The Championship FFP Thread (Merged)

[Rob26]

15 hours ago, Psychopomp said:

Championship football is financially and sportingly broken. Wages far exceed income and PP makes a mockery of the competition. Until salary caps, youth player farming and income distribution are changed (Including prem), football is heading one way outside the top 5/6 clubs. It is a self inflicted implosion , where you cannot say there was not enough money. Greed and self interest have taken over and are out of control and unregulated. 

As an example, Leicester, turnover around £200M yet lose £95M. Complete madness. If you cannot make a club function with £200m to have say 30 players run around a kick a ball, then there is a complete detachment from reality and common sense going on. A Prem club should be a profit making enterprise , financially viable and stable. What exactly are these clubs chasing ? Madness. 

 

I think the way FFP is for all leagues there should be slowly rolling back the allowed losses so every club eventually has to break even, even if it was just half a million a season for the championship for the first few years then up it to a million a year allowance removed, it would give everyone time to move to a system where it forces the clubs to be fully sustainable on their own. or at least make it so clubs lose a lot less, if that means some extra money needs to be handed down the leagues then I think that should be the case.

doubt they will do it but feel like its the right thing to do, and does not have to be put on everyone quickly, do it over the long term so clubs can adjust to their spending. 

would be bad for us, but think we would eventually get there.

 

[Port Said Red]

To some extent I can accept the spending that remains in the game, the bulk of a transfer fee we receive for a Semenyo, which then filters down to Wycombe and others via Mehmetti, etc. What bugs me is the amount that leaves the game through things like Agents fees. If those come out the players pockets then fine, but so much comes from the buying and selling clubs, it's ludicrous. 

When I was working we completed Compliance training every year, and some of the examples of Money Laundering and Bribery and Corruption looked very similar to what we hear Agents receive payments for. 

[Rob26]

I also think there should be some way owners can pump in unlimited money of their personal cash into a club and this boosts their FFP, but does not add to any debt the club owes.

like maybe you have to pump it into a special account monitored by the league, buy a player for 20m, with 5m of wages liability, but only got 5m left of your FFP budget for example, then you need to place 20m in this account that you cannot touch until the final costs for the player have occurred. 

So when you sell the player you can get back what you haven't spent and a refund of any transfer fee paid that is recovered through the sale, or you simply let the club have the revenue to boost FFP too but have to write it off.

I'm sure could be simplified, but would like to see a way people can invest massive amounts into clubs so the clubs benefit and that will trickle down to everyone else too on future deals, but also need to make sure if they do allow it that no liabilities are placed on the club for any of these deals that take clubs out of FFP.

The payments for the players can come direct from this bank account automatically, and to release money back from the pot to the owner they would need to get it authorised from the league. 

I think it would result in a massive amount of money coming in for clubs too, but if you allow it you have to make sure the club stays solvent and benefits from the purchases as a donation rather than increasing the clubs liabilities which if the owners have losses on their outside businesses or grow bored and don't want to put any more money in causes massive cashflow squeezes that can place clubs in situations where they have to be sold or go into administration. Having that money on the books to cover anything over FFP would make them more attractive purchases to the vultures looking to take over.

 

Sure a better system could be made, but they are billions off the books at some of the massive clubs that I think the owners do want to put in. I would let them put it in but place them under more intensive scrutiny and pay everything up front where they cannot get that money back unless the spend is not realised. 

[Davefevs]

21 minutes ago, Rob26 said:

I also think there should be some way owners can pump in unlimited money of their personal cash into a club and this boosts their FFP, but does not add to any debt the club owes.

like maybe you have to pump it into a special account monitored by the league, buy a player for 20m, with 5m of wages liability, but only got 5m left of your FFP budget for example, then you need to place 20m in this account that you cannot touch until the final costs for the player have occurred. 

So when you sell the player you can get back what you haven't spent and a refund of any transfer fee paid that is recovered through the sale, or you simply let the club have the revenue to boost FFP too but have to write it off.

I'm sure could be simplified, but would like to see a way people can invest massive amounts into clubs so the clubs benefit and that will trickle down to everyone else too on future deals, but also need to make sure if they do allow it that no liabilities are placed on the club for any of these deals that take clubs out of FFP.

The payments for the players can come direct from this bank account automatically, and to release money back from the pot to the owner they would need to get it authorised from the league. 

