The Championship FFP Thread (Merged)

[Mr Popodopolous]

Shouldn't rise to it but...

Pearce off the board or loophole shut- the legal fees would be cheap at twice the price!

EFL clubs really need to explore how to remove him that's for sure.

Edited September 9, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

They've signed Nathan Byrne...

I don't know, are the EFL busting a gut to shut the loophole? One of their sensible posters seems to think they have amortisation hitting £20m for a number of years! Though I've also read on DCFCFans that their wage bill is £15-20m per season so...?

Would hope if and when the loophole is shut, the weakening of their squad can continue.

Edited September 10, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Simon Jordan not happy about the EFL appeal! Mel's cheerleader Jim White adds little of interest, but it seems a bit of a pointless appeal.

Loopholes need shutting- Amortisation one and the Fixed Asset one.

Jim White is just a shill though.

Maybe it's to establish the principle of rule changes- or maybe to get Derby some kind of reprimand/warning so that they can push for harder penalties moving forward if there is another overspend.

Edited September 10, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Derby's squad seems thinner than I thought. I hope this is jkust annoying niggling injuries but rolling that disrupt rhythm but not serious or terminal.

Apparently Rooney and Waghorn out Saturday- Holmes too though tbh know little about him. Read some contradictory reports about Bielik fitness also.

Shame that...  

Edited September 10, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[AnotherDerbyFan]

3 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

They've signed Nathan Byrne...

I don't know, are the EFL busting a gut to shut the loophole? One of their sensible posters seems to think they have amortisation hitting £20m for a number of years! Though I've also read on DCFCFans that their wage bill is £15-20m per season so...?

Would hope if and when the loophole is shut, the weakening of their squad can continue.

If I’ve understood that post correctly, that’s £20m total amortisation still to show up in the accounts. £10m this season, £5m next (Lawrence and Evans’ contracts end), then £5m over the following two seasons (Bielik’s contract ends). 

As we both know, some of those players will sign extensions delaying the amortisation shown. 
 

Looking at the squad, I’d be surprised if first team wages were much higher than £20m. Total club wages will probably be £5m higher. 

 

How would changes to the amortisation and stadium rules affect solidarity payments from the PL? I thought I read a while back though our rules need to be aligned with there’s so ensure EFL clubs still get those payments. The best part of £5m for Championship clubs, £700k for L1 and £500k for L2. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

9 minutes ago, AnotherDerbyFan said:

If I’ve understood that post correctly, that’s £20m total amortisation still to show up in the accounts. £10m this season, £5m next (Lawrence and Evans’ contracts end), then £5m over the following two seasons (Bielik’s contract ends). 

As we both know, some of those players will sign extensions delaying the amortisation shown. 
 

Looking at the squad, I’d be surprised if first team wages were much higher than £20m. Total club wages will probably be £5m higher. 

 

How would changes to the amortisation and stadium rules affect solidarity payments from the PL? I thought I read a while back though our rules need to be aligned with there’s so ensure EFL clubs still get those payments. The best part of £5m for Championship clubs, £700k for L1 and £500k for L2. 

Ah okay, I was just skimreading the Derby forum tbh- I'll try and find the exact post but I'll go with your info as you are closer to the club!

Yep, kicking the can down the road slightly- or spreading the cost over 2 rather than one?

That's an interesting one with P&S then- playing vs club- the consolidated accounts would make an adjustment upwards but not take account of all the wages and costs. I did note reading the Written Reasons that it seemed to switch from club to consolidated between 2015/16 and 2016/17- ie 2015/16 was club accounts and then consolidated from 2016/17 onwards?

I think the EFL Report into Bury's demise did state or suggest that? One report by Matt Hughes suggested that the PL and EFL were in talks about it- but that news seems to have vanished. Clearly the PL have a role with the alignment of the regulations but I question how willing the PL would be to impose punitive penalties on a newly promoted club at the request of the EFL. That's irrespective of the rights and wrongs but even with the alignment I'm not wholly sure the PL would enforce a soft embargo or points deduction carried over to the fullest extent possible anyway.

In a way, the stadium rule being amended would be in the interests of PL clubs because fixed asset sale and leasebacks are excluded from the UEFA regs so any PL club qualifying for Europe would need to have compliance irrespective of that anyway. As Aston Villa would've found out had they qualified for Europe- they were one game from it- that £36m profit wouldn't have counted in UEFA's calculations.

I also would love them to massively reform parachute payments- think Parry deems them a problem too.

Edited September 10, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Was looking around about vague FFP related stuff and found this- might be interested @AnAstonVillafan

Now that £93m will of course be inclusive of promotion bonuses so the fall and boost to P&S- because remember Promotion Bonuses seemingly excluded from P&S calculations- will be a bit overstated but that is notable, reducing wage bill by even say £10-15m on promotion!

I might also add, though the TV money goes up of course from Parachute Payments to PL, so does the amortisation, the HS2 revenue surely won't be replicated- if it is MPs need to be asking q's IMO as it's public money, are HS2 covered by FOI, another angle- and the rolling up of two years into one is both a good thing and a bad thing- it means that it adversely impacts some clubs but helps others. I'm not even sure the 2nd tranche should be included as it was classed as "Exceptional Operating Income" but that's another debate! Still by my very rough maths, Aston Villa could've lost £44m in the PL assuming non included costs remained the same this was in 2019/20 but it's £62m over 3 seasons in FFP terms and £88m in accounting IF the costs that are allowable remain the same.

[Mr Popodopolous]

As for our level, slightly conflicted!

Cardiff v Sheffield Wednesday- can't they both lose!  On one hand you have the -12 dodgers but OTOH Cardiff are Cardiff!

Nice to see Derby lose as well- long may they lose!

Still no sign of accounts from either.

Derby's loss was to Reading though and once again there must be questions with respect to compliance even with the rolling up process.

Long may all 3 of the above lose though.

Edited September 13, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Wow!

EFL have actually deigned to update the relevant section of their site! P&S below old rules, no longer

Some Derby and Sheffield Wednesday fans don't like the EFL or Parry but this is a sign it's better run in some ways- for about 3-4 years the old rules just sat alongside the new rules higher up the page and in some areas it was unclear where one set might end and the other begin- which sums up Harvey's stewardship of the Football League tbh.

https://www.efl.com/-more/governance/efl-rules--regulations/appendix-5---financial-fair-play-regulations/

There still is nothing about fixed asset profits being excluded- hope the EFL(possibly in conjunction with the PL) move on that and soon!

The big changes thusfar are a) The rollng up of 2019/20 and 2020/21 into one period and b) Covid losses.

Edited September 13, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Rather helpfully too, they have laid out a template- a genuine template.

[AnAstonVillafan]

13 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Was looking around about vague FFP related stuff and found this- might be interested @AnAstonVillafan

Now that £93m will of course be inclusive of promotion bonuses so the fall and boost to P&S- because remember Promotion Bonuses seemingly excluded from P&S calculations- will be a bit overstated but that is notable, reducing wage bill by even say £10-15m on promotion!

I might also add, though the TV money goes up of course from Parachute Payments to PL, so does the amortisation, the HS2 revenue surely won't be replicated- if it is MPs need to be asking q's IMO as it's public money, are HS2 covered by FOI, another angle- and the rolling up of two years into one is both a good thing and a bad thing- it means that it adversely impacts some clubs but helps others. I'm not even sure the 2nd tranche should be included as it was classed as "Exceptional Operating Income" but that's another debate! Still by my very rough maths, Aston Villa could've lost £44m in the PL assuming non included costs remained the same this was in 2019/20 but it's £62m over 3 seasons in FFP terms and £88m in accounting IF the costs that are allowable remain the same.

Those wage figures are all over place. Gregg Evans needs to go back to writing for the Birmingham Evening Mail. If you add up the estimated players wages, you get nowhere near £93m or £65m.
Note also that John Terry gets an approx. £75,000 a week retainer so there is the possiblity that staff wages are included in his figures.

We've been prudent on wages since our return to the Premier League but it's now acknowledged that to compete we are going to need an uplift in quality which means paying players more money. Most difficult aspect is removal of deadwood in the squad.

 

Why should MPs be asking question about HS2 compensation? In my mind it is fair and correct.

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

On 14/09/2020 at 07:50, AnAstonVillafan said:

Those wage figures are all over place. Gregg Evans needs to go back to writing for the Birmingham Evening Mail. If you add up the estimated players wages, you get nowhere near £93m or £65m.
Note also that John Terry gets an approx. £75,000 a week retainer so there is the possiblity that staff wages are included in his figures.

We've been prudent on wages since our return to the Premier League but it's now acknowledged that to compete we are going to need an uplift in quality which means paying players more money. Most difficult aspect is removal of deadwood in the squad.

 

Why should MPs be asking question about HS2 compensation? In my mind it is fair and correct.

 

I think it's total wage bill, but certain bits won't count towards P&S costs- most will though.

How it comes to £25m I find hard to believe- once promotion bonuses added in it was around £93m I think- all in the accounts but it was certainly pushing towards or around £90m.

I mean I've an open mind on that- Purslow seemed quite worried about relegation that's for sure! During lockdown etc- fairly sure he described it as a 'catastrophe'. Not exclusive to Aston Villa of course but OTOH was a tad different to Norwich who seemed to have budgeted for it.

