The Championship FFP Thread (Merged)

[Mr Popodopolous]

Reading the bit about Brentford got my FFP interest increased again.

Stoke

To cut a long story short by my calculations in conjunction with SwissRamble, if their FFP loss in 2020/21 exceeds £6m- that's a standalone FFP loss in that season- then they have failed FFP.

They needed to improve it by £37m last season basically.

If we delve a little further...

This was 2019/20. Final 3 months give or take of the Reporting period,

£8m in Covid costs- x 4=£32m. An accounting loss not exceeding £45m maybe one metric- one other calculation I had made it to have been £37m but anyway a notable improvement is required from 2019/20!

Even if they managed to get over the line to 2021, they have a drop in £16.5m in allowance to 2022- the final PL year drops off and as for 2023, I believe their combined average for 2020 and 2021 will be worse than the around £8m in 2019 as a starting point.

Edited January 18, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Davefevs]

8 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Reading the bit about Brentford got my FFP interest increased again.

Stoke

To cut a long story short by my calculations in conjunction with SwissRamble, if their FFP loss in 2020/21 exceeds £6m- that's a standalone FFP loss in that season- then they have failed FFP.

They needed to improve it by £37m last season basically.

If we delve a little further...

This was 2019/20. Final 3 months give or take of the Reporting period,

£8m in Covid costs- x 4=£32m. An accounting loss not exceeding £45m maybe one metric- one other calculation I had made it to have been £37m but anyway a notable improvement is required from 2019/20!

Even if they managed to get over the line to 2021, they have a drop in £16.5m in allowance to 2022- the final PL year drops off and as for 2023, I believe their combined average for 2020 and 2021 will be worse than the around £8m in 2019 as a starting point.

If they have impaired such a significant amount of player contracts, surely there amortisation charge for 20/21 will be significantly lower?  Starting from a much lower base position.

Plus the sell of Nathan Collins too.

Does that help a fair bit?

edit: I highlighted the wrong bits on green….doh!

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Just now, Davefevs said:

If they have impaired such a significant amount of player contracts, surely there amortisation charge for 20/21 will be significantly lower?  Starting from a much lower base position.

Plus the sell of Nathan Collins too.

Does that help a fair bit?

edit: I highlighted the wrong bits on green….doh!

 

Agreed- it'll help but remember the Parachute Payments also lower in Year 3 and gone now.

For this season the Collins sale absolutely will help but into next season should almost certainly see a worse starting point than the period into this season so you're running from behind to stand still in a sense.

[Davefevs]

5 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Agreed- it'll help but remember the Parachute Payments also lower in Year 3 and gone now.

For this season the Collins sale absolutely will help but into next season should almost certainly see a worse starting point than the period into this season so you're running from behind to stand still in a sense.

Players like Afobe will be off the wage bill this summer, and others…and some!

Data from Wyscout, but source is transfermarkt!  I haven’t stripped out loans.

[Mr Popodopolous]

PL but may follow its way down...could be very interesting.

https://www.brabners.com/blogs/premier-league-regulations-third-party-transactions

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

Players like Afobe will be off the wage bill this summer, and others…and some!

Data from Wyscout, but source is transfermarkt!  I haven’t stripped out loans.

Stoke seem to be in the strange position whereby they can sign players on x terms but might not be able to renew existing players on existing terms- I remember last April they were having issues renewing Nick Powell.

Wow that is quite the potential rebuild!

[Mr Popodopolous]

I've criticised Stoke but they do seem to be making efforts as well. Adam Davies has just gone to Sheffield United, and Baath has gone to Sunderland. The latter reportedly on a free, the former unsure if a fee or free but he joined Stoke on a free.

Fielding cheaper than Davies and Jagielka, Harwood-Bellis probably cheaper than Baath and Ostigard at this time. We're still to see the 2020/21 accounts of course.

Another one that interests me is Fulham. Parachute Payments or not unlike a lot of clubs they appear not to have generated much in the market.

Wilson was an 8 figure fee and Muniz was reportedly £7-8m? Their loss limit maybe £72m due to 2 PL and 2 Championship seasons but so is Sheffield United's and yet Ramsdale went for good cash, I'd guess Davies cheaper than Olsen too.

Fulham if they stay down could be in trouble. That £72m limit going into next season drops to £55.5m and the same for the below.

Bournemouth also have the £72m loss limit yet I see plenty of departures- of course but if they stay down, more needed.

Cardiff right now have the £55.5m but this falls to £39m next season should they remain in the Championship.

Birmingham's owners apparently have a 3 year plan to push for or gain promotion but big sales in 2019/20 and 2020/21 masked their underlying position a bit...by the time it comes around to 2023/24 could they actually be up against it FFP wise again?

What is striking is how few clubs have released their accounts so far. I make it only:

*Birmingham- via HKSE

*Blackburn- In the form of Venkys London Limited. Muddies the waters a bit. 

Brentford- Promoted to the PL

Us

Hull- They were in League One last year.

Millwall

Norwich- Promoted to the PL.

Wycombe- Relegated.

If we're including sides promoted and relegated last year we are waiting on many, many clubs. I'd hope that the EFL have info submitted by the clubs last summer.

[Hxj]

3 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Hull- They were in League One last year.

And have just had their transfer embargo lifted following repayment of their EFL Monitored Loan.

[Mr Popodopolous]

5 minutes ago, Hxj said:

And have just had their transfer embargo lifted following repayment of their EFL Monitored Loan.

So they have! Glad to see it's still being updated in a timely manner.

Amusingly now, Derby have nearly as many entries on there as the rest of the Football League put together!

5 on their rap sheet, 6 in total across the rest of the League.

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Wilson was an 8 figure fee and Muniz was reportedly £7-8m? Their loss limit maybe £72m due to 2 PL and 2 Championship seasons but so is Sheffield United's and yet Ramsdale went for good cash, I'd guess Davies cheaper than Olsen too.

Wilson - £12m not due til next season…it’s a loan this season with obligation to buy in the summer (although based on certain conditions. I wonder if it’s dependent on promotion.

Having said that, if it was unconditional, then it should be treated as a permanent transfer.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Thought I'd look a little bit more closely at Birmingham. Their 6 month accounts for this season are due at HKSE in about 5 weeks btw. End of February, start of March kinda thing.

Clearly their results in the last two years will have been impacted by Covid but also bear in mind as I mentioned, a bit of a propping up by strong transfer fees. It's about although not exactly, $HK 10 to the £.

Would only likely be able to properly calculate the impact or try to once their UK accounts out but all the same.

UK accounts showed their 2019/20 losses to be £18,168,000 and this was despite and including a Profit on disposal of players listed as £11,542,000.

Once finance costs vs income added that's a loss- underlying- of £29,710,000!?

The HK equivelant showed the headline loss to have been HK$186,519,000- and a Profit on disposal of players listed as HK$115,543,000.

As we can see though it's not exactly 10 x, there is a strong correlation.

Then we move onto 2020/21. Awaiting the UK of course but...

A PROFIT- even including the Revenue hit-of HK$4,836,000- but remember this includes and is despite a Profit on disposal of players listed as HK$276,854,000.

Suggests to me that while the underlying loss is coming down it is certainly there. No FFP issues to this season, possibly not to next season due to that combined average but this seems to clash with their mooted 3 year plan as big underlying losses set them on at least a heavily restricted trajectory.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Little bit more on FFP. Doughty loan to Cardiff, maybe Stoke are compliant and I'm wrong and they are balancing things just about...time will tell?

