Mr Popodopolous

I actually found this Q&A between RamsTrust pertaining to Derby's breaches just before the final decision last year. Found quite illuminating, especially the process of 'sign-off' or otherwise. https://ramstrust.org.uk/wp/efl-response-to-ramstrust-questions/ Don't agree with all of the EFL's answers but found the Q&A quite useful.

There was Muse as well in 2019. They're fantastic live- I think so anyway. Music is good but the set, live display top notch- was there for it in summer 2019, very much enjoyed it.

Agreed. I wonder if something else that maybe an add-back is growth of Commercial revenue. We've basically returned to 2019 levels and we grew that year £4m in Commercial Revenue terms from 2017-18 which in turn was £2m higher than 2016-17. I'm rounding for speed and simplicity.

Surprisingly and happily the accounts state it is not far off at all for 2021-22 when set against 2018-19! A little remarkable actually. 2019 and 2022

Ah are these out now?? Will have to take a quick look at these- thanks. Assume it'd perhaps be bundled up into Commercial Revenue? Closest category I can think of. It's not really Commercial or Event at all though. Rendering of Services? Doesnt neatly fit any category.

This is fair. Is good to see it highlighted quite precisely. Well you and me both how the circle is seemingly being squared is a mystery. Cost of testing etc seems a useful and valid add-back as for all clubs. Do you mean for the Vaccine Centre? Either will have appeared in 2020-21 or 2021-22 I'd have thought.

Six of the best, nice. Strong start, that lengthy injury delay could have stalled us but 6-2 excellent. Maguire should have a penalty, Iran's was dodgy/soft however. VAR eh?? Very clinical too, took chances well..thought we went to sleep a bit after racking up that big lead bit Iran's goal woke us up again. Was no big deal as we were 4 up. To think, Bellingham is only 19?? Grealish, Bellingham, Saka x 2- all goals from midfield one way or another, augurs well. Thought Saka's 2nd was excellent. Rashford scored quickly off the bench too, good for competition and confidence.

No dividends with such losses that's for sure! There has been some interest paid, some waivered of course but in the context of- I've just looked through accounts from 2005 to 2022- the amount by which that could offset SL's contribution to date is truly negligible. For all the talk of freehold being built up by the OP, until SL cashes in his chips it's all hypothetical and paper only. That interest is creeping up a bit however.

Would we say the figure is £240m now, cor how much he has put in- but do we discount a good chunk of interest paybable from this? ie Gross contribution- Interest Paid it or a lot of it=SL's net contribution. Something like? Granted what SL or the Lansdowns may or may not gain is at this stage conjecture. You don't post the at this stsge hypothetical gain until you cash in your chips.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-63645416 https://indianexpress.com/article/sports/football/fifa-world-cup-india-qatar-2022-8278187/ Sure some might be paid or fake but lazy and perhaps incorrect to assume lots are. Read that Argentina and Brazil also quite popular over there (India etc).

One observation too, catching up with a couple of articles. In terms of Qatar- think a couple of issues were conflated. Fans paid on one hand and possible fake fans. Those Indian fans cheering for England, were likely genuine. The PL IS popular in South Asia, Qatar has quite a lot of South Asian migrants and as a result likely they will if they have a favourite national football team, gravitate towards England.

Would kinda prefer Foden as he's better suited to tucking in yo create some kinda 4-2-3-1/4-3-3 hybrid. A little more orthodox than Mount got say a 4-3-3 out of possession. Wouldn't say no to Maddison over Sterling too although the latter more tried and trusted at this level of course.

It strikes me as potentially being at odds with FRS 102 and definitions there. Presumably only the clubs will have seen the guidance but to me "Costs" strikes me as something that cost a a club/business which wouldn't have if not for the circs. E.g. Cost of testing, cost of cleaning, cost of modified travel arrangements to stop the spread. That kinda thing. "It cost £500k in extra cleaning requirements therefore add it back/add it to the allowance". Not costs caused by the transfer market stalling due to Covid-19. It's a hard one to argue either way but objectively speaking surely only an Independent Panel could decide on the concept as a whole. Maybe they did and definitely if they and others get away with it then we should not be singled out. In fact I believe they are more guilty than us! In which case if they get off the hook not properly challenged then there is no reason we should be singled out. "Opportunity" to sell I'd argue that's speculative to an extent.

