Mr Popodopolous Posted February 24 Author Share Posted February 24 (edited) 3 minutes ago, chinapig said: Once you see a reference to net spend you can pretty much discount the person's argument. It baffles me that people fail to consider the total cost of a player including transfer, signing on and agents' fees plus wages but perhaps it's a bit complicated for them. Yes agreed. Then you add their bizarre argument that the Villa Park sale and leaseback was to clear debt and that they went up on loans..a £70-75m underlying wage bill and a large amortisation bill had nothing to do with it. That Tweet could age well though, the one laughing at Wolves selling their players for FFP. Edited February 24 by Mr Popodopolous 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted February 25 Author Share Posted February 25 More Special Pleading Tbis time recent Aston Villa CEO, Purslow. Reckons the rules should be rebooted..irrespective of people's views on the reasons for the rules etc..it is clear that post Grealish sale Aston Villa are likely to swing to a loss in the new starting point, the question is how high. https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/christian-purslow-reveals-aston-villa-28700454 That starting point is inevitably a swing into the red P&S wise. Moans about having to sell home-grown talent. Tough shit, we've had to sell loads to help comply, lots of clubs do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted February 25 Author Share Posted February 25 He wasn't saying this in recent years and nor were certain Aston Villa fan voices. Ty Bracey was crowing about steering clear post the Everton deduction. https://www.astonvillanews.co.uk/2024/01/16/ty-bracey-shares-aston-villa-transfer-prediction-after-everton-and-nottingham-forest-news/ https://www.astonvillanews.co.uk/2023/11/23/ty-bracey-thrilled-aston-villa-not-involved-in-premier-league-naughtiness-amid-everton-development/ Yes they are in line atm but now some are calling for a change in the rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted February 25 Author Share Posted February 25 (edited) In a way I don't miss Aston Villa, I remember their fans in the Championship but the stadium sale and leaseback giving them an opportunity really rankles. Edited February 25 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W-S-M Seagull Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 49 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said: In a way I don't miss Aston Villa, I remember their fans in the Championship but the stadium sale and leaseback giving them an opportunity really rankles. 99% of the 9000 at West Ham were sesson ticket holders so his point is irrelevant. Not sure what planet this guy lives on but for most of us you're talking 50/60 quid on fuel, even more on the train? 30 quid ticket? Food and drinks, during a cost of living crisis so in that context I think taking 1000 for a game over 3 hours away is bloody brilliant. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted February 25 Author Share Posted February 25 (edited) 49 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said: 99% of the 9000 at West Ham were sesson ticket holders so his point is irrelevant. Not sure what planet this guy lives on but for most of us you're talking 50/60 quid on fuel, even more on the train? 30 quid ticket? Food and drinks, during a cost of living crisis so in that context I think taking 1000 for a game over 3 hours away is bloody brilliant. I'd say so yeah, perhaps I shouldn't tar with one brush but I do remember a little bit of needle with Aston Villa a few years ago after the game there. Edited February 26 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob26 Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 On 24/02/2024 at 12:00, Mr Popodopolous said: Aston Villa have spent a fortune on and off, does anyone else find their whining a bit rich?? Not least given the loophole that helped them escape this League in no small part. when people say things like this they don't realise the clubs they are on about often sell quite a few players each season, thats how you manage this ffp, its not different at the top Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob26 Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 everton reduced to 6 points Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted February 26 Author Share Posted February 26 (edited) 4 hours ago, Rob26 said: when people say things like this they don't realise the clubs they are on about often sell quite a few players each season, thats how you manage this ffp, its not different at the top True. Although Aston Villa are especially sanctimonious and entitled it seems so I also attribute it to that, especially given recent gloating about their compliance and so on. Edited February 26 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted February 26 Author Share Posted February 26 https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2024/02/26/nottingham-forest-hearing-premier-league-spending-rules/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted February 26 Author Share Posted February 26 Arsenal..good to see Profit going hand in hand with improving revenue. Ah wait, oh. -£52m pre tax? Finishing 2nd in the League. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnAstonVillafan Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 Don't judge all Villa fans, or the club itself on the rantings of one guy on Twitter who is wrong. There is some merit to what Purlsow is saying. FFP protects the top six and stops upwardly mobile from upsetting the order. FFP shouldn't force clubs to sell their homegrown talent unless its a business/footballing decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted February 26 Author Share Posted February 26 (edited) Okay I rowed back but it did annoy me at the time and I think the flip-flopping on FFP is also interesting. On the FFP point, I do believe that other clubs have had to go through it, Wolves a notable example of selling/offloading 1/4 of the squad or so it looked like, others failed so changing the cycle mid-stream would assist some unduly. This was a concern with me in the EFL too..have any of Birmingham, Cardiff, QPR, Stoke and maybe others received any kind of more favourable treatment, would a change benefit some who have to take harsher medicine. I have limited sympathy on the home-grown point..over the last few years and I appreciate it can be relative to the level.. Kelly, Bryan, Scott, Reid, Semenyo. I am sure there are others who I missed. At least some of them were sold with a P&S angle in mind. Many other clubs btw, we are not the only ones by a long stretch. Aston Villa most notably Grealish but notable others include Ramsey, Carney, Philogene, (can't spell surname without searching), Archer. Edited February 26 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted February 26 Author Share Posted February 26 To he clear the surname of Carney is the one I'm unsure on. However I do struggle, Chelsea already a wealthy club have spent loads and loads and if they have to sell to sell multiple Academy players to fall into line, I can't sympathise too much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted February 27 Author Share Posted February 27 (edited) https://web.archive.org/web/20240226222923/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2024/02/26/everton-points-deduction-premier-league-appeal-rules-dyche/ Hmm wonder which other clubs.. Certainly suggests Chelsea need to raise £100m by end of June albeit Chelsea deny this and say they are fine. Edited February 27 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W-S-M Seagull Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said: https://web.archive.org/web/20240226222923/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2024/02/26/everton-points-deduction-premier-league-appeal-rules-dyche/ Hmm wonder which other clubs.. Certainly suggests Chelsea need to raise £100m by end of June albeit Chelsea deny this and say they are fine. May aswell take the minus 6 point hit and then use the players they've not sold to claw back those 6 points. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted February 27 Author Share Posted February 27 (edited) 14 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said: May aswell take the minus 6 point hit and then use the players they've not sold to claw back those 6 points. I'd have thought a £100m breach if those reports are true gets a lot more than 6 points. The PL wanted to put a floor under it with 6 being the baseline fit any breach then I didn't see any particular ceiling ie £5m=1 point, next £5m=another point etc. It just feels like numbers picked out of the air etc. Think Everton got 2 of their points back for reducing losses... Birmingham case that kciemd this all off got... 7 points for overspend (£8m or something). 3 more points for escalating losses 1 point back for cooperation with Business Plan. Which reminds me in addition to their points they also got an Embargo and Business Plan. Deservedly so but this is how it can differ in the Championship, you get that as a start and the League push for points. Edited February 27 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted February 27 Author Share Posted February 27 (edited) Barnsley accounts out. £4m loss Before Tax in the 3rd tier. Probably one of the better run tbh which is mad. No FFP concerns, but then have they ever? Edited February 27 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob26 Posted February 28 Share Posted February 28 On 26/02/2024 at 21:38, AnAstonVillafan said: Don't judge all Villa fans, or the club itself on the rantings of one guy on Twitter who is wrong. There is some merit to what Purlsow is saying. FFP protects the top six and stops upwardly mobile from upsetting the order. FFP shouldn't force clubs to sell their homegrown talent unless its a business/footballing decision. all that's relevant is the numbers that are publicly available can't blame people for supporting their club, pointing finger at other clubs, not many fans really have a clue how ffp works so pretty easy to find people who think their club is alright or have loads of money to spend when the numbers say something different. you certinley won't win arguments fighting with these sort of fans as they do not want to be educated and often will just come back with something along the lines oh so you support man city then Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted February 28 Author Share Posted February 28 A change in rules depending on how it is formulated could be very beneficial to Aston Villa. https://www.theguardian.com/football/2024/feb/28/premier-league-clubs-set-to-back-uefa-style-framework-of-financial-rules If there is no Upper Loss limit then this risks totally letting some bigger spenders with variable trajectory the hook and others will have been punished ahead of a Regulatory change.. ..Wolves made drastic calls that were very much to their retirement on paper. Losing as they did Lopetegui. A potential £0.4m was it pre tax Profit replaced by a potential €138m (that would be £110-115m) Pre Tax Loss as the starting point. Hmm. I would be raising this forcefully as a PL club especially one who were badly hamstrung or who showed restraint and or took decisions to their detriment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted February 28 Author Share Posted February 28 (edited) We in EFL/Championship will be expected to fall into line but I question whether this will be the case without the adequate amendments to TV distribution. Article speaks of a soft launch next year, fully in 2025-26 but if a club on a negative trajectory to 2024-25 or even 2025-26 they shouldn't be let off the hook. That actively rewards risky calls. Could Chelsea likewise benefit? Edited February 28 