Cardiff though- in addition to Doyle (Man City) and Drameh (Leeds) loans- this would be a 3rd and also linked with Hugill while no offers for Kieffer Moore. Giles has gone back to Wolves.

Does FFP apply to them? Not entirely serious question but going into next season there will be a negative swing of £15-20m quite possibly. Currently with the PL season their Upper Loss Limit is £55.5m but next year if they don't go up, it's £39m! That £16.5m alone is the drop in Upper Loss Limits and then consider that it goes from a 2018/19 PROFIT starting point to a loss in the combined average of last 2 seasons.

Their trajectory looks less than ideal but interestingly there was nothing in the Telegraph article when it mentioned clubs who could fall foul in the next year or 2.

They had Parachute Payments but they went from £35m is it Year 2, to £0 or £4.5m in Solidarity this year- another huge swing.

Another one to have a look at is Reading- Rafael has gone back to Brazil and the Carroll contract has expired but will they have done enough to avoid the suspended 6 points becoming unsuspended this Spring? Will be interesting to see but IIRC they have a fair few hurdles to jump to avoid it!

There are a lot of hazards that means they could easily see -6 become -12 at the stroke of a pen!

https://www.efl.com/contentassets/065e21d5596b42e7a882322d3a203509/efl-v-reading-fc---agreed-decision-approved-for-publication.pdf

I'm also interested in this bit- you might be able to help with clarity on this @Hxj

I've read it back quite a few times and it seems a bit clunky. Wordy.

Edited January 28, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Hxj]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I'm also interested in this bit- you might be able to help with clarity on this @Hxj

I read it as the club cannot have an expected FFP loss of more than £13 million in the periods ending 30 June 2022 and 30 June 2023.  The expected FFP loss is that in the budgets for those periods submitted in the March of each year.  In addition that expected FFP loss is after any expected profits or losses on player sales in the period from 1 March to 30 June in each year are ignored and any expected receipts from connected parties for the period 1 March to 30 June in each year are also ignored.

It looks as if the intent is to keep the club to a proper budget throughout the year and not let them simply wait until they know what the figures are expected to be and then say "ah the expected losses are covered by a player sale at the end of the season, and oh, here's a cheque for £1 million from our owner to rename the stadium, oh look we beat the budget by £100. 

Edited January 28, 2022 by Hxj

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 hour ago, Hxj said:

I read it as the club cannot have an expected FFP loss of more than £13 million in the periods ending 30 June 2022 and 30 June 2023.  The expected FFP loss is that in the budgets for those periods submitted in the March of each year.  In addition that expected FFP loss is after any expected profits or losses on player sales in the period from 1 March to 30 June in each year are ignored and any expected receipts from connected parties for the period 1 March to 30 June in each year are also ignored.

It looks as if the intent is to keep the club to a proper budget throughout the year and not let them simply wait until they know what the figures are expected to be and then say "ah the expected losses are covered by a player sale at the end of the season, and oh, here's a cheque for £1 million from our owner to rename the stadium, oh look we beat the budget by £100. 

Thanks.

Wow, if true the EFL are really upping their game- they did with okay with Birmingham to a point, but it all seemed a bit trial and error- joining up the confirmed breach and the upcoming business plan wasn't as well done as hoped...9 and then a further 3 for not selling Adams would've seemed fair, both applied in 2018/19.

Now this- combined with the future financial information ie T+1, T+2 and the judgement against Birmingham regarding the business plan can really hold clubs to account for the past, present and future.

Edited January 28, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Josh Maja reportedly on loan to Stoke.

Perhaps I was/am wrong about them being within FFP at all times. 2020/21 accounts due out in a month to 5 weeks..

Him in, Doughty out on loan would surely be more expensive.

Have a squad of 32 as well!!

[Davefevs]

Gonna be some interesting financial results coming out.  Maja is a good player imho.

[Mr Popodopolous]

19 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Gonna be some interesting financial results coming out.  Maja is a good player imho.

Agreed on both- Maja a fine player and of a good age where he should only get better- injuries the caveat.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Small FFP updates to watch. Possibly not now but down the line.

Birmingham

BSH have posted a profit warning for their 6 months to December 31st 2021. This will be largely due to a far lower profit on disposal, because the last time they posted profit warnings Birmingham City made some quite substantial losses and further in the last couple of seasons where Bellingham, Adams, and some others sold BSH posted positive news to come.

I expect if a problem arises then it will be in the 3 year period to 2023/24.

Nottingham Forest

As we know there are periodic trades between them and Olympiakos as Marinakis owns both, did so before buying Nottingham Forest.

Usually these are small or free, moderate wages etc- small trades and nothing to write home about.

However this one is altogether different. Joao Carvalho, one of Nottingham Forest's record signings and still quite young. Still only 24 but been in and out. Mooted that it is an 8-figure fee!! Seen £14m mentioned.

One to watch...surely? All that said seen it stated that Worrall and Brennan Johnson could well be sold if not promoted etc. They usually sell academy products legitimately but Carvalho to Olympiakos for that amount. Hmmm.

[lenred]

6 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Small FFP updates to watch. Possibly not now but down the line.

Birmingham

BSH have posted a profit warning for their 6 months to December 31st 2021. This will be largely due to a far lower profit on disposal, because the last time they posted profit warnings Birmingham City made some quite substantial losses and further in the last couple of seasons where Bellingham, Adams, and some others sold BSH posted positive news to come.

I expect if a problem arises then it will be in the 3 year period to 2023/24.

Nottingham Forest

As we know there are periodic trades between them and Olympiakos as Marinakis owns both, did so before buying Nottingham Forest.

Usually these are small or free, moderate wages etc- small trades and nothing to write home about.

However this one is altogether different. Joao Carvalho, one of Nottingham Forest's record signings and still quite young. Still only 24 but been in and out. Mooted that it is an 8-figure fee!! Seen £14m mentioned.

One to watch...surely? All that said seen it stated that Worrall and Brennan Johnson could well be sold if not promoted etc. They usually sell academy products legitimately but Carvalho to Olympiakos for that amount. Hmmm.

They signed Carvalho for around the same amount so guess it’s feasible at least. Obviously it was a different time finances wise when they paid that though but guessing there won’t be too many questions if / when it happens.  

[Mr Popodopolous]

Should add on Birmingham one thing I just remembered, IF Bellingham goes now or the summer then that will surely be for a large amount.

Hence they should get a good few million in the sell on fee- and that will cushion them to an extent.

I'd be stunned if there isn't a sell on clause. Contract expires at Borussia Dortmund 2025 so it could work out well for them timing wise.

Edited January 31, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Thought I'd delve into Stoke a little bit more. This season before any moves that are confirmed in the next few hours:

IN

Bonham- Free, Gillingham.

Fielding- Free, few months to half season perhaps?

Wilmott- Watford. £1.5-5m probably, different reports suggest different figures.

Ostigard- Season long loan, that was ended halfway through as he went to Genoa.

Harwood-Bellis- Half season, presumably to replace the above.

Jagielka- Free until the summer.

Vrancic- Left Norwich, Free, 1 year deal.

Sawyers- West Brom, 1 season loan.

Baker- Finally left Chelsea, fee undisclosed.

Sima- Young loanee from Brighton, still there so season long as it stands.

Bidace- Half season loan for young winger from Aston Villa.

Surridge- Depending on reports, £2.5-5.5m fee.

OUT

Davies- Sheffield United, in January. Half a season of wage savings and maybe a fee of some kind.

