The Championship FFP Thread (Merged)

[Rob26]

get rid of parachute payments, give a payment for going up, its meant so clubs can compete with the premier league, not to make the EFL uncompetitive. 

every relegated club currently gets around £94m over 3 years, give them 40m+ promotion bonus and no further payments if relegated etc. they could also have a increased spending allowed via cash donations (not loans) for owners who want to invest to level up. This would save over the 3 years £162m across the 3nr clubs relegated each season (if they did not get promoted)

the premier league could actually make it an obligation that all clubs need to have a set wage drop clause included in the contract on relegation. I think its a responsible clause clubs should be putting in contracts anyways, this takes away the need for parachute payments, as if owe money for transfer fees they can sell players and not a big issue if all clubs need these clauses. any player who wants no part of this who is too big will no doubt insist on a relegation release clause for a set transfer fee so they are not stuck on the lower wage.

make the rest of the league get more money by giving the league positions more money in the championship and below and then spread the rest of the premier league parachute payments out through the league to boost it further.

If you do not make it a promotion bonus then savings from parachute payments should be passed on back into the league to be evenly distributed. So if a team goes down and goes back up first attempt like Burnley then they have been paid £44m, but there is savings on the follow on £50m that could be spread around the league. That's a nice surplus that someone must be keeping hold of.

you could do that within a seasons notice for promoted teams, and for teams getting relegated already in the premier league you could allow them to have the parachute payments open to them only for 3-5 years (based on how long their contracts are they have liabilities on that the parachute payments were meant to protect I think 3 to 5 years covers this).

9 minutes ago, Bristol Rob said:

 

 

https://www.removepaywall.com/article/current read for free

Edited March 29, 2023 by Rob26

[Davefevs]

17 minutes ago, Rob26 said:

get rid of parachute payments, give a payment for going up, its meant so clubs can compete with the premier league, not to make the EFL uncompetitive.

agree with the sentiments.  Like others why can Burnley include £45m PP in their FFP submission, when clubs like ours and Stoke have owners who might be happy to inject their own money (as long as not loans).

every relegated club currently gets around £94m over 3 years, give them 40m+ promotion bonus and no further payments if relegated etc. they could also have a increased spending allowed via cash donations (not loans) for owners who want to invest to level up. This would save over the 3 years £162m across the 3nr clubs relegated each season (if they did not get promoted)

the 3 year not only applies if they go up and stay up.  If they come straight back down they “only” get 2 years (£79m)

the premier league could actually make it an obligation that all clubs need to have a set wage drop clause included in the contract on relegation. I think its a responsible clause clubs should be putting in contracts anyways, this takes away the need for parachute payments, as if owe money for transfer fees they can sell players and not a big issue if all clubs need these clauses. any player who wants no part of this who is too big will no doubt insist on a relegation release clause for a set transfer fee so they are not stuck on the lower wage.

the only issue is prospective players might not / won’t sign those contracts, especially when put up against another club who is offering a contract without relegation clauses.

It’s a tough one to standardise contracts for all, and might take 8 years for Chelsea players to come around to having to sign a standardised-contract….and then Barcelona or PSG put one in front of them without such a clause.  I don’t think it’s an easy answer.

make the rest of the league get more money by giving the league positions more money in the championship and below and then spread the rest of the premier league parachute payments out through the league to boost it further.

Agree, some form of merit payment seems very sensible / likely.

If you do not make it a promotion bonus then savings from parachute payments should be passed on back into the league to be evenly distributed. So if a team goes down and goes back up first attempt like Burnley then they have been paid £44m, but there is savings on the follow on £50m that could be spread around the league. That's a nice surplus that someone must be keeping hold of.

The PL distribute it back amongst themselves.  Same with the clubs that don’t get Yr3 PP, the PL share it amongst themselves.  Crazy!

you could do that within a seasons notice for promoted teams, and for teams getting relegated already in the premier league you could allow them to have the parachute payments open to them only for 3-5 years (based on how long their contracts are they have liabilities on that the parachute payments were meant to protect I think 3 to 5 years covers this).

I think when the salary cap stuff comes in, there needs to be some form of moratorium on wages for relegated players, e.g. allow them to to cover them in year 1 beyond a set amount, but expect them to renegotiate or transfer a player the next summer.  Might re-stimulate the transfer market.

https://www.removepaywall.com/article/current read for free

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Brentford 1st year accounts of PL out.

