Villa's finances and FFP

[Unan]

https://www.readytogo.net/smb/threads/aston-villa-splashing-the-cash.1479139/page-39#post-31990811

[Mr Popodopolous]

Here's a nice level-headed post from VillaTalk. Nice snippet of it anyway! I feel it doesn't need comment below!

Quote

In my more reflective moments I do wonder if it would be better if we were not weighed down by our glorious past and magnificent stadium. Lots of  bog standard clubs brush off relegation and bounce between the divisions, but relegation for us  creates existential angst.

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Meanwhile, apologies for the source but feel it's of relevance.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-8491111/Relegation-Championship-just-not-worth-thinking-Dean-Smith-Aston-Villa.html

It's NOT a good time to go down. Goes for Bournemouth as well, anyone but these two in particular- imagine dropping into a division with potentially on the way an £18m wage cap, that is hostile to parachute payments- a League in which the CEO described them as 'an evil that needs to be eradicated' or words to that effect. Could you have imagined Shaun Harvey speaking so plainly or with such startling clarity about the imbalance they cause?? (Granted I think there is still a case for them but under strict and significant conditions, reform etc).

Norwich due to their yoyoing ways and general caution seem best equipped.

Bit of sloppy reporting in the article though...why wouldn't a report mention a significant item such as £14-15m in 2018/19 for what appeared to be HS2 compensation (following on from £3m before). Whether it's justified or not, it's taxpayers money- again could well be justified- therefore should be reported on!

[Mr Popodopolous]

Readind through that Sunderland Aston Villa thread posted by @Seneca the Younger on about Page 14.

That poster Cridge reminds me of our old friends AnotherDayInParadise and Delta...could it be?

[Mr Popodopolous]

On Page 27, dipping in and out but reading the thread in its entireity.

Has all the hallmarks of that idiot Delta! Delta Bravo...more like Delta Bullshit?

[AnAstonVillafan]

I'm not sure what you are saying or suggesting here, should we be happy about relegation ? Personally I accept it as a challenge and the league does not lie. We deserve what we get.

Older fans grew up on European success and being able to look down on Midlands rivals. Aston Villa was a jewel in the rough. But now is a new era. One of transition and struggle. Relegation for us creates existential angst because of the Sheffield Wednesday's Leeds United's, Nottingham Forest etc.  Big clubs who went down and never came back. No football fan wants that to happen to their club.

Many Aston Villa fans today think this situation is nothing short of an outrage.

I'm taking teenagers to Villa Park who have known only struggle and oppression where at their age I was taking a coach to Wembley and seeing us destroy the best team in the land by playing positive attacking football, or watching Athletico Madrid and Inter Milan.

In this new era I have to accept it for what it is. There was the opportunity and fanbase to build something special but as a team we are not worthy yet. We sold 30,000 season tickets in the summer with a 7,000 waiting list. 

Its something that I could see Bristol City achieving. The fanbase is there, new stadium and a city providing a large catchment area. Ambitious owners running the club the right way, and progression year on year. I hope you get there.

[AnAstonVillafan]

7 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Meanwhile, apologies for the source but feel it's of relevance.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-8491111/Relegation-Championship-just-not-worth-thinking-Dean-Smith-Aston-Villa.html

It's NOT a good time to go down. Goes for Bournemouth as well, anyone but these two in particular- imagine dropping into a division with potentially on the way an £18m wage cap, that is hostile to parachute payments- a League in which the CEO described them as 'an evil that needs to be eradicated' or words to that effect. Could you have imagined Shaun Harvey speaking so plainly or with such startling clarity about the imbalance they cause?? (Granted I think there is still a case for them but under strict and significant conditions, reform etc).

Norwich due to their yoyoing ways and general caution seem best equipped.

Bit of sloppy reporting in the article though...why wouldn't a report mention a significant item such as £14-15m in 2018/19 for what appeared to be HS2 compensation (following on from £3m before). Whether it's justified or not, it's taxpayers money- again could well be justified- therefore should be reported on!

Are you complaining about sloppy reporting in the Daily Mail ?

Only the local press are going to go into that kind of detail about HS2 compensation.