I think it would result in a massive amount of money coming in for clubs too, but if you allow it you have to make sure the club stays solvent and benefits from the purchases as a donation rather than increasing the clubs liabilities which if the owners have losses on their outside businesses or grow bored and don't want to put any more money in causes massive cashflow squeezes that can place clubs in situations where they have to be sold or go into administration. Having that money on the books to cover anything over FFP would make them more attractive purchases to the vultures looking to take over.

 

Sure a better system could be made, but they are billions off the books at some of the massive clubs that I think the owners do want to put in. I would let them put it in but place them under more intensive scrutiny and pay everything up front where they cannot get that money back unless the spend is not realised. 

Rob - in Lg1/2 FFP (SCMP) they can do exactly that.

It is why Ipswich have been able to spend in the way they have.  There accounts are due soon.  Looking forward to seeing these!

From what I’ve read of the new draft UEFA FFP rules, they align more closely to SCMP (which is salary to turnover based) than the PL and Champ FFP (which is profit and loss related).

I think the new rules will be better.

[Rob26]

https://www.htafc.com/news/2023/march/club-statement-ownership/

huddersfield avoid administration

Edited March 23, 2023 by Rob26

[Rob26]

On 22/03/2023 at 11:45, Davefevs said:

Rob - in Lg1/2 FFP (SCMP) they can do exactly that.

It is why Ipswich have been able to spend in the way they have.  There accounts are due soon.  Looking forward to seeing these!

From what I’ve read of the new draft UEFA FFP rules, they align more closely to SCMP (which is salary to turnover based) than the PL and Champ FFP (which is profit and loss related).

I think the new rules will be better.

mad how they allow it in them leagues but not the championship, should be allowed across all of football i think, but has to be donations only with no liabilities to the clubs, 

 

[Davefevs]

13 minutes ago, Rob26 said:

mad how they allow it in them leagues but not the championship, should be allowed across all of football i think, but has to be donations only with no liabilities to the clubs, 

 

I tend to agree…and I think the potential new rules will be a better regulator of cost / spend / financial management that what we have in the Champ and P/L.  But PPs skews our league. I think others have suggested (rightly imho), why couldn’t SL put in the equivalent of a PP if he wanted to?

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

I tend to agree…and I think the potential new rules will be a better regulator of cost / spend / financial management that what we have in the Champ and P/L.  But PPs skews our league. I think others have suggested (rightly imho), why couldn’t SL put in the equivalent of a PP if he wanted to?

If wage inflation is the issue though and it is an important one, v competitive balance with which Parachute Payments are the driver at this level some kind of exclusion of the bulk of Parachute Payments could he one holding position and eventually realign Solidarity and Parachute Payments into one big pot and distributed accordingly.

Not sure an answer that will be found that all clubs etc will be happy with.

[Mr Popodopolous]

In respect of late submission of account to the League, I re-read the regulations.

It constitutes misconduct as well as the embargo rules, both Burnley and Huddersfield appear to be in breach of this therefore surely they merit misconduct charges?

Edited March 23, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

No news yet on Reading.

Can only assume it's being contested, and by that I mean either the -6 itself or that the League are pushing for a punishment in addition to the -6. I still don't think they have breached the Upper Loss Limit but the Business Plan compliance does look suspect.

Could be something like -6 for the suspended sanction and -3 for the specific offence of failing the Business Plan.

Edited March 23, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Davefevs]

Bournemouth:

[Mr Popodopolous]

I sort of partially disregarded Bournemouth a bit but us there any way that they could have breached FFP enroute up?

Upper adjusted Loss Limit to 2022 was £72m- their 2020-21 profit was a good buffer but...

Think they're probably fine but it's uncertain.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Had they not gone up, well Year 3 of Parachutes drops £20m is it and the Upper Loss Limit shrinks from £72m to £55.5m.

It mentions Promotion Bonuses but doesn't say how much, they're excluded- £10-15m maybe?

Pre tax losses as follows:

2018-19, £32m (PL)

2019-20, £60m (PL)

2020-21, £16m Profit (Championship)

(Combined averaged £22m loss)

2021-22, £55m (Championship)

Challenge for the club and remember a Category 3 Academy so no huge expenditure there is to work backwards from £109m to losses not exceeding £72m once adjustments etc factored in.

Fulham especially and Nottingham Forest to some extent should be interesting to see.

