QPR (Merged)

[Mr Popodopolous]

8 minutes ago, JamesBCFC said:

I've not seen anywhere that suggests it lasts past January.

Everywhere I've seen says "they will have a transfer embargo for January 2019" "for the January 2019 window " "in January 2019" but nothing to say it will carry on in the summer.

Transfer embargos don't tend to be just one window.

My guess would be that window and if they slip into FFP breach for 16/17-18/19 seasons- which might happen with parachute payments therefore income halving last season and this- then the embargo would just be extended and extended until they comply.

Further, I estimate that in order to comply based on 2016/17 figures, they will need to:

• Have cut their wage bill in 2017/18 by about 30% so to about £21m.
• Post parachute payments, maybe halve it again to £10-11m.
• Or make annual large profits on transfers to compensate the shortfall.

With their income base...may even be worse than that.

[downendcity]

5 minutes ago, JoeAman08 said:

Possibly work with premier league clubs on it? Probably not a perfect way to deal with it but in your Reading scenario if they worked together and EPL enforced the embargo going into the premier league season maybe that would sway clubs? Imagine being promoted but not being allowed to add to your championship squad. Still what if they stay up? Still worth it but possibly if they breach the rules they foreit their PP? Problem with that is if they can’t pay their employess after overspending so back at square one. 

Basically got no clue how to right it but still think more can be done

As far as I'm aware, the latest changes to the EFL financial rules were made with the agreement of the premier league.

In the past one of most ludicrous aspects of the EFL rules was that if a team was promoted, having breached the financial limits, they were beyond the duristinction of the EFL and the premier league were not interested in the issue.

When commenting on the penalties for breaking the financial rules, many seem to have concerns about the impact on an affected club and/or that the club might appeal or create a problem for the league e.g. tying them up in court. I would hope that if a club has transgressed, that any penalty does affect them, otherwise what is the point as the money in the game, and especially the pot of premier league gold, make sit worthwhile for owners to risk everything?

 

[downendcity]

18 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Transfer embargos don't tend to be just one window.

My guess would be that window and if they slip into FFP breach for 16/17-18/19 seasons- which might happen with parachute payments therefore income halving last season and this- then the embargo would just be extended and extended until they comply.

Further, I estimate that in order to comply based on 2016/17 figures, they will need to:

• Have cut their wage bill in 2017/18 by about 30% so to about £21m.
• Post parachute payments, maybe halve it again to £10-11m.
• Or make annual large profits on transfers to compensate the shortfall.

With their income base...may even be worse than that.

...and you are just talking about complying with ffp.

As with Villa, the issue is not just ffp, it is about the ability of the club to remain solvent and meet it's committments. If it can't it goes bust and it was to avoid exactly this that the financial rules were brought in in the first place.

This is potentially the greatest irony in all of this. A club breaches the financial rules, that were meant to deter a club from putting it's financial solvency under threat, and the financial penalties subsequently imposed do exactly that which they were designed to deter and avoid!

 

[downendcity]

Just read this article on the BBC website.

They are absolutely right - the financial penalties handed down are chicken feed in comparison to the financial rewards the clubs in question received in the premier league and this means that  fines for breaching ffp rules will not be any deterrent for owners who are prepared to risk everything for a shot at the prem.

The application of points deduction,and potentially depriving a club promotion is the only failsafe deterrent, but will the EFL have the bottle to see it through?

QPR's £42m settlement with the English Football League for breaking Financial Fair Play rules will not deter other clubs from spending big in pursuit of Premier League riches, according to two football finance experts.

The settlement includes a £17m fine, paying £3m of the EFL's legal costs and the agreement from club shareholders to write off £22m of outstanding loans.

Kieran Maguire, a lecturer in football finance at the University of Liverpool, and Dr Rob Wilson, a sport finance specialist at Sheffield Hallam University, both said the fine could have been bigger.

"QPR have earned £148m in broadcasting fees and parachute payments since committing the offence so the fine does not act as a disincentive for clubs in the future," said Maguire.

"The owners made the decision to go ahead with ignoring the FFP rules in the first place and they are independently wealthy to absorb the true penalty, which should have been at least twice the sum charged."

• Read more: QPR agree £42m FFP settlement

Maguire added that having shareholders agree to turn £21.965m of outstanding loans into capital "is merely an accounting housekeeping issue".

The EFL declined to comment when contacted by BBC Sport.

