Points Deduction - When will we know?

[Mr Popodopolous]

On 17/06/2022 at 21:37, Bar BS3 said:

I say it based purely on it surely being something that SL will be aware & in full control of - even if it's a case of bailing us out in some way. 

Plus, surely covid times make everyone immune to any sanctions during that period...? 

Like Derby and Reading you mean. Unsure that entirely stands although their issues were a) Predating this and culminating in 2020/21 and b) The hole and financial mismanagement much greater- indeed in the case of the latter they are still under an EFL Business Plan and this remains until end of June 2023- with a suspended -6 but falling foul of anything that triggers the suspended -6 won't remove or mitigate punishment for the offence itself.

Agree with the first bit although as Shelton's Army says he can't just chuck the cash in...some kind of sponsorships would fill a bit of the hole but needs to be at Fair Market Value- Birmingham sought to sidestep or defer their issues in 2018 this way and the EFL said no- overvalued sponsorship I expect.

[Mr Popodopolous]

On 18/06/2022 at 02:14, Wanderingred said:

What do you think are the chances of it actually happening Mr P? Surely we aren’t going to keep all of Massango, Scott and Semenyo… then we’ve got the likes of Brownhill and Webster with potential percentage fees. It makes grim reading for sure, but I hope we are going to be okay. If we have another difficult season, a points deduction could be devastating.

I should probably qualify some of my last posts a bit. It's only I reckon £4-5m in the hole at present- sale of Scott or Semenyo in particular should resolve it, even if it isn't quite market value- how much would we get for Massengo though given final year of contract? Kalas is saleable too, Wells if we can find someone- wages off.

Webster I just cannot find any transfer speculation on him at all- contract fwiw is until 2026 which surely makes a sale at this stage a bit remote although that can change with just one bid. Brownhill is being heavily linked with the PL but £15m is the ballpark fee- 20-25% of profit there would help but still leave a few million to find- Kelly to Newcastle is heavily touted but will Bournemouth sell- on Brownhill again, a bidding war there would help.

Offloading Moore, Bakinson and perhaps some others will help- but have we a buyer yet for any and these alone wouldn't solve unless the bids are big.

I've gone on a bit but probably still less than 50% but if the in season bit is in play we have now and the Jan window? Or do we just agree a 4-5 point deduction.

[Davefevs]

3 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I should probably qualify some of my last posts a bit. It's only I reckon £4-5m in the hole at present- sale of Scott or Semenyo in particular should resolve it, even if it isn't quite market value- how much would we get for Massengo though given final year of contract? Kalas is saleable too, Wells if we can find someone- wages off.

Webster I just cannot find any transfer speculation on him at all- contract fwiw is until 2026 which surely makes a sale at this stage a bit remote although that can change with just one bid. Brownhill is being heavily linked with the PL but £15m is the ballpark fee- 20-25% of profit there would help but still leave a few million to find- Kelly to Newcastle is heavily touted but will Bournemouth sell- on Brownhill again, a bidding war there would help.

Offloading Moore, Bakinson and perhaps some others will help- but have we a buyer yet for any and these alone wouldn't solve unless the bids are big.

I've gone on a bit but probably still less than 50% but if the in season bit is in play we have now and the Jan window? Or do we just agree a 4-5 point deduction.

Although I’ve been bullish on the cost reduction side, I have been cautious on the revenues.  19k average crowd was better than I thought, so I’m still happy overall the gap isn’t that big.  As you say a few outgoings and we are making serious inroads.

[Mr Popodopolous]

13 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Although I’ve been bullish on the cost reduction side, I have been cautious on the revenues.  19k average crowd was better than I thought, so I’m still happy overall the gap isn’t that big.  As you say a few outgoings and we are making serious inroads.

I dunno how accurate it was but yes that will help for sure- dunno how accurate it was but the Telegraph implied losses of around £2m per month. Could have been 2+2=5 or taking our average over a given period as our current guesstimated number but if the revenues are slightly better then the hole is not quite so bad.

