Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

FFP vs Salary (Compare + contrast (FFP is vertical, not horizontal. It…

- - - - Income must be at least equal to relevant expenses
      - Controversial, losses cannot be bankrolled Peters + Szymanski 2014
      - This aspect also entrenches the success of the bigger sides
- - - - Salary caps set against the league make ability to sign players clearly outside the hands of teams
      - Larger transfers or changes of team preclude the acquisition of multiple highly paid players
      - Fundamentally quite a large restraint on trade, ultimately hinders transfers and the ability of players to seek a move
      - Caps have negative impact on player movement (Latimer, 1994)
    - - As teams can only spend what they have, Peeters + Szymanski also state that FFP will keep the status quo of big teams buying big players
      - FFP conducted on the balance sheet, things like amortisation are ways to get round large fees
      - Restricts competition within the market for players and keeps wages down but does not boost competitive balance in the same was a salary cap (Peeters and Szymanski 2012)
      - Often leads to sell-to-buy culture which will increase player churn and creative accountancy practices