Mr Popodopolous

Think he like many midfielders we have or had, are best suited to a genuine CM 3. We deploy it so often but it seems like something that could bring out the strengths of some while masking some of their weaknesses. In his case high energy, easy to expose if he's one of a pair but in a trio...you can get that different set of characteristics.

The other aspect is, I touched upon in my post yesterday. Acceleration of wages, amortisation or whatever. The latter would make it easier to offload THIS season as costs already front loaded, only the accounts will tell. I'll give it a go, using baseline calculations and baseline EFL permitted add-backs and assuming no big ticket exceptional items last season or indeed any revision to our accounts for 2020-21 or even 2019-20! T-2...(2019-20 and 2020-21 averaged) £14m P&S Loss (£38m and £10m losses added and halved to £24m, minus £5m in allowable and £5m in Covid). T-1...£20.5m P&S Loss. (£28m accounting loss minus £5m in allowable, minus £2.5m in Covid). Therefore T... We require a £4.5m P&S Loss THIS season. No more Covid allowances, so basically an accounting loss not exceeding £9.5m if the £5m in allowables is the same. Or put another way, an improvement of £18.5m once we factor out the inability to offset vs Covid this year. That's all baseline and contains some assumptions of course.

You beat me to it! Was making a long post explaining but there was and is definitely a several million gap between Holdings and the Club in isolation...additonally, was SL talking about wages solely or including NI and the other extras? If we had indeed got the Bristol City HOLDINGS final wage bill down to £20m, or halved I wouldn't be posting about FFP for us as I know that we would be clear without doubt. It is in the same way that I am questioning whether Stoke truly cut their wage bill as was implied last season to £27m in 2021-22 (their group wage bill was £50m in 2020-21 once NI etc included).

Cheers will set one up today. My other contention is, some people (not saying you) say the wage bill is down to £20m this, halved that but I just don't see how at this stage personally. Some players have left and some cutbacks have occured but that seems wildly optimistic to me...or conflating basic wage for playing side perhaps with total remuneration for BCFC Holdings. Accounts should shed some light...

Ah okay, thanks so limb (e) then. In other words we might or might not know how big our claims, in particular the transfer market related ones, are. Aware about the club-by-club analysis but unusual methods used by a few seem subject to challenge. How compliance is achieved has proved important down the line...the word of the auditor is and cannot be final in the context of FFP either, one of the cases upheld this principle. You're right of course, perhaps all clubs are doing it or a lot of clubs...seems the kind of add-back that would be a contentious issue if not though! Ha I am a little yes! Been checking it daily a few times a day...

I also believe that we are set to exceed limits to this season, based on the £39m, allowable costs, combination of the two seasons and the EFL voted on Covid limits- by how much is the question. Certainly don't think that anyone is lying as such but possibly different stances or interpretations on each side? It seems a fairly strange thing to allow given that this was by no means a model that was widely used. 'Investments can fall as well as rise'. This goes for Stoke and their mix of transfer add-backs plus Impairment, Nottingham Forest and the transfer add-back portion of their FFP and Fulham too given that they seem to (in the PL) have lost £90m!! Albeit £21m of Impairment perhaps allocated to Covid. Seems open to challenge to me, if just a few clubs are doing it. Hire Independent experts of your own if you are the Football League and see where things go. Not a short process but I can see (provided that it isn't widespread) these practices from a few clubs raising the hackles of the majority. I totally get adding back lost season ticket revenue, lost ticket revenue, lost matchday revenue, lost corporate revenue and varied other categories... Anyway today should be accounts day? Sure it was stated that they would be out in the next couple of weeks!

Good post, totally agree with the OP. We HAVE to weather this storm, NP is the man to steer the ship to calmer waters IMO, Gould as well off the pitch and he is a big loss or will be when he goes. Good point about the officials too, we should.give them hell really, get right on their back- they give us very little, certainly big calls wise.