Rangers are controlled by co-chairmen Tony Fernandes and Ruben Gnanalingam, with Kamarudin Bin Meranun and the family of Indian steel magnate Lakshmi Mittal also holding stakes.

Wilson said the fine and settlement is "more severe" than any faced by sides in the past - but "does not go far enough to put clubs off" overspending in pursuit of promotion.

QPR's deal comes in the same month that Bournemouth reached a £4.75m settlement of their own with the EFL, having originally been expected to pay a fine of £7.5m for breaking rules when they won promotion in 2014-15.

Earlier this year Leicester City faced a £3.1m settlement having broken spending rules to win promotion in 2013-14. Two years later, they won the Premier League title and in the three seasons after winning promotion made a combined pre-tax profit of £52m.

"The rewards are so great in the Premier League, so you would expect the fine to be a bit more substantial," said Wilson.

"But it is difficult - there is a point where you may push too far and there may be more legal challenges or the club will go to the wall, and no-one wants to see that. 

"It's a balanced verdict in many ways.

"This fine makes a big statement, but it could have been even bigger to stop people doing it completely."

[Son of Fred]

On 27/07/2018 at 08:48, Port Said Red said:

The court have ordered them to pay it back at a rate of £100 pw.

As much as that ??

[havanatopia]

Part owned by arguably the richest man on the planet, Mittal, and the EFL come out and say they were wary of affordability. 

Pathetic negation of duty by an inept impotent EFL... For sure the punt for riches will go on.

[downendcity]

Picked this up from a thread on the Forest forum and it indicates that stringent punishment/deterrent is possible and enforceable.

The post is in response to news of QPR's "punishment" this week.

It’s a less draconian system than here in Germany. 

Clubs have to submit accounts and a business plan to the DFB, in order to get a license to play. If the sums don’t add up, it’s automatic relegation. Most recently this happened to 1860 München, who were relegated from the 2. Bundesliga to the Regional Oberliga, the fourth tier of German football. 

Happily for them though, they won the Oberliga Bayern, so will play in the 3. Liga next season, after sorting out their finances.
 

If we had something like this in place, sales of brown courderoy suits to football club owners would go through the roof! 

[BobBobSuperBob]

For all the huff and puff further proof that breaching FFP As it stands will not result in any punishment that significantly impacts

 

[Bristol Rob]

28 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

For all the huff and puff further proof that breaching FFP As it stands will not result in any punishment that significantly impacts

 

Can't help but wonder if the offending club was a less fashionable one like a Rotherham if the penalty would be deemed so lenient.

But, a London club, with history....

[Lanterne Rouge]

10 minutes ago, Bristol Rob said:

Can't help but wonder if the offending club was a less fashionable one like a Rotherham if the penalty would be deemed so lenient.

But, a London club, with history....

……… and rich, politically powerful owners...……...

[downendcity]

45 minutes ago, Bristol Rob said:

Can't help but wonder if the offending club was a less fashionable one like a Rotherham if the penalty would be deemed so lenient.

But, a London club, with history....

If it was a less fashionable club, then you can bet that they would have been more heavily punished, and would not have been shown the same leniency, than QPR.

[Ivorguy]

There is something rotten at the very heart of English football, and it is money.  

The game we used to know is dead but the game today may also find itself at some point in serious trouble.

I sometimes have the feeling that we are waiting for the volcano to erupt in multiple financial scandals 

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, Ivorguy said:

There is something rotten at the very heart of English football, and it is money.  

The game we used to know is dead but the game today may also find itself at some point in serious trouble.

I sometimes have the feeling that we are waiting for the volcano to erupt in multiple financial scandals 

It's the biggest ponzi scheme ever known 

[reddoh]

I think its quite simple cheat to go up drop out of the league, change the rules so all losses are paid by the owner and the PL,FA,UEFA and FIFA make up the rest if the owner can't pay. 

[downendcity]

1 hour ago, Ivorguy said:

There is something rotten at the very heart of English football, and it is money.  

The game we used to know is dead but the game today may also find itself at some point in serious trouble.

I sometimes have the feeling that we are waiting for the volcano to erupt in multiple financial scandals 

When Paul Pogba's agent is worth twice as much ( his fee from Pogba's transfer to Man U) as Liverpool has just paid for Shaqiri, you know that football has lost all connection with reality.