[Mr Popodopolous]

7 hours ago, AnAstonVillafan said:

Are you complaining about sloppy reporting in the Daily Mail ?

Only the local press are going to go into that kind of detail about HS2 compensation.

Ha yes, can depend on the journo tbh. The paper itself, meh. 

I'd say £14.4m in HS2 compensation is quite notable tbh! Especially with the problems and controversy surrounding HS2 as a whole and getting compensation to people in a timely manner. Wonder if it was fast tracked.

 

I've read his posts from time to time with respect to EFL and FFP. Definite air of entitlement amongst some Aston Villa fans with respect to FFP etc at least if we use online as a barometer- not just him but general tone of replies etc.

[Mr Popodopolous]

In general should what appears to be £3m and £14.4m in successive years from a public body be transparently reported? Hell yes.

By all means compensate if fair but it's absolutely in the public interest to report on this to a wider audience.

I think that compensation package was between 1-1.5% of the entire HS2 budget for that region. It's been a while since I've looked at it however. 

I also note that having delved into it a bit further, 10% of Bodymoor Heath.. 

@Natchfever You seem quite good on valuations etc, what do we think?

What do you think @Davefevs public interest? I'd say so...

[AnAstonVillafan]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

In general should what appears to be £3m and £14.4m in successive years from a public body be transparently reported? Hell yes.

By all means compensate if fair but it's absolutely in the public interest to report on this to a wider audience.

I think that compensation package was between 1-1.5% of the entire HS2 budget for that region. It's been a while since I've looked at it however. 

I also note that having delved into it a bit further, 10% of Bodymoor Heath.. 

@Natchfever You seem quite good on valuations etc, what do we think?

What do you think @Davefevs public interest? I'd say so...

What is your issue with the HS2 compenstion exactly ?

Do you think its too much ?

 

[AnAstonVillafan]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Ha yes, can depend on the journo tbh. The paper itself, meh. 

I'd say £14.4m in HS2 compensation is quite notable tbh! Especially with the problems and controversy surrounding HS2 as a whole and getting compensation to people in a timely manner. Wonder if it was fast tracked.

 

I've read his posts from time to time with respect to EFL and FFP. Definite air of entitlement amongst some Aston Villa fans with respect to FFP etc at least if we use online as a barometer- not just him but general tone of replies etc.

I still don't think there will be a reinvestigation.

If there was the fans would go nuts. I have heard others say its a witch-hunt.

I'm confident we will be OK on that front. If the club are happy enough to put out a statement I'll go with that.

[Mr Popodopolous]

38 minutes ago, AnAstonVillafan said:

What is your issue with the HS2 compenstion exactly ?

Do you think its too much ?

 

I've an open mind about it but I'm interested given it is rather a lot of public money, given that Reading's training ground in the leafy home counties sold for a profit about half of that, though

The relevant part of your club statement is as follows:

Quote

Aston Villa can confirm that in the 3-year period ending May 31, 2019, the Club complied with the EFL’s Profitability & Sustainability Rules. After promotion, The Premier League reviewed and confirmed compliance in accordance with their own policies and procedures.

That! That tells me that it is potentially a live issue at EFL level. "We can confirm we complied" is very different to "Governing body reviewed and confirmed compliance in accordance with".

A world away from:

Quote

"EFL indicated in writing that the arrangement was in accordance with its rules and regulations"

Parry vs Harvey is also quite important. SO too is Gibson threatening legal action vs the EFL with respect to Derby, who knows the full depth of his claims and how much support he has amongst other chairmen too. I've read in a few places however that Parry declared on takeover that it was a 'new regime' or words to that effect!

Sheffield Wednesday also consider/have considered themselves to be on quite solid ground.

The relevant section of their statement reads as follows:

Quote

The Club maintains that it consulted with the relevant executive officers of the EFL in connection with the stadium transaction and that it acted in good faith. The Club has in its possession numerous emails, letters and other documents in which the EFL gave authorisation to the transaction, and on which authorisation the Club understood it could rely. That authorisation gave rise in law to a legitimate expectation that the transaction would be accepted by the EFL, which is binding on the EFL. The EFL is acting in breach of that binding legitimate expectation by retrospectively treating as misconduct that which it had itself previously authorised, and this makes the charges themselves unlawful. The Club is accordingly bringing its own claim against the EFL to establish that it is acting unlawfully, as well as standing ready, if necessary, to vigorously defend the charges.