Bauer- Finally left permanently, one of their loan army.

Edwards- Looks like another season on loan in the MLS.

Collins- Burnley, £12m.

Baath- Sunderland on a free. January.

Wimmer- Back to Austria, again loaned for 2-3 years.

Lindsay- Half season loan to Preston last season, permanent this summer.

Martins Indi- Gone back to Holland, again loan for a year or 2 before.

Cousins- Contract expired, left on a free.

Obi- Mikel- Contract expired, left on a free.

N'Diaye- Finally left permanently, had prior loans away.

Etebo- Loan to Watford. Has been loaned before.

Doughty- Loaned to Cardiff, January 2022. Half- season.

Afobe- Season long loan to Millwall. Has spent prior two seasons out on loan.

Gregory- Offloaded to Sheffield Wednesday- joined on a free so any sale is profit.

Vokes- Gone to Wycombe.

Genuinely hard to ascertain as to whether they will or won't be within FFP.

Obviously the aforementioned Harwood-Bellis for Ostigard.

As for today, Surridge linked with going either on loan or permanent and Maja linked with joining on loan.

Last season, Gunn was there on loan for a full season, then Norrington-Davies Matondo and Jack Clarke for half-season loans. None there now.

[INCRED]

Surely the EFL won’t sanction this when they are under an embargo 

[Southport Red]

8 minutes ago, INCRED said:

Surely the EFL won’t sanction this when they are under an embargo 

Surely that can’t be allowable. 

[luke_bristol]

They really are taking the piss now

[Mr Popodopolous]

I assumed it has been confirmed but possibly misread the story.

Crystal Palace themselves would like the deal to work this way I expect- but if there are rules then they need to be upheld.

Tom Ince-Liam Moore swap being reported- surely that's likely to increase Reading's wages if anything??

Unsure how the deal would work but Liam Moore to Stoke, Tom Ince to Reading.

Edited January 31, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Thought I'd delve into Stoke a little bit more. This season before any moves that are confirmed in the next few hours:

IN

Bonham- Free, Gillingham.

Fielding- Free, few months to half season perhaps?

Wilmott- Watford. £1.5-5m probably, different reports suggest different figures.

Ostigard- Season long loan, that was ended halfway through as he went to Genoa.

Harwood-Bellis- Half season, presumably to replace the above.

Jagielka- Free until the summer.

Vrancic- Left Norwich, Free, 1 year deal.

Sawyers- West Brom, 1 season loan.

Baker- Finally left Chelsea, fee undisclosed.

Sima- Young loanee from Brighton, still there so season long as it stands.

Bidace- Half season loan for young winger from Aston Villa.

Surridge- Depending on reports, £2.5-5.5m fee.

OUT

Davies- Sheffield United, in January. Half a season of wage savings and maybe a fee of some kind.

Bauer- Finally left permanently, one of their loan army.

Edwards- Looks like another season on loan in the MLS.

Collins- Burnley, £12m.

Baath- Sunderland on a free. January.

Wimmer- Back to Austria, again loaned for 2-3 years.

Lindsay- Half season loan to Preston last season, permanent this summer.

Martins Indi- Gone back to Holland, again loan for a year or 2 before.

Cousins- Contract expired, left on a free.

Obi- Mikel- Contract expired, left on a free.

N'Diaye- Finally left permanently, had prior loans away.

Etebo- Loan to Watford. Has been loaned before.

Doughty- Loaned to Cardiff, January 2022. Half- season.

Afobe- Season long loan to Millwall. Has spent prior two seasons out on loan.

Gregory- Offloaded to Sheffield Wednesday- joined on a free so any sale is profit.

Vokes- Gone to Wycombe.

Genuinely hard to ascertain as to whether they will or won't be within FFP.

Obviously the aforementioned Harwood-Bellis for Ostigard.

As for today, Surridge linked with going either on loan or permanent and Maja linked with joining on loan.

Last season, Gunn was there on loan for a full season, then Norrington-Davies Matondo and Jack Clarke for half-season loans. None there now.

We haven’t seen 20/21’s accounts yet, so got no idea of their position.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Derby fans are moaning about corruption if the EFL allow the Plange deal.

They really have little grasp don't they!? Could be a vocal minority etc.

[chinapig]

19 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Derby fans are moaning about corruption if the EFL allow the Plange deal.

They really have little grasp don't they!? Could be a vocal minority etc.

Why corruption if it works in their favour? Posted this on the Derby thread:

Crisis club Derby are set for a much-needed £1m windfall for young striker Luke Plange.

Derby have accepted a bid from Crystal Palace for the 19-year-old, who joined the Rams in the summer after being released by Arsenal.

Plange has impressed this term and scored Derby’s first goal in their memorable 2-2 comeback draw against Birmingham yesterday.

However, the deal is attractive because Palace have agreed to loan Plange back to Derby for the remainder of the season.

Although the Championship club are not allowed to register new players due to their current financial position, Football League rules allow Plange to stay on at Derby providing his wage stays the same

[Mr Popodopolous]

17 hours ago, Davefevs said:

We haven’t seen 20/21’s accounts yet, so got no idea of their position.

Yeah this is true. I have to assume that they're compliant as it stands as they're not under any kind of publicly reported embargo. They could be in an agreement with the EFL on expenditure that falls short of a hard business plan and official sanctions at this stage.

The bottom line is though that give or take, they need to have cut their FFP loss by minimum of £37m in 2020/21 from that reported in 2019/20 to keep within until last year they've been quite prompt ie ahead of the formal deadline. Often November, December time in fact!

Edited February 1, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Thought I would have a quick check. Bear in mind that none barring Derby are actually over statutory or presumably EFL deadlines.

Clubs yet to announce, publish or submit to CH for 2020/21...

Barnsley

Birmingham- Although the HKSE numbers usually are quite accurate.

Blackburn- Venkys London Limited but that runs March-March even though it sits above Blackburn.

Bournemouth

Cardiff

Coventry

Derby- Will they ever see the light of day?? Albeit barring any issues this season, the FFP to 2021 is settled. Would be useful to know in terms of what the EFL allowed for Covid costs.

Huddersfield

Luton

Middlesbrough

Nottingham Forest

Preston

QPR

Reading- Though the FFP is settled and ongoing. Would be useful to see to know what the EFL allowed for Covid costs.

Stoke

Swansea

Clubs newly promoted to the Championship last year who haven't

Blackpool

Peterborough

Clubs relegated from the PL last year who haven't

Fulham

Sheffield United

West Brom

Clubs promoted from the Championship who haven't

Watford

Clubs relegated from the Championship who haven't

Rotherham

Sheffield Wednesday

You'd hope that the EFL have a good handle on it of course, numbers wise and expected numbers wise. 

Varied Holding and subsidiary companies are also in the mix, yet to submit. Indeed Sheffield 3 Limited, the company that the stadium was 'purchased'  through, still haven't submitted accounts that were due end of last July I believe.

Edited February 3, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Bristol Rob]

18 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Thought I would have a quick check. Bear in mind that none barring Derby are actually over statutory or presumably EFL deadlines.

Clubs yet to announce, publish or submit to CH for 2020/21...

Barnsley

Birmingham- Although the HKSE numbers usually are quite accurate.

Blackburn- Venkys London Limited but that runs March-March even though it sits above Blackburn.

Bournemouth

Cardiff

Coventry

Derby- Will they ever see the light of day?? Albeit barring any issues this season, the FFP to 2021 is settled. Would be useful to know in terms of what the EFL allowed for Covid costs.