Not that any of us would really have wanted it to happen to any club, but if Villa had gone bust it might just have been the event to make the football world wake up to financial reality. Until that type of thing does happen players, agents, owners and fans will keep believing that there is a bottomless pit of money that will keep funding ever rising fees and wages and that the worst will never happen to their club.

 

[Davefevs]

They’ve been let off lightly.

if I were a Championship club (or any EFL club for that matter), I wouldn’t sell any of my players to them, let them go a whole season without any signings in effect.

I hope they go down.  No sympathy, and £17m is a pittance versus the reward they got in the Prem.  It doesn’t even count against FFP.

[BobBobSuperBob]

30 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

They’ve been let off lightly.

if I were a Championship club (or any EFL club for that matter), I wouldn’t sell any of my players to them, let them go a whole season without any signings in effect.

I hope they go down.  No sympathy, and £17m is a pittance versus the reward they got in the Prem.  It doesn’t even count against FFP.

It also sets a precedent in terms of punishment for Clubs in the future as when they try and impose harsher penalties (Or IF they ever do) the Club involved will have an expensive QC with these case papers in his hand 

[downendcity]

39 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

It also sets a precedent in terms of punishment for Clubs in the future as when they try and impose harsher penalties (Or IF they ever do) the Club involved will have an expensive QC with these case papers in his hand 

With QPR, all this happened under the "old rules", i.e. QPR had secured promotion before the EFL penalties were levied and by then they were in the prem , so the football league could nothing about it until they were relegated back into the championship. By this time QPR's finances were shot and I think Im right in saying that the club's future could have been placed in jeopardy, had they been forced to pay the fine in full. That would have made the league look completely stupid, as the financial rules were designed to stop clubs putting themselves in financial peril!

Were QPR's situation arise now, then if the breach would be identified during the third season in the 3 year cycle, by production of the club's projected accounts. The new rules allow for penalty to be applied immediately, i.e. in the same season. This includes not only a fine and/or transfer embargo but now they can apply a points deduction and potentially deprive the club promotion.

Of course, it would probably be the case that any club affected would come  armed with the best legal minds they can afford to fight the case. However, my hope ( perhaps over optimistic!) is that the EFL would have the balls to make an example of a club achieving promotion by cheating, as to do anything less would  create a precedent that other clubs could then use to defend exactly the same financial strategy, thereby rendering the financial rules impotent. It would be hard for a club to argue that QPR's case is a precedent, because the points deduction was not available then and it was not made under the requirement to produce projected accounts in the 3rd year - the 3 year cycle means that clubs should foresee a breach of the rules and take action accordingly - the situation Villa probably find themselves in, although their immediate priority this summer was staying afloat!

Unless the EFL really cracks down hard  it will make a mockery of the rules and handicap the majority of clubs that are trying to manage their affairs prudently - Bristol City being one of them!

 

[22A]

One TV channel interviewed some of their fans. They are angry with their owner for landing them in financial trouble. They are even angrier that the EFL  has punished them more severely than any other club that's broken the rules.

 

https://www.fansnetwork.co.uk/football/queensparkrangers/news/48305/qpr-take-ffp-medicine-so-when-will-things-get-better-column 

When you’ve spent four years staring down the barrel of a £42m fine, ending up paying £17m (plus £3m costs) must feel like a bit of a relief. Particularly – and this is key from a QPR point of view – as the club will make the payments in instalments over ten years. A transfer embargo for the January 2019 window, again, doesn’t feel too bad, as QPR have pretty much stopped signing players anyway.

But just because you’ve successfully escaped the threat of being eaten by a crocodile doesn’t mean you’ll happily be mauled by a lion, and this is still a record fine levied by the football authorities in this country and it’s against a Championship club with just 7,800 season ticket holders.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Rules have since changed in a fairly big way-  so it'll be interesting to see.

They certainly got off quite lightly though.

From my own calculations for last season and the 2 real results Forest and possibly Reading have  lost in excess of £39m apiece between 2015/16 and 2017/18 and yet Forest particularly are spending stupidly? Doesn't stack up- this is after debt write offs are obviously excluded which as far as I know don't count towards FFP. I'm not saying those clubs over 3 years breached by a huge amount, my estimates so far suggest  probably a couple of million each over 3 years so say £41-42m losses instead of £39m something like- but nonetheless they breached IMO. Reading haven't really signed much or spent a huge amount this summer, but Forest...

