The Championship FFP Thread (Merged)

[Davefevs]

 

Mr P - trying to keep Willock thread on-topic, so moved here.

Your second point…I’ve seen nothing in the 90-80-70 proposal that says it’s anything but an annual cycle.  Have you?

There is something in the SCMP that says you can use “transfer profit” as revenue as and when you receive the money, so if you get a single lump sum payment, then it will all go into year 1.  If you get 3 annual payments, then you’ll get a third into the accounts each year.  There are pros and cons to each deal I guess.

[Rob26]

https://www.efl.com/news/2023/august/16/efl-statement--reading-fc/

reading docked 1 point, 3 suspended, need 125% monthly wage deposit registering with efl

[chinapig]

6 minutes ago, Rob26 said:

https://www.efl.com/news/2023/august/16/efl-statement--reading-fc/

reading docked 1 point, 3 suspended, need 125% monthly wage deposit registering with efl

Given their record of rule breaking I agree with the EFL that a 1 point deduction isn't enough of a sanction for failing to pay wages in full and on time three times. The logical penalty would be to deduct 1 point for every failure or even 1 point for the first, 2 for the second and so on.

As it stands one drawn game wipes out the penalty!

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

 

Mr P - trying to keep Willock thread on-topic, so moved here.

Your second point…I’ve seen nothing in the 90-80-70 proposal that says it’s anything but an annual cycle.  Have you?

There is something in the SCMP that says you can use “transfer profit” as revenue as and when you receive the money, so if you get a single lump sum payment, then it will all go into year 1.  If you get 3 annual payments, then you’ll get a third into the accounts each year.  There are pros and cons to each deal I guess.

Cheers Dave, yeah that's a good plan!

Okay I haven't looked at it in a while, as it all seems hypothetical and remote right now. I remember one proposal about it that had a loss limit in 3 years of €60m (it was written in €) rising to €90m if equity injected and in good financial health. Dunno if that was the final plan.

Okay so is that instalment based by which I mean?

Sell a player for £5m, received in one hit, that adds £5m to your relevant income for the year.

Sell a player for £25m, say split £10m, £5m, £4m, £3m and £3m.

Year One adds £10m

Year 2 adds £5m

Year 3 adds £4m

Year 4 adds £3m

Year 5 adds £3m

[Mr Popodopolous]

Reading wise, if this was an IDC the League can in theory appeal it I believe. Wonder if that last paragraph is an indicator.

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Cheers Dave, yeah that's a good plan!

Okay I haven't looked at it in a while, as it all seems hypothetical and remote right now. I remember one proposal about it that had a loss limit in 3 years of €60m (it was written in €) rising to €90m if equity injected and in good financial health. Dunno if that was the final plan.

Okay so is that instalment based by which I mean?

Sell a player for £5m, received in one hit, that adds £5m to your relevant income for the year.

Sell a player for £25m, say split £10m, £5m, £4m, £3m and £3m.

Year One adds £10m

Year 2 adds £5m

Year 3 adds £4m

Year 4 adds £3m

Year 5 adds £3m

Yes, been a while since I looked too.

Yep, it’s 3 year cycle for both losses and wages….you were spot on.

 

I wonder when we’ll see it come in here?

[Mr Popodopolous]

Just now, Davefevs said:

Yes, been a while since I looked too.

Yep, it’s 3 year cycle for both losses and wages….you were spot on.

 

I wonder when we’ll see it come in here?

Thanks I wasn't quite sure of the system.

I believe it'll be in, as and when the EFL and PL can arrange the future of TV distribution to harmonise it across both Leagues but until then the League may not agree to the aligned system which would mean that it's a stalemate.

There was talk of an imminent change last April but until a settlement is found or imposed  between the Football League and Premier League, not sure that this will be in yet.

[Hxj]

2 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

the League can in theory appeal it I believe.

Regardless of that the head of the FRU clearly had a bad day at the office:

What on earth does he think notes of meetings/calls/discussions are for, particularly when such an important issue is raised.

The EFL went for an EIGHT point penalty - 4 immediate and 4 suspended - given the total 4 day delay in payment over three occasions that is clearly ridiculous.  That is why they ended up with a one point immediate penalty and three suspended.  Tribunals hate authority over-egging the case or the sanction.

[Rob26]

On 15/08/2023 at 12:02, Mr Popodopolous said:

Oooh excellent. If it filters down all the better.