Huddersfield

Luton

Middlesbrough

Nottingham Forest

Preston

QPR

Reading- Though the FFP is settled and ongoing. Would be useful to see to know what the EFL allowed for Covid costs.

Stoke

Swansea

Clubs newly promoted to the Championship last year who haven't

Blackpool

Peterborough

Clubs relegated from the PL last year who haven't

Fulham

Sheffield United

West Brom

Clubs promoted from the Championship who haven't

Watford

Clubs relegated from the Championship who haven't

Rotherham

Sheffield Wednesday

You'd hope that the EFL have a good handle on it of course, numbers wise and expected numbers wise. 

Varied Holding and subsidiary companies are also in the mix, yet to submit. Indeed Sheffield 3 Limited, the company that the stadium was 'purchased'  through, still haven't submitted accounts that were due end of last July I believe.

So who do you expect to be in a similar boat to City?

Would guess Boro (similar size club, similar transfer policy) Forest maybe.

[Mr Popodopolous]

6 hours ago, Bristol Rob said:

So who do you expect to be in a similar boat to City?

Would guess Boro (similar size club, similar transfer policy) Forest maybe.

To which season ie which period? To the combined average of 2020 and 2021 ie to last season, to 2022 or indeed to 2023 next season?

Middlesbrough potentially yes but their amortisation seems to have dropped drastically in recent times, which helps. All the same the 2018/19 profit drops off but if Spence can hold his reported value then as a free transfer, a £12m move to the PL helps a lot in 2022/23.

Stoke surely although there is some uncertainty about how much they have impaired or can impair- they tried to put £30m of transfer fee amortisation still outstanding down to Covid in 2019/20!? Surely that cannot go unchallenged. Even so, that is an FFP loss of £43m 2019/20 alone after Covid claims and usual allowables.

Their limit to 2021 as a relegated side and Covid was complex but an upper loss tariff of £55.5m, this season it falls to £39m- last season was also third and final year of Parachute Payments.

Nottingham Forest are often close to the wire but sold- or is that 'sold' Carvalho to Olympiakos, the owners main club for according to some reports £14m in January.

They often sell youth players legitimately and staying down we could see one of Worrall or Johnson going for an 8 figure fee- reportedly they turned down £15m for the latter in January!

I'd say Cardiff too- but the uncertainty over Sala could swing in their favour. If they win their case they can write £15-20m back to Profit and Loss, reversal of provision and @Hxj reckons it can be the season of the decision. Last seasons accounts will give a better indication.

I think for FFP purposes it should be the season the Provision was made or the season after otherwise that's could be an unbelievable, freakish, outrageous bit of fortune out of a tragedy. They too are on the £55.5m to this season that will fall to £39m next season.

If they stay down, I expect Bournemouth and Fulham could have some issues. Limits for both would drop to £55.5m and in the case of Bournemouth the 3rd year of Parachute Payments of course is markedly lower.

West Brom would also drop to £55.5m but I don't really see them running into FFP issues for a while yet.

Huddersfield would drop to £39m as did Swansea this year and Parachute Payments expire at the same time but I don't see them in FFP trouble.

Reading obviously have their current ongoing issues.

Subject to the precise nature of the rules for relegated clubs, if there is any carry over from the final season ie Relegated, League One, League One then the 2018/19 restated Stadium Profit drops off for Sheffield Wednesday, the new starting point is their 2019/20 loss and whatever their 2020/21 figures was as the starting point- definitely could exceed £39m to next year..

£19m profit and £3m in allowances costs in 2018/19 makes it virtually impossible to fail to 2022 but she that goes?

One to watch in the 3 year period ending in 2023/24 might be Birmingham.

Edited February 4, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

I've a horrible feeling though that ongoing or legacy issues carrying over aside- ie Reading, maybe Sheffield Wednesday due to promotion, player sales, questionable accounting treatments,and reversal of a provision if the case successful that was borne out of a tragedy, we might be the only ones holding the parcel or looking for a seat when the music stops.

Edited February 4, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Strange old system FFP.

Stoke made an FFP loss of about £43m in 2019/20, halved that's £21.5m, £8m in 2018/19 and about £23m on relegation from the PL. Upper Loss Tariff to 2021, £55.5m of which they've used £52.5m.

This drops to £39m this season.

Yet looking at their side tonight..

Ben Wilmot starts, so does PL loanee Harwood-Bellis.

Joe Allen and Nick Powell as part of the CM 3.

That young Aston Villa loanee winger wide of a front 3.

Players such as Liam Moore (one of Reading's top earners), Clucas, Maja on the bench.

Vrancic not even in the 18!!

Whereas we on our £39m limits lost £21m, made a Profit of £15m in 2018/19.

Combined average anything from £10.5-16.5m in the Covid period.

£16.5-22.5m to 2021, 3 year period.

In all probability, an FFP loss of say £18m this season.

£13.5-19.5m this season post transfer business. We're scrambling around for signings in the summer.

Stoke with £52.5m in 2.5 of 3 seasons or £29.5m out of £39m already banked signing players like that!?

Though for completeness, Clucas 2018, Powell 2019 and Allen new deal post relegation..

Edited February 8, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Davefevs]

15 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Strange old system FFP.

Stoke made an FFP loss of about £43m in 2019/20, halved that's £21.5m, £8m in 2018/19 and about £23m on relegation from the PL. Upper Loss Tariff to 2021, £55.5m of which they've used £52.5m.

This drops to £39m this season.

Yet looking at their side tonight..

Ben Wilmot starts, so does PL loanee Harwood-Bellis.

Joe Allen and Nick Powell as part of the CM 3.

That young Aston Villa loanee winger wide of a front 3.

Players such as Liam Moore (one of Reading's top earners), Clucas, Maja on the bench.

Vrancic not even in the 18!!

Whereas we on our £39m limits lost £21m, made a Profit of £15m in 2018/19.

Combined average anything from £10.5-16.5m in the Covid period.

£16.5-22.5m to 2021, 3 year period.

In all probability, an FFP loss of say £18m this season.

£13.5-19.5m this season post transfer business. We're scrambling around for signings in the summer.

Stoke with £52.5m in 2.5 of 3 seasons or £29.5m out of £39m already banked signing players like that!?

Though for completeness, Clucas 2018, Powell 2019 and Allen new deal post relegation..

Don’t forget FFP allowances.  Stoke are Cat 1.

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Don’t forget FFP allowances.  Stoke are Cat 1.

That's true. Perhaps I have underestimated that side, although I have a total of £7m per season for their FFP costs- my estimates are net of ie after that, plus the Covid Costs/claims including of course that £30m Covid Impairment.

Unadjusted, their losses would be:

2017/18- £30m loss 

2018/19- £15m loss

2019-20- £88m loss

2020/21- ??

2021/22-??

£123m loss albeit pre allowance, pre Covid. Upper Loss limit to 2021, £55.5m, 2019/20, 2020/21 averaged.

Us

2017/18- £25m loss

2018/19- £10m profit

2019/20- £10m loss

2020/21- £38.4m loss

£53.4m pre allowance, pre Covid allowance loss. £39m Upper Loss Limit, 2019/20 and 2020/21 averaged.

Lewis Baker, that's another Stoke purchased in January.

Edited February 8, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Davefevs]

38 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

That's true. Perhaps I have underestimated that side, although I have a total of £7m per season for their FFP costs- my estimates are net of ie after that, plus the Covid Costs/claims including of course that £30m Covid Impairment.