@Davefevs This is the bit that confuses me. Even if it doesn't count towards FFP in terms of losses, surely they have to make a provision for the £1.7m in the annual accounts each year? Which post parachute payments is about 9-10% of income- obvious ways there are wage bill fall, or sales, higher ticket prices whatever- but legit income. Or do they just get a higher loss allowance to account for the fine? It seems a grey area that...

On this, there are stories that Villa have had their transfer embargo lifted!! Unless they have some big incoming sales then I don't really see how- in fact nobody even reported they were under an embargo until the news of it being lifted! All very odd.

[Davefevs]

@Mr Popodopolous guess it will be treated / excluded in the same way Academy costs are in FFP.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Thanks @Davefevs

That's barely any punishment at all then.

I assumed, that while it may not count towards FFP costs, that they may have to cut their wage budget or transfer budget or generate that extra income naturally by that amount on average for the next decade. While not a huge punishment, it would still act as a deterrent and certainly leave them hamstrung while not bust.

However unless they get a long- and I mean a long- embargo. Well I guess this shows at least sets a precedent in the sense that the Football League won't let infringements go- but they got lucky. Under new rules maybe different, even heard on the radio that they maybe going after Wolves over FFP. 

Wonder who the first club to be properly clobbered with a points deduction- or demotion from top 2 to top 6, top 6 to 7th or top 2 to 7th will be?

[downendcity]

6 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Thanks @Davefevs

That's barely any punishment at all then.

I assumed, that while it may not count towards FFP costs, that they may have to cut their wage budget or transfer budget or generate that extra income naturally by that amount on average for the next decade. While not a huge punishment, it would still act as a deterrent and certainly leave them hamstrung while not bust.

However unless they get a long- and I mean a long- embargo. Well I guess this shows at least sets a precedent in the sense that the Football League won't let infringements go- but they got lucky. Under new rules maybe different, even heard on the radio that they maybe going after Wolves over FFP. 

Wonder who the first club to be properly clobbered with a points deduction- or demotion from top 2 to top 6, top 6 to 7th or top 2 to 7th will be?

With our luck, it will be us when we are 10 points clear at the top and produce our projected accounts. 

After the punishment handed out to Wright and Fammy,  we will probably be demoted to the conference, despite being overspent by just £50!

[Lord Northski]

Rather than QPR being banned from making any January 2019 transfers. I suggest the harsher penalty of Mark Ashton and Lee Johnson being put in charge of them. 

[Out of his pie crust]

Speaking of qpr...a little off topic...anyone know when away tickets are on sale?

[Monkeh]

2 hours ago, Lord Northski said:

Rather than QPR being banned from making any January 2019 transfers. I suggest the harsher penalty of Mark Ashton and Lee Johnson being put in charge of them. 

what a lose out on players like baker, Fammy, CoD, etc......

[Bar BS3]

Am I missing something here, or shouldn’t this kind of thing be able to be stopped, rather than punished in retrospect..?

Why don’t the FA just hold each clubs audited budgets and then have to financially sanction any transfer before it completes, after checking that it falls in line..? 

Surely that’s not too hard to implement and will stop clubs spending beyond their allowance and also stops them benefiting from cheating, before later being fined for it. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

6 minutes ago, Bar BS3 said:

Am I missing something here, or shouldn’t this kind of thing be able to be stopped, rather than punished in retrospect..?

Why don’t the FA just hold each clubs audited budgets and then have to financially sanction any transfer before it completes, after checking that it falls in line..? 

Surely that’s not too hard to implement and will stop clubs spending beyond their allowance and also stops them benefiting from cheating, before later being fined for it. 

The new rules might do this- projected accounts submitted by clubs in March or the end of March give time for a points deduction or a demotion from top 2 to top 6, top 6 to playoffs or out the playoffs altogether.

If it's applied properly, I would suggest Reading signing Baldock would be doubtful whether he's registered (they breached FFP IMO) and all of Forest's signings this summer that cost money the same, based on my ongoing calculations which suggest Forest and Reading lost over £39m over 15/16 to 17/18. Even after sales by Forest- or in Reading's case the last 2 years of parachute payments- they still lost over £39m across the 3 seasons IMO.

[Lord Northski]

6 hours ago, Monkeh said:

what a lose out on players like baker, Fammy, CoD, etc......

If memory serves, they were summer signings. 

My dig was at our January transfer activity which rather than assisting our promotion push, pretty much put an end to it, and QPR  have been banned from January transfers  

Perhaps too subtle for some. Hope this helps.