You know a biut about the law don't you @Davefevs? Sure there's some others too..

Surely if the EFL win these cases it gives them a green light to pursue Aston Villa, given the strength of these club statements? Precedents and equal treatment of all clubs spring to mind...

[AnAstonVillafan]

10 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I've an open mind about it but I'm interested given it is rather a lot of public money, given that Reading's training ground in the leafy home counties sold for a profit about half of that, though Bodymoor Heath is rural Warwickshire so that may change the equation back in your favour.

Is it 10% of Bodymoor Heath? That's one report anyway, reports can be wrong!

With respect to FFP, it is an example of exceptional Operating Income. Now that is fine but it appears as exceptional Operating Income in both 2017/18 and 2018/19...it is incumbent upon the EFL to properly analyse that under their exceptional Items policy. Last I checked clubs have to apply for these- now if Aston Villa want to have it reduce losses in the accounts that's more than okay but under FFP certain exceptional Items are a matter of debate between a club and the Governing body- in this case the EFL. £14.4m was it, that's major- that's a material item! I don't see why based on its classification should be counted under FFP twice.

Birmingham fans went nuts when they were charged. I bet Derby and Sheffield Wednesday fans were hardly happy- in fact I know they are not!

In the nicest possible way and I don't mean this as a slight but being honest and objective,,I don't really care if Aston Villa fans go nuts tbh- just like I didn't care if/when Birmingham, Derby or Sheffield Wednesday fans did before them! Why would I...no free passes I've always said. EFL have to do right by every club and that is the priority here. I bet you if Sheffield Wednesday get say a 15-20 point deduction, their fans will go nuts but who cares? Same with Derby- Birmingham fans were fuming last season when they got charged and it escalated from there.

Fans claiming it is a witch-hunt, well they can claim it if they like but I'm not sure it carries much sway with the EFL or objectivity? EFL even appeal Independent judgements for being too light a sentence these days, is that a witch-hunt? God knows how many times Macclesfield have been charged this season- but they've been docked 13 points across a range of offences! EFL appealing the final one too, one or two more points would send them down in place of Stevenage.

Read Derby's statement from last September- read it closely. It's fairly unambiguous, this is/was early in the investigatory stage.

Anyway, decent win for you today- if you stay up the issue is well and truly kicked into the long grass!

I'm happy to dissect the key bits of the two statements and indeed perhaps that of Sheffield Wednesday to prove it is not always the final word on the matter...

Derby County last September when news came out about EFL, and I do assume they had been notified directly by the EFL between it leaking into the papers and their statement:

Yet they got charged!!

 

I think it's adademic at the moment. We're still odds on to go down despite today's result, if/when we do and the EFL or the club say there is an investigation I'll concede to you. And I'll be furious with the club for letting it happen. I'm not sure who at Villa would be responsible.

I have no problem with HS2 being public money. Villa have owned Bodymoor Heath for nearly 50 years and invested a lot there. A decade ago £13million went in. The current redevelopment is a figure north of £20million. They are losing 1st team two training pitches but building spectator facilities for the youth and women's teams. I read somewhere that the works are going to take 10 years. Maybe it's being spread over accounts throughout this period ?

I don't know.

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 minute ago, AnAstonVillafan said:

I think it's adademic at the moment. We're still odds on to go down despite today's result, if/when we do and the EFL or the club say there is an investigation I'll concede to you. And I'll be furious with the club for letting it happen. I'm not sure who at Villa would be responsible.

I have no problem with HS2 being public money. Villa have owned Bodymoor Heath for nearly 50 years and invested a lot there. A decade ago £13million went in. The current redevelopment is a figure north of £20million. They are losing 1st team two training pitches but building spectator facilities for the youth and women's teams. I read somewhere that the works are going to take 10 years. Maybe it's being spread over accounts throughout this period ?

I don't know.

 

Fair enough, Bodymoor Heath is probably pretty big/vast. Time will tell but remember investigation doesn't even=charges let alone guilty. Takes 2-3 steps to even get near a points deduction so an investigation would be little to fear in itself- IMO anyway.

That's fine, fair compensation is a must- wasn't aware there was such a big investment but that is a good point- £13m inflated to todays value seems fine. Just wish journos might be a little more on the ball, or maybe it's my pedantry.

Only time will tell- one way or another. I'll concede if all cleared and signed off sans investigation.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Specifically with respect to HS2,  I'm surprised there hasn't been wider scrutiny on a national level, in the media.

I've done some reading on this as it seems interesting, and this article if it has some truth. I'm surprised more hasn't been made of things.

https://underagaslitlamp.com/2019/04/16/tony-xias-purchase-of-aston-villa-involved-in-hs2-contract-conspiracy/

I don't think it's a grand conspiracy theory to suggest that HS2 might have played a role in 2016 purchases.

Aston Villa, Birmingham, West Brom and Wolves all were purchased by Chinese owners in this time frame. 2016 to 2017 and West Midlands is a key part of HS2. Business opportunities? Fair enough if so. 

What I gleaned as quite notable (and surprising!) was some claims in the article.

"Members of the Villa board have already held discussions with HS2 executives over a compensation deal."

This throws up problems on two levels. Firstly that is a very privileged level of access!

There will be many companies and organisations, plus individuals adversely affected by HS2. That's pretty newsworthy in itself perhaps. 

Second issue is who amongst the HS2 executives? Which ones? Another aspect to be taken into consideration is that a senior executive in West Midlands HS2 is a certain Steve Hollis, formerly a chairman of Aston Villa! 

No wrongdoing is either suggested or implied. In fact it may even be a cul-de-sac because if they negotiated with national HS2 executives then WM regional ones surely would've been bypassed in these talks. 

Still, it feels like a story worthy of further media interest on a national level. To me anyway.

[AnotherDerbyFan]

5 hours ago, AnAstonVillafan said:

I still don't think there will be a reinvestigation.

If there was the fans would go nuts. I have heard others say its a witch-hunt.

I'm confident we will be OK on that front. If the club are happy enough to put out a statement I'll go with that.

You only have to look at Derby and Wednesday. The EFL gave us the thumbs up for our P&S accounts for the period ending in 2018. Then in the winter just gone, charged us for breaching spending limits. 
Is it not the period ending in 2019 that the EFL would possibly look at? It’s within the timescale set previously, so certainly not beyond possibility if/when you come down.

[Mr Popodopolous]

3 hours ago, AnotherDerbyFan said:

You only have to look at Derby and Wednesday. The EFL gave us the thumbs up for our P&S accounts for the period ending in 2018. Then in the winter just gone, charged us for breaching spending limits. 
Is it not the period ending in 2019 that the EFL would possibly look at? It’s within the timescale set previously, so certainly not beyond possibility if/when you come down.

Thank you! You've nailed it and quickly.

I was trying to argue this point but got bogged down in other points- but yeah it's entirely possible the EFL would/could look at the 3 years to 2019. Parry in for Harvey, Gibson legal action and the demise of Bury all probably combined on this however if relegated it's just a year on from your timescale ie 2017/18 period ended, Aston Villa period ended 2018/19...

Think the Investigation into you, Sheffield Wednesday- and Reading which has either gone quiet or is rolling on, slowly- was launched in early September.

[Natchfever]

17 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

In general should what appears to be £3m and £14.4m in successive years from a public body be transparently reported? Hell yes.

By all means compensate if fair but it's absolutely in the public interest to report on this to a wider audience.

I think that compensation package was between 1-1.5% of the entire HS2 budget for that region. It's been a while since I've looked at it however. 

I also note that having delved into it a bit further, 10% of Bodymoor Heath.. 

@Natchfever You seem quite good on valuations etc, what do we think?

What do you think @Davefevs public interest? I'd say so...

