters/criteria in monitoring European clubs in order to prevent them from “over-spending” and, as a consequence, threatening their own long-term survival. Reports had suggested that hundreds of European clubs were running in debts with a percentage in serious financial peril. Most recently, the perilous state of Glasgow Rangers has come to light. A large proportion of European club debts is attributed to clubs within England, Italy and Spain. It must be noted that French and German leagues have been running regulations similar to FFP for years and, hence, their clubs are in better financial shape than their counterparts in the other countries mentioned.

      After numerous delays in implementing FFP, the current season is the beginning of the monitoring period from within which clubs will not be allowed to lose more than a certain amount per three-year period. With that said, it is still unclear to many as to what constitutes FFP, what is allowed under it, what is not, and what happens if clubs do not adhere to it. What we will try to do is to simplify everything through a question and answer analysis in order to dissect FFP to its basic core.
       
      Question marks, such as those raised by Arsene Wenger, lay over how far UEFA would go in potentially punishing violators. Already and very significantly, Manchester City have signaled their acceptance that they may not be able to fulfill all regulations and pass the FFP’s first monitoring period review. The question remains over how UEFA deals with clubs such as Manchester City, and possibly Chelsea, who in all likelihood, may fail to fulfill UEFA’s criteria in gaining a license for European competition the first time around. Only time will tell.
       

      Karl-Heinz Rummenigge, Chairman of the Executive Board at Bayern Munich as well as Acting Chairman of the European Club Association representing European clubs after the dissolution of the G-14, is a strong proponent of FFP
       
      What will UEFA Financial Fair Play do?
       a) Monitor club finances ensuring that clubs do not lose more than a specific amount annually

      b) Implement periods of monitoring (three years) to avoid single-season “one-off” events from distorting financial prospects
       
      c) “Punish” violators of FFP
       
      What must clubs do?
       
      They need to ensure that they don’t make losses of more than €45m per three year period except for the first monitoring period which is over two seasons (2011/12 and 2012/13) and would impact over participation in 2014/15 European competitions. The “allowed” loss drops to €30m over three years from the 2015/16 season onwards (3rd season of FFP application).

      However, clubs are only allowed to record this level of loss if owners are willing to “subsidize” losses above €5m by injecting equity, otherwise the maximum permitted loss is €5m for the first review period of 2011/12 and 2012/13. So in reality the level of losses “allowed” by UEFA is much lower than what is being widely reported. Although equity injection helps owners such as those at Chelsea and Manchester City to have a better chance of compliance with FFP. Complicated much?
       
      Will all “expenses” under expenditure be monitored?
       
      In a word, no. Any expenditure accumulated under developing or building new stadiums will not be recorded under FFP monitoring. Furthermore, any expenses made towards youth development and infrastructure or anything to do with the youth team will not contribute towards expenditure either
       
      So what exactly is considered in terms of “expenditure”?
       
      Only football-related expenses from transfer fees and salaries. Transfer fees would be “amortized” or divided evenly over the term of a player’s contract
       
      What about in terms of income?
       
      Almost everything will be part of the assessment of income. That means ticket sales, TV money, sponsorships, merchandising, player sales and prize money from competitions.

      What are critics saying about FFP?
       
      a) They are questioning whether smaller clubs will be able to compete with bigger clubs if clubs can only “spend what they make”
       
      b) Wages for players contracts signed before June 2010 will not go across calculations for the 2011/12 break-even analysis. A one-season waiver has been given by UEFA for the first monitoring period and again this goes a long way to help clubs such as Chelsea who signed deals with Drogba, Terry, Cech, Cole, Lampard, Essien and Kalou, among others, before that deadline
       
      c) Potential for bigger clubs to create “artificial” income from sponsorships/stadium rights from companies with vested interests from their owners. Manchester City’s stadium naming rights with Etihad Airways has recently come under the microscope. UEFA have yet to rule on its validity although they have stated “if we see clubs looking for loopholes, we will act”. UEFA have said they will ensure “Fair Value” is given to such deals
       
      d) Effect of different tax rates across countries mean some clubs will be paying more/less gross than the net figure accounted for

      e) Third-party ownership is “allowed” by FFP but the English Premier League out-laws it, thus disadvantaging English sides
       
      f) Solidarity or “parachute” payments to lower league clubs are only made by the Premier League and Ligue 1. These payments will be accounted for in FFP as the Premier League continues to lobby UEFA to discount them
       
      g) UEFA states that if there is a loss recorded in a review period but there is a “positive trend” and losses recorded for 2011/12 can be attributed partly to deals undertaken before June 2010, then the club may not be sanctioned
       
      Has FFP effected club behavior already?
       
      a) Italian clubs have, for the first time, negotiated a collective TV rights deal which gives bigger clubs a smaller share of the cake in the spirit of creating a more level playing field in Italian football. Spain’s La Liga remains the only major league which still negotiates individual TV rights and, as a consequence, creates a huge gulf between income raised by Barcelona and Real Madrid compared to other teams
       
      b) Clubs can no longer afford to lose major players on Bosman free transfers, as signaled by Arsenal’s sale of Samir Nasri and Gael Clichy to Manchester City in the summer of 2011. Manchester United manager Sir Alex Ferguson admitted in March 2012 that even though they will let Dimitar Berbatov leave in the upcoming summer transfer window they will “sign a new contract” with him first in order to get a fee for him and not lose him on a Bosman transfer
       
      c) Traditionally heavy spenders like Inter Milan and to an extent Chelsea have begun curbing their spending
       