Depends if there is another big whack in the 2019/20 accounts in the P&L- could be that profit appeared in Statement of Comprehensive Income but Cash Flow appears over multiple.

One thing for sure though, Aston Villa got privileged access with that. Most people facing issues with HS2 do not get such privileged access.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Elsewhere, some Sheffield Wednesday fans are certainly delusional.

Few trot out the line of the points deduction being put back into prior seasons!

Probably a few possible outcomes but that one feels the least sensible of all! 

https://www.owlstalk.co.uk/forums/topic/292348-points-deduction-peoples-thoughts/

This poster...raises some interesting points but overlooks a significant and key part of the EFL Regulations...

Quote

The minus 12 may be left in play; If so I don't see anything other than further litigation. However, all parties will be aware that this will impact on future season/seasons so the appeal board would not wish to pursue a route that would take their client (The EFL)  down a route with significant admin and financial risks,

 

Compromise deal for me would be a fine or minus 3, EFL would be hoping for -6 + a fine.

See no grounds for reduction myself.

Poster, you might want to read the Arbitration Section of the EFL Regs- a) It has to be via Arbitration, it's part of Terms of Membership and b) Arbitration Panels cannot award Punitive Damages.

You along with every other club, will have signed an Agreement in Writing to Arbitrate- Punitive Damages feels off the table.

Edited September 15, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Listening to a good Podcast, by a- sensible- Aston Villa fan oddly enough.

Dave Jordan, YorkshireAVFC- I remember him on Twitter. Didn't agree with everything he posted but he was very good. About to listen to it- dare say he still is!

https://villatrust.org.uk/the-villa-trust-podcast-3/

It's PL and quite Aston Villa specific. 

His facts and figures so far are slightly out of whack though, broke even for P&S doesn't sound quite right- depends how you add it up! Swiss Ramble and Kieran Maguire had different interpretations. He's right though about decent headroom I expect...£240m spending though, dunno about that??

I query some of his figures and I dare say the EFL might have queried some aspects of Aston Villa's figures under Parry too. His estimated losses net of Covid but inclusive of all the usual allowable costs was £20.5m in 2019/20.

There also are some interesting bits of the regulations which I never paid much attention to on Sunday. 

Quote

Guidance

The Executive will in due course consider the Annual Accounts for the Accounting Reference Period in respect of which information pursuant to Rule 2.2.2 is submitted and in particular examine whether any material variances indicate that the estimated financial information was not prepared in accordance with Rule 2.2.2(b).

2.2A In respect of Season 2019/20:

2.2A.1  the deadline for submission of the information required by Rule 2.2 shall be 26 August 2020; and

2.2A.2  there shall be no obligation on each Club to submit the information referred to in Rule 2.2.3.

Quote

Guidance

The review of Clubs’ P&S Calculations for 2018/19 against actual figures in Clubs’ Annual Accounts (and supporting information) will still be undertaken by the EFL. The adoption of Rule 2.2A.2 does not release any Club from liability relating to any breach of these Rules relating to Season 2018/19 or any prior Seasons. The EFL Board will continue to seek sanctions in line with the existing sanction guidelines.

You might be interested in this @Davefevs @Coppello @downendcity

Seems a sensible compromise to me, thusfar...

Edited September 17, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

My calculations are, my rough ones- and he doesn't take account or make mention of the much more restrictive UEFA limits, which will surely become an issue as and when Aston Villa qualify for Europe! UEFA will keep quite tough on it IMO. Still listening to Dave Jordan, he reckons the wage bill is now £105m!  Now that isn't so uncommon in terms of the Premier League tbh.

Anyway, some of my calculations for that particular season are:

Quote

Operating Loss before player trading and exceptional items

£83,956,000

This is before player trading ie profit on disposal and exceptional items, but seems to be inclusive of amortisation- quite possibly.

Anyway, £83,956,000 before:

Quote

Minus- Profit on disposal of player registrations

£10,598,000

Now around £73,358,000

Quote

Add Back to Expenses- Exceptional items- promotion liability

£30,000,000

Quote

Add Back to Expenses- Exceptional items- promotion related payments.

£15,808,000

Remember though, the add backs aren;t really add backs because they don't count under P&S. They cancel out therefore.

Quote

Subtract from Losses-Profit on disposal fixed assets

£36,374,000

Quote

Subtract from Losses- Exceptional operating income

£14,494,000

We are therefore on the Operating Loss before player trading and exceptional items of:

£83,956,000

Down to £73,358,000 AFTER Profit on disposal of players.

Then the Stadium Sale and the HS2 'Exceptional' (except as you and we all well know @AnAstonVillafan Exceptional it was not because it took place in successive seasons so I'd hope the EFL would have had something to say had you come back down).

Down to £22,490,000.

Then remove from that Interest Receivable of £55,000 but also add back Interest Payable and similar expenses- £641,000.

£23,076,000.

Once we factor in the allowable P&S related costs- Youth, Community etc, and fair play your club seem to be quite transparent on this in a way not many are.

Quote

Depreciation and Impairment- £4,656,000

Community Development Expenditure- £843,000

Youth Development Expenditure- £9,280,000

P&S loss for the year of £8,297,000. However I'm not sure 100% of the allowable costs stated will always count, seen estimates of P&S losses for the year of £9-10m for the year which feels somewhat more in line.

[Mr Popodopolous]

May as well take a quick look.

As we know the new 3 year rolling period owing to Covid is 2017/18, 2018/19 and 2019/20 and 2020/21 rolled into 1 and averaged out- simplest example maybe £15m loss in 2019/20 and £20m loss in 2020/21, is a £17.5m loss for P&S.

I read somewhere that Wigan lost £20m in 2019/20- would have to trawl through and see their Hong Kong Accounts and the football segment, but it's the least of their concerns!

Birmingham- they also have their main company based in Hong Kong. What is unclear is how this Reporting Period has been extended due to Covid- I'll assume it has but if not their 2019/20 results should be out soon. They seem to be on the right road.

Reading- I think there are and will be question marks with respect to their compliance- think they need to average an £11m loss at most, net of Covid and net of allowable costs across 2019/20 and 2020/21 in order to remain compliant.

Stoke have loaned out but pressure is on to get back up- the final season of Parachute Payments!

The ongoing issues- Derby, Football League are appealing- and Sheffield Wednesday, they are appealing their verdict. Neither have yet released their accounts for 2018/19!

Edited September 28, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Further P&S news.

Reading appear to still be under some kind of restrictions some of their fans on Twitter seem angry and to be blaming the Football League for the missing out on a loan for Roman Riquelme from Atletico. Talented youngster, sure he won't come cheap? Linked with Bournemouth.

It was totally predictable though for anyone who followed their accounts- Kia Joorabchian the super-agent who apparently helps to advise their owners was ranting on Talksport earlier about the current financial regulations. About to listen to it myself- maybe interested @Davefevs @downendcity @Coppello @chinapig @CyderInACan

Should be good!

You might also be interested @havanatopia and @The Gasbuster I remember a while ago we all queried whether they were within FFP.

Edited September 29, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

@ashton_fan

I certainly don't want to derail the other thread with FFP/P&S chat but I can outline how it's changed as a result of Covid.

Quote

(f)  in respect of Seasons 2019/20 and 2020/21 only, COVID-19 Costs.

As we can see, this is aspect one of the change- went from rolling 3 years to taking in 2017/18 and 2018/19 as usual, but instead of the most recent season being the assessment point this adds up the two and then splits them in half.

Plus.

Quote

1.1.7  COVID-19 Costs means lost revenues and/or exceptional costs incurred by a Club that are directly attributable to the COVID-19 pandemic and that are identified and calculated in accordance with such guidance as issued by the Board;

I'd trust the EFL under Parry to make a better fist of it than if Harvey still ran it! This is no green light to go on a spending spree- wonder if a few clubs will be caught out by UEFA if they've spent significantly without making good cutbacks in other areas and sales and qualify for Europe within the given period. I digress!

Quote

1.1.11  P&S Calculation means, save as indicated below, the aggregation of a Club’s Adjusted Earnings Before Tax for T, T-1 and T-2. In respect of Season 2020/21 only, the P&S Calculation shall be the aggregation of:

That is the usual- current season=T, last season=T-1 and 2 seasons back=T-2. In other words, 2019/20, 2018/19 and 2017/18- supposedly assessed in March but seems scope to do it retrospectively as in the past 3 seasons- so for tis season it'd be 2018/19, 2019/20 and the 3 years to 2020/21 assessed in March 2021 but...

Now...

Quote

(a)  the mean of the Adjusted Earnings Before Tax of T and T-1; and

(b)  the Adjusted Earnings Before Tax of T-2; and

(c)  the Adjusted Earnings Before Tax of T-3;

2017/18, 2018/19 and then the mean of 2020/21 and 2019/20- submitted in March! Given they would have actual figures for 2019/20 this should increase the chances and ability of the EFL to genuinely assess in March- they'll have 2 real results and the 50% of the real results for this rolled up period- shouldn't be difficult!

Quote

1.1.14 T means the Club’s Accounting Reference Period ending in the year in which assessment pursuant to Rules 2.2 to 2.9 takes place, and:

(a)  T-1 means the Club’s Accounting Reference Period immediately preceding T;

(b)  T-2 means the Club’s Accounting Reference Period immediately preceding T-1;

(c)  T-3 means the Club’s Accounting Reference Period immediately preceding T- 2;

(d)  T+1 means the Club’s Accounting Reference Period immediately following T; and

(e)  T+2 means the Club’s Accounting Reference Period immediately following T+1.