If he has got this correct it could mean that the Projected Breach could be grounds for dropping a deduction in the Spring. If he's right it needs to filter down to this level too.

In other words sort by March or else kinda thing.

Are my hopes too high @Hxj  ? I know you keep a close eye on the regulatory changes. The fact they are now checking accounts for last season in December encourages me in this respect.

I've seen a few things that suggest Chelsea are well within FFP at the moment, so think that is way off. 

see here for one example 

https://talksport.com/football/1534030/chelsea-transfer-news-ffp-rules-explained-boehly/

 

17 hours ago, chinapig said:

Given their record of rule breaking I agree with the EFL that a 1 point deduction isn't enough of a sanction for failing to pay wages in full and on time three times. The logical penalty would be to deduct 1 point for every failure or even 1 point for the first, 2 for the second and so on.

As it stands one drawn game wipes out the penalty!

I think its more to do with setting them up to not breach again, more than punish them hard for it. The EFL seems to work that way for a lot of offences, putting in place a setup for the club to avoid these situations in future, rather than going in hard. With something like this unless the rules don't allow it then I would like to see when they get them to agree to the deduction a sliding scale for future breaches. So 1 point now, suspended 3 more points, if subsequent breaches are made within so many months/years each time the points deduction will be double, so hit the 3 points deducted and get a further 6 points suspended, hit the 6 points have 12 points suspended. That way the point totals will affect any club who disregards them. 

Their current one is low, I feel 3 points is more fair, but even a 3 points deduction should be borderline meaningless for this season as you would expect them to do good in this league. hopefully they miss the play offs by one point, that would be priceless :laugh:

[Mr Popodopolous]

Interesting little bit.

Seems Lech Poznan did Derby  a bit of a favour pertaining to Jozwiak, waiving 1/3 of the fee due to their dire situation in 2022.

https://poznan.tvp.pl/71767700/lech-poznan-uratowal-angielski-klub-pilkarski

I assume it was linked to their dire straits in 2022 anyway.

Edited August 17, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Ahhh, so that is what cheating is called these days.

Bournemouth fan who does financials, referring to 2014-15...their overspending was taking a punt on promotion sufficiently to "level the playing field". That was their first and key promotion to the top flight.

Edited August 17, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Digging individual clubs out aside, a fresh thought or two on the new PL FFP rule amendment and how it might work in real time.

1) Club who lose X and Y submit their accounts to the League perhaps projections for the upcoming season at end of December to the League.

2) The League can then perhaps direct them or assist them in the January window to avoid a breach come assessment time in March.

(In practice this means monitoring or a target yo raise £x).

3) If by the end of March they have not put it right then Sanctions or Disciplinsy it is to be wrapped up by end of June.

The Future Financial Information 2 years ahead of time should also give a positive indicator for the League.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Stoke fans are a chippy lot.

Spent nothing? Pfft. PL loans are cheap are they, wage bills of £52m, £50m and £37m cheap are they. First two were covered in Parachute Years but still.

Arrogant bunch too. Must he a Midlands thing.

Joking but I remember Aston Villa fans being be4y arrogant all told. Others more of s mixed bag, some on DCFCfans were really cocksure 4 and a half years ago.

Edited August 24, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[downendcity]

On 17/08/2023 at 18:03, Mr Popodopolous said:

Interesting little bit.

Seems Lech Poznan did Derby  a bit of a favour pertaining to Jozwiak, waiving 1/3 of the fee due to their dire situation in 2022.

https://poznan.tvp.pl/71767700/lech-poznan-uratowal-angielski-klub-pilkarski

I assume it was linked to their dire straits in 2022 anyway.

Money for nothing then!

[Davefevs]

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Okay the transfer bit below is out of date obviously but.

https://archive.is/2023.06.16-063325/https://inews.co.uk/sport/football/championship-revenue-player-wages-2411424

2021-22 season this was for, wages exceeding turnover but of course a host of legacy contracts that will have come to an end in summer 2022 and summer 2023.

Promotion bonuses also aren't part of base wage but I believe Nottingham Forest exceeded 100 pct even without. Unsure about Parachute bolstered Bournemouth and Fulham.

That's not cos base but wages. Just wages! Exceeding the entire turnover of the club as a divisional average!?

Edited August 25, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Clubs should IMO be lodging inquiries about Stoke to the EFL at this point.