A near £30m...Profit!

Wonder if Benham will start reclaiming some of his loans. He occasionally has but it's not altogether clear that the £18-19m of loan repayments wasn't external.

All credit to them however and I don't just mean financially as they're not bad on the pitch either. A reasonable number of Championship era players still feature prominently. They can switch between a more reactive but still dangerous 3-5-2 v stronger opposition and a more attack minded 4-3-3 at home vs middling and lower and a way to lower opposition.

Edited March 29, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[ExiledAjax]

17 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Brentford 1st year accounts of PL out.

A near £30m...Profit!

Wonder if Benham will start reclaiming some of his loans. He occasionally has but it's not altogether clear that the £18-19m of loan repayments wasn't external.

Brentford played it so well. They matched the sale of Benrahama and Watkins with a perfectly timed promotion and built a sensible new stadium at the same time.

Without those two sales and the promotion they'd have possibly been in trouble in the Championship* and probably would have needed a "reset" like we've had for the last two seasons. 

They're well managed and well run, but they did also get the rub of the green with the timing of their promotion.

*It's hard to tell for sure as relatively unknown promotion bonuses were paid. Without those their costs would have been lower that season, but I think it would have been pretty close for them.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Just now, ExiledAjax said:

Brentford played it so well. They matched the sale of Benrahama and Watkins with a perfectly timed promotion and built a sensible new stadium at the same time.

Without those two sales and the promotion they'd have possibly been in trouble in the Championship* and probably would have needed a "reset" like we've had for the last two seasons. 

They're well managed and well run, but they did also get the rub of the green with the timing of their promotion.

*It's hard to tell for sure as relatively unknown promotion bonuses were paid. Without those their costs would have been lower that season, but I think it would have been pretty close for them.

£15m I think...remember too the combined impact of Covid-19 and 2018-19 still remaining on the books. Maybe one more year at it and then problems ahead if not.

[ExiledAjax]

1 minute ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

£15m I think...remember too the combined impact of Covid-19 and 2018-19 still remaining on the books. Maybe one more year at it and then problems ahead if not.

I think they're a perfect text book case study for how important it is for an EFL club to balance good financial management with successful player trading, infrastructure investment, and luck. 

You could write two or three chapters on Brentford's exploitation of each of those four things.

We have two or three of those four at the moment, just need to get the others nailed down and we'll be in position.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Just now, ExiledAjax said:

I think they're a perfect text book case study for how important it is for an EFL club to balance good financial management with successful player trading, infrastructure investment, and luck. 

You could write two or three chapters on Brentford's exploitation of each of those four things.

We have two or three of those four at the moment, just need to get the others nailed down and we'll be in position.

Agreed. Purely financially a £24m pre tax profit in 2019 having just checked would have enabled one last go IMO. Yes though all boxes ticked and good luck to them tbh. Had they gone up in 2019-20 maybe they'd have been pushing top 6 with Benrahma and Watkins in a perfectly honed 4-3-3 on top of what they already had.

They've balanced it out brilliantly and yes a bit of luck at the right time...talking of luck and timing had Fulham not gone up in 2019-20 in that late play-off final due to Covid they would have had FFP issues in the upcoming years.

I digress timed it brilliantly and I expect they will continue to invest sensibly, build their cash buffer etc.

[Davefevs]

29 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Brentford played it so well. They matched the sale of Benrahama and Watkins with a perfectly timed promotion and built a sensible new stadium at the same time.

Without those two sales and the promotion they'd have possibly been in trouble in the Championship* and probably would have needed a "reset" like we've had for the last two seasons. 

They're well managed and well run, but they did also get the rub of the green with the timing of their promotion.

*It's hard to tell for sure as relatively unknown promotion bonuses were paid. Without those their costs would have been lower that season, but I think it would have been pretty close for them.

Although they kinda gambled on promotion, had they not gone up in 20/21, they still had a host of saleable assets to negate any fear of FFP imho.

[ExiledAjax]

56 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Although they kinda gambled on promotion, had they not gone up in 20/21, they still had a host of saleable assets to negate any fear of FFP imho.

True, but they would have had to sell those assets.