What's the general thinking then about squaring the circle of a £28m reported loss and apparently being on course to avoid a points deduction.. 1) I wonder if we have accelerated costs, for example a BIG impairment in 2021-22 which means naturally a drop to the cost base this coming season and indeed helps us moving forward. 2) Or perhaps we have done a provision for Onerous contracts, for unwanted players. Thereby accelerating some of their wages to 2021-22. 3) Or a mix. 4) Clearly there are Covid add-backs but ones that ate large enough to fill the hole in terms of the transfer market would be controversial and I would have thought open to challenge especially down the line. 5) We have our position and the EFL haven't fully ie unequivocally signed it off! Sure they will have ratified the raw numbers but the process by which they are reached?? Well this can be analysed further down the track, FFP isn't an instant assessment necessarily- perhaps an IDC could adjudicate on the validity of the methods used by us and others.

Well one baseline stat pertaining to Naismith is...League games only. 11.30 shots per game when he is on the pitch. 9.06 shots per game when he is off the pitch. Up to and including 1st half Coventry at home for period 1, from 2nd half Coventry at home to present for period 2. He just gives us that extra thrust, dimension IMO.

Pring too was our academy wasn't he? Benarous?

There were errors but data would be interesting to see. Clearly stats aren't all, but the intangible of the extra attacking threat (in mindset not numbers as such) for us, which in turn gives the opposition something to think about can't be understated IMO.

? Not anymore by the sound...

Often we have bounced back well, recently anyway. A little less clear the last few games... 1) Virtually asleep 1st half v QPR, then a solid point v Coventry. 2) The complete no show at Birmingham, then a decent or at least spirited win v Preston. 3) The terrible game v Millwall, the 1st win at WBA in 29 years! 4) The no show at Reading, the good match v Swansea and indeed Sheffield United. We're surely due a good one on those trends...

Financials aside, I voted to keep Pearson. It's a bloody tough job, think his experience will see us through the storm.

£12m profit yes, but that was in 1 year only. They had a total wage bill of £50m in 2020-21 for example, that being the final year of Parachute Payments. Worth noting that they sold the Stadium and Training Ground for a profit of £32m that season (2020-21) as well as seeking to allocate significant Covid costs.. For all that, despite a) Year 3 of Parachute Payments contributing to a Turnover of £40m, b) That £32m profit on disposal c) Receipt of £2.5m of Business Interruption Insurance... ...They STILL posted a pre tax loss of £9-10m!? Unless we are to believe that they truly cut wages by £20-25m in 2021-22...we've been unable to do anything of the sort as a %. Seems to me that the two clubs have received very different treatment on the face of it.

We are one of the worst placed quite frankly. If Stoke are so terribly placed, why do they have SIX PL loanees plus Alex Neil is reportedly on £1.1m per year there. Gayle is on £20k per week, sacked a manager and Holden...all costs. Also added permanently players such as Wilmot, Vrancic, Surridge last season plus a loan for Maja from France. (Having said that I have some very serious questions about their spending and attempts to allocate costs). I saw Gould say it live and read his words back but it'll need to be some major Covid allowances to see us fine...because using the EFL standard ones combined with a reported £28m loss, I'd estimate an £18m improvement this season in our financial position just to see us level out!! Luton have actually spent a bit this summer, the other 3 you mentioned all added PL loanees although I take your general point. We are in such a bad place or have been that PL loanees have not really been possible for 2 years. Remember too, the EFL have the right to review. Gould didn't actually categorically rule out that we would have any issues although we seem quite bullish, wouldn't surprise me if the EFL investigated clubs for some Covid claims at some point...us, Stoke, Fulham, Nottingham Forest all spring to mind. Coventry's embargo is short term probably, imposed during October due to HMRC issues which can still be rectified by January. Reading's embargo is more of a soft one that sees them able to sign players only within a certain averaged wage, no transfer fees etc. Of course if Chelsea send Rahman on loan for free that is useful indeed!! Did it with him and Drinkwater last year too.