They partially wiped the slate through dodgy Covid mechanisms. I know our restraints are somewhat self imposed but they signed numerous PL loanees during their apparent downsizing, the period to 2021 or to 2022 needs referral IMO.

Refer not with the £5m x 2 and £2.5m in mind but take the £60m then subtract the £30m Impairment, £10-11m in lost transfer profit in 2020-21 and £1-2m with the same last year. Recalculate, Refer for adjudication.

Edited August 25, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Rob26]

On 25/08/2023 at 15:22, Mr Popodopolous said:

Clubs should IMO be lodging inquiries about Stoke to the EFL at this point.

They partially wiped the slate through dodgy Covid mechanisms. I know our restraints are somewhat self imposed but they signed numerous PL loanees during their apparent downsizing, the period to 2021 or to 2022 needs referral IMO.

Refer not with the £5m x 2 and £2.5m in mind but take the £60m then subtract the £30m Impairment, £10-11m in lost transfer profit in 2020-21 and £1-2m with the same last year. Recalculate, Refer for adjudication.

they probs had someone cough several times in the dressing room so added another £30m for this seasons covid losses

[Mr Popodopolous]

27 minutes ago, Rob26 said:

they probs had someone cough several times in the dressing room so added another £30m for this seasons covid losses

 Very good! Or that seasons anyway.

Seriously Gibson has been quite vocal in the past about such issues, he should be getting back into the swing and leading the charge once more.

I'd add Lansdown to this but spending and being competitive sadly seems to be the last thing on his mind atm.

Middlesbrough seem to adhere quite strongly, Gibson I don't get why he hasn't lodged a complaint with the League.

Their Player Impairment and supposed lost transfer profit claims were a joke.  They legitimately comply now but the period to 2021 or 2022 I have real issues with.

Edited August 29, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

I mentioned Leicester in the past when I had queries to this season so it's only fair I mention their late in the window outbound activity.

Castsgne- sold to Fulham £15m..that's a book profit of £6-7m plus wage saving. Dunno if there was a relegation wage reduction clause for all players,  some of the wage saving may already be accounted for if so but it's a saving all the same.

Kristansen and Thomas loaned out. Wage savings and loan fees no doubt- the latter an academy product hence any loan fee is a pure profit. Dunno how much Kristansen went for but wage saving ie his wages paid and a loan fee to contribute towards his amortisation cost for the year I'm sure.

[Rob26]

daka is leaving to ac milan too https://onefootball.com/en/news/milan-reach-agreement-with-leicester-city-for-patson-daka-38142271 +2m 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Daka remained!

Soumare to Sevilla on loan, while Ndidi and Ilenacho appear to have remained.

Cannon joined for £5m was it in the end. Still wonder a little about £83m.

[Rob26]

On 02/09/2023 at 00:08, Mr Popodopolous said:

Daka remained!

Soumare to Sevilla on loan, while Ndidi and Ilenacho appear to have remained.

Cannon joined for £5m was it in the end. Still wonder a little about £83m.

think the parachute payment clubs like leeds and Leicester ffp problems are more likely to occur in year 2/3 if they dont get promoted and keep spending. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

48 minutes ago, Rob26 said:

think the parachute payment clubs like leeds and Leicester ffp problems are more likely to occur in year 2/3 if they dont get promoted and keep spending. 

Ordinarily agree although Leicester and their £92m pre tax loss in Year 1 feeding into the 3 year adjusted loss of £83m is higher than the average.

[Rob26]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-12408661/Premier-League-introduce-new-rule-following-Evertons-FFP-charges-season-clubs-recent-history-overspending-submit-accounts-THREE-MONTHS-earlier-rest-flight.html EXCLUSIVE: Premier League introduce new rule following Everton's FFP charges last season that will see clubs with a recent history of overspending submit their accounts THREE MONTHS earlier than the rest of the top flight

The Premier League have introduced a new rule following Everton's Financial Fair Play charges last season which compels clubs with a recent history of overspending to submit their accounts three months before the rest of the top flight. 

Under Rule E.48 clubs who are forecasting losses must file audited accounts to the Premier League by December 31 rather than the standard March 31 deadline.

The new regulation is an attempt by the Premier League to ensure that any disciplinary cases arising from alleged breaches of FFP rules are dealt with before the end of the same season. 

 

should be everyone imo not just those with history

Edited September 11, 2023 by Rob26

[Rob26]

 https://theathletic.com/4844776/2023/09/11/investigation-football-club-owner-convicted-fraud/?source=user_shared_article

Investigation: The football club owner with four names believed to have been convicted of fraud

Quote

Investigation: The football club owner with four names believed to have been convicted of fraud
Matt Slater and Philip Buckingham
Sep 11, 2023
With the cupboards bare, bills to pay and another relegation looming, Scunthorpe United fans were holding out for a hero. Then David Hilton arrived.

The Nottingham-born businessman bought the club from the deeply unpopular Peter Swann in late January, clearing a six-figure tax bill and pledging to take Scunthorpe back to the English Football League.

A fresh start was promised for a tired club that was in the Championship in 2011 and once launched the careers of England greats Ray Clemence and Kevin Keegan. After relegation out of the National League was confirmed in April — Scunthorpe finished 77 points behind title winners Wrexham — Hilton promised to turn the ship around in National League North, the sixth tier of English football.

Big ambitions have been revealed, including plans for a new stadium, but a protracted legal fight means Scunthorpe risk finishing the season away from their home, Glanford Park, while there are pertinent questions surrounding Hilton’s suitability to own a club founded in 1899.

An investigation by The Athletic has found that a man we strongly believe to be Hilton was sentenced to two years in prison for 15 counts of fraud by false representation under the name of David Anderson.

In a case that started at Nottingham Crown Court in late 2014, Anderson was also disqualified from being a company director for five years after pleading guilty to 15 charges.

Hilton has made no secret of the fact he was born David White and changed his name to Hilton for unspecified “family reasons”. In fact, until very recently, Hilton still had a Facebook account under the name of David White.

According to Companies House, the government agency that keeps the register of British companies, there are multiple references to David White being a company director up to 2012. Between then and 2014, David Anderson is listed as a director of two different companies. Anderson then disappears and there is no further trace of him anywhere online. Hilton appears as a director of several companies in November 2017 and still has six active directorships.

White, Anderson and Hilton all share the same date of birth: October 9, 1977. A search of UK birth records reveals that a David White was born that day in Nottingham but no David Anderson or David Hilton.

The civil registration birth index also shows that the David White born on October 9, 1977, in Nottingham, later changed his surname to Mellors, another name by which Hilton has been known. David White’s mother’s maiden name is listed as Mellors on his birth certificate.

David White’s name in the list of records
Companies House documents also show that David White and David Anderson have similar handwriting and signatures. And the address David Anderson gave to the court in 2014, “Forsythia Gardens, Nottingham”, also happens to be where a Kate White, Hilton’s sister, was registered as living at the time.

It is unclear if Hilton complied with the terms of the current non-League owners’ and directors’ test (OADT), overseen by the English Football Association (FA). It must be completed by every owner or director and requires the disclosure of “previous or other names”. Hilton’s form is not publicly available and Hilton did not reply when The Athletic asked if he had disclosed any previous names on the form.

Asked about this and David Anderson’s conviction for fraud, an FA spokesperson said: “We are aware of these serious allegations and are looking into them.”

When asked about other names he has used by fans of Scunthorpe and Bury, another stricken football club he tried to buy in 2020, Hilton has never admitted to using the name Anderson and has strongly denied ever serving a custodial sentence.

Some might say “fair enough” — after all, under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974, convictions of under two years and six months are considered spent after four years. For the vast majority of professions, you do not have to disclose a spent conviction when applying for a role and that has certainly been football’s attitude in the past.

But that is changing.

Following a series of crises, which included clubs going bankrupt and the threat of a breakaway European Super League, former sports minister Tracey Crouch was asked by the government to lead a review of football’s governance in 2021. She made 10 key recommendations, with the most important being the creation of an independent regulator, improved financial reporting and tighter rules around who can buy clubs.

In February this year, the government committed to introducing most of those recommendations into law when it published a white paper that included a pledge to ensure “owners are fit to become temporary stewards of these long-lasting community institutions; and that clubs operate in a financially sustainable way”.

Under pressure to beef up their rules before the independent regulator does it for them, the English Football League and Premier League have already revised their OATDs. From this summer, the tests now say that any individual with two or more fraud convictions, whether they are spent or not, must disclose them. The FA, which is responsible for the non-League OADT, is considering a similar requirement.

The independent regulator, which should be up and running by the start of next season, is going to take responsibility for vetting owners and directors at clubs down to the National League, the fifth tier and the division Scunthorpe hope to be playing in next season.