      Yet to be seen if clubs like Chelsea and Manchester City will be smiling after UEFA addresses their financial reviews under FFP
       
      How will UEFA punish violators of FFP?
       
      a) Give them a warning
       
      b) Fine the club. Although this may seem like a chicken/egg conundrum when one thinks of it
       
      c) Deduct points. This is likely to occur in the group stages of the Champions League and Europa League. Importantly, this measure was a new punishment proposed and ratified immediately at Nyon in an Executive Committee Meeting in January 2012
       
      d) Disqualify the team from UEFA competition. Although this is a major step, it is difficult to see if UEFA will take this stance
       
      e) Exclude the team from future UEFA competitions. Again, similar to above, it is difficult to see if UEFA will adhere to such a measure
       
      f) UEFA will discuss three other potential punishments for violators at the Istanbul UEFA EXCO on March 20-21. They include the withholding of UEFA prize money for taking part in the Champions League and Europa League, preventing clubs from registering “new players” for UEFA competitions, as well as restricting the total number of players that clubs may register for UEFA competitions. UEFA have shelved the proposal to implement transfer bans on clubs after receiving legal advice suggesting that it would contravene the European Community’s Restraint of Trade regulations

      http://notbottomline.wordpress.com/2012/03/15/the-idiots-guide-to-uefa-financial-fair-play-what-does-it-all-mean/


      I thought it might be helpful to have a brief guide to FFP just for the sake of information.

      UEFA produced a pdf guide which is available at this link.

      http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/resources/FFP%20Press%20Kit%20EN_FINAL_en%20_1_.pdf
      Bier
      • Guest
      Re: Financial Fair Play Regulations
      Reply #18: Aug 09, 2012 12:40:06 pm
      Yet to date both Chelsea and City's strategy seems to have been spend in order to obtain competitive advantage which would suggest a change in behaviour.

      Chelsea's net to date for 2012/13 is £66.5m and that might not be over.

      Granted City have been quiet but I don't expect that to last. We might be expecting a substantial donation from them ourselves shortly if they follow through on Agger £40m+.

      Yeah, I know. My comment was more directed at George Lucas' comment about United's debt. I should've quoted him to avoid confusion.

      No question that teams like Chelsea, Man City, PSG etc will in no way comply to the FFP as it's intended. If they do it will be through loopholes.
      Semple
      • Forum Legend - Dalglish
      • *****

      • 7,854 posts | 149 
      • Ireland's Finest Scouser. Henderson supporter.
      Re: Financial Fair Play Regulations
      Reply #19: Aug 09, 2012 12:44:42 pm
      Take a look at net spend figures over the last five years in the EPL: Man Utd are 8th.

      Man City        £395m
      Chelsea         £235m
      Stoke            £83m
      Aston Villa      £61m
      Liverpool       £53m
      Spurs             £50m
      QPR               £33m
      Man Utd         £26m


      http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/en/premier-league/transferentwicklung/wettbewerb_GB1.html

      United do have debt elsewhere as George points out.

      If you think about last summer, and take say Downing out of the equation, our spending looks a lot more favourable. Cheers for posting by the way.
      George Lucas
      • Banned
      • *****

      • 6,615 posts | 57 
      • JFT96
      Re: Financial Fair Play Regulations
      Reply #20: Aug 09, 2012 12:46:56 pm
      Well the spending will look more favourable if you take players out of the equation ?? But that gives a false impression ??
      Red Rob 60
      • Forum Ian St John
      • ***
      • Started Topic

      • 448 posts | 43 
      Re: Financial Fair Play Regulations
      Reply #21: Aug 09, 2012 12:47:59 pm
      We believe the league itself may have to adopt its own rules given that clubs seem to be ignoring UEFA’s rules...

      So we are to hope that the FA and/or Premier League impose sanctions against the likes of ManUre, Chavski and Citeh?

      Yeah, ok  :-\

      Looking at Chelsea this year you've got to laugh unless of course Roman is prepared to pump in a massive capital injection to offset losses.

      I don't think at this stage the Old Toilet are really comparable to City or Chelsea.

      It comes down to how the other clubs are going to react.

      To be fair the clubs in the SPL really stuck the boot in on Rangers if that's any precedent.

      If.
      s@int
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 14,987 posts | 2282 
      Re: Financial Fair Play Regulations
      Reply #22: Aug 09, 2012 12:48:12 pm
      Man city would fail FFP even with their dubious deal.



      City have little debt though as their owners are one of the few that pays down debt by buying equity in the club unlike Abramavich at Chelsea.


      Premier League debt

      Chelsea                £734m
      Manchester United£439m
      Fulham                £190m
      Newcastle United £150m
      Liverpool             £123m
      Aston Villa          £110m
      Arsenal               £97.8m
      Bolton Wanderers£93m
      Tottenham         £78.6m
      Wigan Athletic    £73m
      Sunderland       £66m
      QPR                 £56.1m
      Everton           £45m
      Manchester City£41m
      Blackburn Rovers£21m
      Norwich          £16.8m
      Stoke City       £8m
      West Bromwich£2m
      Swansea        £0m
      Wolves          £0m




      Quick Reply