Unadjusted, their losses would be:

2017/18- £30m loss 

2018/19- £15m loss

2019-20- £88m loss

2020/21- ??

2021/22-??

£123m loss albeit pre allowance, pre Covid. Upper Loss limit to 2021, £55.5m, 2019/20, 2020/21 averaged.

Us

2017/18- £25m loss

2018/19- £10m profit

2019/20- £10m loss

2020/21- £38.4m loss

£53.4m pre allowance, pre Covid allowance loss. £39m Upper Loss Limit, 2019/20 and 2020/21 averaged.

That £88m does stick out like a sore thumb doesn’t it.  Will be very interesting to see how the EFL treat the section of their return for Covid allowances.  Revenues down £20m on 18/19, I’m ok with in principle, but the impairment of players?  Just because it’s in the accounts doesn’t mean it’s allowed in the FFP return.  If it is, then can other clubs undertake a retrospective impairment?

[Mr Popodopolous]

7 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

That £88m does stick out like a sore thumb doesn’t it.  Will be very interesting to see how the EFL treat the section of their return for Covid allowances.  Revenues down £20m on 18/19, I’m ok with in principle, but the impairment of players?  Just because it’s in the accounts doesn’t mean it’s allowed in the FFP return.  If it is, then can other clubs undertake a retrospective impairment?

Agreed, as far as I can see no other club in the top 2 divisions wrote down- Everton aside- players and attributed it to Covid. Talking 2019/20.

There might have been some regular impairments but that's normal accounting treatment, through the FFP calcs. Attributing it to Covid is completely different.

Covid claims, I made it about £8m in regular Covid losses ie revenue, paying staff instead of utilising furlough etc. Fine- but that £30m is mad. Despite that it's still a £43m FFP loss in 2019/20 alone. 

One club in the Championship of course haven't submitted accounts for almost 3 years..they as part of the Agreed Decision are not to impair or revalue players except without permission of the EFL.

Them aside, if accepted in Stoke's case what's good for one...

Edited February 8, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Davefevs]

3 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Agreed, as far as I can see no other club in the top 2 divisions wrote down- Everton aside- players and attributed it to Covid. Talking 2019/20.

There might have been some regular impairments but that's normal accounting treatment, through the FFP calcs. Attributing it to Covid is completely different.

Covid claims, I made it about £8m in regular Covid losses ie revenue, paying staff instead of utilising furlough etc. Fine- but that £30m is mad. Despite that it's still a £43m FFP loss in 2019/20 alone. 

One club in the Championship of course haven't submitted accounts for almost 3 years..they as part of the Agreed Decision are not to impair or revalue players except without permission of the EFL.

Them aside, if accepted in Stoke's case what's good for one...

Stoke have £15.5m in PPs in their yet to be published 20/21 accounts.  Will help a bit.

I do agree, I think they are the most likely to be sanctioned…hence them keen to back Richard Gould….but their probs are this season….whereas others is next season.

Edited February 8, 2022 by Davefevs

[Mr Popodopolous]

15 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Stoke have £15.5m in PPs in their yet to be published 20/21 accounts.  Will help a bit.

I do agree, I think they are the most likely to be sanctioned…hence them keen to back Richard Gould….but their probs are this season….whereas others is next season.

That can be complicated a bit by the fact that central awards and distributions are paid at certain times in the years though the aggregate amount (subject to Covid rebates) will be the same. Won't be evenly spread but might be £20m as opposed to £15.5m in Year 3, which helps in the short-term, as a few million less in 2019/20.

To 2022 seems like a definite issue for Stoke.

Even to 2021, they need to cut the P&S loss by a minimum of £37m.

2017/18- P&S Loss £23m

2018/19- P&S Loss £8m

2019/20- P&S Loss £43m

Halved it's an average of £21.5m.

Means they need an average of £3m season just gone, so not exceeding £6m in total.

Everton in the PL are in a similar position, according to some calcs I've seen online:

2017/18- P&S PROFIT £8m

2018/19- P&S Loss £88m

Means they need not to exceed a total, combined before halving P&S loss of £50m across 2019/20 and 2020/22.

2019/20- P&S Loss Well it might be £52m??

If the calculations I've seen have some accuracy, they need to transform that into a £2m P&S profit last season, but the PL don't seem that worked up about it. Loss limit in PL £105m rather than our £39m.

[Mr Popodopolous]

As for our League, like I posted a week or so ago- same for PL too tbh, no new accounts released since.

End of February, early March we should see...

Barnsley

Cardiff

Coventry

QPR

Stoke

Plus Birmingham Sports Holdings 6 month results to end of December 2021.

Sure everyone reading this thread knows but basically you don't need 9 months, not in the slightest when all said and done. Just clubs choose to utilise this at CH as you have 9 months after the end of Reporting Period.

Loopholes can extend it further.

Edited February 9, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Davefevs]

 

Edited February 9, 2022 by Davefevs

[Mr Popodopolous]

Had a quick look. From an FFP/a P&S perspective no issue barring them going nuts, would arise until 2023/24 IMO.

The fact that their wage bill was as low as £20-21m as recently as 2019/20 is also fairly notable. If they don't go up this or next year then I assume some players will be sold, contracts not renewed etc.

Edited February 10, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Had a quick look. From an FFP/a P&S perspective no issue barring them going nuts, would arise until 2023/24 IMO.

The fact that their wage bill was as low as £20-21m as recently as 2019/20 is also fairly notable. If they don't go up this or next year then I assume some players will be sold, contracts not renewed etc.

pretty decent!

 

[Davefevs]

@Mr Popodopolousa Q for you.

Are Reading still working to a 3 year cycle, or are they on single year monitoring?  I’m never quite sure what happens.  Ta

@Beni71

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

@Mr Popodopolousa Q for you.

Are Reading still working to a 3 year cycle, or are they on single year monitoring?  I’m never quite sure what happens.  Ta

@Beni71

I believe the principle of reset kicks in after a breach.

What isn't made clear is whether that means it goes aggregate...if aggregate is equal to or above £26m then £13m it is this and next season or if it's a case of £13m, £13m...in season 1 you lose I dunno £6m FFP wise and in season 2 it's let's say £30m- I'm using the Renhe Sports Management as my basis here- therefore it's £6m + £13m=£20m target for this year and then £6m target for next season...but that way could throw up some weird outcomes and calculations in the present and near future. Think their P&S loss was about £6m in 2018/19...

If it's the latter it can be unwieldy- Birmingham's was easy as both 2016/17 and 2017/18 exceeded £13m in P&S losses hence £13m and £13m.

If they are not using the Renhe Sports Management as the basis for P&S it's easier to calculate but given it sits above Reading as the top company, would be a bit surprised if not. From the Agreed Decision it doesn't seem to delve into further detail- so it could be either £13m or £20m this season.

In the event that they do very well and get their P&S loss down to say £10m this season through wage cuts and player sales then they would be able to lose as much as £16m next season. I believe their P&S exclusions to be £5m per season so that'd be an accounting loss of say £21m.

Good summary below too.

https://star-reading.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/211124-Reading-FC-EFL-decision-STAR-assessment.pdf

Edited February 10, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Davefevs]

Ta, so to summarise.

Club X went over £39m…penalised appropriately.

The season after that cycle, their 2 “old” seasons are capped at £13m each, therefore “new year 1” has to be within £13m.  Cycle of “old season” (£13m), plus “new season 1&2” (£26m) - new seasons 1&2 could be £5m +£21m for example.  The next cycle is new seasons 1+2+3.