However, the status of spent fraud convictions is only one of the changes coming down the track. The new regulatory regime will also apply a “fitness and propriety test”, conduct enhanced due diligence on potential owners’ finances, and demand robust plans for each club’s running costs.

As the source of Hilton’s wealth remains unclear — there is certainly nothing filed at Companies House that suggests he has the ability to fund Scunthorpe — and there is no other readily available evidence of any other source of significant funds, it is only inevitable his ownership of this community asset will come under greater scrutiny.

And that, ultimately, is why we believe it is in the public interest to share what we have learned about Hilton and what we strongly believe to be true about his past. Having seen the demise of Bury and Macclesfield Town, where fans did not realise until it was too late, we think supporters deserve to know who is controlling their clubs so they can decide whether they are the right people for such a responsibility.

After taking control of Scunthorpe, Hilton told supporters: “I will give my all to help get this club back where it belongs.”

It is vital to ensure the club has the best possible chance of doing just that.

Hilton is a man who says he “buys and sells land for a living” but, under different aliases, has created a long list of short-lived businesses. Eleven companies in which he — as either White or Hilton — has been named as a director have been dissolved since 2008, with none in existence for more than three years.

Hilton is the sole director of Maxwell Cohen Estates Limited. It has not filed any accounts since April 2020 and its 2021 figures are now 19 months overdue. It is subject to an “active proposal to strike off” — ie, a formal application to dissolve the company. He is also listed as a director at two home-building firms set up last November, Albany Land and Investments and Ruddington Developments.

Hilton has previously been listed as a director of Church Street Developments, Acquisition and Property Management Ltd, DH Management and Holdings Ltd, Stratton Enterprises, Centrepoint Marketing, Reality Marketing and Advent Corporation, but all seven of those companies have been formally dissolved.

He was also a director of four companies that were dissolved without filing accounts between 2006 and 2012 when he was David White.

And then there are two David Anderson companies. One, Guardian Property Corporation Ltd, was wound up in the public interest after a petition was served by the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills in 2013.

Documents from the Ministry of Justice outline that David Anderson started his two-year sentence in April 2015, four years before Hilton began his first stages of investment in Ilkeston Town, a non-League team based 10 miles west of Nottingham.

Anderson denied a 16th charge for fraudulent trading and he was found not guilty of that when the prosecution offered no evidence.

Hilton has never gone into any detail when asked about his decision to change his name from White, his father’s name, only pointing out that thousands do similar every year in the UK. But it is perhaps worth noting that David White faced two charges for conspiracy to commit fraud and concealing, converting or transferring criminal property in 2012. He was found not guilty at Nottingham Crown Court when the prosecution failed to submit any evidence.

Hilton arrived at Ilkeston, then in English football’s eighth tier, as a silent investor after former Notts County owner Alan Hardy sold the club to ex-footballer Mark Clifford in October 2019. Hilton did not join the board until 12 months later and initially did so for just for one week.

But Hilton became the full owner in November 2021 and that remained the case until this January, when Hilton transferred his shareholding to his business partner Andrew Nally. Under FA rules, no individual is permitted to own more than one club that might meet in competition, so Hilton had to relinquish control at Ilkeston, who are now in the seventh tier. Nally was also a director of Church Street Developments, one of Hilton’s dissolved real estate businesses.

Hilton had looked at bigger clubs than Ilkeston before, though. In late 2020, he said he was involved in “extremely positive” negotiations to buy Bury, who had been expelled from the EFL in 2019 in one of the darkest recent chapters in English football history.

“My only objective is to revive Bury Football Club and create a self-sustainable model moving forward,” he said, but his interest was met with fierce opposition from Bury fans.

“I decided to walk away,” he would later explain. “Things were made very difficult for me. It got uncomfortable. It became complicated and messy.”

'The supporters have changed the mindset of the club and town - it's on us now'

It is Monday, August 28, the last bank holiday of the British summer and Scarborough Athletic, another former EFL club that has fallen on hard times, are in town.

Demand for tickets is high despite the weekend’s 1-0 defeat away to Curzon Ashton, a semi-professional side from Manchester’s eastern suburbs. Clicking through the turnstiles are 4,860 supporters, an attendance that would not look out of place in League One. But this is the National League North, where full-time teams can be counted on one hand. Scunthorpe United have not played at a level this low since 1950.

“Championship and you *** it up,” sing the Scarborough fans, who see their part-time team beaten 4-1. That strengthened Scunthorpe’s hold on the table’s top spot and they are the bookmakers’ favourites for promotion.