Although a pessimistic article on Football 365- good author but a few incorrect facts but a good writer about EFL sides in general and has written on FFP issues about a range of Championship clubs in recent times. He also neglects to mention the likely £5m per year bit in allowable costs but then he isn't City specific so might lack knowledge on some of the finer details.

https://www.football365.com/news/opinion-bristol-city-face-summer-cost-cutting-winter-discontent-nigel-pearson

Edited June 20, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Bristol Rob]

6 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I should probably qualify some of my last posts a bit. It's only I reckon £4-5m in the hole at present- sale of Scott or Semenyo in particular should resolve it, even if it isn't quite market value- how much would we get for Massengo though given final year of contract? Kalas is saleable too, Wells if we can find someone- wages off.

Webster I just cannot find any transfer speculation on him at all- contract fwiw is until 2026 which surely makes a sale at this stage a bit remote although that can change with just one bid. Brownhill is being heavily linked with the PL but £15m is the ballpark fee- 20-25% of profit there would help but still leave a few million to find- Kelly to Newcastle is heavily touted but will Bournemouth sell- on Brownhill again, a bidding war there would help.

Offloading Moore, Bakinson and perhaps some others will help- but have we a buyer yet for any and these alone wouldn't solve unless the bids are big.

I've gone on a bit but probably still less than 50% but if the in season bit is in play we have now and the Jan window? Or do we just agree a 4-5 point deduction.

Don't think it'll happen but....

Imagine if Moore and Bakinson SUDDENLY in pre season show these loans have paid off and Moore is a 1st class centre half/,defensive midfielder and Backinson has grown up.

That would be a game changer.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Now there is no news at such but with the confirmation of Cundy, the earlier departure of O'Dowda and the imminent departure of Palmer I thought I would have a look.

£4-5m the forecast hole coming into this season- with some assumptions in mind- interested in @Davefevs too.

Revenue  this upcoming season by £2m

Wages  this upcoming season by £2m- that's departures net of signings.

However as with all clubs at this level, the third and final tranche- the Covid allowance for 2021/22 was £2.5m- this is now gone.

Net impact therefore based on assumption and fact  £1.,5m improvement on last season.

As in, the net improvement would take us to £4-5m in the hole.

Where are we at currently? Read that Palmer was a £1.3m cost saving to Coventry so that's good...what was O'Dowda on £10-15k per week? Cundy- £5-10k per week....any ideas? King staying or going?

A potential cost saving therefore of £2.3-2.56m which puts us slightly ahead of the £2m target.

OTOH new signings- what do we think the 3 average, £8k per week maybe?

Which is a potential cost readdition of £24k per week- or £1.248m.

If anything the hole is slightly bigger if some other guesstimates are broadly accurate- a net saving of £2m to get us to the £4-5m possible overspend as a starting point.

We may be a bit further on but still a few million to find IMO. Massengo sale might solve it, Kalas and Massengo both being sold certainly would. Let alone Scott or Semenyo.

I also have the impression that the EFL still aren't budging or able to sell the idea of player add-backs but time will tell. That would solve it without a doubt. Alternatively there is some kind of semi amnesty to 2022 or 2023 due to rule changes...

My numbers are based on the EFL allowances and no more- if there are further allowances that would help and perhaps help greatly but in a sense should there be.

Edited June 21, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Now there is no news at such but with the confirmation of Cundy, the earlier departure of O'Dowda and the imminent departure of Palmer I thought I would have a look.

£4-5m the forecast hole coming into this season- with some assumptions in mind- interested in @Davefevs too.

Revenue  this upcoming season by £2m

Wages  this upcoming season by £2m- that's departures net of signings.

However as with all clubs at this level, the third and final tranche- the Covid allowance for 2021/22 was £2.5m- this is now gone.

Net impact therefore based on assumption and fact  £1.,5m improvement on last season.

As in, the net improvement would take us to £4-5m in the hole.

Where are we at currently? Read that Palmer was a £1.3m cost saving to Coventry so that's good...what was O'Dowda on £10-15k per week? Cundy- £5-10k per week....any ideas? King staying or going?

A potential cost saving therefore of £2.3-2.56m which puts us slightly ahead of the £2m target.

OTOH new signings- what do we think the 3 average, £8k per week maybe?

Which is a potential cost readdition of £24k per week- or £1.248m.

If anything the hole is slightly bigger if some other guesstimates are broadly accurate- a net saving of £2m to get us to the £4-5m possible overspend as a starting point.

We may be a bit further on but still a few million to find IMO. Massengo sale might solve it, Kalas and Massengo both being sold certainly would. Let alone Scott or Semenyo.