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Ta, so to summarise.

Club X went over £39m…penalised appropriately.

The season after that cycle, their 2 “old” seasons are capped at £13m each, therefore “new year 1” has to be within £13m.  Cycle of “old season” (£13m), plus “new season 1&2” (£26m) - new seasons 1&2 could be £5m +£21m for example.  The next cycle is new seasons 1+2+3.

 

Feels like the Devil is/can be in the detail tbh subject to how the losses fell.

Illustrative example, Derby after accounts restated and their Agreed Decision, would have had Principle of Reset.

It'd be a fair assumption that both of 2015/16 and 2016/17 would have individually exceeded £13m. Easy. £13m target in 2018, £2m of £13m FFP losses.

Therefore for 2018/19 it must not exceed £24m, it did hence the £11.72m overspend.

A club then if this is right benefit further from reset are that £2m/£13m remains on the books but that £35.72m loss is again reset to £13m.

Therefore Derby's target combined average wise is about £24m- which again they breached albeit just a 3 point deduction for that one.

If my understanding is broadly correct, then to lose £14m x 3 say would be worse for a club than say £1m, £10m and £31m as the former gives a club the neat £13m target whereas the latter gives the club  £10m so that's an extra £3m if headroom for Year 3 and an automatic reset- both reset to Year 3, so it'd be...

(£14m- now £13m)

(£14m- now £13m)

Vs

(£10m- now £10m)

£31m- now £13m)

Of course there could be points for surging losses and other aggravating factors but as far as the basics go..far better to take a 2 year aggregate I think.

Edited February 10, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Shows the importance of the Stadium Sale too as by my rough calculations based on that Agreed Decision and principle of reset Derby would have breached by:

£7.76m to 2017- 6 points

£29m to 2018- 12 points

£20m+ to 2019- 12 points

£11-12m to 2021- 8 points

Max the EFL could have pushed for with it was 17 points, in a counterfactual without one well up to 44 points based on loss tariff!!

Still let's hope if it goes back to Derby for £20m then they perhaps look at the 3 years to 2018 in a new light.

Edited February 10, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Will actually revisit my numbers, got them wrong!

3 years to 2017- Aggregate £46.76m loss, unaffected by Stadium sale. 6 points. 

3 years to 2018- Aggregate £28.12m loss but includes IIRC £39m Stadium profit. Reset means £2.12/13m used up but add £39m and that's £67.12m 3 year loss or a £28.12m overspend- 12 point deduction.

3 years to 2019- Both prior seasons reset to £13m but by process of elimination, if nothing else changes then it's a £61.6m 3 year loss- 12 point deduction.

4 years what with years 3 and 4 averaged. Both prior seasons reset to £13m. Overspend was £1.96m but to add £10.88m to it, it's a £12.84m overspend. 8-9 point deduction.

38-39 points in total in that scenario instead of the maximum of 17 that could have been pushed for in reality..

[Mr Popodopolous]

Thought I would do a bit of a counterfactual in a world where Profits on fixed assets didn't count towards P&S. Indeed until 2015/16 and now from the present they did and do not- and with UEFA they never did!

I've gone on about Derby a lot but we do forget that several other clubs have done this.

Quote

Aston Villa

I will include as acceptable to a reasonable extent and certainly for the purposes of this bit, the HS2 Revenue. All the same I made it even including the stadium sale an aggregate 3 year loss of £32-33m to 2019.

£36,374,000 was the Profit on Villa Park- that would be in this more sane world, a P&S loss of £68-69m and a £30m overspend with a certain 12 point deduction. Or perhaps they would have been restricted in their expenditure quite severely in 2018/19- the season of promotion which would have impacted them on the pitch.

Quote

Birmingham

This would have been a breach that followed a breach.  Maybe an £8-8.7m overspend BUT remember they could have sold Che Adams by June 2019 and that would have filled the hole- as it was he was sold in July 2019 and the profit counted in 2019/20.  Loss with stadium sale- £8,444,000, without £25,629,000 but they had about £4m per season in P&S allowances. As it was, what with Covid extending the period and combining the average, getting that fee for Bellingham and so on they wouldn't have failed to 2021 IMO but without all of that, could have been very difficult to balance things. Theoretically though, a 2nd breach of between £8-9m probably. Although lop £1.25m per season off rent and that maybe a £6.75-7.7m breach.

Quote

Reading FC

Theirs is quite complex. Because in 2017/18, they had the club accounts and thereafter Renhe Sports Management limited. All the same, profit from Fixed Assets? Most definitely did!

To June 2016- roughly a P&S Loss of £10m.

To June 2017- About breakeven P&S wise- ie Accounting Loss-Deductions=P&S.

To June 2018- P&S Loss of £22,471,090.

Aggregate about £32-33m. To June 2016, it drops off.

To June 2019- In reality, a P&S loss of about £6.75m, but in this scenario you lop off the Profit on disposal of Fixed Assets- then you're looking at a P&S loss in 1 year of £36,683,458.

That's about £20m over limits and a 12 point deduction to June 2019 or beyond that, with perhaps more for surging losses- see Birmingham's 2018 case.

To June 2020, well it would have required player sale profits or cost cutting of- well of that £45m loss I estimate £5m in FFP costs and £2m in Covid costs...£25m or carried over to 2021 what with the combined average, well I dread to think.  Even in a scenario whereby they breakeven P&S wise in 2020/21, about £12m in improvement or so required just to stand still. As we know they breached by £18-19m to 2021 in reality so...Think it was £1.5m per year rent- lop that off too but wouldn't impact the overspend to 2019 or maybe 2021.

Quote

Sheffield Wednesday

Firstly, the stated reason that their deduction was halved was due to the intent to sell the stadium to rectify matters. Ridiculous as they botched it but that get out wouldn't have been there so surely a -12 or close to for the 3 years to 2018.

Rolling it forward wouldn't have worked either- well it would, but it would have been pointless from this angle as with all Fixed Asset Profits excluded from P&S. To 2019 therefore, even with the principle of reset they breach again based on things not taking a different path. Steve Bruce compensation appeared to have been about £6.47m but I make their P&S costs about £2.5m-3m per season. £16-16.5m P&S loss in the £13m target year...further 4 point deduction, maybe one back for improving losses in that season....

...Followed by perhaps more to the present- the period even with reset (again) to 2020 or as it turned out 2021, looks tricky...although lop £2.5m per year in rent off too. Their 2018 accounts were 14 months, maybe a 2-3 point deduction instead.

Would have been interesting to see tbh.

Edited February 12, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Jon Lansdown has been quoted as saying that up to seven clubs could fail P&S/FFP in addition to us, presumably over this and next season. A few candidates and for and against, albeit brief summaries.

Bournemouth

Their spending speaks for itself! Granted Parachute Payments, big player sales too but a pretty low regular income basis. Upper Loss Loss Limit to this season of £72m and Year 2 of Parachutes- they shouldn't fail to 2022 but promotion feels a must.

No promotion and it's a double whammy...Upper Loss Limit drops to £55.5m to 2023 and Parachute Payments fall to the 3rd and final year which is markedly lower than the 2nd. Drop of £15-25m is it?

Not yet seen 2020/21 accounts but we know they made a Profit on disposal of players of £50m last season.

Verdict: Only really likely to be in trouble if they blow promotion!

Cardiff

Probably fine to this year. Tight but fine, don't see them smashing the £55.5m Upper Limit to 2021 or 2022. Last year was the 2nd and final year of Parachute Payments.