Whether the amount of money in compensation appears OTT or not, it will be underpinned by 2 valuations - one undertaken by each side in the discussion. It does seem to beggar belief from the outside looking in, but such a number has to be supported by suitably qualified valuation professionals.

As an aside, and touching upon the question of stadium valuations, again these should be supported by an RICS surveyor putting his/her reputation and possibly career on the line by confirming a number at the bottom of the page. The best way to inflate the value of land or buildings is to go down the investment value approach, agree the highest sustainable annual rent and then capitalise that revenue over the term of the lease - which in the case of a football club could be a very very long time.

[Hxj]

The Club maintains that it consulted with the relevant executive officers of the EFL in connection with the stadium transaction and that it acted in good faith. The Club has in its possession numerous emails, letters and other documents in which the EFL gave authorisation to the transaction, and on which authorisation the Club understood it could rely. That authorisation gave rise in law to a legitimate expectation that the transaction would be accepted by the EFL, which is binding on the EFL. The EFL is acting in breach of that binding legitimate expectation by retrospectively treating as misconduct that which it had itself previously authorised, and this makes the charges themselves unlawful. The Club is accordingly bringing its own claim against the EFL to establish that it is acting unlawfully, as well as standing ready, if necessary, to vigorously defend the charges.

 

The problem with this is that you have to show that you have lost out as a result of the change (or the change in position is inequitable).  If the choice is fail FFP or undertake a transaction which stops you breaching FFP, it would be difficult to show that you have actually lost out, if the transaction is investigated and the agreement repudiated.  You would need to show that you would otherwise have taken a different course of action, which given the disposal was right at the end of the accounting period may be tricky.

[Mr Popodopolous]

On 13/07/2020 at 08:55, Natchfever said:

Whether the amount of money in compensation appears OTT or not, it will be underpinned by 2 valuations - one undertaken by each side in the discussion. It does seem to beggar belief from the outside looking in, but such a number has to be supported by suitably qualified valuation professionals.

As an aside, and touching upon the question of stadium valuations, again these should be supported by an RICS surveyor putting his/her reputation and possibly career on the line by confirming a number at the bottom of the page. The best way to inflate the value of land or buildings is to go down the investment value approach, agree the highest sustainable annual rent and then capitalise that revenue over the term of the lease - which in the case of a football club could be a very very long time.

Thank you for the response- just not got round to it until now.

I assume you're talking about the HS2 here? It does seem quite odd, as you from the outside looking in and valuation wise has to be justified- in fairness it's not entirely clear how much of Bodymoor Heath went- one report says 10%, one report says something else- but yeah has to be supported by the suitably qualified valuation professionals as you say.

Confirming a number at the bottom of the page- should this appear in accounts then in the year of sale e.g.? Because the only disclosures I can see, have seen are "Independent advice" etc.

It's interesting you should mention the Investment value approach- some of the clubs appear to be on the level here, some don't- as with valuations, the rental terms seem to diverge- for example!

1. Reading- The first one- 25 year lease, at £750,000 per season. £26.5m sale price. Renhe Sports Management.
2. Derby- 25 year lease (though the land registry seems to suggest 20, which is further on from accounts), Kieran Maguire suiggested a while back that it was around £1.1m per season but when they finally release their accounts for last season it might become clearer? Either way, £1.1m per season on an £81.1m transaction be it for 20 or 25 yearss doesn't fell altogether commercial- the company who purchased it and the company who controls the company who purchased it- Gellaw Newco 202 and 204 respectively- show no lease receivables for last season so the plot thickens slightly...
3. Sheffield Wednesday. God knows! £60m sale price, seems to be no indication in their 2017/18 accounts of any rent due at all! Once they release the 2018/19 accounts, due at the end of this month it may show more. Sheffield 3 Limited, the company who 'own' Hillsborough, have extended their accounts to 31st July 2020 so we won't know for some while in terms of receivables!
4. Reading- The second aka new/replacement one- 24 year lease, at £1.5m per season. £37.5m sale price- Chinese company. This feels more in line...
5. Aston Villa- Not so much! £2.6m per season on a £56.7m sale price feels alright but for 4 or 5 seasons, it's unclear whether the total rent due thusfar will be £10.4m or £13m- not enough to justify...
6. ...Whereas Birmingham, sold for £22.76m. Rent due £1.25m per season x 25 seasons- that actually feels right or moreso than the rest- especially Derby, Sheffield Wednesday and Aston Villa! Over time I mean.