Edited March 24, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Seems hard to argue for notably higher Covid losses than EFL permitted add-backs too tbh. The £5m, £5m and £2.5m looks about par in their case given the non TV revenue streams although perhaps a bit more due to PL and Parachute rebates.

Their typical FFP add-backs probably around £4-5m per year, compliance seems very tight.

We're no longer the highest loss makers in 2021-22!  At this level, Bournemouth are the winners, the leaders.

Cardiff I thought had taken the lead but the debt thing cancelled out at a group level.

Otoh absolute fiannciak sanity albeit League One. Kieran Maguire breakdown of Rotherham- well done Rotherham.

Think they would be higher in the League if Warne was still there too, especially had they added players such as Hjelde, Fosu, Hugill and others under Warne, given him that January backing. No slight on Taylor but Warne knew that club and those players very well- they iirc had 14 pts from 8 games when he left and beat Reading, Birmingham and Blackpool at a combined aggregate of 9-0 albeit all at home.

Talking of Birmingham, we'll probably see theirs in the next few days.

 

Edited March 24, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[chinapig]

I see Wigan players have boycotted training as a protest against wages still not being paid.

This is a club that came out of administration and then lost £7m I believe last season.

[Mr Popodopolous]

19 minutes ago, chinapig said:

I see Wigan players have boycotted training as a protest against wages still not being paid.

This is a club that came out of administration and then lost £7m I believe last season.

Lost £7m but worse than that, wages were and I dunno if promotion bonuses were paid but 156 pct of turnover!?

Post administration wow that is, I thought the EFL have strong monitoring powers how was that permitted unless the wage structure was heavily incentivised I dunno.

Now a nice contrast with Derby that. David Clowes reportedly said a target within 5 years is...Championship football. Sounds as if they're in very safe hands. He sounds a sensible owner.

Edited March 24, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[cidered abroad]

On 22/03/2023 at 11:18, Rob26 said:

I also think there should be some way owners can pump in unlimited money of their personal cash into a club and this boosts their FFP, but does not add to any debt the club owes.

like maybe you have to pump it into a special account monitored by the league, buy a player for 20m, with 5m of wages liability, but only got 5m left of your FFP budget for example, then you need to place 20m in this account that you cannot touch until the final costs for the player have occurred. 

So when you sell the player you can get back what you haven't spent and a refund of any transfer fee paid that is recovered through the sale, or you simply let the club have the revenue to boost FFP too but have to write it off.

I'm sure could be simplified, but would like to see a way people can invest massive amounts into clubs so the clubs benefit and that will trickle down to everyone else too on future deals, but also need to make sure if they do allow it that no liabilities are placed on the club for any of these deals that take clubs out of FFP.

The payments for the players can come direct from this bank account automatically, and to release money back from the pot to the owner they would need to get it authorised from the league. 

I think it would result in a massive amount of money coming in for clubs too, but if you allow it you have to make sure the club stays solvent and benefits from the purchases as a donation rather than increasing the clubs liabilities which if the owners have losses on their outside businesses or grow bored and don't want to put any more money in causes massive cashflow squeezes that can place clubs in situations where they have to be sold or go into administration. Having that money on the books to cover anything over FFP would make them more attractive purchases to the vultures looking to take over.

 

Sure a better system could be made, but they are billions off the books at some of the massive clubs that I think the owners do want to put in. I would let them put it in but place them under more intensive scrutiny and pay everything up front where they cannot get that money back unless the spend is not realised. 

That is basically what happened before FFP and any other method etc, came into being. The chairmen and board members  quietly made up the loss every year. Thus the bigger clubs with wealthy Board members in each Division were the ones who won titles and cups and those with less money struggled on to avoid relegation. As long as that system kept the clubs going it was OK. as most clubs behaved with some responsibility. It's when an owner or a board spend ore than they put in that trouble comes.

So what is different now except that those who break the rules are the ones with the brainiest accountants who are able to fiddle the annual results. Where there is cash, is where the fiddling goes on. Ordinary working people never earn enough to do anything but survive. Those with loads of cash can afford to pay for the fiddling!

[Rob26]

1 hour ago, chinapig said:

I see Wigan players have boycotted training as a protest against wages still not being paid.