And if that was not reason enough to be cheerful, an announcement came over the public address system telling them that the price of a pint in the Iron Bar had just been cut to £2.50.

No one appeared willing to consider this might be Scunthorpe’s final game at a ground they have called home since 1988, as Glanford Park is at the heart of a bitter wrangle between the club’s current and former owners.

The no-frills stadium, with a capacity of 9,000, was taken out of the club’s ownership and transferred to Swann’s Coolsilk Property and Investment company in 2021. A debt of £11million ($13.7m), owed by the club to Coolsilk, was written off in the process.

Hilton’s takeover of Scunthorpe, signed off in February, included neither Glanford Park nor the adjoining land that has always commanded the higher value. He paid only £3 for the club but agreed to settle a tax bill of just under £200,000 and pay January’s wage bill, although he also acquired the £60,000 that was sitting in the club bank account.

The real deal was for the club’s property assets. For those, Hilton agreed to pay Swann a figure in the region of £3million, with a completion deadline of May 24.

Hilton effectively had an exclusivity agreement with Swann, which included a short-term lease for the stadium. But once that deadline was missed, laminated signs were tied to the gates leading to Glanford Park warning people to stay away or be subject “to section 6 of the Criminal Law Act 1977”. The gates are padlocked at 5pm every evening.

Scunthorpe’s club offices remain on site — along with the Iron Foundation, its charitable arm — yet there has been great uncertainty over where this season’s home games will be played.

Hilton told a fans’ forum he had offered to extend the lease at a rent of £20,000 a month but had been unable to strike a deal to cover this season. He and Swann have not been on speaking terms for months. Instead, Hilton has come up with the novel approach of subletting the ground to the club on a rolling one-week basis.

Swann, who owned the club between 2013 and 2022, believes that is illegal and wants Hilton, and therefore the club, off his land.

How that impasse will be resolved is now a matter for the courts, as we shall explain, but the row has meant Hilton had to find alternative accommodation.

The Athletic has been told by sources close to the club, who wish to remain anonymous to protect their jobs, that Hilton has a deal in place with Gainsborough Trinity, a Northern Premier League club based 16 miles away from Scunthorpe, to rent their ground, The Northolme. The National League has sanctioned the move, should it be required, but with a capacity of just over 4,000 and only 500 seats, it can only be a short-term fix.

The Northolme hosts Gainsborough Trinity’s FA Cup tie with Shrewsbury Town in November 2015 (Matthew Ashton – AMA/Getty Images)
But Hilton has another plan. He announced in July that two plots of land had been bought in Scunthorpe and said his intention is to build a new stadium and training ground in time for the 2025-26 season.

One site is a former council tip that would need significant investment before construction could begin. And while there are signs at both sites saying they have been “acquired” by Scunthorpe United, only heads of terms for their purchase have been agreed.

The cost of building a new stadium would also far exceed the value attached to Glanford Park and its surroundings. Hilton told fans that retail opportunities would be key to funding, while he also suggested that the UK government’s levelling up fund — a £4.8billion ($6bn) initiative to “invest in infrastructure that improves everyday life across the UK” — was another option.

Scunthorpe, an industrial town in north Lincolnshire and still England’s largest steel processing centre, might be eligible for such financial assistance, but there will be many in the region who think it should not be used to replace a perfectly adequate football stadium.

Swann, who spectacularly fell out with fans towards the end of his time in charge, released a 1,500-word statement in July that said Hilton had “no legal right” to issue those seven-day leases and he would be taking him to court. The 57-year-old added it was “unfathomable” Hilton could claim Scunthorpe had secured a two-year lease.

Hilton was quick to fire back.

“I shouldn’t be responding to absolute lies from a man (who) was two weeks away from killing your club and seemingly quite excited to do so,” he wrote on Facebook.

“(Swann) has no intention of selling the stadium to us, he only wants your club to die.”

Hilton says he still wants to buy Glanford Park but the initial agreement with Swann must be revised because of access-related issues at the site that have only recently come to light. In the meantime, Hilton says, he is willing to pay Swann a fair monthly rental.

Swann is not convinced.

“I have still not seen proof of funds directly or, received via the solicitors, any up-to-date proof of funds or wealth as requested, and we must question until proven otherwise whether those funds were available or are still available to purchase the site under the exclusivity agreement,” he said in his July statement.