So I'm not saying I think they would have breached and been given points deductions etc. However they would have needed to sell, restructure the squad, "reset" as it were.

They wouldn't have imploded without promotion, but they'd have needed to restart the cycle imo.

[Mr Popodopolous]

6 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

True, but they would have had to sell those assets.

So I'm not saying I think they would have breached and been given points deductions etc. However they would have needed to sell, restructure the squad, "reset" as it were.

They wouldn't have imploded without promotion, but they'd have needed to restart the cycle imo.

£24m profit 2018-19

£8-8.5m averaged pre tax loss in the combined average of 2019-20 and 2020-21...Which is before Covid add-backs, FFP allowances and less promotion bonuses of apparently £12m. That's £6m combined average you lop off.

They could have made last year shit or bust IMO. Not the Brentford way but room was there.

Edited March 29, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Interesting article on Burnley and their late accounts.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Tu4OUCknBK9cFZbiNOY18eOwg0PQAKme/view

[Mr Popodopolous]

Pertaining to FFP, by the end of the week the following are due:

1) Fulham, that's FC, Football Leisure and Cougar Holdco London Limited.

2) Hull

3) Nottingham Forest and their parent NF Football Investments Limited.

4) Watford FC and their parent Hornets Investment Limited.

5) West Bromwich Albion and their parent West Bromwich Albion Holdings and West Bromwich Albion Group.

See also Blackburn Rovers and Peterborough but I don't foresee anything drastic in these.

Plus Sheffield United and Blades Leisure Limited and Huddersfield Town have somehow extended to the end of June... @Hxj any idea what loophole they've used here? Not like they've extended the reporting period or pushed it back a day. Covid extra 3 months has gone.

In the Premier League, Chelsea and associated companies, Everton, Leeds, Newcastle, Southampton and parent.

City Football Group too.

Oh and Man United 2nd quarter to December 2022 is due tomorrow.

Edited March 29, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Hxj]

11 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Plus Sheffield United and Blades Leisure Limited and Huddersfield Town have somehow extended to the end of June... @Hxj any idea what loophole they've used here?

Not a loop-hole.  The Registrar of Companies is happy to extend the deadline with good cause.

[Mr Popodopolous]

25 minutes ago, Hxj said:

Not a loop-hole.  The Registrar of Companies is happy to extend the deadline with good cause.

Thanks. Intrigued as to what the good cause is, I guess them and CH will know.

Edited March 29, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[PHILINFRANCE]

4 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Thanks. Intrigued as to what the good cause is, I guess them and CH will know.

Potential/Probable take over?

[martnewts]

5 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Thanks. Intrigued as to what the good cause is, I guess them and CH will know.

It is still possible to get a 3 month extension just by citing covid as an excuse with no questions asked. I do it monthly for any clients who may be unlikely to comply 

[Redsi2]

No-one on here has commented on Birmingham citys accounts, surely a £25 million loss last season puts them in a sticky situation and their wage bill is huge compared to turnover and they have a ground falling apart and huge areas cant be used. Interested to hear peoples thoughts

[Mr Popodopolous]

@Redsi2

Think they're fine FFP wise to 2022 and probably 2023, it's 2023-24 that 3 year period where the problems may arise.

Selling Bellingham and Adams across 2019-20 and 2020-21, as well as the combined Covid roll up should help to 2022-23.

The losses to next season could be significant but what may save them is the Bellingham sell on if he leaves Borussia Dortmund. I say if, it's widely touted that he will...could easily be an FFP hole of £10-15m next year prior to any kind of sales or sell ons etc. Perhaps their wage bill also falls.

Interested in Cardiff too as their new starting point to 2024 will be the £26m pre tax loss last sesson.

Edited March 30, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

14 hours ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

Potential/Probable take over?

Makes sense.

13 hours ago, martnewts said:

It is still possible to get a 3 month extension just by citing covid as an excuse with no questions asked. I do it monthly for any clients who may be unlikely to comply 

Thanks, that's surprising in some ways. Thought Companies House would be a bit more stringent.

[Hxj]

17 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Companies House would be a bit more stringent

You need to think of Companies House as just a data storage warehouse, it does little else.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Looks as if Lai won't be repaying West Brom any time soon.

