The Championship FFP Thread (Merged)

[JoeAman08]

Leeds posted 64m loss last season. How did that come into play over their 3 season average? Doesn’t matter because it paid off in the end. 

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, JoeAman08 said:

Leeds posted 64m loss last season. How did that come into play over their 3 season average? Doesn’t matter because it paid off in the end. 

I find it hard to believe / understand how this didn’t warrant an investigation when they submitted predicted accounts last March.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Those are huge losses and as it goes I'm a bit surprised given all their sales of players- Peacock-Farrell, Jansson, Clarke, Roofe and there were more- in Summer 2019 that the Profit on Disposal isn't higher than £10-11m.

I digress, their losses are MAJOR but not necessarily FFP breaching having had a look but not in depth.

For a start, promotion costs ie Bonuses and I guess if fees due to clubs if and only if promotion achieved are excluded. Believe that these were in the region of £20-25m. They weren't stated but 2018/19 Accounts for contingent liabilities in the event of Promotion had it in that ballpark.

Then their Accounts were to July as opposed to the usual June to take account of the extended season. 

Last July, it stated in Ahead of The Game £19m and £5m due to Promotion.

Also I noted in their P&L £7m in Broadcasting Rebate. This would be the Sky Rebate and arguably a Covid cost as without Covid they wouldn't have extended Reporting Period to July and it wouldn't be a cost that would be there as no Rebate.

Maybe £30m off already.

Then the Costs of Covid. Says Insurance paid out £2.5m owing to lost Revenue, though £2.5m seems conservative to me. I'd have thought more like £5m tbh.

Then there was the agreed rollup by clubs of two years into one. Irrespective standalone I think they're close but not quite over. However without promotion, major cutbacks would have been required.

Think their Allowable Costs £5-6m per year.

Edited April 4, 2021 by Mr Popodopolous

[downendcity]

7 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I find it hard to believe / understand how this didn’t warrant an investigation when they submitted predicted accounts last March.

I find it hard to believe that you find it hard to believe this didn’t warrant an investigation when they submitted predicted accounts last March.  

It appears to be, once again,  the application of the “big club” coefficient (otherwise known as the Villa protocol). This  ensures that , despite all that the ffp rules  might indicate regarding penalties for breaching ffp,  no embarrassment will be caused to any “big club” ( and the EFL) in the season that they secure promotion, notwithstanding what their accounts/projected accounts might indicate.

Of course, the Vila protocol was complicated by their use of the Morris manoeuvre. This is similar, but different,  to the Heimlich manoeuvre - the Heimlich manouvre relieves choking on something difficult to swallow, whereas the morris manoeuvre causes choking on something difficult to swallow, namely the accepted valuation of  stadium sold by an owner to himself.

[Hxj]

20 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I find it hard to believe / understand how this didn’t warrant an investigation when they submitted predicted accounts last March.

It may well of done.  However as there is now no FFP test for 2019/20 then they can't fail ...

As @Mr Popodopolous says they have also thrown the kitchen sink at the accounts and altered the accounting date so difficult to really tell what is happening.  My particular favourite is including a provision for the refund of Premier League TV receipts of £7 million, where the original Premier League TV receipts don't obviously appear in the accounts ...

 

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Yep, the Rebate appearing in 2019/20 is a bit odd...

Had they stayed down then no more Bielsa and his team, no more Phillips. Thats just for starters I expect.

Also worth noting that the 13 month account vs 12, without Covid and also without promotion you knock several million off the wage bill and 1/13 off the amortisation. Definitely not a Covid cost but 12 month accounts would paint a slightly better picture.

I read bits of it again, that £2.5m Insurance payout was for Events etc alone. Lost matchday revenue etc maybe similar again...?

I think they would have been just the right side of the line but significant cutbacks, downsizing with Bielsa and Phillips gone to name two.

[Hxj]

A clever move by the EFL in putting all those with no accounts submitted onto an Embargo.

It gives anyone who is a bit slow two months to file the accounts, agree their FFP position and move on.  It neatly avoids a club running into the 2021/22 season having bought a bunch of players without having sorted 2019/20.

Any club not submitting accounts will be deliberately doing so.

As to the claim of 'Financial Armageddon' well it is the Daily Mail.

[Mr Popodopolous]

There are a few angles here.