Hilton denies this and insists proof of funds was shown to Swann’s solicitors in April.

“Please show me more respect than that,” Hilton concluded in his riposte. “I’m pretty certain I’ve earned it.”

Swann before Scunthorpe’s League One game against Peterborough in 2018 (Chris Vaughan – CameraSport via Getty Images )
This stand-off is not what Hilton promised.

“The football club will own the stadium for certain,” he told BBC Radio Humberside in late January.

A means to that end was the launch of the ‘1899 Membership’ scheme, which gave fans the chance to buy one of the 1,899 shares in a company that would own Glanford Park. The one-off cost, something Hilton described as “unique”, was £1,899. In case you’ve forgotten, the club was founded in 1899.

If the scheme was designed to raise funds to buy the stadium, it did not work. Fewer than 60 of the 1,899 memberships were sold before Swann’s May 24 deadline.

It was at that point that Hilton pivoted to his new stadium plan, with the promise of a home on the other side of town, near the large factory that supplies gas to Scunthorpe’s steel industry.

But the uncertainty of the club’s future goes beyond the stadium.

At the start of April, Hilton upset many fans by revealing his intention to close down the club’s academy and move training to Ilkeston, his old club, 70 miles away.

“The savings to the club are significant,” he said.

Against a backlash from fans, it was decided within days that Scunthorpe would continue to train in the town and he also reversed his decision to shut the club’s Category 3 academy.

However, Hilton has since made a U-turn on the U-turn and the youth setup has been closed, with staff laid off.

To soften this blow, Hilton said £2million has been “set aside” to build a 4G pitch, gymnasium, restaurant, medical facilities and even a place for players to stay. This would represent a huge improvement on the training facilities close to the stadium. There is a sign on the gate that rather optimistically says: “Today is another chance to get better.”

The morning after the thumping win against Scarborough, Scunthorpe were back in action in room 15 of the Leeds Combined Court Centre.

And there were no smiles on the faces of the 12 people who had assembled for what some fans thought might be the most significant fixture in the club’s recent history: Swann versus Hilton.

It was not, however, decisive. In fact, it quickly became clear that nobody would be turfing anyone out of anywhere anytime soon.

And that, as far as Hilton and Scunthorpe United are concerned, was a far bigger win because, despite the very obvious lack of jeopardy on the day, there was always a small chance that Tuesday could have been the existential crisis that some predicted.

The judge, Christopher Royle, did not make a decision over the stadium’s ownership. The hearing was billed as a directions hearing, which means its significance had perhaps been a little oversold by those predicting an Armageddon. Directions hearings are more about agreeing staging posts on the road to a full hearing than summary justice.

It emerged Team Hilton had filed their defence 22 days late. Hilton changed his legal staff halfway through August (although that was still after the deadline for the submission of the defence) but there was no real harm done to Swann’s side as the judge had already made it clear that this row had to go to a full hearing.

So, the fight for Glanford Park will now take place over three days at a court and date to be found somewhere in the three-month window between January 2 and March 29.

Storm clouds gather over Glanford Park (Eddie Garvey/MI News/NurPhoto via Getty Images)
Unlike Swann, Hilton turned up for this fixture and watched it from the row behind the barristers. On his left was Tahina Akther, a barrister and one of the six new directors Hilton appointed to Scunthorpe’s board this month.

Hilton seemed relatively relaxed throughout but was in no mood to talk to The Athletic when all was said and done. “No comment” was quickly followed by “go away” when we attempted to ask him about his previous visits to court.

No problem. After all, this was his day. He came to court to get more time and he got it.

However, the judge made it clear that he was giving both parties time, whether Swann wanted it or not, as three-day hearings cost a lot of money and nobody can ever be certain of the outcome. Perhaps, then, a better solution would be a deal.

That would certainly be Hilton’s choice and he now has the space to do it. But Swann has a few cards still to play, too.

For example, the judge set a deadline of October 13 for the two sides to disclose all relevant information to each other. Swann is likely to ask for all the financial information that he claims Hilton has so far failed to provide.

Perhaps, then, there is a motive for mediation on both sides.

Then there is the money. The only figure that was said out loud in court was 7p, as in seven pence, which is effectively the rent the club is paying Hilton as part of the weekly subletting deal he is giving them while this row plays out.

Swann wants to deal with the “money” part of the dispute after he has evicted Hilton. The judge was happy with that timetable suggestion.