Usually it's T, T-1 and T-2- now it's T and T-1 averaged, T-2 and T-3 standalone.

Quote

Guidance

The Executive will in due course consider the Annual Accounts for the Accounting Reference Period in respect of which information pursuant to Rule 2.2.2 is submitted and in particular examine whether any material variances indicate that the estimated financial information was not prepared in accordance with Rule 2.2.2(b).

2.2A In respect of Season 2019/20:

2.2A.1  the deadline for submission of the information required by Rule 2.2 shall be 26 August 2020; and

2.2A.2  there shall be no obligation on each Club to submit the information referred to in Rule 2.2.3.

Looks to me as if the deadline for last season was extended from March to the 26th August- Rule 2.2.3 seems to be deleted so unsure what that was.

However, it's not a free pass...

Quote

Guidance

The review of Clubs’ P&S Calculations for 2018/19 against actual figures in Clubs’ Annual Accounts (and supporting information) will still be undertaken by the EFL. The adoption of Rule 2.2A.2 does not release any Club from liability relating to any breach of these Rules relating to Season 2018/19 or any prior Seasons. The EFL Board will continue to seek sanctions in line with the existing sanction guidelines.

What I therefore find intriguing and maybe Devil is in the Detail a bit, is that does it give Statute of Limitations- maybe it gives the Football League scope to go back years analysing?? Is there Devil in the Detail?

Very helpfully, here is the P&S template of what clubs submit and what it looks like. I applaud Parry and the transparency.

https://www.efl.com/-more/governance/efl-rules--regulations/appendix-5---financial-fair-play-regulations/

There's obviously more than I've put, but these are for me the relevant parts of the changes. 

PS- I suppose in light of the changes, that Template should read T-3, T-2 and Mean/Average of T-1 and T.

PPS- also forgot this bit!

Quote

3.4  In respect of Season 2020/21, the Lower Loss Threshold and Upper Loss Threshold for each Club shall be calculated based on the aggregation of the Club’s Annual Lower Loss Threshold and Annual Upper Loss Threshold for T, T-1, T-2 and T-3 as per the figures set out table in Rule 3.1 as amended by dividing those figures by 4 and then multiplied them by 3.

Unsure even I can work this bit out fully though!   Assuming that's to help get a figure for clubs who have not been consistently at this level- most notably been in both the PL and Championship but where to start...

In theory, it could even reduce the allowable upper limits for clubs across both divisions but that can't be right...Lower is easy as it's £5m regardless of division, but higher...hopefully the EFL will have it all in hand!

Edited September 29, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[WarksRobin]

21 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Further P&S news.

Reading appear to still be under some kind of restrictions some of their fans on Twitter seem angry and to be blaming the Football League for the missing out on a loan for Roman Riquelme from Atletico. Talented youngster, sure he won't come cheap? Linked with Bournemouth.

It was totally predictable though for anyone who followed their accounts- Kia Joorabchian the super-agent who apparently helps to advise their owners was ranting on Talksport earlier about the current financial regulations. About to listen to it myself- maybe interested @Davefevs @downendcity @Coppello @chinapig @CyderInACan

Should be good!

Isn’t “super agent” a contradiction in terms

[Davefevs]

2 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Further P&S news.

Reading appear to still be under some kind of restrictions some of their fans on Twitter seem angry and to be blaming the Football League for the missing out on a loan for Roman Riquelme from Atletico. Talented youngster, sure he won't come cheap? Linked with Bournemouth.

It was totally predictable though for anyone who followed their accounts- Kia Joorabchian the super-agent who apparently helps to advise their owners was ranting on Talksport earlier about the current financial regulations. About to listen to it myself- maybe interested @Davefevs @downendcity @Coppello @chinapig @CyderInACan

Should be good!

You might also be interested @havanatopia and @The Gasbuster I remember a while ago we all queried whether they were within FFP.

Kia not understanding the difference between Jordan saying Governance not Government.

Kia I’m sure is looking for a fast buck.

Let him “sink” £50m into Derby, Forest etc.  I reckon he’d end up with less than £50m of his outlay....although he will have dreamed off a percentage for himself.

 

Not just having a go at him because we all hate agents / 3rd party owners like this....I listened to him several years back, and not every player owned by him makes him £millions, but in Brazil for example, you can acquire player ownership so cheaply, you can play the numbers game.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Looks like Derby and Reading- segments aka two sets of fans who don't get FFP! This thread below. 

That Derby fan in particular I've seen, had a few erm robust debates  with him on Twitter over it let's say!

@Hxj forgot to tag you in the original stuff but looks like Reading have some similarly deluded or out of touch fans or at least as a proportion when it comes to the FFP stuff!

 

Edited September 30, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

At first when they had sold the stadium for £26.5m and that appeared to be it, Reading were on my meh list. £6.5m profit, despite Home Counties land value.

However that's all changed! They sold the stadium again the following year, albeit rent doubled, but sold for £37.5m and leased it back. They possibly sold the old training ground and they sold some other property.

They pocketed £3m in a loan fee for a clearly past his best Aluko- from the owners Chinese club! Could've covered the wages I guess but even so!

They were under a soft embargo in summer 2019- and promptly signed Joao and Puscas! No problem with the signings from a football POV, good players clearly but FFS.

They rejected a bid for Loader in 2019- he leaves on a free. Every little helps.

They rejected a I think £10m bid for Moore in 2018.

This summer they rejected bids for Swift- and may have rejected a bid for Meite.

Some say that they were permitted to sign Ejaria as there was some loan to buy arrangement, legally binding etc? I don't know but surmising!

Because of their decent squad they do have assets to sell- for varying reasons and levels but:

1. Rafael- Good GK, has played in Serie A, joined on a free- sale=profit.
2. Moore- See bid. Decent CB.
3. Morrison- Joined on a free, not a bad Championship CB- sale=profit.
4. Swift- Joined on free and bids rejected this summer.
5. Meite- Good direct attacking player, why not make a profit.
6. Ejaria- Has just joined but bet they could turn a profit.
7. Joao- Good player- probably once Fee-Book Value=Profit.
8. Puscas- Sought after by other clubs, Romania international- young, joined from Inter- yeah reckon you could turn a profit.

One or two more as well- Yiadom, okay full back, joined on a free=Profit. Rinomhota- Profit again, from academy.

Zero sympathy whatsoever- I still wonder if Football League were quietly trying to afford them the time to ease themselves back to balance as Howe on the board and it'd be most embarrassing to have to charge them with P&S breaches.

Edited September 30, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Birmingham's results are out!

I'm assuming Segment result is the one to look for here- Football Club.

Quote

For the year ended 30 June 2020

Football club 

HK$’000

Segment revenue

External sales 204,395 

Results

Segment results (186,519)

For one that's in HK$, dunno if the exchange rate would be effective the date of release or the date the accounts are to- ie 30th June or 30th September.

This will of course be inclusive of the usual allowable costs, but also the Profit on disposal of players. Will surely also include some Covid allowable costs so I think they fall within their £13m target! Especially as that is now moot with the rolling up of 2 seasons into one and the Bellingham sale- as well as one or two others- that all offset losses.

As I recall, the ones to 2019 showed some revenue in UK but not HK, because it wasn't included in the latter- possibly similarities there. Point is, they seem to be on the right track and unlikely to fall foul again any time soon IMO.

Think it's about 10HK$ to the £ anyway, so nice and easy.

The other interesting aspect perhaps, is here- 3 months extension, easy- whereas in this case, in Hong Kong-Pandemic or no Pandemic, all released on time! Not only that but the segmentation is because the business is more than just a football club- yet guess what- no extension or pushing the deadlines!!

Edited September 30, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[Davefevs]

12 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Birmingham's results are out!

I'm assuming Segment result is the one to look for here- Football Club.

For one that's in HK$, dunno if the exchange rate would be effective the date of release or the date the accounts are to- ie 30th June or 30th September.

This will of course be inclusive of the usual allowable costs, but also the Profit on disposal of players. Will surely also include some Covid allowable costs so I think they fall within their £13m target! Especially as that is now moot with the rolling up of 2 seasons into one and the Bellingham sale- as well as one or two others- that all offset losses.

As I recall, the ones to 2019 showed some revenue in UK but not HK, because it wasn't included in the latter- possibly similarities there. Point is, they seem to be on the right track and unlikely to fall foul again any time soon IMO.

Think it's about 10HK$ to the £ anyway, so nice and easy.

Maguire was suggesting losses of £27m!

Bellingham’s transfer will be in next year’s accounts.  You would’ve thought that 19/20s numbers ought to result in points deduction...shouldn’t it?

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

Maguire was suggesting losses of £27m!

Bellingham’s transfer will be in next year’s accounts.  You would’ve thought that 19/20s numbers ought to result in points deduction...shouldn’t it?

Thanks. Maybe I've misread it a bit then.

I'm assuming that the rollup means that the 3 years to 2020 wouldn't be assessed in isolation and those look like the headline figures- maybe the segmented results are the ones to look for, well I've done that anyway.