Next year this Upper Loss Limit falls to £39m. Starting point a loss and a fall of £16.5m in allowances. Much might depend on Sala, because if they win their case at the CAS perhaps this provision can be written back to Profit and Loss THIS season, that's a £15-20m one off boost and could smooth things reasonably as far forward as the cycle ending in 2023/24. Still not seen 2021 accounts.

Verdict: Much may depend on Sala, I'm unsure about how it fits with the integrity of FFP allowing it in any year except the year of the Provision.

Fulham

Like Bournemouth, a £72m Upper Loss limit and unlike Bournemouth a wider income base and Year 1 not 2 of Parachute Payments. Otoh, they have certainly sold less players.

Of course, stay down and there is a two-fold queeze, firstly Year 2 lower than Year 1 of Parachute Payments, secondly the Upper Limit drops to £55.5m as opposed to £72m- could they be beginning with a bigger loss than now also? Still not seen 2021 accounts.

Verdict: Surely only in trouble if not promoted- and look at their form, 1 defeat in 20 League games! Bit of a cut above right now tbh.

Middlesbrough

I don't see them being in trouble to 2022, it's to next season where the problem arises IMO. Profit in 2018/19 drops off to be replaced by a loss.

Promotion is one way out, player sales another- Djed Spence linked with PL for £12m, apparently they value him at £15m. As a free transfer that is pure profit. They have quite a low amortisation bill plus some academy products who if push comes to shove maybe they sell- still not seen 2021 accounts. 

Verdict: After all Gibson has said and done, surely not?? They seem to have two exit routes as well.

Nottingham Forest

Much like Middlesbrough, although they always seen much closer to the line. Selling Matty Cash probably saved them to 2021, Carvalho potentially this year! Value Brennan Johnson at £20m, he might go if they stay down. Other academy product Joe Worrall often linked with PL, for 8 figures. No sign yet of 2021 accounts.

Verdict: Always close to the wire but promotion would see them okay. Alternatively player sales, although could Carvalho to Olympiakos be investigated if a large fee? Both clubs owned by same guy!

Reading

We already know they failed to 2021, likely cannot exceed £20-21m FFP losses to this year in principle of reset or it's another 6 points, and further charges if appropriate. Range of hazards that could see 6 become 12 just like that! No 2021 accounts yet.

Verdict: Very much an ongoing matter.

Stoke

Upper Loss limit to 2021 £55.5m, to this year £39m. Parachute Payments ended last year ie was 3rd and final year, very controversial £30m Impairment put down to Covid- not yet seen 2021 accounts but their fans seem quite relaxed. May or may not have 'sold' Fixed Assets late May 2021.

Verdict: Surely strong candidates. Have to be serious questions even if the £30m Impairment stands.

Edited February 16, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Davefevs]

My list was:

Forest

Boro

Stoke

Reading

Cardiff

Brum

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

I had considered Birmingham but I think for them, it's more likely in the 3 years to 2023/24...although their 6 month accounts to the end of December 2021 will give us a strong idea.

A sell on clause for Bellingham could help them greatly, either for FFP or extra spending power- unsure how much it is though.

[Club and Country]

Talksport and Simon Jordan talking about us and the points deduction at the moment…

[lenred]

6 minutes ago, Club and Country said:

Talksport and Simon Jordan talking about us and the points deduction at the moment…

I only caught the ass end of it after seeing your post.  He’s obviously keen for us to get a points deduction. Really doesn’t like us does he (or mores the point Lansdown!) 

Edited February 17, 2022 by lenred

[Mr Popodopolous]

Just looking around here and there- Stoke fans or the Stoke local press don't seem all that concerned, Cardiff fans haven't expressed much concern either about a potential overspend and penalties.

[Mr Popodopolous]

I might also add, on Stoke- plenty on us and I fear if we don't sell players then trouble is ahead.

I did some estimates on their Covid position- prior to Covid these remain IRL but subsequently with this news...

£88m LOSS

MINUS- £7M in allowable costs.

Minus- well it's £5m over 2 years, should we credit £5m to Year 1 and disregard Year 2 or spread it evenly over the term- let's say £2.5m.

Although you also disregard the £30m in Covid Impairment or can you add that back to the Profit and Loss??

One early and quick estimate is a rise to £48.5m in 2019/20 alone.

Upper Loss Limit seems to be £55.5m still...which added to £23m + £8m=needing no more than a £0.5m FFP loss in 2020/21. Might not have that quite right tbh...

How do we account for their £30m in claimed Covid amortisation Impairment, is the big question in light of these amendments.

Edited February 17, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Nottingham Forest. No accounts yet but I wonder how their figures look in light of this £5m Covid cap.

Let's assume £2.5m per season spread evenly over the 2 seasons. Frankly £5m over 2 seasons is £5m over 2 seasons, regardless of how you slice it.

Remember too, loan write offs are excluded from P&S. After say 50% of Covid allowance but before usual allowables I make it £19.5-20m before 2020/21 arises. SwissRamble has detail! £6m a year in allowables maybe?

Middlesbrough. £35m or thereabouts in 2019/20 alone...SwissRamble estimated £4m in Covid Costs for the season alone, £7m in P&S.  £24m but then if you add £1.5m pro rata back in then their accounts look a bit more interesting though a £9m P&S profit in 2018/19 might make it okay to this season!!

That extra £2.5m for this season will be welcome for everyone (even Derby and Reading).

Cardiff fans are very bullish but surely Year 2 of Parachute Payments to Solidarity is a plummet of £30m in a season. With a £55.5m Upper Loss Limit to this year, I expect them to be fine but to next year this drops to £39m.

2018/19- £35m, PL

2019/20- £13m, Championship

2020/21- £13m, Championship

2021/22- £13m, Championship

£35m + £13m + £13m + £13m/4 x 3=£55.5m.

Then

2019/20- £13m, Championship

2020/21- £13m, Championship

2021/22- £13m, Championship

2022/23- £13m, Championship

£13m + £13m + £13m + £13m=£52m/4 x 3=£39m.

Edited February 18, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Can't speak for anyone else but save for those who have fallen foul to this season, I see a lot less chat on rival boards about the issue interestingly.

Now part of ths is my fault, I have banged on about it for some time

Fans aside however, what us striking is how little other clubs and execs are talking about it. 

We've speculated who may have a tight spot or breach next year but a few strong candidates for this appear not to acknowledge the risk publicly. .compare and contrast with Richard Gould and to an extent Jon Lansdown.

Gould especially has been openly speaking about the risk of points deductions. He's the only executive to do so this year however of those who may breach.

Oh yeah in our worked example, the Covid losses might read as:

£5m over 2 seasons- Automatic

Conservative- a further £5-7m in lost revenue.

Moderate- A further £8-10m in lost revenue

High end- A further £12-13m in lost revenue.

Baseline £5m, thereafter clubs can claim.

Edited February 22, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[NcnsBcfc]

On 17/02/2022 at 19:12, Mr Popodopolous said:

I might also add, on Stoke- plenty on us and I fear if we don't sell players then trouble is ahead.

I did some estimates on their Covid position- prior to Covid these remain IRL but subsequently with this news...

£88m LOSS

MINUS- £7M in allowable costs.

Minus- well it's £5m over 2 years, should we credit £5m to Year 1 and disregard Year 2 or spread it evenly over the term- let's say £2.5m.

Although you also disregard the £30m in Covid Impairment or can you add that back to the Profit and Loss??

One early and quick estimate is a rise to £48.5m in 2019/20 alone.