I also have the impression that the EFL still aren't budging or able to sell the idea of player add-backs but time will tell. That would solve it without a doubt. Alternatively there is some kind of semi amnesty to 2022 or 2023 due to rule changes...

My numbers are based on the EFL allowances and no more- if there are further allowances that would help and perhaps help greatly but in a sense should there be.

I think you are in the right ball-park.

Would love to know what money we make out Elton / gigs this summer, will help 21/22 and 22/23’s revenue positions, which I’ve been cautious on, but starting to feel the need to raise.

Cundy will have been on much less than £5k imho….£2k???

If I take RG’s “budget will remain about the same” paraphrased comments, I’d say when Palmer gets announced we are probably just ahead of the curve, but not much.

Back to revenues, I’d estimated 26m (21/22), 28m (22/23), 30m (23/24) in a very unsophisticated manner.  If they were 30 / 32 / 34 instead, we’d pretty much be ok.

[NcnsBcfc]

5 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I think you are in the right ball-park.

Would love to know what money we make out Elton / gigs this summer, will help 21/22 and 22/23’s revenue positions, which I’ve been cautious on, but starting to feel the need to raise.

Cundy will have been on much less than £5k imho….£2k???

If I take RG’s “budget will remain about the same” paraphrased comments, I’d say when Palmer gets announced we are probably just ahead of the curve, but not much.

Back to revenues, I’d estimated 26m (21/22), 28m (22/23), 30m (23/24) in a very unsophisticated manner.  If they were 30 / 32 / 34 instead, we’d pretty much be ok.

Thanks @Mr Popodopolous& @Davefevsfor this.

I can't help feeling though that Naismith in particular will be on £10k+ at the very least; and Wilson/Sykes collectively around the same as Cundy & COD put together.(Cundy on minimal wages potentially).

With that in mind, KP,COD & Cundy leaving (at this stage) feels more like a perhaps £500k off the wage bill rather than the £2m for me.

If Kalas/Wells were to go as well as Moore & Vyner for instance; then maybe that's when the major reductions of the wage bill will come into play?

I won't add HNM to the list out of respect for @Davefevsfeelings 

[phantom]

16 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Would love to know what money we make out Elton / gigs this summer, will help 21/22 and 22/23’s revenue positions, which I’ve been cautious on, but starting to feel the need to raise.

Do "Bristol City FC" actually benefit financially? 

[Mr Popodopolous]

4 minutes ago, phantom said:

Do "Bristol City FC" actually benefit financially? 

I can't say this with certainty but it should be on the turnover for Ashton Gate Limited which in turn sits under the consolidator- Bristol City Holdings. It should appear in the 2021/22 accounts for this- Commercial Revenue probably the category of choice. Bristol City Holdings is I believe the reporting entity for FFP.

Edited June 21, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Davefevs]

48 minutes ago, phantom said:

Do "Bristol City FC" actually benefit financially? 

No, Bristol City FC don’t, but Ashton Gate Ltd does , and both those companies are part of Bristol City Holdings…and we do FFP under the Holding entity.

[22A]

City feature 1.08 - 2.28.

 

[formerly known as ivan]

We have sellable assets in HNM, Scott, Semenyo. Obviously we wouldn’t want to but should we need to and sell Themis transfer window, would that go against the numbers? Or are the finances as of a fixed date so even selling this transfer window wouldn’t help avoid a points deduction?

What would be worse from our perspective? A 10 point deduction or losing one of our prized assets?

[Pezo]

13 minutes ago, formerly known as ivan said:

We have sellable assets in HNM, Scott, Semenyo. Obviously we wouldn’t want to but should we need to and sell Themis transfer window, would that go against the numbers? Or are the finances as of a fixed date so even selling this transfer window wouldn’t help avoid a points deduction?

What would be worse from our perspective? A 10 point deduction or losing one of our prized assets?

What we really don't want to do is get the points deduction and then sell one of our prized assets because the offer was too good.

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, formerly known as ivan said:

We have sellable assets in HNM, Scott, Semenyo. Obviously we wouldn’t want to but should we need to and sell Themis transfer window, would that go against the numbers? Or are the finances as of a fixed date so even selling this transfer window wouldn’t help avoid a points deduction?

What would be worse from our perspective? A 10 point deduction or losing one of our prized assets?