This is a club that came out of administration and then lost £7m I believe last season.

https://fanbanter.co.uk/chaos-at-wigan-as-players-speak-out-go-on-strike-fixture-at-risk-and-owners-lies-slammed/ not good :laugh:

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 hour ago, cidered abroad said:

That is basically what happened before FFP and any other method etc, came into being. The chairmen and board members  quietly made up the loss every year. Thus the bigger clubs with wealthy Board members in each Division were the ones who won titles and cups and those with less money struggled on to avoid relegation. As long as that system kept the clubs going it was OK. as most clubs behaved with some responsibility. It's when an owner or a board spend ore than they put in that trouble comes.

So what is different now except that those who break the rules are the ones with the brainiest accountants who are able to fiddle the annual results. Where there is cash, is where the fiddling goes on. Ordinary working people never earn enough to do anything but survive. Those with loads of cash can afford to pay for the fiddling!

Just on the Football point, the big exploitable loophole at our level was the Fixed Asset one.

That was shut under the one year FFP regs and UEFA sensibly never opened it in the first place.

However for some reason when it switched to the 3 year rule it reopened or was opened, worth doing a counter factual adjusting out profits on disposal of stadium or training ground and looking at the FFP results without, I started this the other day.

The other big one is Covid and there are a few clubs who have assigned bogus and opportunist claims to player valuation who should be held to account.

In one case I don't believe that the adjustment out or reassignment would materially affect their FFP returns anyway ie tip from compliant to breach but in a few others it may well do. Can think of 4 clubs across the top 2 divisions.

That is a key test for me, if an adjustment is made are a club still compliant at all times.

Aston Villa

They itemised stuff. I don't believe they breach to 2020-2021 anyway even with the relevant downward adjustment out were it made if we're talking transfer market stuff. Selling Grealish for £100 smooths matters well from last season.

We all know their game changing loophole was the £36m stadium sale profit in the year of promotion.

Everton

Huge red flags all over the place. Their losses were astronomical but they seemed to have argued £82m in Covid losses over 2019-20 and 2020-21 which in itself maybe but then they've sought to add £88m in lose transfer profit and cost saving taking it to £170m, seeking to argue that up to a further £50m is possible.

Their wage bill in fact actually rose during 2020-21 so I don't see how their arguments stand up tbh. They're massive cheats. Think their pre tax losses were £384m from 2017-18 to 2020-21, it's not like they were a little bit over. In FFP terms their pre tax losses once averaging kicks in was £255m in that period.

Fulham

Not actually listed that much but you can kind of extrapolate against past seasons what might constitute realistic losses. The big one thete is £20-21m in impairment assigned to Covid. They lost £93m that season alone btw.

Stoke

They're a bit like the ying to Everton's yang. Selling Bursik, Collins, Souttar plus a sell on for Collins is good work but my problem is largely to 2020-21. Wage bill seemingly fell £13m in a season which can also be praised but how compliance was achieved I have issues with...

1) In 2019-20 they posted a pre tax loss of £88m. However of this:

A) £8m were regular Covid costs and rebates whixh when itemised looked okay as Parachute Payments would have taken a hit too. That's fine if maybe a little bit high.

B) Some £30m of their Impairment of Player Registration were assigned to the impact of Covid-19. This has a dual effect which is firstly to exclude it from the pre tax loss and secondly to remove it from future costs.

Possibly a triple effect which is to enable players to be moved on with partial wage payments or mutual agreements without incurring a loss on disposal.

2) Then in 2020-21.

A) £7m in regular Covid losses. Once again I get it and makes some sense over the 2 seasons that's fine...

B) £11m assigned to apparent lost player transfer profits and or cost savings. That's a nonsense.

C) Stadium and Training Ground 'sold' for a combined profit of £32m though the the rent looks more than fair at this point in time.

3) Then in 2021-22

A) Like I say cost base definitely trending well and Collins sale good nut...

B) £4m assigned to Covid that year. Given that £2-3m was transfer related again dodgy although the real offence are in the prior 2 years. I doubt that would have a material impact.

Honourable mention  to Nottingham Forest as well. Oh their Covid losses across 2019-20 and 2020-21 averaging about £8m ie £16m across the 2 seasons look okay on the face of it, the big red flag is how they are forecasting £12m for 2021-22, some £10m above EFL voted and agreed limits.

I've said it before and will do so again, have we received equitable treatment in terms of FFP over the last 2-3 seasons.

Edited March 24, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Let's spend big, propose loopholes and not put in our accounts on time to the League and CH and see if the League refer us to an IDC. Technically it does or can constitute misconduct but it's never been utilised. If all clubs are treated equitably then no problem right.