But Swann has subsequently opened another front in the battle for Glanford Park.

Last week, fans’ group the Iron Trust was informed by the council that the club’s ex-owner has given the local authority notice of his intention to sell the stadium. The trust was given this warning because it nominated the ground for “asset of community value” status, which gives “community interest groups” a chance to bid for these assets when they come up for sale.

The trust now has until October 11 — six weeks from the end of August — to submit a written request to be treated as a potential bidder. If that request is received, a six-month “moratorium” is triggered, giving the community group time to raise money for a serious bid. That window would last until February 28, 2024.

Tongues have persistently wagged among many Scunthorpe fans when it comes to the past of the club’s owner, particularly his aliases and whether he has served time in prison. So much so that he made a point of publicly going through a dossier in front of 200 or so supporters who had gathered in Glanford Park’s Sir Ian Botham Lounge one night in May.

Hilton has clashed with fans on social media. He used his Facebook account under his childhood name of David White to tell one fan he had “gifted” the club “£1.7m so far which rises to £2.5m by August”. He added that Scunthorpe’s future “without my money is extremely bleak”.

Yet if some are sceptical, others have been content to give Hilton the benefit of the doubt. He, after all, was the man who arrested Scunthorpe’s sorry slide by replacing Swann, a figure whom most supporters were desperate to see the back of.

A small section of fans sang “There’s only one David Hilton” during the win over Scarborough and a GoFundMe page was set up last week to help cover the costs of Hilton’s legal battles with Swann.

The final months of last season might have been disastrous but, after an ambitious recruitment drive, Scunthorpe are the odds-on favourites for promotion. They also remain a full-time professional outfit and have a proven leader at this level in the dugout in Jimmy Dean, who won manager of the month for August.

Attendances have also been remarkably resilient. Even last season, the average gate was 3,259.

Off-field disquiet, however, has continued. Hilton was absent when Scunthorpe’s relegation was confirmed by a 2-0 loss to Oldham Athletic last season and he has overseen a turbulent summer of redundancies and resignations.

Oldham’s Bassala Sambou celebrates his side’s second goal as Scunthorpe are relegated in April (Eddie Garvey/MI News/NurPhoto via Getty Images)
Key personnel have left and there have been some complications with the payment of wages.

On April 28, some staff were paid directly via transfers from Hilton’s personal account. In the same week, staff also received a letter from Standard Life saying the club had failed to make its pension contributions since December, despite deductions coming from monthly pay throughout the period. Players took the matter to Hilton, who claimed it was a problem inherited from Swann. It is unclear whether the matter has been resolved.

Scunthorpe were also flagged for filing their annual accounts late, something Hilton called a “slightly embarrassing oversight”. They did appear at Companies House a few days later and there were stark words from the auditors.

“Based on the accumulated losses to date and the quantity of the historic debts, there remains a material uncertainty as to whether all liabilities will be met as they fall due for at least 12 months from the signing of these accounts,” they warned.

A section of fans have their concerns over Hilton’s plans for Scunthorpe. Others, for now, are more content to celebrate life after Swann.

Sitting at the back of the court with The Athletic last week was an observer who described himself as “a lifelong fan and shareholder”. He did not wish to share his name but said he was very pleased that we were there, too.

“I don’t trust the new bloke or the old one,” he said. “And I probably trust the new bloke even less.”

Hilton saved his words for the club website.

“As many of you were aware, Scunthorpe United was in court today facing the very real prospect of being evicted from Glanford Park,” he said. “We achieved a positive outcome today. While the immediate prospect of eviction has been halted, there were no winners or losers.”

Not yet, anyway.

 

 

[Rob26]

 

 

[Davefevs]

36 minutes ago, Rob26 said:

 

 

So, £40m transfer, original fee circa £20m…3 lots of £800k for Norwich…equals 12% sell-on by my quick maths.

[Rob26]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-09-11/liverpool-s-everton-football-club-close-to-sale-to-777-partners everton sale close to 777

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/66784450 (not behind a paywall)

rumoured to be about 600m take over, which is around a 750m loss on what he has put into the club, not including Russian revenue which was thought to probs have come from the share holders 

Edited September 12, 2023 by Rob26

[Rob26]

oh this dont sound like they may get approved

also states the take over is 500m, a 250m loss, excluding any further losses that was money disguised as russian based revenue, which i'm sure there was plenty of before the sanctions hit

Edited September 13, 2023 by Rob26