Hindsight to some extent. When we signed him, he had gained 2 promotions and 2 play-off seasons in his prior 4 Championship seasons. He was 25. Starting to enter yet not fully into peak age range. Not bad albeit conservative with possession, technically speaking. Of course none of that is any good if players are consistently injured.

Possibly have misunderstood your point yes. I am going back well before the PL with my assessment periods, basing it on among other things, criteria such as years spent in the top 2 divisions, possibly attendances. Trophies although until 2004, Middlesbrough had won zero major trophies- same as us! North East is historically or has been a bit of a hotbed of football, although otoh we have a huge catchment area to tap into. Derby and West Brom...basing it on top 2 divisions, trophies won etc. Am guessing that both habe a bigger supporter base or have done over time but again success helps to out this in place. Otoh I do think having looked again that we are or have been a historically bigger club than Brighton!

How far back do you want to go... What defines size of a Club? Relatively recent history? Size of fanbase? Totality of history, status of a Club ie years spent in the top two divisions? Or some combination of it all. Historically, we are not bigger than Blackburn..we have bigger gates than them and have for a number of seasons, but does that make us a bigger club? Matter of debate tbh! Perhaps they overachieved greatly and Walker took them up again but size of club is subjective I believe, metrics help with that too.

Some truth to that, agreed. Brentford recruited very well to a system though to some extent, again made the most and reinvested very well. Maupay cost for example, a fraction of the fee for Diedhiou. Younger, technically superior, more dynamic. £1.6m! Watkins is cited as the one who got away but Maupay would have been a very useful addition too...Watkins £1.8m reportedly. Benrahma to Brentford, £2.8m. All 3 were sold for significant profits. You could have signed Benrahma, Maupay and Watkins fee wise, for not a huge amount more than our record signing at that time, Diedhiou. A million more tops, probably less. Huddersfield under Wagner tapped the German market very well, Luton yes they have shot up to the playoffs and top 6 pushing again, they have really overachieved.

All of them have had the luxury of a) To some extent, a steady plan and b) None of them are in such a financial state that they cannot even sign a PL loanee. For 2 years.

Middlesbrough and Sheffield United are historically bigger clubs than us so you can cross them off for a start. Talking more PL, far more time in the top two divisions etc. Blackburn won some trophies in their early days and again have spent only six years in their history outside of the top 2 divisions, arguably a bigger club irrespective of Walker. Derby, clearly a bigger club. West Brom likewise. Others I have more sympathy on, ie Watford, Norwich and Fulham for example. Some of these pumped up by money, Parachute Payments or a combination of the two although I expect that even pre PL, Norwich have featured more heavily in the top 2 divisions. Brighton are a curious case. They were turbocharged by a combination of promotion and their move to the Amex in 2011-12. Went up in 2010-11, left the Withdean that same year. Attendances rose by 12.5-13k in just one year and they have comfortably averaged 20k plus ever since, whereas we have only averaged 20k plus twice in my lifetime I believe. Have our turnovers ever risen by 12-13k in one season in modern times, or has our turnover ever pretty much trebled in a year?

Other clubs do. Tottenham with Clarke, Crystal Palace with Liam Delap, in the case of the latter Derby were deeper in the mire (albeit with 21 pts deducted).

Line from the Times, which suggests that the amount on the table of extra cash for the EFL would be another £170m per year.. Unsure how much Parachute Payments would be cut by either although it uses the term 'drastically'.

From a financial perspective, TV money alone is several million lower, obviously gates etc would fall- definitely revenue would fall but non matchday revenue commercially ie events etc may not take such a big hit. Think I'll leave it to @Davefevsas I don't know so much about the L1 stuff, I suppose my query is how does it transition as in if you have 2 years of Championship football under the 3 year rule would a club who post say £20m and £10m in FFP terms be expected to reduce their losses to £9m in the 1st League One season or is that totally forgotten.