Some of them will be for late submission- see Coventry, Huddersfield and Luton. I can't see them threatening the FFP limits for varying reasons.

Some of them will be late submission but late submission for a reason as you say @Hxj . ie Deliberately doing so. That could be lifted but lead to further complications down the line if late accounts show them in breach?

Sheffield Wednesday, I have read in Matt Hughes Ahead of the Game column that the EFL are looking at the valuation of Hillsborough- an adjustment there could well change their FFP position and tbh I think it's overvalued. Also mentioned Reading though Madjeski Stadium given built 1997, given location near London I don't see as excessive though the rise from £26.5m to £37.5m in a year feels suspect? Given in 2017/18 it sold to Renhe then Renhe sold it in 2018/19- you can't include them both in FFP, one or the other? Renhe is the company directly above Reading FC.

Actually an argument to exclude Hillsborough entirely IMO.

Anyway I digress, some of those clubs will be Soft Embargo for FFP rather than purely late submission based reasons- here is an interesting line from the article:

Quote

The transfer window does not reopen until the summer. Some believe clubs are taking the penalty now hoping that they will be in a position to trade their way out of embargo when it reopens.

Take it now as banking on hitting financial targets and showing within limits and if you take Soft Embargo now you have a bit more flexibility to trade but trade with that Target and deadline looming large.

[Mr Popodopolous]

This guy is out of touch- Special Pleading maybe.

 

[Hxj]

44 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

The transfer window does not reopen until the summer. Some believe clubs are taking the penalty now hoping that they will be in a position to trade their way out of embargo when it reopens.

This completely misrepresents what has happened.  The EFL are just firing a warning shot across the bows of those who haven't submitted final accounts.  Currently there is no real penalty just the inability to sign out of contract players.  All those clubs who want to, will be able to submit final accounts and agree their FFP position by the beginning of June at which point their embargo will be lifted.

If any club can't or wont do that their embargo will stay.  At which point I hope that they will remain or become complete embargoes until the posiiton is resolved.

I doubt there will be much sympathy from Messrs Lansdown, Gibson and the other 12 who have complied so far.

 

 

PS I understand that the quote is not from @Mr Popodopolous it just appeared like that!

Edited April 6, 2021 by Hxj

[Mr Popodopolous]

32 minutes ago, Hxj said:

This completely misrepresents what has happened.  The EFL are just firing a warning shot across the bows of those who haven't submitted final accounts.  Currently there is no real penalty just the inability to sign out of contract players.  All those clubs who want to, will be able to submit final accounts and agree their FFP position by the beginning of June at which point their embargo will be lifted.

If any club can't or wont do that their embargo will stay.  At which point I hope that they will remain or become complete embargoes until the posiiton is resolved.

I doubt there will be much sympathy from Messrs Lansdown, Gibson and the other 12 who have complied so far.

 

 

PS I understand that the quote is not from @Mr Popodopolous it just appeared like that!

Always thought a Soft Embargo was a bit of a pre-emptive holding position, or has been used as such in the past.

If their final Accounts submission shows a Projected breach- and there are both Projected for this season and actual for last submitted in March unless the Projected requirement has been waived for now, no reason at all to lift the Embargo surely- hold it in place until Reporting Period done and then assess whether they've sold sufficient players and made sufficient cutbacks in order to present compliant accounts- is there something I'm missing?

Thought a few Scenarios might go something like this:

1. Late Submissions=Embargo until such time as Submissions completed...
2. ...Submit in Good Time but Showing a Projected Breach, albeit with e.g. Player Sales in the Summer to make it up=Embargo until Sales completed and Breach rectified...
3. ...Submit Late, but eventually Submit=Embargo lifted- but Accounts show potential FFP issues- Soft Embargo back on as a Holding Position?

Edited April 6, 2021 by Mr Popodopolous

[1960maaan]

6 minutes ago, Hxj said:

This completely misrepresents what has happened.  The EFL are just firing a warning shot across the bows of those who haven't submitted final accounts.  Currently there is no real penalty just the inability to sign out of contract players.  All those clubs who want to, will be able to submit final accounts and agree their FFP position by the beginning of June at which point their embargo will be lifted.

If any club can't or wont do that their embargo will stay.  At which point I hope that they will remain or become complete embargoes until the posiiton is resolved.

