Hxj

Do you think that he might be looking for someone else to blame when he pulls out? After all you do have a bit of a reputation with Morris, and the fake Sheikh and the tax fraudster!

From an FFP perspective Everton. The first three year period will cover 2020/21, 2021/22 and 2022/23. They lost £120 million in 2020/21 (before allowable costs admittedly) but their FFP limit for 2022/23 will be £91 million and at 30 June 2021 they still had £210 million of intangible assets on the balance sheet. That will take some finessing, I hear Mel and Steve are looking for jobs.

I think what is working even better is the recruitment of talent from elsewhere at a younger age. The youngish players who played today who had a non-traditional academy career from the age of 2 were Atkinson, Tanner, Cundy, Scott and Semenyo. That's pretty impressive.

Yep. Plus there is another problem. As at 21 March 2022 Morris hadn't put a claim in, so he unless he does he couldn't vote anyway!

Yes. This and the 'State Aid' position is a problem. Either makes life incredibly difficult for the council going forwards.

None. There is no debt owed to Morris directly by the football club. Where the debt is owed to a connected company, that company is also in Administration. Where a company is in Administration it is the Administrators that act in place of the directors, therefore they decide how that debt is voted.

???

I agree that it was the figured mentioned - whether or not that was a real possibility remains open in my view - I honestly do not know what the answer is. Would a third party agree to that lease?

I happily stand corrected. The season ticket issue is a misunderstanding. An Administrator simply cannot use cash received in respect of future income to fund current cash expenditure. If they do they might have to repay the sums personally.

But the real test is what is the open market rent, We already have a figure £3 million odd a year, see the Disciplinary Committee and League Appeal Panel decisions,

Much more appropriate, especially as most of it is painted black and white, and it is was also once owned by a financial manipulator.

I have some good contacts. I also understand that issues have now been raised over the purchase of the ground by the City Council and whether or not that amounts to 'State Aid'. 'State Aid' is significantly restricted where the recipient of the benefit is an 'Undertaking in Difficulty'. Benefit is not just cash, so for example a lease at a non-market rent is also 'State Aid'. Wait until the lawyers really get involved!

My understanding at the time still seems to be correct.

I did, my information was that the money would run out by next Monday, and that there were problems with the ground ownership and the business plan. All have now been confirmed by Mr Kirchner himself. I don't mind being mocked on dcfcfans, it's not their fault.

As to Burnley, I don't really understand the journalist's comments. I need to sit down with the accounts for Calderdale (the UK parent), its subsidiary Holdings (the company whose accounts were published), and its subsidiary Football to understand exactly what is going on. Bearing in mind that Holdings and Football had turnover of £120 million, made a loss of £2.5million and have £50 million cash, not sure I have a huge amount of sympathy!

Kirchner has been busy on Twitter recently. Two points he makes - "I’m fiscally responsible for the club starting in 6 days and it needs to be done for me to write checks." "I’m conditional that MM no longer owns the stadium. I’m not directly involved in those discussions, so I don’t have a comment right now." So he won't pay for the stadium and requires someone else to buy it from Morris. As I understand things at the moment there are still some significant issues in respect of: The acquisition of the Stadium, the cost and the rent and what hoops the City Council have to jump through to undertake and finance the transaction. Kirchner actually writing a cheque. The Business Plan with the EFL. There is an impression that CK is setting up the Council and Morris to fail. Finally his most relevant quote: "Hoping we don't have to answer that question" in response to "What happens if it doesn't get sorted by 7 May?" Not sure 'Hoping' fills me with any confidence at this late stage.

The rules don't appear to have a different treatment for clubs promoted from League One. Therefore my assumption has always been that the same cap applies £39 million over three years. In 2020 turnover was BCFC £16m SWFC £22m at the club level. Wages were BCFC £27m SWFC £33m Player Amortisation BCFC £12m SWFC £6m Balance of player contracts left BCFC £25m SWFC £4m I think that at 2020 SWFC were in a better financial position than we were.

I agree @Mr Popodopolousbut I think that you are overthinking this. If we take our favourite club Derby County as an example. There are relegated in May 2022. They are therefore required to comply with 'Championship FFP' for all periods to 30 June 2022 (or whenever their accounting date is). So they can be sanctioned under the Championship FFP rules for the periods to June 2022. Thereafter they fall within the League 1 rules.

So it won't be dealt with this parliament then, not sure it will be a priority for a new government, so will probably be swept under the carpet and forgotten about in due course.

I was at Pride Park today and Idehen was great. It wasn't the difficult things which impressed me, but the simple ones, he seems to understand when to kick it into row z and when to flick it along the touchline.

Looking at the figures this will exclude all salaries and wages. It's also interesting that the whole club is still spending £1.6 million a month on salaries, cash paid as salaries plus HMRC deductions in list provided. That annualises at £20 million a season.

There are two separate pre-administration secured loans created on 6 August 2020 and 8 November 2020, the date in the latest report is an error . The different security held has an impact on what is paid out on the charge.

For shorthand and to help my memory the Football Group includes the football club and all parents and subsidiaries, similarly for the Stadium Group. There are various ways of achieving the same result, using a NewCo like Sheffield 4 is one way.

For tax and legal reasons a 'Section 110 Reconstruction' took place, nothing to do with FFP. It allows you to separate the 'Stadium Group' and 'Football Group' tax free. This was the same technique used by Morris to separate the various Derby County enterprises.

If they had made the adjustment on the transfer to FRS 102 then it would be compliant. As they did not then they cannot now change their mind because they don't like the answer as it was was an acceptable accounting treatment. Contrast with the 'amortisation' that was an unacceptable accounting policy and therefore has to be changed.