Each 3 year FFP cycle ends with the club’s accounting cycle (if they are May, June or July year end), so for City our cycle runs to 31st May.  Because of covid the cycle has been increased to 4 years and 19/20 and 20/21 are added together and halved.  For the 4 year cycle ending 31st May 2022 we are well inside of the £39m FFP limit, courtesy of the profit we made in 18/19 being part of the calculation.

That profit drops off in the cycle that ends next summer - May 31st 2023, so when you add 19/20, 20/21, last season (21/22) estimated and this season 22/23 estimated together, we are likely to break the £39m with all the various things we are allowed to deduct. E.g. Academy costs, covid costs, etc.  But not by much.

The EFL will have received projections from us for this season, as there are reporting requirements if you are between £15-£39m…which we are.  So they will be fully aware of our situation.

So a lot of pre-amble…basically we could sell at any point before 31st May 2023 if we needed to.  We could of course cut costs in other ways, e.g. lowering wages, spreading the likes of Kalas, Massengo, Bentley, Dasilva’s transfer fee (amortisation) over a longer period, etc.

[Port Said Red]

There is no outward signs of panic with the way the club are conducting their business, so I am taking this as a good sign.

Richard Gould strikes me as someone who would have a good handle on where we stand.

[cidered abroad]

15 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Each 3 year FFP cycle ends with the club’s accounting cycle (if they are May, June or July year end), so for City our cycle runs to 31st May.  Because of covid the cycle has been increased to 4 years and 19/20 and 20/21 are added together and halved.  For the 4 year cycle ending 31st May 2022 we are well inside of the £39m FFP limit, courtesy of the profit we made in 18/19 being part of the calculation.

That profit drops off in the cycle that ends next summer - May 31st 2023, so when you add 19/20, 20/21, last season (21/22) estimated and this season 22/23 estimated together, we are likely to break the £39m with all the various things we are allowed to deduct. E.g. Academy costs, covid costs, etc.  But not by much.

The EFL will have received projections from us for this season, as there are reporting requirements if you are between £15-£39m…which we are.  So they will be fully aware of our situation.

So a lot of pre-amble…basically we could sell at any point before 31st May 2023 if we needed to.  We could of course cut costs in other ways, e.g. lowering wages, spreading the likes of Kalas, Massengo, Bentley, Dasilva’s transfer fee (amortisation) over a longer period, etc.

As Bristol City FC Holdings are the company that owns the stadium and Bristol City FC, then does the club benefit financially from all non football usage of the stadium?

Summer concerts, Bristol Bears matches (their only constraint is a limit on playing squad wages) so could City get any share of Bears hospitality, match day refreshments and pitch maintenance? Remember how City income for non football had grown by over £10 million per annum before COVID arrived.

Surely non football income should now be recovering to pre 2020 levels? And thus helping City to get/stay in the black for season 22-23?

I understand that SL owns everything, BCFC, Bears, Bristol Sport but surely it will be possible and legal to keep us out of trouble.

[brad blit]

Regardless of FFP il be amazed if one of the ‘bigger’ players (HNM, Bents, Kalas, Scott, Semenyo) dosnt leave this summer as all have diff reasons for leaving with no shortage of suitors.

This would solve any potential issues.

[Loosey Boy]

36 minutes ago, Port Said Red said:

There is no outward signs of panic with the way the club are conducting their business, so I am taking this as a good sign.

Richard Gould strikes me as someone who would have a good handle on where we stand.

Agreed - a very calming influence around the club and someone who’s performed well as a CEO in previous roles. I have every confidence that we are now in very safe hands with RG and NP.

I do however sense that we may need to see departures before anyone else arrives - perhaps this is why we’ve not signed that CDM Nige wants yet?

[GreedyHarry]

12 minutes ago, cidered abroad said:

As Bristol City FC Holdings are the company that owns the stadium and Bristol City FC, then does the club benefit financially from all non football usage of the stadium?

Summer concerts, Bristol Bears matches (their only constraint is a limit on playing squad wages) so could City get any share of Bears hospitality, match day refreshments and pitch maintenance? Remember how City income for non football had grown by over £10 million per annum before COVID arrived.

Surely non football income should now be recovering to pre 2020 levels? And thus helping City to get/stay in the black for season 22-23?

I understand that SL owns everything, BCFC, Bears, Bristol Sport but surely it will be possible and legal to keep us out of trouble.