Is a fairly big post to respond to but I'll try @Davefevs 1) No concern about SL and cash losses. 2) It strikes me as being the case that regular Covid add-backs would not in themselves fill the gap. Reduce but not fill. Could we (others too) and the League have a difference in interpretation as to what the guidance entails and allows for? 3) Defo SL wouldn't cook the books. My concern again is a genuine difference in interpretation of the regs if we are arguing for certain items. All hypothetical at this stage. 4) Agreed. Although revenue wise I think above £15-16m in those 2 years is questionable, notably above feels fanciful. 5) Agreed. Hope so.

Remodelled: T-2 2019-20 and 2020-21. Averaged pre-tax loss £24m. - £5m x 2 in FFP allowance (averaged £5m). - £15-16m in legitimate declines in revenue and added costs. T-2= £12-12.5m FFP loss T-1 2021-22. £28.5m pre-tax loss. -£6m FFP allowance and £2.5m in Covid add-back. T-1=£20m FFP Loss T...No more Covid add-backs, estimate £6m FFP allowance. Need to lose no more than £6.5-7m in FFP terms. £12.5-13m accounting wise. Remember that the £2.5m drops off meaning we need a £15.5-16m improvement in accounts this year.

Hmmm thanks for that bit. Definitely secured funding for Cash Losses and Covid add-backs is a must. If we forecasted say a £25m pre tax loss verbatim but after £15m of profit on disposal it's down to £10m...problem is with no 'paper trail' ie of transfer arranged but that fell through it feels speculative to me. This is a very good spot. As you say what others did and what Gould said before...I suppose my concern is that the likely easily quantifiable Covid losses are likely £15-16m across 2019-20 and 2020-21 and £2.5m last season which would still put us well or somewhat in the red FFP wise. Amortisation excluded or Covid write-down perhaps?

I forgot about Chile. Agreed on your post but it's definitely a challenging zone even at times for the big 2, less so than it used to be- Chile aren't a walkover in the main even if in a lesser generation of players.

Weakest yeah but not necessarily an easy away game- compare to San Marino, Andorra, Gibraltar etc. I'd fancy a number of the weaker South American sides v Latvia, Lithuania and so on too. Bolivia and Ecuador were skewed a bit by altitude.

Plus dangerous 2nd tier like Colombia, Peru, Paraguay- Uruguay somewhere between the two. Bolivia and Venezuela have European based players too. There aren't really any 'whipping boys' in the South American zone.

On a general football note. Impossible to judge on the strength of this game but suspect Ecuador are not a bad side. Firstly anyone who qualifies from the gruelling South American zone merits some respect and second they put 4 past Uruguay and 6 past Colombia in qualifying. Technically and tactically sound.

Errr?? I didn't see much wrong with that goal.

Although as we saw with Derby and arguably even Sheffield Wednesday over the timing issue, if accounts are not in accordance with FRS 102 they are de facto non-compliant

£15-16m lost revenue is totally in alignment across the 2 years with my views and expectations. Agreed on that but a counterpoint is no specific space for it but it's arguable and I would suggest a suitably constituted IDC or a formal vote of clubs could decide the transfer add-back debate.

Some I know are looking forward to it saw a few today but a combination of circumstances, location and timing will act as a bit of a drag.

Totally agree, but I still as indeed none of us know if the concept of Player add-backs was voted for or just the more regular and agreeable stuff. Football League could always publish guidance as to categories of add-back they deem permissible or not. Surely the only thing voted for in concrete terms was £5m x 2 and £2.5m and the averaging of 2019-20 and 2020-21. Everything else could be open to argument and I'd even query whether lost transfer add-backs are FRS 102 compliant.