I doubt there will be much sympathy from Messrs Lansdown, Gibson and the other 12 who have complied so far.

 

 

PS I understand that the quote is not from @Mr Popodopolous it just appeared like that!

The quote is from the article that I posted on another thread.
The EFL are not firing anything, it's in their rules and regs. Company House has given a grace period for Accounts, because of COVID. The EFL haven't made any changes so the allowances aren't in place. That's why some clubs, and Alan Biggs above, are referring to it as administrative I believe. As I understand it , one club is already out of embargo (Huddersfield), another due out soon (Stoke), with others to follow. Luton & Cov have said it's due to accounting, but other clubs have stayed silent. Make of that what you will. Of 10 clubs under embargo , any number could be down to delayed accounts, which would mean they could be out soon. The fact that the reporter says "All of those clubs on the list were approached for comment. No responses were forthcoming", might mean that some are for other than administrative reasons. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Ooh little bit of a development on Blackburn and their Embargo. 

They claim to have submitted and still under Embargo...outstanding P&S q's, Soft Sanctions maybe?

Edited April 6, 2021 by Mr Popodopolous

[1960maaan]

15 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Ooh little bit of a development on Blackburn and their Embargo. 

They claim to have submitted and still under Embargo...outstanding P&S q's, Soft Sanctions maybe?

I'm guessing that means a real embargo that will go into the window then.

[Hxj]

So what Blackburn are saying is:

1.  We have submitted the 2020 accounts and P&S stuff to the EFL,

2. 2020 position is bad so we aren't going to publish the accounts until the latest possible date so no one really knows,

3. As for FFP at 30 June 2021 we need to sell some players before that date or we are in big .

4. Therefore we are under a complete Embargo.

5. Which players do you want where we can sell at anything over book value in the 2020 accounts?  PS we have to sell by 30 June 2021.

Edited April 6, 2021 by Hxj

[Mr Popodopolous]

3 hours ago, Hxj said:

So what Blackburn are saying is:

1.  We have submitted the 2020 accounts and P&S stuff to the EFL,

2. 2020 position is bad so we aren't going to publish the accounts until the latest possible date so no one really knows,

3. As for FFP at 30 June 2021 we need to sell some players before that date or we are in big .

4. Therefore we are under a complete Embargo.

5. Which players do you want where we can sell at anything over book value in the 2020 accounts?  PS we have to sell by 30 June 2021.

Agree with this assessment. I've had queries about them for a few months FFP wise, at least with respect to Soft Sanctions and limits. Surely Reading are in a similar boat, their accounts maybe worse if anything.

I digress though, here is my concern. What can the EFL do if Blackburn:

A) Propose to sell and leaseback Ewood Park.

B) Do so but with Training Ground.

C) Read somewhere an idea to revalue the latter- Brockhall I believe- to £50m. Putting the Revaluation Gain through P&L.

Can the EFL prevent this route out if proposed to them by 30th June?

There certainly aren't many loopholes but the Fixed Asset one is gaping.

Edited April 6, 2021 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

On another note, Derby.

Their fans do seem on Dcfcfans pretty unintelligent with respect to football financial matters. Some are saying it's been imposed as the EFL are sore about the legal loss..

FFS, FFP is a rolling and ongoing process. You don't just win a case and get let off for a few years!! That case was to 2017/18, nor are CH Accounts and internal EFL Reporting Requirements one and the same.

One of what I thought their more sensible posters said something about how Mel Morris should gift them Pride Park. Do they just pretend the MSD and maybe Gabay charges don't exist, are waived or what.

Still on the Derby theme, the EFL appeal is dragging? Yes needs to be done by Video/Zoom I expect and Easter takes a long weekend out but it began on Saturday 20th March, surely if an open and shut case it would have been dismissed or awarded fairly quickly.

[Mr Popodopolous]

With respect to Sheffield Wednesday and Hillsborough.

Cannot at all see how it's worth £60m, recall doing a big spreadsheet from 1990-2017 in terms of valuation, improvements, depreciation, methods etc etc. How it rises from Feb 2014 DRC of £22.25m to a 2018 or 2019 sale price of £60m, well anyone??

[Mr Popodopolous]

Small update. As we know, Reading's financial position is appalling as the thread elsewhere on here showed. Renhe would improve it by a bit but nowhere near enough to even knock it below £15m overspend say.

Stoke City Property have submitted their Accounts but there is very little of significance. Stoke City Holdings or Stoke City FC probably- my guess Holdings- probably the one.

Venkys London Limited, these appear to be the Group Accounts for Blackburn but the oddity is that these run until March 31.

Maybe April 1st-March 31st for a 12 month period but how do we reconcile the two? Maybe the Blackburn Rovers Accounts are best but consolidated Accounts seem useful.

Of the 10 on the list therefore, we are still awaiting the following at CH:

*Birmingham City (both FC PLC and PLC). Plus Stadium company. 

*Blackburn Rovers- Venkys in soon but maybe the club and the parent to reconcile fully.

*Cardiff- Both the club and Holdings. Stadium company too but that's not so significant.

Coventry

Huddersfield

Luton and 2020 Holdings.

*Stoke City- Both club and Holdings.

Edited April 15, 2021 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Now then.. Sheffield Wednesday and Derby- deserve their own post in this respect!

Sheffield Wednesday finally got round and yes part of it was due to legal wrangling with the EFL potentially, to submitting their Accounts to July 31 2019 in March 2021- due at the end of July or at the end of April 2020 Covid deadlines permitting, though the Case wasn't decided until end of July and Appeal result not out until  early November. Finally! Now they just need to post the ones to 2020 and they'll be getting somewhere, not due until the end of April. There's more though.

Sheffield 3 Limited, the company that the Ground was sold to, not got Accounts due out until June 21st 2021. Sheffield 5 Limited, the company that controls that company has Accounts due out on June 24th 2021 and Sheffield 2 Limited is quite interesting- the Confirmation Statement makes no reference to it yet but maybe it's the ultimate Group Company, due out June 21st 2021- says it is above SWFC Holdings Limited (HK based) in their Accounts.

Still wonder if issues are to come there- they did after all roll the Stadium sale forward into the right year.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Derby County- quite simply:

The Derby County FC Limited- Football Club

The Derby County FC Academy Limited- Youth/Academy Expenditure

Club DCFC Limited- Listed as "Event Catering Activities"- CH Category.

Stadia DCFC Limited- Listed as "Other Sports Activities"- CH category.

Sevco 5112 Limited- Top Company in the Group.

Quite simply, no Accounts released for 2 years now. Since Spring 2019 (so the Reporting Period to 30th June 2018)!! Most of those come under Sevco 5112 Limited.

Gellaw Newco 203 Limited- wasn't sure if it would cover to 2019 or 2020 as its first year but CH seems to have it as the consolidated Accounts ie the top company in the Group over and above Sevco 5112 Limited- as per CH their Accounts to 30th June 2019 were due on 18th March 2020- still nothing. 

Sevco 5112 Limited also has the Confirmation Statement listed as overdue. Although it has been suggested that control has reverted back to Sevco 5112 Limited?

Now there is an argument seemingly emanating from the club that Accounts not released as they are awaiting the EFL's final amortisation verdict. Where this might have some merit is e.g. Derby County FC, Sevco 5112 Limited and Gellaw Newco 203 Limited if applicable in the latter case. Even if you take that at face value though as Amortisation in other areas wouldn't count towards P&S but is integral to the EFL v Derby case, and if you then accept that consolidated and top consolidated results would include the Amortisation of Players- how does it impact upon DCFC Academy Limited, Club DCFC Limited or Stadia DCFC Limited??

Any ideas @AnotherDerbyFan why even the 3 smaller ones which wouldn't factor in Player Amortisation Registration haven't released in 2 years?? I think the case not to release is sketchy in the Club and 2 Consolidated but can see arguments for and against- but in these 3 (Club, Stadia, Academy), I can't see any great justification on the face of it...

Edited April 15, 2021 by Mr Popodopolous

[AnotherDerbyFan]

9 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Derby County- quite simply:

The Derby County FC Limited- Football Club

The Derby County FC Academy Limited- Youth/Academy Expenditure

Club DCFC Limited- Listed as "Event Catering Activities"- CH Category.

Stadia DCFC Limited- Listed as "Other Sports Activities"- CH category.

Sevco 5112 Limited- Top Company in the Group.

Quite simply, no Accounts released for 2 years now. Since Spring 2019 (so the Reporting Period to 30th June 2018)!! Most of those come under Sevco 5112 Limited.

Gellaw Newco 203 Limited- wasn't sure if it would cover to 2019 or 2020 as its first year but CH seems to have it as the consolidated Accounts ie the top company in the Group over and above Sevco 5112 Limited- as per CH their Accounts to 30th June 2019 were due on 18th March 2020- still nothing. 

Sevco 5112 Limited also has the Confirmation Statement listed as overdue. Although it has been suggested that control has reverted back to Sevco 5112 Limited?

Now there is an argument seemingly emanating from the club that Accounts not released as they are awaiting the EFL's final amortisation verdict. Where this might have some merit is e.g. Derby County FC, Sevco 5112 Limited and Gellaw Newco 203 Limited if applicable in the latter case. Even if you take that at face value though as Amortisation in other areas wouldn't count towards P&S but is integral to the EFL v Derby case, and if you then accept that consolidated and top consolidated results would include the Amortisation of Players- how does it impact upon DCFC Academy Limited, Club DCFC Limited or Stadia DCFC Limited??

Any ideas @AnotherDerbyFan why even the 3 smaller ones which wouldn't factor in Player Amortisation Registration haven't released in 2 years?? I think the case not to release is sketchy in the Club and 2 Consolidated but can see arguments for and against- but in these 3 (Club, Stadia, Academy), I can't see any great justification on the face of it...

In all honesty, I have no idea.

I would have expected us to submit all accounts then restate the relevant figures if needed in following accounts

[Mr Popodopolous]

There could be more to come but as of this moment in time for Blackburn- based on admittedly the Venkys London Limited- I don't see what all the fuss was about.

£20-21m loss, which should include some Covid losses. Category A Academy, think their Allowable costs overall in the £5-6m range. Yes they're as I thought in Soft Sanctions, walking the line territory but it's nothing like e.g. Reading. Unsure why they released them- admittedly last seasons and Venkys London Limited meant to be the overall but as previously, run towards March 31st, they seem just about to be walking the FFP tightrope. Can't be at all expansive but don't seem like they would plunge into Hard Sanctions- this season averaged with last could change that?

Edited April 16, 2021 by Mr Popodopolous

[Port Said Red]

So @Mr Popodopolous, with the apparent news of Nigel P getting the job, where do we stand in regards to FFP for wriggle room during the transfer window? 

Also are there any hints or suggestions that FFP may have to be tweaked to take account of this year of lockdown?

Edited April 28, 2021 by Port Said Red

[Mr Popodopolous]

I was actually heading towards this thread to post a list of Championship clubs- including this and last season- who haven't yet posted Accounts to CH, and it's quite a long list! In some cases there has been EFL related Disciplinary issues, in two- Wigan and Charlton- issues with takeovers that were on and off but it's quite long!

Current Championship clubs who have not:

• Barnsley
• Blackburn- Though if consolidated are Venkys London Limited that may do it, albeit that runs until March 2020 so...can be a bit difficult to reconcile though.
• Cardiff- Both Club and Holdings
• Coventry (Trades under the name Otium Entertainment- or vice versa).
• Derby- The Club, the consolidated and all the small companies that make up the consolidated- not for two years, so to Summer 2018 posted in Spring of 2019.
• Huddersfield
• Luton- Both Club and Holdings.
• QPR- Both Club and Holdings.
• Stoke- Both Club and Holdings.
• Sheffield Wednesday- Be it the Club, the Parent/controlling company- Plus Sheffield 3 Limited (Stadium Purchasers) and Sheffield 5 Limited (The controlling company of Sheffield 3 Limited).
• Wycombe

Clubs relegated to League One- The aforementioned Charlton and Wigan. Includes Club and all associated companies.

Clubs relegated from PL- Watford, plus Hornets Investment Limited.

Clubs promoted last season- Fulham. That's the Club, Fulham Football Leisure and the overall top company.

Swansea have and Parachute Payments though they have had, credit where it is due. A PROFIT.

Cut the wage bill by 1/6 as well and the Amortisation charge now <£10m- seem fairly sensibly run, keep selling as well- see Rodon to Tottenham. A slightly longer look shows Operating Expenses cut by £111m from 2017/18 to last season- so in two years.

Compared to Stoke...well though no Accounts yet, they came down the same year as Swansea, therefore on the same Parachute Payments 3 year Schedule- their results maybe skewed by Accounts ending in May so some Parachute Payments deferred to 2020/21 is possible, whereas Swansea's Accounts until July.

Stoke's are interesting as they include a £43m (IIRC) Impairment Charge and the club have claimed based on media Reports and snippets in Bet365 Accounts that of that, £30m could be considered to be an excludable cost under Covid- claimed to be "In accordance with EFL guidance". That means £87m-I dunno say £3m in Revenue losses directly attributable to Covid-£30m-£7m generally stated for their Allowable Costs (ours around £5m)- that is still £47m! However as we know Impairment reduces expenses in future years, but unsure how much in this instance- and it's skewed as well because the Bet365 Accounts are to late March, in a 12 month period- therefore Stoke's Accounts on there run until late March and incorporate April and May of the 2018/19 season...so it could push their losses higher still! One thing is for sure, Parachute Payments up next year- as they are for Cardiff- and both are staying down. Stoke by dint of the rollup will be on £39m loss limits next season, this year it's about £55.5m, due to the loss limits being different in PL and Championship and some sort of Averaging out Formula...can make guesswork as to whether their loss last season was higher, lower or the same but until their consolidated Accounts out it'll be hard to say!

And rather interestingly- or might be nothing- Stoke City Property has shifted its Reporting Date to 31st May 2021 as opposed to end of March. 

Could be as simple as aligning with Club and Holdings or could be part of a Plan. By (pure coincidence?) they have appointed a Surveyor who was already on Stoke City Property and Stoke City FC as one of the Directors of Stoke City Holdings. Again could be alignment...or could be an (attempted) plan.

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 hour ago, Port Said Red said:

So @Mr Popodopolous, with the apparent news of Nigel P getting the job, where do we stand in regards to FFP for wriggle room during the transfer window? 

Also are there any hints or suggestions that FFP may have to be tweaked to take account of this year of lockdown?

Hi @Port Said Red

I believe that we are, will be one of the better placed in this respect. Parachute clubs and Brentford (if they stay down of course) maybe better placed still e.g. The amount of Profit they make on Players- we're good but they're top IMO.

As it stands currently, the Regs were tweaked but it's always possible they can be tweaked again if Governing Bodies and Clubs so desire.

Pre Pandemic this could have been, in conjunction with the 2019/20 season but especially this season, could have been our "Go for it!" However clubs agreed, after UEFA made a start that 2019/20 and 2020/21 would be merged in order to try and neutralise the impact of the Pandemic. Further, Covid Costs would be added for 2019/20 and 2020/21 only as one of the items that can be disallowed from expenditure- so Accounting Loss/2-P&S Allowances-Covid Costs=P&S., Subject to EFL guidelines and externally audited I am sure.

By my estimates, we lost:

£25m in 2017/18- This if not for Covid would have gone by now, but is T-3 and for these purposes T-2. Believe our Allowances were £5m.

PROFIT- £10m in 2018/19- add back the £5m in Allowances and that season is a £15m Profit for T-2- albeit of course for this roll up it represents T-1.

LOSS- £10m in 2019/20- add back the £5m in Allowances and I've seen estimates ranging from £2-5m for Covid Costs. Point is it's either £0-3m in P&S loss which is well well within.

However you then halve that and remember the Profit and Loss in 2018/19 and 2019/20 included around £38m in Profit and £25m in Profit on Disposal of Player Registrations respectively.

Where we're at to 2020/21 is therefore...

T-2/T-3 depending on how you want to look at it, P&S= -£20m

T-1/T-2 depending on how you want to look at it, P&S= +£15m

This year incorporates as said, this and last season averaged so for P&S purposes it'd be T- think regardless of Covid quite a lot of clubs would have failed to Summer 2020 if not for the rollup and averaging...we would 100% not have.

The fact Covid losses are allowable means that, let's assume that all clubs have Gate Receipts and Corporate Losses ie no Concerts, Events etc wiped- and that our wage bill remains fairly static...£2m Profit on Disposal of Players so a possible P&S loss of £30m if all is wiped as it might be for all clubs- unable to sell Season tickets, Concerts etc is directly attributable to Covid. If I haven't factored in the Covid losses for 2019/20 as well then it'd be more like £25-27m P&S loss for this year.