Yes is my understanding, as I think the holding company is the one used for FFP reporting, and always has been. 

[Davefevs]

12 minutes ago, cidered abroad said:

As Bristol City FC Holdings are the company that owns the stadium and Bristol City FC, then does the club benefit financially from all non football usage of the stadium?

I guess the best way of putting it is - as we report FFP at Holding Company level, then we combine BCFC Ltd and Ashton Gate Ltd together….so yes, sort of!!!  Let’s not forget some years AG Ltd has made a loss, so we aren’t being “dodgy” by combining both.

Summer concerts, Bristol Bears matches (their only constraint is a limit on playing squad wages) so could City get any share of Bears hospitality, match day refreshments and pitch maintenance? Remember how City income for non football had grown by over £10 million per annum before COVID arrived.

yes, but also worth noting, Bristol City also pay rent to Ashton Gate Ltd too…all business between entities is done at arms length.

Surely non football income should now be recovering to pre 2020 levels? And thus helping City to get/stay in the black for season 22-23?

yep, must be getting back to it.

I understand that SL owns everything, BCFC, Bears, Bristol Sport but surely it will be possible and legal to keep us out of trouble.

SL will do things properly and above board.

Just now, Loosey Boy said:

Agreed - a very calming influence around the club and someone who’s performed well as a CEO in previous roles. I have every confidence that we are now in very safe hands with RG and NP.

I do however sense that we may need to see departures before anyone else arrives - perhaps this is why we’ve not signed that CDM Nige wants yet?

Yep, bar the keeper from France, I think we are now in a lull waiting for outgoings.

[cidered abroad]

6 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Yep, bar the keeper from France, I think we are now in a lull waiting for outgoings.

@Davefevs

But is the "rent" that we pay just taking account of the fact that all non football items like stadium/pitch maintenance, ticket sales etc, are handled now by Bristol Sport. Whereas before Bristol Sport, City employed everyone directly. It's not rent in the true meaning of the word. And our share of things like pitch maintenance is reduced to account for Bristol Bears paying for and using the same pitch/stadium. Just a different way of accounting it.

[Davefevs]

17 minutes ago, cidered abroad said:

@Davefevs

But is the "rent" that we pay just taking account of the fact that all non football items like stadium/pitch maintenance, ticket sales etc, are handled now by Bristol Sport. Whereas before Bristol Sport, City employed everyone directly. It's not rent in the true meaning of the word. And our share of things like pitch maintenance is reduced to account for Bristol Bears paying for and using the same pitch/stadium. Just a different way of accounting it.

Bristol Sport’s “shared services” sit outside BCFC (and BC Holdings), so again, we pay for those services at arms length.

Probably a bad example, but Supporter Services sell tickets, we collect the revenue from these, but pay the them for manning the phones, posting the tickets etc.

But as for the rent, it is exactly that, rent for the ground to Ashton Gate Stadium Ltd for using it for football matches.

Rent and ticket servicing are two separate things and paid to separate companies.

 

[Monkeh]

Considering we've gone on record ans stated non football revenue was down significantly during the record should tell you the club benefit massively from concerts such as elton john and the killers,

[Hxj]

My take on this is that there will be no points deduction - it will be tight as we can see from the current recruitment policy.  My belief is that the club are planning on a worst case scenario to just meet the requirements.

In any case the earliest time that there will be a default will be the accounting period to May 2023.  Due to the delays in final figures this will impact on 2023/24 season.

That said there are several situations which could arise that could arise to make passing FFP easy:

1.   Sale of an existing player over the written down value - take your pick from many currently worth far more than their written down cost.
2.   Sale of an existing player at more than their remaining salary costs - again take your pick.
3.   Profit share on the onward transfer of an ex-player - Brownhill, Kelly or Webster.
4.   Event income - This is interesting as when the new stadium opened Ashton Gate Ltd decided to just let the stadium for a fee - all other services were provided by others.  The intent, once they had watched and learned, was to move to a different model whereby they provided all the services as well, and despite taking on more risks over a period would make significantly more profit.
5.   A good cup run
6.   Promotion.  

Edited June 27, 2022 by Hxj

[Davefevs]

32 minutes ago, Hxj said:

My take on this is that there will be no points deduction - it will be tight as we can see from the current recruitment policy.  My belief is that the club are planning on a worst case scenario to just meet the requirements.