[Mr Popodopolous]

May as well update this, and ponder what might have been.

Their Accounts are not yet out but a Reported loss last year of £99m!?

In the PL. A Covid Impact. Yes..some Revenue deferred? Maybe.

Might have been interesting had they come straight back!! Technically as the P&S is supposed to be consistent between the two Divisions, the EFL should have a say still?

Remember a few of you were interested last year.

@Davefevs @downendcity @The Gasbuster @Ska Junkie

Also @Coppello surely they must be pushing the PL limits or hemming themselves in over the coming years.

I recall Delta suggested they would break even..well that even without Covid looks a joke at this stage.

Wolves sold players like Doherty and Jota despite a better FFP position and higher loss limits going into this season.

£99m though even in a season somewhat Covid disrupted as a newly promoted club!? Kinnell!!

Them and Derby of all the FFP deviants would be the most deserving of a comeuppance IMO.

[Davefevs]

Wow.

[Ska Junkie]

Crikey!

Would anything happen if they came back down at some point?

£99M, crazy.

[Hxj]

Aston Villa website confirms a £99 million loss in 2019/20.

Can't check my figures at the moment but I believe that that means a loss for the football club of over £180 million in three years!  Even with all the adjustments that could cause some issues in meeting the Premier League requirements to 2020/21.

I hope for their sake that they don't get relegated next season, that would cause absolute carnage. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 hour ago, Hxj said:

Aston Villa website confirms a £99 million loss in 2019/20.

Can't check my figures at the moment but I believe that that means a loss for the football club of over £180 million in three years!  Even with all the adjustments that could cause some issues in meeting the Premier League requirements to 2020/21.

I hope for their sake that they don't get relegated next season, that would cause absolute carnage. 

Sounds like the EFL might not be considering matters to be closed then- Aston Villa fans seem totally relaxed about it all...

[AnAstonVillafan]

Where does it say that EFL are going to do anything ?

£99m ? A third of that is down to Covid.

Southampton lost £76m, Man City lost £126m, Everton lost £140m, Leeds £62m, Brighton £67m, Wolves £40m.

Sheffield United £17m profit. Burnley are now £90m in debt after their leveraged buyout.

I'll remind you that The EFL and Premier League found no wrongdoing from their investigations into the Villa.

Turnover is up, we are debt free and have nearly ten thousand people who want season tickets and cant get them.

We are trying to progress and build something here.

Our bellies are full. Sheffield Wednesday are dying on their arse. Can't you just be happy with their demise ?

[Mr Popodopolous]

Had you come straight back down the EFL certainly would have been interested. Could have been problematic both with past but also present.

Until the Accounts are out and the finer detail is out, that £99m loss could be significantly misleading but Delta was wrong I suspect when that poster suggested you would break even- yes prior to Covid but...

The P&S regs are joined up and there is a formula brought about due to Covid:

Quote

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

1.1.8  Earnings Before Tax means profit or loss before tax, as shown in the Annual Accounts.

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

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

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

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

Which means 2017/18 is the first year in this Assessment- once that's off the books things may start to ease notably.

Quote

2.5  If the aggregation of a Club’s Earnings Before Tax for T-1 and T-2 (or in the case of Season 2020/21 T-2 and T-3) results in a loss, any consideration from Related Party Transactions having been adjusted (if appropriate) pursuant to Rule 2.3, then the Club must submit to the Secretary its P&S Calculation.

2.6  If the P&S Calculation results in a loss of up to the Lower Loss Threshold (calculated in accordance with Rule 3), then the Executive shall determine whether the Club will, until the end of T+1, be able to fulfil its obligations as set out in Regulations 16.19.8(a), (b) or (c).