[ExiledAjax]

Seems as good a time as any to remind people that there are organisations working to change things, and to move all our clubs towards proper sustainability and a more equitable financial situation.

The Football Supporters Association do fantastic work and are really open and will respond to your random email! One way you can help them right now is by completing their National Supporters Survey 2023 - https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/fsa-fans-census

At Fair Game (full disclosure I volunteer with Fair Game) we are lobbying and working to bring about a fairer future for football. Last week I attended the Fair Game conference and heard from club owners, MPs, journalists (Guardian's David Conn was keynote speaker), academics and others from across the football pyramid about how football can be better, can be fairer, and can be more than it currently is. Then this week I and others have been working on delivering feedback to the Government's white paper consultation, and that will be published and submitted next week I believe. If you'd like to support us then you can do that in one of four ways:

1. spread the word on social media - https://twitter.com/fairgameuk - https://www.facebook.com/FairGameUK2021

    

2. contact your MP (feel free to DM me if you want some help with this);

3. contacting your local council; or

4. donate via the link on this website - https://www.fairgameuk.org/ - I think it's within forum rule to post this? Mods please tell me if not.

The other thing you can do is write to Bristol City Football Club and tell Phil Alexander, Steve Lansdown, and anyone else you care to address your letter to that our club should be supporting these reforms. I or the SC&T can help with that as well.

It doesn't have to be like this.

[1960maaan]

2 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Everton

Huge red flags all over the place. Their losses were astronomical but they seemed to have argued £82m in Covid losses over 2019-20 and 2020-21 which in itself maybe but then they've sought to add £88m in lose transfer profit and cost saving taking it to £170m, seeking to argue that up to a further £50m is possible.

Their wage bill in fact actually rose during 2020-21 so I don't see how their arguments stand up tbh. They're massive cheats. Think their pre tax losses were £384m from 2017-18 to 2020-21, it's not like they were a little bit over. In FFP terms their pre tax losses once averaging kicks in was £255m in that period.

Something happening ?

[GrahamC]

6 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I sort of partially disregarded Bournemouth a bit but us there any way that they could have breached FFP enroute up?

Upper adjusted Loss Limit to 2022 was £72m- their 2020-21 profit was a good buffer but...

Think they're probably fine but it's uncertain.

One of the reasons I’ll be delighted to see them relegated this season is they cheated FFP in the first place to ever get to the Prem & now did this to get back up there.

A club with a league one ground & (until recently) dubious Russian money.

They are pretty much everything that’s wrong with modern football.

[Mr Popodopolous]

46 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

One of the reasons I’ll be delighted to see them relegated this season is they cheated FFP in the first place to ever get to the Prem & now did this to get back up there.

A club with a league one ground & (until recently) dubious Russian money.

They are pretty much everything that’s wrong with modern football.

They went for a broke a bit, think they were a few million within ultimately- they claim to have passed FFP but time will tell.

Relegation would be a delight, they only got up as the one year rules had few teeth then a combination of PL money , higher loss limits and Parachutes- indeed helped to buy good players they could sell via said PL cash, that they wouldn't have gained in the 1st place without the initial overspend.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Birmingham lost around £25m last season. Amortisation steadily drops but wage bill still £32m.

No Kieran Maguire thread yet.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Read that Birmingham were bumped up to Category One last season but like a yoyo, lift of snakes and ladders they were bumped back down to Category Two again.

Their rent on St Andrews has possibly fallen but it's not certain. Was £1.25m per season.

Perhaps £4-5m per year in allowables?

Their loss in 2020-21 bumped up a bit by dint of restatement.

Fine to 2021, fine to 2022, probably fine to 2023 but not certain. 2024 however...Bellingham sell on could be key.

[Mr Popodopolous]

This time next week could be useful.

We await the accounts of:

1) Fulham (Plus other group companies).

2) Nottingham Forest (plus parent).

3) Watford (plus parent).

4) West Brom (including the group companies).

Maybe more as well but these could all be of interest- Blackburn we have a fair idea on.

Oh plus Huddersfield but they're in the midst of a takeover and seem to have somehow pushed it back to the end of June.

Sheffield United too and their parent Blades Leisure Limited.

Wonder why extended...

Edited March 26, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Rehashing old ground but Stoke fans talking about spending big again.

Edited March 27, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Rob26]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/65103808

Peterborough United: Ground owners go into receivership over £6.6m debt

[Bristol Rob]