[Davefevs]

1 minute ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Thanks. Maybe I've misread it a bit then.

I'm assuming that the rollup means that the 3 years to 2020 wouldn't be assessed in isolation and those look like the headline figures- maybe the segmented results are the ones to look for, well I've done that anyway.

I thought they were on annual reviews?

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

I thought they were on annual reviews?

Good point, maybe different criteria would apply to them with the rollup, but- they seem to be under no sanctions yet but we'll see what the EFL decide in due course.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Was reading the Sheffield Wednesday forum in terms of FFP posts etc, some as well as some fans of other clubs sure are a bit deluted

Quote

Complete breakdown in relationship between Derby and the EFL by all accounts

 

EFL heirachy needs clearing out from top to bottom,  jokers 

That's a rather odd take- yes a breakdown but surely it's the Derby rep that needs clearing off the EFL board in that case! 

The EFL are the Governing body albeit with clubs deciding, Derby are one of many clubs

Can someone explain why the EFL relationship with Derby breaking down should lead to a clear-out of the EFL top brass? 

Here's another!

Quote

Given the high stakes, clubs will continue to seek loopholes and push boundaries, it’s inevitable. We need a simplification of the rules and an end to artificially leveling the playing field and holding wealthier clubs back.

What we need is a simplification of the rules, a removal of the daft loophole or 2 that exists and correct, real-time monitoring- as in the case of the last one, is supposed to be happening anyway.

Lastly, a fan of a fellow cheating club chips in- we even get a mention in the FFP debate!

Quote

Sorry Nero, but you're talking out of your bumhole. 

 

The idea that Derby pushed for Wednesday to be punished more severely is risible. Do you think if we had any such influence over the EFL that we'd be going through this shitshow?? 

 

Gibson, Lansdown at Bristol, and the yank fool at Barnsley are the prime movers in all of this. Parry is doing their bidding, whatever the Tribunal might have said. 

 

Derby got off because the case against us was ill-conceived, badly compiled and found to be 99% testicles. The remaining 1% is an argument about the use of an amortisation method which actually makes more sense than the straight line method, is used in the PL, and which isn't outlawed by either the EFL rules or accounting standards. It's a petty vendetta, plain and simple. 

 

And the idea that the Mail puts out stories favourable to Derby would have every Derby fan weeing themselves. They've been spreading poo about us for years.

I agree with him that Derby pushing for Sheffield Wednesday to be punished more severely is fairly amusing and likely untrue though!

Anyway fans of your club, your club, Aston Villa and Reading- Birmingham are a greyer area as they seem to have been cutting back in conjunction with a smaller stadium sale than anyone else, have sold no other fixed assets etc- and were punished- fans of these 4, maybe 5 clubs are a part of the reason why the PL bailout talks are hitting issues!! Well done!

Edited October 2, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[Hxj]

On 30/09/2020 at 16:24, Mr Popodopolous said:

Thanks. Maybe I've misread it a bit then.

I'm assuming that the rollup means that the 3 years to 2020 wouldn't be assessed in isolation and those look like the headline figures- maybe the segmented results are the ones to look for, well I've done that anyway.

If anyone is interested the accounts are available at https://www1.hkexnews.hk/listedco/listconews/sehk/2020/0930/2020093001616.pdf

The loss for the company and subsidiaries is £26.5 million or thereabouts.  The reported loss for the football club is as per @Mr Popodopolous at £18.5 million.  If I was the EFL  would also be looking at the £8 million of unallocated central costs to see which ones related to football.

As to all reporting to the EFL my understanding is that all the current reporting rules apply as do all the sanctions, so if your are in, or potentially in breach, you can still for example be handed transfer embargos.  The final reckoning and any actual breach of FFP can't happen until the final 2020/21 position is agreed.

 

 

[WarksRobin]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/54436076
 

Chickens coming home to roost for Wednesday? 

[WarksRobin]

WRDC weasel strategy in action

[Davefevs]

13 minutes ago, WarksRobin said:

WRDC weasel strategy in action

Do they know the ground doesn’t belong to the football club

[WarksRobin]

22 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Do they know the ground doesn’t belong to the football club

Maybe Mel is going to upsell the deal and offer the ground for a reasonable markup

[1960maaan]

30 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Do they know the ground doesn’t belong to the football club

When the deal is close, you will probably find out it includes the Holding Co. too.  

Much, much funnier if it didn't mind .

[Mr Popodopolous]

John Percy reckons the deal is in its advanced stages.

Spawny bastards however- spawny, spawny bastards! I hope the EFL win their appeal and get some ponts docked and there must be ZERO leeway- £39m losses, change rules quick sharp in terms of fixed asset sales, perhaps fair value rules too look at these again- maybe I'm overreacting the Coates family have megabucks yet Stoke seem to be walking the line, there are lots of rich owners at this level yet FFP is enforced to some extent.

Given that there is a charge over their assets from Dell, charges not yet cleared as per Companies House as per Gabay, how does this work then??

A small silver lining could be paying rent on Pride Park e.g. but it's £1.1m per season or so- on an £81.1m transaction FFS!

For comparison sake, and I'm a big critic of the first 3 especially:

Aston Villa- £56.7m, £2.6m per season rent. My problem there is that it does not go beyond 5 years so £10.4m rent back on a £56.7m transaction is somewhat suspect...if they return to the Football League soon, Football League should be looking at that very closely!

Reading- £750k per season on a £26.5m transaction.

This subsequently rose to £1.5m per season on a £37.5m transaction- more like it but still not feeling high enough.

Sheffield Wednesday- Purportedly, £3m per season on a £60m transaction- though we only have EFL Written Reasons to go on.

Birmingham- Theirs actually seemed low if anything, but £1.25m per season on a £22.76m transaction- low in terms of sale price I mean.

Derby though, the highest fee received, the lowest rent payable- ugh!!

Edited October 31, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

On a side note, it is NICE to see Sheffield Wednesday struggling so.

Coventry's coupon buster, albeit they have now played a game more- Sheffield Wednesday TEN points off safety at this early stage despite P8 Pts8-- I'll say no more in case I jinx but it's good to see. Nottingham Forest on 6 pts, 6 from 4 since Hughton joined- it means despite their survival level start they're as it stands more points off safety than they were after winning first game at Cardiff- then it was -9, now it's for now at least, -10!

They of course have or will be lodging appeal vs their sanction. I don't recall the last time a Football League imposed points penalty was appealed- anyone?? Certainly in modern times- could get tasty because I read that Steve Dale was informed going into 2019/20 that nobody overturned one of MY points sanctions- he didn't name names but can only assume it was someone senior in the Football League? 

Granted it was one of his rambling statements but I get the impression given the obvious bad blood between club (or maybe just Chansiri as such)?and Football League, they won't take kindly to Chansiri pushing this appeal...?

Edited October 31, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[1960maaan]

8 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Derby though, the highest fee received, the lowest rent payable- ugh!!

I don't pretend to either have followed the events closely. or to have an understanding of the accounting but..

What would stop the take over Co. also buying the ground holding Co. at a cut price under some pretence or another. Then incorporating it into the "new" DCFC company, then next year selling the ground again. Unless they impose penalty's, and stick to it, what's the point of the rules in the first place.

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

On 31/10/2020 at 09:12, 1960maaan said:

I don't pretend to either have followed the events closely. or to have an understanding of the accounting but..

What would stop the take over Co. also buying the ground holding Co. at a cut price under some pretence or another. Then incorporating it into the "new" DCFC company, then next year selling the ground again. Unless they impose penalty's, and stick to it, what's the point of the rules in the first place.

 

Bit topical, now the League Arbitration Panel have basically halved the penalty for Sheffield Wednesday- yet these Independent panel are unpredictable, the Football League are due to appeal Derby's amortisation sometime this Autumn, after Derby were found innocent of each! Maybe failings in the case by the Football League played a role?

As it stands, nothing perhaps- rule change would be needed for a start, but we'd hope the Football League would be on the case as of the first taking charges out against the ground occurred- I'd quite like them to block the takeover for a start if at all possible.

Edited November 5, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[AnAstonVillafan]

7 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Bit topical, now the League Arbitration Panel have basically halved the penalty for Sheffield Wednesday- yet these Independent panel are unpredictable, the Football League are due to appeal Derby's amortisation sometime this Autumn, after Derby were found innocent of each! Maybe failings in the case by the Football League played a role?

As it stands, nothing perhaps- rule change would be needed for a start, but we'd hope the Football League would be on the case as of the first taking charges out against the ground occurred- I'd quite like them to block the takeover for a start if at all possible.

Why do you want the EFL to block the takeover ? 

[Mr Popodopolous]

9 hours ago, AnAstonVillafan said:

Why do you want the EFL to block the takeover ? 

I'd like to say- the moral high ground, Sportswashing by Despots bad- but mainly it's because I wish ill on that club!   There's a few clubs that aren't even traditional local rivals of us that I have a serious dislike of these days...

I will finally take a look at the charges over the assets and bits of the club- @Davefevs @myol'man may also find this interesting...seems odd that you'd buy a club whereby charges are over all the main assets from Dell, Gabay- at least as per CH. @Hxj might also- seems the EFL have given the green light anyway, there's no real reason AFAIK to stop it.

FFP equity limits, EFL need to scrutinise like a hawk any transactions between UAE and Derby too. I don't care about Covid, I don't even care about Derby's wellbeing as a club. The more hardship the better in fact.