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted February 28 Author Share Posted February 28 @ExiledAjax You are closer to this than a lot on here. How so you transition and plan across the 2 divergent systems especially in the slightly extreme example as provided by me. Bournemouth another, barely sold anyone spent quite big for 2 years lower income than many PL clubs probably. Again..switching midstream seems a real oddity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted February 28 Author Share Posted February 28 (edited) Talking of the ones with a charmed life.. Aston Villa have extended their Period to end of June. That could be the Accounts to this rather than last season but. Edited February 28 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted February 28 Author Share Posted February 28 Tbh it could be greater regulatory alignment with PL and UEFA, we did similar but it could be a bit of both. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILINFRANCE Posted February 28 Share Posted February 28 3 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said: A change in rules depending on how it is formulated could be very beneficial to Aston Villa. https://www.theguardian.com/football/2024/feb/28/premier-league-clubs-set-to-back-uefa-style-framework-of-financial-rules If there is no Upper Loss limit then this risks totally letting some bigger spenders with variable trajectory the hook and others will have been punished ahead of a Regulatory change.. ..Wolves made drastic calls that were very much to their retirement on paper. Losing as they did Lopetegui. A potential £0.4m was it pre tax Profit replaced by a potential €138m (that would be £110-115m) Pre Tax Loss as the starting point. Hmm. I would be raising this forcefully as a PL club especially one who were badly hamstrung or who showed restraint and or took decisions to their detriment. On occasions, predictive text can prove detrimental to what one wants to post . 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted February 28 Author Share Posted February 28 27 minutes ago, PHILINFRANCE said: On occasions, predictive text can prove detrimental to what one wants to post . Ha well that's a good spot..hmm very detrimental.. ..Albeit you could say such retrenchment forced the retirement of Wolves as far as any outside top 6 chances went. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted February 29 Author Share Posted February 29 (edited) Today is (hopefully) the day for.. *Aston Villa and Associated Companies *Cardiff City and Associated Companies *Coventry City and Parent *Liverpool and Parent *Wolves and Parent Plus Birmingham City 6 months to end of December via Hong Kong. I don't see what benefit dragging it out to the last day brings, the League see it earlier, post deadline..yet due out prior to Summer Window opening I'm unsure what difference it makes in real terms. Certainly post the January window. Edited February 29 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted February 29 Author Share Posted February 29 Liverpool lose £9m pre tax but still nowhere near P&S/FFP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob26 Posted February 29 Share Posted February 29 wonder how you would work the uefa standard in the championship, given turnover compared to wages alone is way out, but then clubs with parachute payments going to have a even bigger advantage if efl went this way also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted February 29 Author Share Posted February 29 FSA have had this to say on it. I assume that number is taken as a weighted average and while Parachure Payments v Solidarity Payments would be reduced, a notable gap would remain. By £110m v £20m it means inclusive of football wages, player amortisation, agents fees vs income then perhaod transfer profit or cash flow. £110m v £20m is a bit reductive and averaging but the gap would be substantial at minimum. Maybe bigger than now. @Davefevs knows more about this particular system than me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted February 29 Author Share Posted February 29 (edited) Jumped up.. Bournemouth fan in that thread. Talk about forgetting where they came from and the fact that historically they're similar size to those two at best. When I say historically I mean up to the early 2010s. Granted history is ever moving. Edited February 29 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted February 29 Share Posted February 29 1 hour ago, Rob26 said: wonder how you would work the uefa standard in the championship, given turnover compared to wages alone is way out, but then clubs with parachute payments going to have a even bigger advantage if efl went this way also. Rob, Google “UEFA FFP CLFSR 2022 onwards”. There is a pdf of their plans, what’s included, what’s not. I expect Championship P&S to be similar(ish), which won’t be massively different to SCMP. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted February 29 Author Share Posted February 29 Birmingham interim accounts are out They appear to have made a LOSS despite and inclusive of THE Bellingham money for the 6 months to December 31 2023!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted February 29 Author Share Posted February 29 https://www1.hkexnews.hk/listedco/listconews/sehk/2024/0229/2024022901631.