Upper Loss Limit seems to be £55.5m still...which added to £23m + £8m=needing no more than a £0.5m FFP loss in 2020/21. Might not have that quite right tbh...

How do we account for their £30m in claimed Covid amortisation Impairment, is the big question in light of these amendments.

Thanks @Mr Popodopolous.

I was going to ask about this concept of covid impairment.

Seems to me that a number of clubs that have published their results so far, have included large amounts under this form of proviso (Stoke and Derby spring to mind, but there will be others of course).

Stoke seem very bullish that this will get through, even after the EFL passed their own regulations update on the £5m impairment.

I'm confused as to how any club next year can be bought up on breaching FFP if others have just thrown caution to the wind, and come up with their own figures.

If that was the case, let's intergrate our own £20m loss into our own figures, and go along the Stoke et al lines.

Or am i missing something?

[Greedo]

HL taken a battering 

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-02-22/hargreaves-sinks-most-on-record-as-pandemic-recovery-saps-demand

[Mr Popodopolous]

43 minutes ago, NcnsBcfc said:

Thanks @Mr Popodopolous.

I was going to ask about this concept of covid impairment.

Seems to me that a number of clubs that have published their results so far, have included large amounts under this form of proviso (Stoke and Derby spring to mind, but there will be others of course).

Stoke seem very bullish that this will get through, even after the EFL passed their own regulations update on the £5m impairment.

I'm confused as to how any club next year can be bought up on breaching FFP if others have just thrown caution to the wind, and come up with their own figures.

If that was the case, let's intergrate our own £20m loss into our own figures, and go along the Stoke et al lines.

Or am i missing something?

Those were Stoke's numbers for 2019/20 alone, £30m in Player Impairment!? On another thread, @AnotherDerbyFan says that as per Rick Parry the £5m is initial ie free to all, but that further loss claims can be put in and presumably assessed later. ie Everyone gets £5m in the 2 years and £2.5m this season, no questions asked- so that £5m cap seems fluid and that's fine for typical revenue hits- Gate receipts, season tickets, TV cash, if a club doesn't utilise furlough the cost of paying wages throughout and so on.

Derby have already been punished but haven't released any accounts publicly for never mind last year, but going on 3 years!? Last released April 2019, for account to June 2018- goes for club, parent, top co and all subsidiaries or similar.

Stoke however are a totally different kettle of fish. £7-8m in usual looking Covid costs which is fine but the £30m Player Impairment looks all wrong in light of the EFL vote last week.

It's possible that they will try and add more Covid Player Impairment to their 2020/21 accounts which are due at CH within a week or so- it's £30m and counting! They are the one and only club at our level (Everton in PL) to have done this in 2019/20.

I think being conservative our genuine 2 seasons revenue hit could be considered £10-12m, at the other end the most perhaps £18m. Stoke laid out their normal categories which seemed alright but it's the Covid Player Impairment I have a great issue with at this stage..

This approach seeks to exclude the amortisation from the FFP/P&S calculations entirely. If Impaired in the usual way it would turn a £43m P&S loss in 2019/2020 into a £73m one. Spreading it back across 2-3 years would be complex but perhaps a fairer reflection, they can put x in the accounts but as we've seen with Derby, the accounts can be reviewed and if required, revised for consistency from an FFP perspective.

I have long had a slight nagging feeling that club after club will have attempted a loophole or lucked out outrageously (Cardiff Sala write back if they win their case) and then we will be left carrying the can for an easy to verify fail), along with perhaps Reading and if it follows them down or they come up, maybe Sheffield Wednesday (again).

If what the Derby fan says is accurate and it's £5m plus application to include verifiable losses...how it might look for us additional loss application wise over the last 2 seasons before this.

£5-7m- Conservative

£8-10m- Moderate

£12-13m- Top end

This is regular revenue falls, not cynical nonsense such as Covid Player Impairment that Stoke are suggesting.

Edited February 22, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Davefevs]

Mr Pops - worth listening to Kieran’s latest pod…out yesterday.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Thanks Dave.

Haven't listened to podcasts for a while but will make time today or tomorrow.

[NcnsBcfc]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Mr Pops - worth listening to Kieran’s latest pod…out yesterday.

What does he deal with on it @Davefevs?

[Davefevs]

Just now, NcnsBcfc said:

What does he deal with on it @Davefevs?

Bit about the new covid allowances, but also Derby, that they are whining without justification.

[NcnsBcfc]

2 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Those were Stoke's numbers for 2019/20 alone, £30m in Player Impairment!? On another thread, @AnotherDerbyFan says that as per Rick Parry the £5m is initial ie free to all, but that further loss claims can be put in and presumably assessed later. ie Everyone gets £5m in the 2 years and £2.5m this season, no questions asked- so that £5m cap seems fluid and that's fine for typical revenue hits- Gate receipts, season tickets, TV cash, if a club doesn't utilise furlough the cost of paying wages throughout and so on.

Derby have already been punished but haven't released any accounts publicly for never mind last year, but going on 3 years!? Last released April 2019, for account to June 2018- goes for club, parent, top co and all subsidiaries or similar.

Stoke however are a totally different kettle of fish. £7-8m in usual looking Covid costs which is fine but the £30m Player Impairment looks all wrong in light of the EFL vote last week.

It's possible that they will try and add more Covid Player Impairment to their 2020/21 accounts which are due at CH within a week or so- it's £30m and counting! They are the one and only club at our level (Everton in PL) to have done this in 2019/20.

I think being conservative our genuine 2 seasons revenue hit could be considered £10-12m, at the other end the most perhaps £18m. Stoke laid out their normal categories which seemed alright but it's the Covid Player Impairment I have a great issue with at this stage..

This approach seeks to exclude the amortisation from the FFP/P&S calculations entirely. If Impaired in the usual way it would turn a £43m P&S loss in 2019/2020 into a £73m one. Spreading it back across 2-3 years would be complex but perhaps a fairer reflection, they can put x in the accounts but as we've seen with Derby, the accounts can be reviewed and if required, revised for consistency from an FFP perspective.

I have long had a slight nagging feeling that club after club will have attempted a loophole or lucked out outrageously (Cardiff Sala write back if they win their case) and then we will be left carrying the can for an easy to verify fail), along with perhaps Reading and if it follows them down or they come up, maybe Sheffield Wednesday (again).

If what the Derby fan says is accurate and it's £5m plus application to include verifiable losses...how it might look for us additional loss application wise over the last 2 seasons before this.

£5-7m- Conservative

£8-10m- Moderate

£12-13m- Top end

This is regular revenue falls, not cynical nonsense such as Covid Player Impairment that Stoke are suggesting.

This is the issue though. If a large number are going to try to pull a metaphorical fast one. I'm not sure how the EFL can apply a ruling; when so much is up in the air.

It's not like the Derby/Reading situations that are a lot more clear cut in a way.

[Davefevs]

Preston’s results in.

No FFP panic at Deepdale.  They even got a Business Interruption Insurance payout!

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Had a quick look at it early- think Blackburn may have had that too, we'll see in the fullness of time but don't think many clubs did take it on!

Another interesting item when I looked a bit further down appears to be rental income, wonder what that relates to... as for FFP, reckon their allowable costs must be £2-3m per year? They are not really a club I've considered in depth because I've never had them down as likely to breach thusfar. Still don't.

Last time SwissRamble assessed them properly, he had P&S allowances at £2m per season. £2-3m unless any significant changes since seems okay.

Edited February 23, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous