Not a bad summary of the issues from the BBC

[Link]

Meanwhile in Scotland if anyone can follow what is going on up their good luck. The machinations and manoeuvrings between clubs and the SFA is something to be behold.

Confused? You will be (Soap).

Edited by Badger11 (14 Apr 2020 2.24pm)

One more point

‘ On 3 April, the Premier League agreed to advance £125m in payments to the EFL and National League, although only £2m of it will go to the 68 National League clubs.’

Of the 21 Championship clubs who competed in the EFL last season, the latest published accounts for five of them included parachute payments that came with relegation from the Premier League.

In 13 instances out of the remaining 16, the club's wage bills exceeded their income. In their accounts, Reading and Birmingham said there was "material uncertainty" over their ability to exist as a going concern. As is the case for the majority of Championship clubs, they are reliant on funding from their owners.

It has been reported that in order to protect themselves, if agreement can not be found between individual clubs and the Professional Footballers' Association over wage cuts and deferrals, a "nuclear option" of all 24 clubs going into administration was being considered.

But this notion has been rejected by alternative sources influential within Championship circles.

"It is hard enough getting all 24 clubs to agree the time of day, let alone the detail about how you could go about doing that," said one. "It just wouldn't happen."

Each club has a very different funding model.

Some - Stoke and Preston are two examples - have long-standing, wealthy owners, who have already vowed to honour their financial commitments. In contrast, Leeds and Birmingham have already reached deferral agreements with their first-team squads. Others are looking at other ways to reduce costs. West Bromwich Albion chief executive Mark Jenkins has taken a 100% pay cut.

Evidently, distrust exists. BBC Sport understands EFL chairman Rick Parry is in receipt of a letter from a club questioning how wage deferrals - existing and in the future - are going to be paid and whether, until salaries are honoured in full, clubs are going to be allowed to make new signings or agree new deals with players whose contracts expire on 30 June.

The argument is some have stretched themselves too far and should not be allowed to avoid the consequences.

When Covid-19 has been dealt with and life has returned to normal, it is anticipated the financial operations of EFL clubs will be looked at again.

Insiders have told BBC Sport the present "Profit and Sustainability" regulations are "not fit for purpose". The EFL already has a working group looking at the rule, which allows clubs not recently relegated from the Premier League to lose £39m over a three-year period. However, rather than look at the whole issue with scepticism, as has been thought likely, it is hoped the experience of the past month, and what lies ahead, will allow all parties to adopt a more mature position which, in theory, will provide the breathing space needed to reach more acceptable - and workable - regulations.

Indications are that Sky will not ask for the money they have paid for this season back. However, if the middle of June arrives with no indication when the 2020-21 campaign will begin, they are unlikely to hand over their first payment - and that would concern every club as it would chop off funding.

Indications are that Sky will not ask for the money they have paid for this season back. However, if the middle of June arrives with no indication when the 2020-21 campaign will begin, they are unlikely to hand over their first payment - and that would concern every club as it would chop off funding.

****************

That agreed administration by all clubs in the championship sounded like a good plan but unsurprisingly its fallen down.

First I’ve heard sky might not want their 19/20 Tv money instalment back.

COYP

Wow, mass generalization there...why do you even bother watching or supporting them if you think so little of them?

Their refusal to moderate their wages show that the players have zero loyalty to their clubs nor, more importantly, to the supporters.

They all seem to feel "picked on" and are determined to hold their ground whatever. Be interesting to see if they are so resolute once clubs start going tits-up.

I'd propose a temporary maximum wage of £3,000 per week. Their inflated wages restored when normality returns.

Real hardship for the poor petals.

Who on here has earned £150,000 pa - not many I'll bet.

Edited by Eaglehamster (15 Apr 2020 9.23am)

I have now sufficient funds to last me the rest of my life. Provided I don't buy anything.

The players (with the help of agents) are a big part of why clubs have to spend millions on new players. With regards to wages anyway. They can’t complain if clubs spend money on players to improve or evolve the team, and some of them might be players hoping to go onto pastures new. The alternative is using more younger players which I’d welcome tbh, but that might backfire on current prem players when the younger ones prove better for the clubs in several ways. There will be so many reasons why they should take a cut vs the good old sin of greed.

COYP

Apropos survival I won't be surprised one iota if some lower league clubs go to the wall.A couple of people who ae prominent at their clubs believe as many as 10 could fold.