[Mr Popodopolous]

So much to wade through actually, maybe later or tomorrow.

Starting point:

Company                                                         Charge Created Charge Delivered     Who the Lender is            

The Derby County Football Club                   6th August 2020   11th August 2020    Msd UK Holdings Limited (As Lender)

The Derby County Football Club                   8th October 2020   14th October 2020  Msd UK Holdings Limited (As Lender)

Club DCFC                                                      6th August 2020   11th August 2020    Msd UK Holdings Limited (As Lender)

Stadia DCFC                                                   6th August 2020   11th August 2020    Msd UK Holdings Limited (As Lender)

The Derby County FC Academy Limited      6th August 2020   11th August 2020    Msd UK Holdings Limited (As Lender)

Sevco 5112 Limited                                        6th August 2020   11th August 2020    Msd UK Holdings Limited (As Lender)

Gellaw Newco 203 Limited                           6th August 2020   11th August 2020    Msd UK Holdings Limited (As Lender)

Gellaw Newco 202 Limited                        6th November 2019   13th November 2019  Rams Investment Limited- Gabay?

Gellaw Newco 202 Limited                           6th August 2020   11th August 2020    Msd UK Holdings Limited (As Lender)

Gellaw Newco 204 Limited                        6th November 2019   13th November 2019  Rams Investment Limited- Gabay?

Gellaw Newco 204 Limited                           6th August 2020   11th August 2020    Msd UK Holdings Limited (As Lender)

These are all charges listed at CH as outstanding or similar.

Edited November 5, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[Hxj]

Evening @Mr Popodopolous

There is a new charge in there over the training ground - Mel must be getting very short of money!  Having seen them play yesterday I think finances are the least of the club’s problems.

[downendcity]

Will be interesting to see where and how Pride Park features in the takeover.

I can’t imagine that the incoming buyers will want a football club without it’s ground. Accordingly, and as DCFC no longer own Pride Park, I can only presume that there will have to be a separate transaction for the purchase of Pride Park from Morris’s “other” company. If so it will be interesting to see what price is paid, as I am pretty certain the new owners will require their own (truly) independent valuation in order to determine a fair market price.

As this could cause serious egg  on the faces of Morris and the EFL as regards the ffp judgement, what’s the betting that when the figures are agreed the price paid for the stadium will be exactly that which was used when DCFC “sold" PP for ffp purposes, and that the price of the football club will be “adjusted to account for any shortfall in the buyers valuation of the ground? 

[AnAstonVillafan]

20 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I'd like to say- the moral high ground, Sportswashing by Despots bad- but mainly it's because I wish ill on that club!   There's a few clubs that aren't even traditional local rivals of us that I have a serious dislike of these days...

I will finally take a look at the charges over the assets and bits of the club- @Davefevs @myol'man may also find this interesting...seems odd that you'd buy a club whereby charges are over all the main assets from Dell, Gabay- at least as per CH. @Hxj might also- seems the EFL have given the green light anyway, there's no real reason AFAIK to stop it.

FFP equity limits, EFL need to scrutinise like a hawk any transactions between UAE and Derby too. I don't care about Covid, I don't even care about Derby's wellbeing as a club. The more hardship the better in fact.

At least you're honest. 

There is no guarantee that new foreign owners, automatically mean that the club fortunes instantly improve.

My club, Villa had a Chinese owner once. As do our rivals Birmingham. Neither of us have good things to say about them.

Wolves on the other hand may take a different view.

Man City had a Thai owner. They hated him. Leicester City have Thai owners. The fans sing his name.

[Mr Popodopolous]

On 06/11/2020 at 15:35, AnAstonVillafan said:

At least you're honest. 

There is no guarantee that new foreign owners, automatically mean that the club fortunes instantly improve.

My club, Villa had a Chinese owner once. As do our rivals Birmingham. Neither of us have good things to say about them.

Wolves on the other hand may take a different view.

Man City had a Thai owner. They hated him. Leicester City have Thai owners. The fans sing his name.

Don't get me wrong, I'm no great fan of Sportswashing either- Man City- UAE, PSG- Qatar- nearly Newcastle with the Saudis, could argue some others too.

You're right. Even Man City didn't kick on that quickly- may have been better in first few years with Sven over Hughes I reckon for that phase of development but that's football talk, has no place on a finance thread.  

Yeah you're right big variety. Birmingham and Aston Villa neither were ideal let's say...West Brom's seems so so, neither disastrous or anything amazing, Fosun at Wolves however seem very smart, very strategic.

Agreed- possibly only big positive he did there was selling, having to sell to to UAE!

It's just a thought of frustration at Derby wriggling out of issues with questionable sponsorships- like Man City, when they clearly have FFP issues.

[AnAstonVillafan]

23 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Don't get me wrong, I'm no great fan of Sportswashing either- Man City- UAE, PSG- Qatar- nearly Newcastle with the Saudis, could argue some others too.

You're right. Even Man City didn't kick on that quickly- may have been better in first few years with Sven over Hughes I reckon for that phase of development but that's football talk, has no place on a finance thread.  

Yeah you're right big variety. Birmingham and Aston Villa neither were ideal let's say...West Brom's seems so so, neither disastrous or anything amazing, Fosun at Wolves however seem very smart, very strategic.

Agreed- possibly only big positive he did there was selling, having to sell to to UAE!

It's just a thought of frustration at Derby wriggling out of issues with questionable sponsorships- like Man City, when they clearly have FFP issues.

I don't believe Derby will wriggle out of any issues. They are a mess at the moment and it will take time to sort. Morris was a geniune fan of the club. Like Lansdown and Gibson are of their clubs.

West Brom used to be one of the best run clubs in the country. Ruled by Jeremy Peace, who was born in the area, a fan and ruled with a rod of iron. He always got maximum value in every deal. The current Chinese owner seeks to lead in the same way. It was managerial problems which caused their relegation.

When Doug Eliis was Villa's major shareholder the club was debt free, and prudent. The fans hated this. We always wanted more and more money spent on new players. But we never apprieciated what we had with him. Its shame that it always seems to be foreign billonaires nessessary to push a club forward in these times.

 I used to deliver newspapers to Ellis's house as a teenager. 25 minutes drive from the stadium.

[downendcity]

12 minutes ago, AnAstonVillafan said:

I don't believe Derby will wriggle out of any issues. They are a mess at the moment and it will take time to sort. Morris was a geniune fan of the club. Like Lansdown and Gibson are of their clubs.

West Brom used to be one of the best run clubs in the country. Ruled by Jeremy Peace, who was born in the area, a fan and ruled with a rod of iron. He always got maximum value in every deal. The current Chinese owner seeks to lead in the same way. It was managerial problems which caused their relegation.

When Doug Eliis was Villa's major shareholder the club was debt free, and prudent. The fans hated this. We always wanted more and more money spent on new players. But we never apprieciated what we had with him. Its shame that it always seems to be foreign billonaires nessessary to push a club forward in these times.

 I used to deliver newspapers to Ellis's house as a teenager. 25 minutes drive from the stadium.

As Joni Mitchell wrote “ you don’t know what you’ve got ‘till it’s gone!” 

[Port Said Red]

14 hours ago, downendcity said:

As Joni Mitchell wrote “ you don’t know what you’ve got ‘till it’s gone!” 

If only the next line was 

"They paved Pride Park, put up a parking lot"

[Mr Popodopolous]

Norwich's accounts out.

They're prudent, as ever. Well within FFP- all very, well Norwich really?

Bit busy to trawl through them so Swiss Ramble.

Think Hull made a profit too even last season in relegation from the Championship with ZERO Parachute Payments.

I may have mentioned it before but anyway...

Of course, the flipside of cutbacks, cutbacks and selling two star players in January, was relegation- FFP is important but the fact the fans and Allams have no relationship means that approach inevitable, despite a balance being needed.

Edited November 9, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Football League have a task on their hands here IMO. They need to be ready and prepared...

1. They need to find out a way to see how to remove Pearce from the club representatives on the Board, though maybe that's more of a medium-long term goal?

Then with respect to the takeover:

1. This Abu Derby takeover- Abu Derby is it- they need to get in early and hard- lay out the position of the club with P&S, chances are they are pushing it, put them under a Business Plan ON ARRIVAL, warning that to deviate from it will incur a rapid referral to the Independent Disciplinary Commission.
2. Meeting with the new owners like Aston Villa summer 2018- except this time DO IT PROPERLY. Interrogate them on and scrutinise to the full their plans, and whether they are compatible with P&S. I'd gladly do it given the chance, referring upwards to Senior Officials and Accountants/Auditors utilised by the League where necessary.
3. They need to be uber tough when it comes to probable Related Party sponsorships- Birmingham got theirs downgraded in summer 2018 I read, they just need to use the relevant comparable with other clubs and external ones …and stick to it! Excluding the excess for P&S before it can even be properly utilised.
4. They need to have them walk that line, exercise the powers open to them when losses exceed £15m but fall below £39m, utilise them to the full.
5. If on track to fail P&S by a big margin and say a large ie excessive training ground sale, GET GOOD INDEPENDENT VALUERS IN INSTANTLY! Better yet, hire one or some on retainers!
6. IF full disclosure demanded in the Meeting with new owners, the inevitable one with respect to possible P&S questions, demand disclosure to the fullest extent possible of HOW they intend to solve the P&S issue- again scrutinise, push back. That would help with 5).