Quote

3 Loss Thresholds

3.1 Save for Rule 3.4, the Lower Loss Threshold and Upper Loss Threshold for each Club shall be calculated based on the aggregation of the Annual Lower Loss Thresholds and Annual Upper Loss Thresholds set out in the following table, by reference to the league of which the Club was a member in the Season covered by the applicable Accounting Reference Period:

Annual Lower Loss Threshold

Annual Upper Loss Threshold

Premier League

Subject to Rule 3.2, £5 million

Subject to Rule 3.2, £35 million

The League

Subject to Rule 3.3, £5 million

Subject to Rule 3.3, £13 million

Guidance

By way of example a Club that was a member of The League in 2016/17, the Premier League in 2017/18 and The League in 2018/19, will have:

(a)  a Lower Loss Threshold of £15m; and

(b)  an Upper Loss Threshold of £61m (using the figures set out in Rule 3.1).

3.2  The Loss Thresholds for any Accounting Reference Periods relating to Seasons when Clubs were members of the Premier League shall be calculated on the basis of the three year aggregated figures set out in Premier League Rules E.57 and E.59 respectively (as amended, extended or replaced from time to time in accordance with the Rules of the Premier League) divided into three equal annual instalments.

3.3  Where there is an adjustment to the Premier League’s Annual Lower Loss Threshold and/or Annual Upper Loss Threshold, as described in Rule 3.2, then The League’s Annual Lower Loss Threshold and/or Annual Upper Loss Threshold for the equivalent period shall be adjusted by a percentage equal to the percentage change applied by the Premier League.
Guidance
By way of example, if for Season 2019/20 the Premier League introduce an Annual Lower Threshold of £6m and an Annual Upper Threshold of £36m then the Thresholds for The League in that Season will be £6m and £13.37m. For ease, threshold figures will be rounded up to the nearest £10,000.

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

Therefore your Allowable losses- after Deductions and Covid Costs to 2020/21 would be £72m.  At the Upper level.

What has it to do with the EFL? Well the alignment of the Regulations does suggest.

Quote

5 Clubs Ceasing to be Members of the Championship

5.1 If a Club is promoted or relegated out of the Championship Division that Club shall, notwithstanding promotion or relegation, remain bound by these as if it were still a Championship Club, until such time as it has complied with all of its obligations relating to its last Season as a Championship Club.

I'm quite happy with the Sheffield Wednesday situation though won't be counting any chickens until they're down.

Derby I would love it just love it if the EFL will win the case against them- though maybe hope over expectation and they need to apply a maximum pressure and scrutiny policy to them and any other clubs who maybe floundering with FFP regs.

[Toblerone boot]

I wish I understood this subject as well as certain other posters but the whole ffp seems ridiculous for me as the parachute payments make a farce of any idea of fairness . I notice as seems usual top two relegated last year and Bournemouth in the top six that cannot be a fair system especially for clubs like us who seem to play by the rules apologies if someone has explained this at length already 

[AnAstonVillafan]

9 hours ago, Blockb said:

I wish I understood this subject as well as certain other posters but the whole ffp seems ridiculous for me as the parachute payments make a farce of any idea of fairness . I notice as seems usual top two relegated last year and Bournemouth in the top six that cannot be a fair system especially for clubs like us who seem to play by the rules apologies if someone has explained this at length already 

FFP is a good idea implemented very badly. Its probably outdated now.

As for parachute payments, what do you think is the problem exactly ?

They are crucial to how promotion and relegation operate between the top two divisions. Norwich and Watford being top has nothing to do with parachute payments. Their squads are too good for the division.

[Toblerone boot]

13 minutes ago, AnAstonVillafan said:

FFP is a good idea implemented very badly. Its probably outdated now.

As for parachute payments, what do you think is the problem exactly ?

They are crucial to how promotion and relegation operate between the top two divisions. Norwich and Watford being top has nothing to do with parachute payments. Their squads are too good for the division.

I agree with you outdated also agree that there squads are better nothing wrong with parachute payments very necessary to avoid huge financial problems for relegated teams . As I said I do not fully understand ffp but it does seem you have some teams having a huge advantage so do you think it should be scrapped. In the premier league can you spend unlimited amount or is it the same ie are villa at a huge disadvantage to say Man City