EFL: Clubs accept £50m L1&2

[millertop]

EFL: Clubs accept £50m Premier League rescue package for League One & Two

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/54895818

[Beaufighter]

Starved into submission

[Brin]

1.08 Million pound each, not much but every little helps.

I genuinely feel so sorry for all 'legitimate' business' during this pandemic. I can't even begin to think the amount of mental stress and anguish some poor owners are going through.

[Grist_To_The_Mill]

1.08 Million pound each, not much but every little helps.

I genuinely feel so sorry for all 'legitimate' business' during this pandemic. I can't even begin to think the amount of mental stress and anguish some poor owners are going through.

Not £1.08 million each I suspect. That would assume equal shares, the article mentions that it's to compensate for loss of revenue on gate receipts. That would suggest that it won't be an equal distribution.

[Lolmorgan]

Not £1.08 million each I suspect. That would assume equal shares, the article mentions that it's to compensate for loss of revenue on gate receipts. That would suggest that it won't be an equal distribution.

That’s Wendies big share then on gates of 40,000 allegedly.

[CAMiller]

That’s Wendies big share then on gates of 40,000 allegedly.

You relegated them already then Lol?

[avondalemiller]

............and Peterbro spend big???

Is it a gift or a loan like the last offer???

[Brin]

Not £1.08 million each I suspect. That would assume equal shares, the article mentions that it's to compensate for loss of revenue on gate receipts. That would suggest that it won't be an equal distribution.

Good point Grist, quite presumptive of me. Obviously those that have spent the most will get looked after the most! Totally corrupt!!!

[Grist_To_The_Mill]

Good point Grist, quite presumptive of me. Obviously those that have spent the most will get looked after the most! Totally corrupt!!!

Yep, and that’s why it’s a complete mess

[John2]

Good point Grist, quite presumptive of me. Obviously those that have spent the most will get looked after the most! Totally corrupt!!!

What's your rationale on this? Surely it will be based on some average of previous attendance revenue rather than how much a team has spent?

With a goal of keeping teams afloat for loss of revenue which definitely does vary hugely its hard to make a case it should be split equally. It's a very exceptional circumstance.