£0-3m in 2019/20 + £25-27m=£25-30m/2=£12.5-15m for this combined and averaged year.

-£15m in 2018/19.

Add £20m in 2017/18.

In short, £17.5-20m Covid loss...but that major millstone in 2017/18 drops off and our new starting point will be the big Profit in 2018/19!

The big assumption here is that the system doesn't change again but we could have a combined FFP Profit of £2.5m or average of around breakeven for 2018/19 and the combined period- which might mean we can make an Accounting loss of £54m (£13m x 3 + £5m in Allowable Costs) in 2021/22. Maybe even a couple of million more.

@Davefevs estimated a while back that Cost Savings in Summer could add a further £5m in Wages and Amortisation- assuming that's the net total of all who might leave. In theory if that is accurate and my interpretation of the regs is also right, maybe we could lose as much as £64m next year and remain compliant- of course doing that and not getting up- it would completely knacker us for a while thereafter, with Player Sales, probably Embargoes if we're lucky, significant Cost Savings- swingeing ones maybe to move into compliance for the following two seasons!

Could be as simple in my scenario of "Roll the dice- go for it fully, Play to win..." if we don't go up- ooh I dread to think, we're talking Reading type overspend! As in £30-35m overspend moving into the following year. P&S regs now allow for T +1 and T + 2 to be forecasted by the club, with respect to future compliance in that period.

Edited April 28, 2021 by Mr Popodopolous

[BLRed]

With all that potential leeway on spend, if we got recruitment right and signed 5-8 players of Brentford Ilk that could not only help us push for promotion but individually increase their value significantly a la Toney, it would make the spend all worth it. Recruitment is the key to this. God I hope we get it right

[Port Said Red]

Thank you @Mr Popodopolous, I am sure you have probably covered a lot of this in previous posts, so I apologise for getting you to summarise it all at such a late hour.

If your figures are close to reality which I think is very likely then I think we are in a good position.

I don't think we will "go for it" however for 2 reasons.

1. Pearson's comments about 4 to 6 windows makes me think that he has bought in to the academy and will look to bolster a squad built around the most talented, and use the profit from others to fill positional gaps, e.g. right back.

2. The deficit we are allowed to make, doesn't tally with the way SL works and that he would want us to make. At the very least I would expect us to spread any potential losses over 2 or 3 seasons.

I still feel confident that we will be pushing back up the table at least.

Edited April 29, 2021 by Port Said Red

[Mr Popodopolous]

Quick note on Sheffield Wednesday. They appear to have taken/be taking advantage of the Covid extension for a 2nd year on the spin!?

This is fairly unprecedented, can't think of any club who have done it twice.

Certainly not at Championship level or above.

Could be an automated CH error thing, but it says due date end of July 2021 yet they did it last year. The only club worse are Derby.

Derby's are once extension factored in are almost 10 months overdue for last season and almost 22 months overdue for 2018/19.

You have to look through the Companies that make up the consolidator for Derby, some different deadlines but bottom line is no Accounts for any season since 2017/18, last published Spring 2019.

Open ended embargo for each feels appropriate IMO.

Edited April 29, 2021 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Little bits to add- that may be general finance, maybe FFP or may cross over.

Sheffield Wednesday have once more failed to pay wages on time. Telegraph suggested for April, potentially March as well. This feels like maybe the 3rd time this season? Rumours of this or of an unusual payment mechanism first materialised in December 2019, when they were in the top 6 but not long after the EFL charged them- could be cashflow related too of course. Or transferring money from Thailand, delays about that- same happened with Reading two years ago but that seems to have been an isolated incident. :hmm: Feels like gaining an unfair sporting advantage but the players seem to still play despite it.

Cardiff. Mick McCarthy when he first came in suggested that playoffs was the aim. They are staying down!

Why this is interesting is that this will be the first season, ie 2021/22 since 2012/13 since they had neither the benefit of Parachute Payments or PL money. With a very different FFP system to back then...wonder if sell before buy a part of that. Surely they won't be able to retain Wilson and Ojo, renew their loans for a start.

They along with Sheffield Wednesday- these were two of the 10 clubs listed as under an Embargo in April- as mentioned above, Sheffield Wednesday took the Covid extension again and nothing on Cardiff in terms of released Accounts for 2019/20.

Edited May 3, 2021 by Mr Popodopolous