On that Business Plan note, not that I have a great problem with Birmingham overall due to reform, sales and probably the biggest punishment for the smallest offence once compared, but why the Football League did not flag in the March 2019 Hearing their issues with the Business Plan is strange- they only sent it through in May 2019, despite the fact that January had been and gone by the time March came around. As it happens I think they've been punished and reformed, or are reforming but the Hearing in March 2019 suggested they had complied substantially with the Terms of the Business Plan...some kind of double punishment in March or a Second Hearing in March/April 2019 for not selling Adams in January 2019 might have been in order- mind you, Harvey let the in-season punishments drag waaaaay too far- in fact he didn't seem keen to push them at all, hence why Birmingham were charged in August 2018 and others not at all under him, for offences that took place in the 3 years concluding in 2017/18.

Sheffield Wednesday's accounts extension pushed them higher in terms of overspend. Lots of their smug and ill-informed fans say that a 12 point deduction would've been midtable to midtable- well if in the season OF the offence as intended, assuming the same time as Birmingham- I have the table from that date in front of me, in 2018.

In-season deductions for a) Size of overspend and projected and b) Rising losses=aggravating factor. No real grounds for mitigation at this point.

38 games in.

1. Sheffield Wednesday 41 pts.
2. Birmingham 33.

Think Birmingham looking at 9-10 points there, let's go with 9 as they were nonetheless pretty cooperative and maybe as they apparently put themselves under an embargo in January 2018 you could even make a case for 8. Nonetheless, whether reduced to 24 or 25, it surely consigns them to the drop? Only stayed up on last day as it was!

Sheffield Wednesday had a load of injuries and bad form at the time, though had just won at Leeds. 8-9 points plunges them RIGHT into the scrap, totally different ballgame psychologically- might they have dropped too?

Few of you might be interested in this- @Davefevs @Coppello @downendcity @Hxj

Apologies if I've missed anyone.

Edited November 14, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Trying to work out Sheffield Wednesday's P&S losses if taken on 12-month accounts and this is the Sanctioning Guidelines.

Quote

The Following number of points shall be deducted from the 12 points.

Quantum of the Breach

• 9 points if less than £2.0m
• 8 points if between £2.0m - £4.0m
• 7 points if between £4.0m - £6.0m
• 6 points if between £6.0m - £8.0m
• 5 points if between £8.0m - £10.0m
• 4 points if between £10.0m - £12.5m
• 3 points if between £12.5m - £15.0m
• No deduction if breach is greater than £15.0m

Then the balance shall be further reduced if the loss in the final season is less than the season(s) before.

Typical Football League- deductions of points from the deduction- wonder if Harvey himself wrote the guidelines!  I know what it means but it's badly worded and poorly laid out.  Back to front, simply- "Overspend by £1-1,999,999=3 points, £2m-£3,999,999=4 pts" etc.

Their overspend if adjusted to 12 months was surely at least as large as that of Birmingham.

Losses by season.

2015/16- £9,755,000.

2016/17- £20,765,000.

*2017/18- £35,485,000

*=14 months. Think P&S allowances were estimated at £7.5m, maybe that falls to £7m with 3 x 12 as opposed to 2 x 12 and 1 x 14? Perhaps the losses would be lopped down to say £29m for the season, 9 point deduction plus rising losses each season?? Birmingham type levels and then a bit worse! That would plunge them to, well split the difference and say 10 points but that would put them into the drop zone or as good as. Based on the table on 17th March 2018, going into the International break.

Edited November 14, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[Bris Red]

On 08/11/2020 at 19:02, AnAstonVillafan said:

I don't believe Derby will wriggle out of any issues. They are a mess at the moment and it will take time to sort. Morris was a geniune fan of the club. Like Lansdown and Gibson are of their clubs.

West Brom used to be one of the best run clubs in the country. Ruled by Jeremy Peace, who was born in the area, a fan and ruled with a rod of iron. He always got maximum value in every deal. The current Chinese owner seeks to lead in the same way. It was managerial problems which caused their relegation.

When Doug Eliis was Villa's major shareholder the club was debt free, and prudent. The fans hated this. We always wanted more and more money spent on new players. But we never apprieciated what we had with him. Its shame that it always seems to be foreign billonaires nessessary to push a club forward in these times.

 I used to deliver newspapers to Ellis's house as a teenager. 25 minutes drive from the stadium.

Doug Ellis was like our own Steve Lansdown in a way, you know the club is always going to be in safe hands with these types of men but over the years i think its fair to say we could have pushed the boat out considerably more than we have done and would have probably experienced Premier league football by now.

[Mr Popodopolous]

I do apologise a bit for my slating of Sheffield Wednesday fans or what seemed like it. That post was written in a hurry by me, with little context.

To be clear, it is those morons who state that the punishment should be moved back tro 2018/19 from this season that I have a big beef with in this instance.

14 hours ago, bris red said:

Doug Ellis was like our own Steve Lansdown in a way, you know the club is always going to be in safe hands with these types of men but over the years i think its fair to say we could have pushed the boat out considerably more than we have done and would have probably experienced Premier league football by now.

FFP has been an issue for years, could you state when exactly?

Could you state when, given the extensive range of powers the Football League have- from automatic embargoes under the old system, to the current system in which the penalties are good but the implementation erratic- they should have automatic points penalties based on size of overspend tbh, like administration. 2 years of prior real accounts, 1 year of club projected and if £10m over, automatic 8 point deduction before a short hearing to determine aggravating and mitigating factors.

Remember in 2015/16, had we pushed the boat out and exceeded £13m which we were not altogether far from as I recall, it would have been an automatic embargo had we not gone straight up so that's out- similarly if our 2 year losses had hit or exceeded £26m going into 2016/17, that would have capped us that year and had it been 2015/16 and 2016/17 combined at £26m, it'd have capped us at £13m in 2017/18. A season in which even after deductions we lost 50% more, despite a record turnover in modern times certainly it was.

Now if we're going back to January 2008 I would agree that would be a great time to push the boat out, but I did some work on this a while ago and it's notable that from say 2010/11 or 2009/10, as our wage bill increased our League standing decreased. Which is massively counterintuitive but can be more common with clubs than people expect.

Was Coppell not an attempt to push the boat out- we actually got relegated in 2012/13 with a midtable or thereabouts wage bill yet finished bottom by a mile.

Let's not even forget that aforementioned 2017/18- we did push the boat out somewhat, we lost £25m- before allowances of course, and in January 2018 we kept Bryan, Flint and Reid. That alone was a sign of intent, keeping some of our best when arguably their stock at its highest, despite in the case of Bryan and Reid, summer 2018 going into the final year of their contract.

Edited November 14, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[Bris Red]

17 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I do apologise a bit for my slating of Sheffield Wednesday fans or what seemed like it. That post was written in a hurry by me, with little context.

To be clear, it is those morons who state that the punishment should be moved back tro 2018/19 from this season that I have a big beef with in this instance.

FFP has been an issue for years, could you state when exactly?

Could you state when, given the extensive range of powers the Football League have- from automatic embargoes under the old system, to the current system in which the penalties are good but the implementation erratic- they should have automatic points penalties based on size of overspend tbh, like administration. 2 years of prior real accounts, 1 year of club projected and if £10m over, automatic 8 point deduction before a short hearing to determine aggravating and mitigating factors.

Remember in 2015/16, had we pushed the boat out and exceeded £13m which we were not altogether far from as I recall, it would have been an automatic embargo had we not gone straight up so that's out- similarly if our 2 year losses had hit or exceeded £26m going into 2016/17, that would have capped us that year and had it been 2015/16 and 2016/17 combined at £26m, it'd have capped us at £13m in 2017/18. A season in which even after deductions we lost 50% more, despite a record turnover in modern times certainly it was.

Now if we're going back to January 2008 I would agree that would be a great time to push the boat out, but I did some work on this a while ago and it's notable that from say 2010/11 or 2009/10, as our wage bill increased our League standing decreased. Which is massively counterintuitive but can be more common with clubs than people expect.

Was Coppell not an attempt to push the boat out- we actually got relegated in 2012/13 with a midtable or thereabouts wage bill yet finished bottom by a mile.

Let's not even forget that aforementioned 2017/18- we did push the boat out somewhat, we lost £25m- before allowances of course, and in January 2018 we kept Bryan, Flint and Reid. That alone was a sign of intent, keeping some of our best when arguably their stock at its highest, despite in the case of Bryan and Reid, summer 2018 going into the final year of their contract.

Yes it is the January of 2008 that sticks in my mind. Nothing against Dele Adebola or Nick Carle but they weren’t the type of quality signings that were going to push us over the line that year IMO.
I agree obviously since FFP has come into play we have had to play by the rules, the Lansdown family are sensible people and would obviously not risk fines or a points deduction by trying to bend the rules. I just still feel disappointed by January window in 08 to be honest.. i think under a different board we would have gone up that year. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 hour ago, bris red said:

Yes it is the January of 2008 that sticks in my mind. Nothing against Dele Adebola or Nick Carle but they weren’t the type of quality signings that were going to push us over the line that year IMO.
I agree obviously since FFP has come into play we have had to play by the rules, the Lansdown family are sensible people and would obviously not risk fines or a points deduction by trying to bend the rules. I just still feel disappointed by January window in 08 to be honest.. i think under a different board we would have gone up that year. 

2008 definitely looking back is the one, I'll agree. Stoke pushed the boat out somewhat as I recall. Shawcross and some others?

I also think that switching from 4-4-1-1 which the signing of Adebola helped to facilitate didn't help. Adebola good depth but I thought that we lost a bit of control and security without Noble linking the midfield and attack as often.

Could Carle have maybe performed that role as an alternative to Noble for some games? He (Carle) was one I'm don't think we saw the best of.

However yes, splash say £10m in January on a mix of wages, fees and high quality loans and we have a very good chance.

[downendcity]

6 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

2008 definitely looking back is the one, I'll agree. Stoke pushed the boat out somewhat as I recall. Shawcross and some others?

I also think that switching from 4-4-1-1 which the signing of Adebola helped to facilitate didn't help. Adebola good depth but I thought that we lost a bit of control and security without Noble linking the midfield and attack as often.

Could Carle have maybe performed that role as an alternative to Noble for some games? He (Carle) was one I'm don't think we saw the best of.

However yes, splash say £10m in January on a mix of wages, fees and high quality loans and we have a very good chance.

Much as though many won;t like to admit, the biggest miss back then was LJ ’s injury. While he as out injured our form, and results, dropped off a cliff.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Sheffield Wednesday written reasons released- well last week, just discovered them myself.

https://www.efl.com/siteassets/efl-documents/youth-alliance/201104---sheffield-wednesday-fc-v-efl-appeal---decision-final-201116.pdf

Few might be interested- @Davefevs @downendcity @BTRFTG @Coppello @Hxj

About to have a quick look myself.

[Major Isewater]

On 14/11/2020 at 05:21, bris red said:

Doug Ellis was like our own Steve Lansdown in a way, you know the club is always going to be in safe hands with these types of men but over the years i think its fair to say we could have pushed the boat out considerably more than we have done and would have probably experienced Premier league football by now.

I agree ,Steve Lansdown is an accountant and a fan.

 I believe both cause him pain and joy. 

[Major Isewater]

On 15/11/2020 at 14:06, bris red said:

. i think under a different board we would have gone up that year

And probably be doing a ‘Portsmouth ‘ at the time of writing.

 

[Hxj]

4 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Sheffield Wednesday written reasons released- well last week, just discovered them myself.

https://www.efl.com/siteassets/efl-documents/youth-alliance/201104---sheffield-wednesday-fc-v-efl-appeal---decision-final-201116.pdf

Few might be interested- @Davefevs @downendcity @BTRFTG @Coppello @Hxj

About to have a quick look myself.

Thanks - interesting read.

Provides some useful insight into the process.

[Davefevs]

6 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Sheffield Wednesday written reasons released- well last week, just discovered them myself.

https://www.efl.com/siteassets/efl-documents/youth-alliance/201104---sheffield-wednesday-fc-v-efl-appeal---decision-final-201116.pdf

Few might be interested- @Davefevs @downendcity @BTRFTG @Coppello @Hxj

About to have a quick look myself.

I haven’t read past the first few pages....how is that not an aggravated breach?

[BTRFTG]

Scumbag Wednesday bring the game into disrepute, though as a long-established 'big club' are deemed more important than others.

Their arguments as set out in the first two appeals are clearly spurious and had regulation allowed should have allowed the EFL to impose additional sanctions, but that would never happen. EFL only like to punish the small and weak, those who aren't part of the Old Boys network.

Unlike as demonstrated against many smaller clubs sanctions are supposed to be immediate and non-negotiable, which beggars why the EFL were so collaborative in deferring the sanction at Wednesday's request in the full knowledge they might later appeal it not being to imposed as per the regulation? That 'loophole' exists for good reason and is to be used where clubs have unwittingly breached regulation, admitted having done so, have openly demonstrated remorse and made full effort to rectify matters. None of which scumbag Wednesday showed any inclination toward doing.

One thing is for sure, when they and their lawyers left court in taxis, it wasn't in those who purport to sponsor the club.....

What's the betting the £42m for the ground is never settled in full?

[Mr Popodopolous]

On 24/11/2020 at 10:36, Hxj said:

Thanks - interesting read.

Provides some useful insight into the process.

It does. Still some opacity possibly though I read it reasonably quickly about actual in-season deductions.

On 24/11/2020 at 12:07, Davefevs said:

I haven’t read past the first few pages....how is that not an aggravated breach?

Your guess is as good as mine. If we look at Birmingham...

7 points for the overspend and 3 for the increasing losses per year.

1 back for early compliance.

Sheffield Wednesday overspend ALONE 12 points.

Theirs increased at a similar rate to and perhaps a greater rate than Birmingham AND they were less honest and cooperative.

Yet, because they were PLANNING to sell the Stadium- which they did not complete within the required timeframe quite clearly- that was worth SIX points back?? Would be pretty irate if I was Birmingham- let's not forget that they then had an EFL Business Plan to adhere to- and rightly so- but Sheffield Wednesday it seems not at least if so, it's not in the public domain.

If anything Sheffield Wednesday might have had 12 for the overspend and 2-3 more for escalating losses but no??

In the very most optimistic scenario, 1-2 back for at least having a plan ie selling the ground but to halve it?!

Edited November 25, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

On 24/11/2020 at 18:47, BTRFTG said:

Scumbag Wednesday bring the game into disrepute, though as a long-established 'big club' are deemed more important than others.

Their arguments as set out in the first two appeals are clearly spurious and had regulation allowed should have allowed the EFL to impose additional sanctions, but that would never happen. EFL only like to punish the small and weak, those who aren't part of the Old Boys network.

Unlike as demonstrated against many smaller clubs sanctions are supposed to be immediate and non-negotiable, which beggars why the EFL were so collaborative in deferring the sanction at Wednesday's request in the full knowledge they might later appeal it not being to imposed as per the regulation? That 'loophole' exists for good reason and is to be used where clubs have unwittingly breached regulation, admitted having done so, have openly demonstrated remorse and made full effort to rectify matters. None of which scumbag Wednesday showed any inclination toward doing.

One thing is for sure, when they and their lawyers left court in taxis, it wasn't in those who purport to sponsor the club.....

What's the betting the £42m for the ground is never settled in full?

Agreed.

I still dunno about whether there is a big club bias, Birmingham are a reasonable sized club but got hauled over the coals somewhat more than Sheffield Wednesday in some ways. EFL wanted to relegate Sheffield Wednesday so the claims go, so I am on the fence. There are additional powers though, you're quite right.

Now this is an undoubted bugbear of mine. I'm sure you're familiar with the regulations but if not there is something very specific in them that allows for in-season punishment. Will pull it out:

Quote

1.1.14 T means the Club’s Accounting Reference Period ending in the year in which assessment pursuant to Rules 2.2 to 2.9 takes place, and:

(a)  T-1 means the Club’s Accounting Reference Period immediately preceding T;

(b)  T-2 means the Club’s Accounting Reference Period immediately preceding T-1;

(c)  T-3 means the Club’s Accounting Reference Period immediately preceding T- 2;

(d)  T+1 means the Club’s Accounting Reference Period immediately following T; and

(e)  T+2 means the Club’s Accounting Reference Period immediately following T+1.

Followed by.

Quote

2 Profitability and Sustainability

2.1  Rules 2.2 to 2.9 shall apply with effect from Season 2016/17.

2.2  Subject to Rule 2.2A, each Club shall by 1 March in each Season submit to the Executive:

2.2.1  copies of its Annual Accounts for T-1 (and T-2 if these have not previously been submitted to the Executive) together with copies of the directors’ report(s) and auditor’s report(s) on those accounts;

2.2.2  its estimated profit and loss account and balance sheet for T which shall:

(a)  be prepared in all material respects in a format similar to the Club’s Annual Accounts; and

(b)  be based on the latest information available to the Club and be, to the best of the Club’s knowledge and belief, an accurate estimate as at the time of preparation of future financial performance; and

2.2.3  if Rule 2.5 applies to the Club its P&S Calculation in a form approved by the Executive from time to time and which as at the date of these Rules is set out in Appendix 1.

This ie T- that means when a club submits their Projected Accounts ie 2.2.2- this is in order to assess against the 2 prior sets of actual accounts- anything over £39m and it's sanctions there and then. Or should be.

Of course, there is a decent amount of blame to the Football League- Shaun Harvey only had the points tariff in place by September 2018 despite the fact that there had already been two years in which 'T' could have been applied with deductions etc. If anything it should have been in place going into 2016/17 so everyone knew where they were with it. How he became CEO of the Football League well...who knows!

Birmingham even got a bit fortunate as they were not correctly assessed until Summer 2018- I think Harvey was pretty keen to see clubs get off the hook with FFP in summer 2018, or buy time personally, but Birmingham and their idiotic breach of a soft embargo forced the Football League's hand.

Nick De Marco is the man- represented Derby as well, and the Saudis with Newcastle. Gives a fair idea about him tbh...yes waiting for a D-Taxi, that'd never arrive!

It's worse than that- £60m! £60m but look at their accounts for Sheffield Wednesday from 1997 to 2014 with a range of valuations and I'd say Sheffield Wednesday PLC from 1990-1997, I choose 1990 as that is when we could factor in improvements post Hillsborough and necessary expenditure.

Even if we take 1997 when it last had work done on it in a major way, valued after that the years before for Euro 96 it was not far off the £22-24m in 2014. It never diverged a huge amount from that range...

To add insult, there is speculation that they can stick it in the 2018/19 accounts giving them a big FFP boost for at least one or two more years.

The one good thing to materialise is that the rent is mooted to be in the range of £3m per season, which will act as a drag on FFP for years to come but god I hope they go down.

Edited November 25, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

https://www.efl.com/contentassets/c9fc5dceaa7f4b62b81dca0b9e2f7c9d/2020.10.26---decision-on-mfc-redaction.pdf

Seems Middlesbrough launched an appeal against the Pride Park valuation- about to read it myself.

I assume that is the end of it but who knows...?

Man who went into bat for Derby- Sheffield Wednesday, QPR prior to this and even the Saudis at Newcastle appeal- is the well known QC who specialises in such areas as Sports Law, and his name is ***** De Marco. Well that's what I think he is anyway.

Edited November 26, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[Hxj]

12 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

• Author

•   On 24/11/2020 at 12:07, Davefevs said:

I haven’t read past the first few pages....how is that not an aggravated breach?

Your guess is as good as mine. If we look at Birmingham...

Because the EFL did not contend for an aggravated breach at the Sanctions Hearing see paragraph 20 efl-v-sheffield-wednesday---decision-on-sanction.pdf  

[BTRFTG]

15 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Agreed.

I still dunno about whether there is a big club bias, Birmingham are a reasonable sized club but got hauled over the coals somewhat more than Sheffield Wednesday in some ways. EFL wanted to relegate Sheffield Wednesday so the claims go, so I am on the fence. There are additional powers though, you're quite right.

Now this is an undoubted bugbear of mine. I'm sure you're familiar with the regulations but if not there is something very specific in them that allows for in-season punishment. Will pull it out:

Followed by.

This ie T- that means when a club submits their Projected Accounts ie 2.2.2- this is in order to assess against the 2 prior sets of actual accounts- anything over £39m and it's sanctions there and then. Or should be.

Of course, there is a decent amount of blame to the Football League- Shaun Harvey only had the points tariff in place by September 2018 despite the fact that there had already been two years in which 'T' could have been applied with deductions etc. If anything it should have been in place going into 2016/17 so everyone knew where they were with it. How he became CEO of the Football League well...who knows!

Birmingham even got a bit fortunate as they were not correctly assessed until Summer 2018- I think Harvey was pretty keen to see clubs get off the hook with FFP in summer 2018, or buy time personally, but Birmingham and their idiotic breach of a soft embargo forced the Football League's hand.

Nick De Marco is the man- represented Derby as well, and the Saudis with Newcastle. Gives a fair idea about him tbh...yes waiting for a D-Taxi, that'd never arrive!

It's worse than that- £60m! £60m but look at their accounts for Sheffield Wednesday from 1997 to 2014 with a range of valuations and I'd say Sheffield Wednesday PLC from 1990-1997, I choose 1990 as that is when we could factor in improvements post Hillsborough and necessary expenditure.

Even if we take 1997 when it last had work done on it in a major way, valued after that the years before for Euro 96 it was not far off the £22-24m in 2014. It never diverged a huge amount from that range...

To add insult, there is speculation that they can stick it in the 2018/19 accounts giving them a big FFP boost for at least one or two more years.

The one good thing to materialise is that the rent is mooted to be in the range of £3m per season, which will act as a drag on FFP for years to come but god I hope they go down.

There's still a major issue football needs to address in how IFRS allows infrastructure assets to be accounted. As Sheff Wed, Derby et al have shown it's possible to think of a number and provided one is selling to an 'interested party' one may evidence 'market value', even if it's nothing of the sort.

Sports stadiums, unless there's another team needing such facility, are largely specialist, limited value assets. It's only the land on which they stand that has long-lasting value. Problem is if it's land for development once one takes into account clearance, CIL & Section 106 costs it's probably only worth a quarter of what the asset's valued at. Not sure it's yet been tested but should one of the clubs struggle, sell the ground at a loss (possibly to temporarily groundshare elsewhere,) does the hit they take count as expense under FFP in the same way as the inflated sales account as income? If they don't there's an opportunity to keep flipping assets to incur profits and losses as deemed necessary.

[Mr Popodopolous]

The man, the myth- the enabler.

Wonder if it was one of the FFP cheats who helped indirectly fund that, or takeover appeal money from the Saudis- that list, it says all you need to know about him tbh.

Edited November 27, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

On 26/11/2020 at 11:26, BTRFTG said:

There's still a major issue football needs to address in how IFRS allows infrastructure assets to be accounted. As Sheff Wed, Derby et al have shown it's possible to think of a number and provided one is selling to an 'interested party' one may evidence 'market value', even if it's nothing of the sort.

Sports stadiums, unless there's another team needing such facility, are largely specialist, limited value assets. It's only the land on which they stand that has long-lasting value. Problem is if it's land for development once one takes into account clearance, CIL & Section 106 costs it's probably only worth a quarter of what the asset's valued at. Not sure it's yet been tested but should one of the clubs struggle, sell the ground at a loss (possibly to temporarily groundshare elsewhere,) does the hit they take count as expense under FFP in the same way as the inflated sales account as income? If they don't there's an opportunity to keep flipping assets to incur profits and losses as deemed necessary.

Agreed. It's FRS 102 now though I believe, transition in mid 2010s? 

It's interesting, as I read the report for the Derby case- very long it was too, but quite sure it cited "Depreciated Replacement Cost" as the correct valuation method here. Sheffield Wednesday not so sure, but it mentioned yield so even if it went for £60m, if annual rent is £3m some kind of merit? Rental charge would count against FFP also, even though we all know it's overvalued- surprised the Football League chose not to challenge the valuation, maybe that could still come down the track. What's your thoughts on it potentially being restated to the correct accounts? If there was a way to exclude it verbatim for FFP purposes it'd be good, but might that prove impossible?

Agreed. Specialist assets, with limited value. However from what I read on this, Depreciated Replacement Cost appears to be a good proxy for it- which is why it confuses me so much as to why using this very same method, it rises from say rounding up £24m in 2014, to £60m in 2018 or 2019! 2014 accounts are worth a read, they seem to state it inclusive of land under the DRC. Might have been yield related for sale price though, £60m price/£3m rent.

Talking of rent, Pride Park appears to be annually £1.1m or £1.3m or something, for an £81.1m transaction- the Report showed much difference ie £4m or more a year BUT they invoked a clause on days that it would only be used for football related activities. Which knocked between £2.5-3m off it but there is also talk that Football League can substitute in a Fair Market Rent basically, for FFP/P&S purposes.

Birmingham's looks easily the cleanest of any at £22.76m price- that's price not profit- and a £1.25m annual rent x 25. 2nd city, not a million miles from City centre and they downsized in other areas, player sales- I can live with that. They were seemingly the most honest of the clubs anyway yet got the biggest punishment to date!

Aston Villa, Derby, Sheffield Wednesday- and must not forget Reading, who sold ground in 2017/18, then Renhe Sports Management Ltd sold it to owners Chinese company in 2018/19 for £37.5m- up from £26.5m in 2017/18, also sold was the Training Ground and some land- even loaned Sone Aluko to Chinese club owned by their owner for £3m!? Lower profile as a club and I hope we win tomorrow for both on the pitch and off the pitch, but they're one of the worst actually in this respect! CEO is also or has also been on EFL Board too- him and the Derby one, Nigel Howe and Stephen Pearce respectively- especially the latter- should be drummed off at the earliest.

Might also add, in the case of Aston Villa they also received £3m in 2017/18 for what may have been HS2 related land and £14.4m in 2018/19! I bet there are many, many people awaiting compensation still for HS2- but Aston Villa got bumped right up- without that £14.4m they fail FFP. That's even with the Stadium sale factored in. Despite 3 years of Parachute Payments- I do hope the Football League are patiently waiting for them to return.

AFAIK, the situation is this- and it goes for all Fixed Assets, not just Stadia:

Stadium sold- Profit can be accounted for if the Stadium is sold and deemed to be at Fair Value. If not then disputes over valuation, adjustments for FFP kick in etc.

Stadium sold at loss- I'd like to think the loss would go against for FFP, as well as in the accounts- in theory it absolutely should, but you're right it hasn't been tested- but I imagine it would be "Loss on Disposal of Tangible Fixed Assets" appearing in P&L. Selling at under value though can or should bring outside trouble greater than the EFL, HMRC would surely want words...?

The solution here for Football- it's so simple. Exclude Profit or loss on disposal of Fixed Assets from FFP/P&S calculations. UEFA do this with their FFP- but even better, the Football League themselves did this until 2015/16 season. In 2016/17 season, for reasons unknown- could easily be an error at EFL HQ- when they transitioned from those old rules to the new ones, this clause was removed and nobody has ever explained it. The old rules themselves excluded Fixed Asset Profits or Losses from the calculations- you can interchange, transfer and flip as much as you like, it's just irrelevant for the calculations- like various other items.

Edited November 27, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[Sir Geoff]

Wouldn't it be funny if after all this Derby were relegated.  Here's to hoping.