 Their full accounts aren't out but Kieran seems to have found an extract from somewhere.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Ince has said next 24-48 hours.

https://rdg.today/its-imminent-paul-ince-gives-update-on-reading-fcs-efl-points-deduction/

6 points seems to be the magic number.

[Mr Popodopolous]

West Brom £5.4m profit but that included the sale of Pereira and Year 1 of Parachute Payments.

https://www.wba.co.uk/news/albion-submit-202122-accounts

Devil in detail until we see the club and indeed the Holdings accounts. 

Edited March 30, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Man United quarterly profit to the end of December.

Which means £25m in pre tax losses to date this season ie July to December.

They seem to be gaining interest from financial dealings as opposed to shelling it out. Dunno if this will be a one off.

Edited March 30, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Hull have without fanfare dropped their accounts.

However remember that debt writeoffs don't count towards FFP so it's basically a £6m loss.

Keane Lewis-Potter how much did he go for? £15-20m? Academy player so pure profit, to appear in 2022-23.

Peterborough however have extended their Reporting deadline to end of June.

Edited March 30, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Wow!! @Davefevs @Hxj @chinapig @ExiledAjax

Now tbis included apparently £20.9m in promotion bonuses but the question of FFP really really has to be asked here!! Nottingham Forest claimed they have complied fwiw.

I make that pre tax losses of £94-95m in the period before usual allowances etc. From 2018-19, 2019-20 and 2020-21 combined average and then obviously subtract loan write offs whixh don't count.

Edited March 31, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[ExiledAjax]

5 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Wow!! @Davefevs @Hxj @chinapig @ExiledAjax

Now tbis included apparently £20.9m in promotion bonuses but the question of FFP really really has to be asked here!! Nottingham Forest claimed they have complied fwiw.

I make that pre tax losses of £94-95m in the period before usual allowances etc. From 2018-19, 2019-20 and 2020-21 combined average and then obviously subtract loan write offs whixh don't count.

Well aren't they lucky they got promoted.

[Mr Popodopolous]

While we took our wage bill down and made sacrifices, they had a basic wage bill of £35m and increased amortisation.

I've always asked if we have been treated in an equitable manner by the League FFP wise as set against other clubs.

23 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Well aren't they lucky they got promoted.

However based on the rules as they were, they should not have been allowed to run up such a deficit in any case.

Future Financial Information etc requirements suggests that the League did not do a stringent job here.

Given the past two seasons can require this FFI and theirs were markedly below ours, why were we so restricted compared with Nottingham Forest and some others.

They possibly made a small profit on Carvalho to Olympiakos. £2m or similar.

Edited March 31, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Davefevs]

6 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

While we took our wage bill down and made sacrifices, they had a basic wage bill of £35m and increased amortisation.

I've always asked if we have been treated in an equitable manner by the League FFP wise as set against other clubs.

However based on the rules as they were, they should not have been allowed to run up such a deficit in any case.

Future Financial Information etc requirements suggests that the League did not do a stringent job here.

Given the past two seasons can require this FFI and theirs were markedly below ours, why were we so restricted compared with Nottingham Forest and some others.

They possibly made a small profit on Carvalho to Olympiakos. £2m or similar.

The unfortunate thing about it is that they came from a better starting position, despite losses than look just over the £39m three year figure (based on the EFL allowances).  They weren’t forced to cut their squad depth / quality / cost like us, so could afford the calculated risk - tied up in promotion bonuses!

They were tight though, and imagine Covid add-backs / allowances have been favourable like us.

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

The unfortunate thing about it is that they came from a better starting position, despite losses than look just over the £39m three year figure (based on the EFL allowances).  They weren’t forced to cut their squad depth / quality / cost like us, so could afford the calculated risk - tied up in promotion bonuses!

They were tight though, and imagine Covid add-backs / allowances have been favourable like us.

Nottingham Forest?

Their starting position was T-2 £25m, combined average £22m loss across 2019-20 and 2020-21.

£69m in 3 years, P&S being-£47m.

Unsure what you mean by starting position, do you mean in P&S terms?

Ours was a £10m profit and £10m and £38m losses, pre tax. Combined average £10m and -£24m.

-£38m in 3 years, -£14m.

In each case before allowable losses and Covid add-backs.

Edited March 31, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous