Jump to content

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums, like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process that requires minimal information for you to signup. Be a part of One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums by signing in or creating an account.

  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Full access to all forums (not all viewable as guest)
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members.
  • Support OTIB with a premium membership

Mr Popodopolous

The Championship FFP Thread (Merged)

Recommended Posts

On 17/05/2019 at 19:34, View from the Dolman said:

So looking at the Derby County stadium ownership... The freehold of DY342736 was transferred to GELLAW NEWCO 202 LIMITED (registered 19th June 2018) and registered on 30th July 2018. GELLAW NEWCO 202 LIMITED was incorporated with GELLAW NEWCO 201 LIMITED (registered  18th June 2018) holding the only share in the company. GELLAW NEWCO 201 appointed its liquidators 10 days after its incorporation in a members voluntary liquidation on 28th June 2018.

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck...

To return to this one, possibly being a bit dense but what's this mean? @29AR mentioned back-to-back and insta-collapse deal.

As in, what tangible difference does it make if GELLAW NEWCO 204 LIMITED now has significant control over it- whereas at time of purchase it was GELLAW NEWCO 201 LIMITED- this of course being the control over the company who purchased Pride Park, ie GELLAW NEWCO 202 LIMITED.

Sheffield Wednesday might have done similar incidentally. Put in less technical terms than you did but anyway..

SHEFFIELD 3 LIMITED purchased Hillsborough on 28th June 2098. Controlling Party was SHEFFIELD 4 LIMITED and this was notified on 21st June 2019. Control of SHEFFIELD 3 LIMITED by SHEFFIELD 4 LIMITED seemingly ceased on 28th June 2019, and there was on the same day a special resolution to wind up SHEFFIELD 4 LIMITED. Liquidators appointed on 28th June 2018 according to the below. Meanwhile, the new owner of SHEFFIELD 3 LIMITED was SHEFFIELD 5 LIMITED, said notification was 28th June 2019.

https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/3321692

Interesting/useful summary elsewhere.

Quote
  1. On the 20/6/2019 Dejphon Chansiri registers the following companies, with a registered address of Hillsborough, Sheffield 4 Ltd, one £1 share and 1 director, himself, and also controls the company. The company is listed as a “Non Trading Company”. Also he reduced to current accounting period to 31/07/2019
  2. 21/06/ 2019 He now registers 2 companies at Hilsborough, Sheffield 2 Ltd and Sheffield 3 Ltd, Sheffield 2 Ltd is identical to Sheffield 4 Ltd, Sheffield 3 Ltd is slightly different, if has 1000 £1 shares rather than 1 and control of the company is Sheffield 4 Ltd not himself personally, as with all the others, it is Non Trading..
  3. 24/06/2019 he now forms Sheffield 5 Ltd identical to Sheffield 2 and 4
  4. 28/06/2019 He holds a shareholders meeting of Sheffield 4 Ltd and votes to have the company wind up! He appoint joint liquidators, the same company as the Sheffield Wednesday auditors.
  5. 08/07/2019 He increase the shares in Sheffield 2,4 and 5 to 1,000 (yes including 4 which is being liquidated) He also changes control of Sheffield 3 from Sheffield 4 to Sheffield 5.
  6. 17/07/2019 Sheffield 4 has now it has changed its registered office to the offices of it auditor (but not the Sheffield branch but the one in Cleckheaton)
  7. 18/07/2019 The liquidators release a statement saying the company is solvent! The accounts show assets of £1,999 the only liability is the £1,000 of shares, therefore Chansiri gets his £1,000 back, I have got no idea what happens to the £999 since there should be a loss. Also how has a non-trading company made a profit of £999? It is stated that there is no liquidation charges as these are being paid by a third party

 

Edited by Mr Popodopolous

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/stoke-city-financial-fair-play-3596135

Saw this on Kieran Maguire's Twitter- about to have a look.

This line looks interesting...

Quote

“We are doing everything we can to make them as favourable to us as possible.

It's the Stoke CEO Tony Scholes discussing the regulations and the clubs perspective.

I hope the EFL and other clubs take note of this. Hope they're all over it in fact.

Not the article of course, but to be on alert for any dirty tricks by Stoke.

Incidentally, for what it's worth, Stoke fans don't seem altogether impressed- small sample size granted- with the stance by Scholes and the club. Different to Aston Villa, Sheffield Wednesday and to an extent Derby fans at this stage?

Edited by Mr Popodopolous

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

https://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/stoke-city-financial-fair-play-3596135

Saw this on Kieran Maguire's Twitter- about to have a look.

This line looks interesting...

It's the Stoke CEO Tony Scholes discussing the regulations and the clubs perspective.

I hope the EFL and other clubs take note of this. Hope they're all over it in fact.

Not the article of course, but to be on alert for any dirty tricks by Stoke.

Incidentally, for what it's worth, Stoke fans don't seem altogether impressed- small sample size granted- with the stance by Scholes and the club. Different to Aston Villa, Sheffield Wednesday and to an extent Derby fans at this stage?

Chief executive Scholes told Radio Stoke today: “We’re fortunate to have owners here who are not just willing and able but extremely keen and enthusiastic and want to do everything they possibly can to get this club back into the Premier League, where we spent 10 good years - or maybe not all 10 were fantastic.

“They will do everything they can but we are constrained by the rules that are in place. We don’t like the rules, we think they’re wrong and they’re ill-conceived. We think they should be changed - but they’re in place.

“We are doing everything we can to make them as favourable to us as possible.

“It’s hard, of course, but all I’ll say is that the owners will do all they can in terms of providing the funds and everyone working at the club will do everything we can within the constraints.”

There are quite few clubs ( including us) that are also fortunate to have owners not just willing and able, but extremely keen and enthusiastic and want to do everything they possibly can to get this club back into the Premier League - or in our case into the premier league for the first time. However these other clubs accept the rules and organise their clubs' affairs in order to stay within the limits imposed, even if they would prefer if those rules were not there.

Why is it so hard from relegated premier league clubs to come to terms with the rules of the championship? Like Villa previously, they see the parachute payments, not as a financial buffer that enables them to make the financial adjustments needed to fit within the reduced income streams the championship provides, thereby fitting within the EFL ffp limits, but as a war chest giving them a huge advantage over most other championship clubs in regaining their premier league status. Unfortunately, like Vila before them, they are realising that championship promotion is a tough ask and are now sweating that not only is promotion moving further away from them as the end of parachute payments gets ever closer, but that relegation is a real threat.

Hopefully their fans are now realising that after Birmingham, and with Wednesday in the firing line and Derby possibly being lined up next, getting around ffp by dodgy dealing will likely end up with the club being punished to a degree, that in Stoke's case, could pose a real threat t their championship status.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chansiri also charged with misconduct.....apologies if this is old news!

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2019/12/02/exclusive-sheffield-wednesday-chairman-could-banned-football/

Dejphon Chansiri, the Sheffield Wednesday owner, is facing further scrutiny after being charged with misconduct by the English Football League.

The Daily Telegraph can reveal that Chansiri, finance director John Redgate and Wednesday’s former chief executive, Katrien Meire, have all been charged and could be banned from football if found guilty by an independent panel.

The charges by the EFL are understood to relate to the controversial £60 million sale of Hillsborough to Chansiri.

Wednesday insist they will “vigorously defend” the sanctions, which could include a heavy points deduction, but Chansiri, the Thai businessman, plus Redgate and Meire are also under the microscope.

The charges the trio face are believed to have been relayed to the club on Nov 14, the same day the EFL announced its decision to charge Wednesday with misconduct.

Redgate stepped down from the club’s board of directors last year but remains the finance director, while Meire, who held a similar role at Charlton Athletic, left Wednesday in February.

Chansiri has been Wednesday’s owner since 2015 and infuriated many rival Championship clubs when he agreed the sale of Hillsborough to help record a pre-tax profit of £2.5 million in the 2017-18 accounts.

Land Registry documents revealed the stadium’s sale appeared to be completed the following year and the EFL subsequently charged the club with misconduct following a lengthy investigation.

It is alleged that Chansiri sold the stadium to avoid breaking the EFL’s new profitability and sustainability rules. Wednesday are thought to be ready to contest the charges.

Birmingham City became the first club to be punished for breaching spending rules when they were docked nine points towards the end of last season.

The new rules dictate that Championship clubs are permitted to lose a maximum of £39 million over three years.

Wednesday declined to comment on the charges. The club are ninth in the table, two points adrift of the play-off positions.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, that's huge! Thanks @Davefevs

Him being charged with misconduct but he (along with Meire and Redgate) could be banned if guilty, am I reading it right- eff me!

I have a feeling that it wouldn't ie this ban option have been at all likely had Shaun Harvey still been running the EFL but I could be way out! Dunno what others think- mind you I think against all sense etc he would have let Steve Dale's Bury have had a crack at starting the season too! He really ran a very loose ship...

Wow though, that's quite the escalation!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an outsider looking in....no way the EFL go down this route if SW aren’t up shit-creek.

Points deduction, embargo, might need fire-sale in window???

Apologies to Owls fans looking at this, it’s you guys that suffer....and although a very different era and circumstances we had our own problems in 1980s.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could be a big points deduction.

Birmingham held their hands up and were quite transparent IIRC (stand to be corrected) and got 9 points in the end for a simple breach of going over the 39m in a three year period.

Sheffield appear to have tried to hide their misdeeds with some "creative" accounting and are now protesting innocence.

Not sure how the deductions work but. if the charges stand, they must be heading into a double figure points deduction to make it a meaningful punishment ?

Luton got a 30 point deduction albeit in different circumstances...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

Could be a big points deduction.

Birmingham held their hands up and were quite transparent IIRC (stand to be corrected) and got 9 points in the end for a simple breach of going over the 39m in a three year period.

Sheffield appear to have tried to hide their misdeeds with some "creative" accounting and are now protesting innocence.

Not sure how the deductions work but. if the charges stand, they must be heading into a double figure points deduction to make it a meaningful punishment ?

Luton got a 30 point deduction albeit in different circumstances...

Someone posted recently how deductions are calculated. Feel sorry for their fans who just pay their money to watch their football team and behind the scenes all sorts of misdeeds are occurring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

Could be a big points deduction.

Birmingham held their hands up and were quite transparent IIRC (stand to be corrected) and got 9 points in the end for a simple breach of going over the 39m in a three year period.

Sheffield appear to have tried to hide their misdeeds with some "creative" accounting and are now protesting innocence.

Not sure how the deductions work but. if the charges stand, they must be heading into a double figure points deduction to make it a meaningful punishment ?

Luton got a 30 point deduction albeit in different circumstances...

If they are guilty of not just ffp but also fudging it, I think we can expect to see something in the region of 15-21 points 😱

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My early and rough calculations are as follows- using the template estimated by Kieran Maguire and I think Peter Loehmann, and loss limits in the EFL judgement.

Birmingham- 7 points for the overspend. 3 for a deliberate breach and one back for cooperating fairly early, though some wonder about that. Anyway 7 + 3 -1=9.

Sheffield Wednesday- wrong period let's assume that's proven.

12 points for the overspend alone!! Were there 2 charges laid at them or 1? Anyway each could be construed as an aggravated breach- so that could be 3 + 3 again- we're on 18 now! Then the point back, well they abided by a soft embargo in Summer 2018 so I suppose that you could make a case for 1 off, but then again if they contest it strongly now, should they get one back?

Somewhere between 11-18 IMO, quite possibly more! Perhaps 14-18 a better range there.

Edited by Mr Popodopolous

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever happens, it must be sorted by 31st Dec.  Teams in the Championship must know the fate of SW before the Window opens, it could influence a team’s recruitment / trading plans.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Worth revisiting what Shaun Harvey has said over the last 6-18 months about FFP and owners...

Will highlight what I consider to be a few pertinent aspects, that may help to explain how it reached this point with all of the sloppiness in between!

On QPR, after the settlement/verdict was finally reached- late July 2018!

Quote

EFL Chief Executive, Shaun Harvey said: “The outcome vindicates the approach of the EFL Board in defending the challenge to our Rules.

“In agreeing to the settlement above, the Board was conscious that the financial burden placed on the Club had to be manageable, so as not to put its future in doubt when considering that after this season the Club will no longer benefit from the promotion that was the catalyst for the dispute in the first place.

“QPR remain a valued member of the EFL and a great community asset. We look forward to continuing our productive working relationship with them for many seasons to come and are delighted to bring this long running dispute to a conclusion.”

On Birmingham, 1st August 2018:

Quote

Harvey said: “The club are fully aware of the situation. We are working with them trying to resolve how they are able to register players for the new season. From my perspective we have been clear and we are hoping to help the club through this. Long before 9 August and deadline day I imagine the position will be resolved and the relevant club will know what it can and can’t do.

“The EFL is not about restricting activity. We want clubs to be strong and we want them to be vibrant. Clubs not being able to sign players they would like to sign is not good for the EFL.”

Asked if clubs pay enough notice to the rules, Harvey added: “I certainly think QPR have taken it seriously enough and Leicester and Bournemouth – whatever your view is on the settlements reached – it is money they would much rather have done something else with than pay it to the EFL, so there is a seriousness. The big challenge we have got in the next six months is to communicate really clearly what can and cannot take place by clubs that breach these rules.”