In any case the earliest time that there will be a default will be the accounting period to May 2023.  Due to the delays in final figures this will impact on 2023/24 season.

That said there are several situations which could arise that could arise to make passing FFP easy:

1.   Sale of an existing player over the written down value - take your pick from many currently worth far more than their written down cost.
2.   Sale of an existing player at more than their remaining salary costs - again take your pick.
3.   Profit share on the onward transfer of an ex-player - Brownhill, Kelly or Webster.
4.   Event income - This is interesting as when the new stadium opened Ashton Gate Ltd decided to just let the stadium for a fee - all other services were provided by others.  The intent, once they had watched and learned, was to move to a different model whereby they provided all the services as well, and despite taking on more risks over a period would make significantly more profit.
5.   A good cup run
6.   Promotion.  

Even moving on Saikou Janneh for a nominal fee helps.

[Hxj]

16 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Even moving on Saikou Janneh for a nominal fee helps.

yep - every penny helps.

[Mr Popodopolous]

While I largely do agree with @Davefevs and @Hxj and I wasn't altogether aware of Point 4, it is my belief that a deduction can be imposed in the Spring although it's not exactly a top possibility but a combination of factors IMO makes it more possible now than previously.

1. The Projections go in on 1st March for the existing season along with the prior 2 actual seasons.
2. Combine this with the EFL v Birmingham 2nd case- Birmingham won it but the EFL won on appeal- no deduction although was stated as not a guide or precedent for future such cases due to the Covid circs but what it did state was that targets such as these were an absolute obligation IIRC- that was the crux of the dispute which was Best endeavors as argued by Birmingham vs Absolute Obligation which the EFL saw it as

These two alone may not be enough to give grounds for an in-season deduction but then you have in addition...

1. The Future Financial Information- if a club are forecast to overspend by say £5m in March of the upcoming season, an Absolute Obligation could be interpreted on that club as clearing the deficit or perhaps having deals lined up for the summer but pre-arranged in March to make good that deficit- otherwise straight to a points deduction and appeal perhaps?
2. Then if that's not enough, the EFL Regs do seem to allow some kind of Projected Breach
3. Finally, the ability to put a pre-emptive Business Plan/Embargo of some kind ahead of a potential breach- that arguably puts onus on the club who are set to breach to rectify by March or face the consequences once the Projections checked vs the Future Info there and then.

In short I believe that there are grounds for a deduction in the season of the breach now that various loose ends have been tied up, the February 2022 changes etc.

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 hour ago, Hxj said:

My take on this is that there will be no points deduction - it will be tight as we can see from the current recruitment policy.  My belief is that the club are planning on a worst case scenario to just meet the requirements.

In any case the earliest time that there will be a default will be the accounting period to May 2023.  Due to the delays in final figures this will impact on 2023/24 season.

That said there are several situations which could arise that could arise to make passing FFP easy:

1.   Sale of an existing player over the written down value - take your pick from many currently worth far more than their written down cost.
2.   Sale of an existing player at more than their remaining salary costs - again take your pick.
3.   Profit share on the onward transfer of an ex-player - Brownhill, Kelly or Webster.
4.   Event income - This is interesting as when the new stadium opened Ashton Gate Ltd decided to just let the stadium for a fee - all other services were provided by others.  The intent, once they had watched and learned, was to move to a different model whereby they provided all the services as well, and despite taking on more risks over a period would make significantly more profit.
5.   A good cup run
6.   Promotion.  

Should also ask @Hxj what do you think our projected overspend going into this season is ie the period ending 2022/23? Me and Dave in the past have considered it £4-5m currently- are we a bit bearish or in the right ballpark in your view?

Edited June 27, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Hxj]

7 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

my belief that a deduction can be imposed in the Spring

I'm not sure how any penalty can be imposed for a period where the final figures are not available.  Yes good estimates are available, but for example what if you would have ended up 6th without the points penalty and made it to the play-off final, that might be enough to mean that you didn't fail at all.  I appreciate all conjecture, but who knows??

6 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

what do you think our projected overspend going into this season is ie the period ending 2022/23?

I reckon that we are flying at around £38-£39 million FFP losses for the period ending 31 May 2023.  I think that you and @Davefevs are too conservative on allowables and too conservative on income growth from the Stadium.

On the Stadium side good to see that Lisa Knights has been appointed a Director of Ashton Gate Limited.