The second paragraph is pretty pivotal IMO- makes me wonder ever more about him and his actions last summer "The EFL is not about restricting activitiy." Reluctance? "We want clubs to be strong and we want them to be vibrant. Clubs not being able to sign players they would like to sign is not good for the EFL". A very, at best, laissez faire approach here!!

I wonder if things could have shifted on the bolded bit of the last paragraph after the TV deal debacle thatr caused issues last November- overseen, surprise surprise on HIS watch! 👀

This article is pretty interesting.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/48412747

Quote

Football needs "to look at how it treats the owners at some of its clubs" as without them, fans "wouldn't have a club", says departing English Football League chief executive Shaun Harvey.

Harvey said costs across the 72 EFL sides were going up but owners were being "roughed [up] and ridiculed in certain quarters".

"Championship losses are getting bigger," he said.

"We have a business model that relies, just about, on owner funding."

Speaking to BBC Radio 5 Live's Sportsweek, he added: "Those owners are either benevolent, looking after their local clubs who they have supported for many years, or are investing to try to achieve the big prize that Aston Villa and Derby are going to play for this time."

I mean, pretty disgraceful but pretty interesting as to where his priorities may have laid from 2016 onwards? Yet on a technical level...may well be right, deficit to shortfall vs income.

These snippets reinforce his perspective.

Quote

"So, we are reliant on owners and football needs to look at how it treats the owners at some of its clubs.

"Fans not happy about the investment that is going into their club. Trust me, without them [the owners], they wouldn't have a club."

Quote

"After six years [in the role], the league does need to have a look at itself and decide how it's going to go forward," said Harvey.

"I think the big challenge is going to be around player wage inflation.

"How do you manage that in such a way that it doesn't take away from the quality of the product that we all want to contribute to?"

@DerbyFan did make reference to the quality of product aspect I believe, at some point.

I am sure there were more and I'll add to these as and when I find them...

Have to wonder the nature of the discussions that took place summer 2018, or 2018/19 regarding these issues, between the EFL/Harvey and clubs...all behind closed doors of course.

This is from his 1st August 2018 quotes too, but curiously not on the BBC article from the time,

Quote

There is no doubt in the Championship in particular a lot of the clubs survive purely on the basis of owner funding. The vast majority are all making a loss.

“The level of the loss changes. What we have to be really careful about is making sure the owners of the clubs keep funding it.

So once again, it really, really makes you wonder about that Summer of 2018! 👀

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not City related, it's not even Championship related.

Think the PL is the land of guaranteed profits? Maybe not...

The club maybe a bit of a surprise!

That is the club results- the parent company ones were worse than the club last season- more income but higher running costs too. I assumed they would make a loss tbh.

Edited by Mr Popodopolous

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

It's not City related, it's not even Championship related.

Think the PL is the land of guaranteed profits? Maybe not...

The club maybe a bit of a surprise!

That is the club results- the parent company ones were worse than the club last season- more income but higher running costs too. I assumed they would make a loss tbh.

He thinks their wages to income ratio at 60% is a bit high? Many championship clubs are at or above 100%!

I think Ive just read somewhere ( it might have been on another thread) that Brighton made a loss of £21m last year. If so, that tends to debunk the notion that getting to the premier league sets the club up financial.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, downendcity said:

He thinks their wages to income ratio at 60% is a bit high? Many championship clubs are at or above 100%!

I think Ive just read somewhere ( it might have been on another thread) that Brighton made a loss of £21m last year. If so, that tends to debunk the notion that getting to the premier league sets the club up financial.

Yeah- don't know how good they have it in that respect...Championship is a mad, mad League financially though!

Agreed- I think we would not make losses tbh but can't be said for all clubs- that TV cash etc can get eaten up very quickly. Now they have abolished STCC, the PL that is, maybe those losses and wages will start to rise even quicker.

Edited by Mr Popodopolous

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think it was linked to rises in wage %, an additional layer to the standard FFP loss limits. This isn't quite in line with 2016/17.

http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/latest-news/premier-league-update-their-ffp-rules

Now no longer.

https://www.fourfourtwo.com/features/new-financial-fair-play-rule-change-will-completely-change-how-next-seasons-premier-league

Think £81m the most recent baseline level, before it was scrapped.

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BBC investigations into Championship finances being discussed on 5Live breakfast right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...