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob26 Posted February 29 Share Posted February 29 3 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said: FSA have had this to say on it. I assume that number is taken as a weighted average and while Parachure Payments v Solidarity Payments would be reduced, a notable gap would remain. By £110m v £20m it means inclusive of football wages, player amortisation, agents fees vs income then perhaod transfer profit or cash flow. £110m v £20m is a bit reductive and averaging but the gap would be substantial at minimum. Maybe bigger than now. @Davefevs knows more about this particular system than me. surely 20m is no transfer budgets, that don't cover the wages of many championship clubs, which was why I was wondering how it would work epically when parachute clubs if on the same percentage as other clubs can spend way more for a few years. after so many years if revenue cannot be increased i'm sure many clubs will end up with lower wage bills and pay less on the fee's, but I'm sure we will see players that would be top tier championship players trying to break into premier league hit that point and if they cant get the wages they get now will probs go abroad if not good enough for a premier league club to buy. going to see the quality of the experienced players drop off I reckon. I still think owners should be able to donate money to their clubs, and its allowed to be spent as revenue as long as the owner does not put any debt on the books. A side effect of ffp is cutting off this investment in the game that some people want to make and would not care about donating money to the club to cover it. but you are not going to build many teams worthy of joining the premier league apart from the odd team where everything just clicks for the right season at the right time that beats the parachute payment clubs, and even then it's probs going to be a team that has little quality to it compared to what they are facing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted February 29 Author Share Posted February 29 (edited) Not content with moaning about Everton, he is now piling in on Reading and the EFL. While I do sympathise with Reading on some of the latter stuff, or their fans anyway does he just think Governing bodies should ignore FFP breaches or what? As an Academic does he consider the deterrence and vindication element of FFP sanctions. I know other stuff came later but 2020-21 to 2022-23 was very much P&S related. Edited February 29 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted February 29 Author Share Posted February 29 Coventry accounts out albeit I query how the Exceptional Income should be treated but they shouldn't fail P&S any time soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 1 Author Share Posted March 1 (edited) The accounts for: *Aston Villa and Associated Companies *Cardiff City and Associated Companies *Wolves and Parent Are all officially late. Probably Liverpool and Parent too but we know the headline number. Edited March 1 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 1 Author Share Posted March 1 (edited) Birmingham could easily conservatively be looking at 3 year losses of £60m. Even with their sponsorship deal. P&S? 2021-22 -£25m 2022-23 -£23-25m 2023-24...-£4m half-season including Bellingham sell-on. Which makes the 6 month underlying loss £14-15m. Underlying loss £14-15m probably in HALF a season less the sponsorship. £60-65m Maybe as high as..P&S? Edited March 1 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 1 Author Share Posted March 1 (edited) Yet their fans are crowing that they are fine and in safe hands. Someone square the circle? Sure the first £48-50m came under the old owners but a little the improvement down to the Bellingham sell-on. The bump in Commercial Revenue with that RPT too..that is upcoming. Hmm. I'd be surprised if that is just waved through. Edited March 1 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 1 Author Share Posted March 1 (edited) https://archive.is/2024.02.28-133233/https://theathletic.com/5302961/2024/02/28/premier-league-psr-everton-forest/ PL clubs ultimately have themselves to blame for the relative chaos. They had the opportunity to vote on a more fixed framework (but not binding) in 2020. They declined. On the Birmingham point clearly their new owners better than their last but those are some sizeable underlying plus last 2 year losses still. Edited March 1 by Mr Popodopolous 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 1 Author Share Posted March 1 (edited) Across the 2 divisions though, Bournemouth are the ones who really baffle me though. Everton x 2, Nottingham Forest ran aground and were charged. Along with multiple Championship clubs in recent times. Others have been hemmed hemmed in to a degree- Aston Villa, Newcastle arguably, Wolves had to offload big time. A lot of Championship clubs were close, us included. A lot of PL clubs have higher income, and Fulham and Nottingham Forest aside, higher loss limits. (£105m v moving between divisions). Edited March 1 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 1 Author Share Posted March 1 (edited) Bournemouth- what we know for sure 2018-19 (PL) -£32m *2019-20 (PL) -£60m *2020-21 (Championship) £17m *Combined average of 2019-20, -2020-21=-£21.5m 2021-22 (Championship) -£55.5m Upper Tariff- £72m plus Allowables etc. Same again to last season. 2022-23- ? Covid losses yes. They don't have a huge infrastructure, their FFP Allowables also won't be huge...Category One Academy is a good add-back. Bournemouth were Category 3 for some time. I don't think their Women's side is especially high profile. It doesn't make much sense in the context of everyone else. Last sales of note were also 2021-22. Edited March 1 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 1 Author Share Posted March 1 https://www.insideworldfootball.com/2024/03/01/textor-calls-world-super-league-says-financial-sustainability-fraud-term/ Oh dear. A bit more on the Crystal Palace investor who calls FFP a fraud or the term, perhaps. He supports a World Super League. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 1 Author Share Posted March 1 (edited) Wolves accounts have landed at CH. Albeit not yet available. As has Aston Villa Foundation which should indicate theirs are on the way. Still no sign of Cardiff's.. Edited March 1 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 1 Author Share Posted March 1 (edited) https://almajir.net/2024/03/01/bsh-interim-accounts-2024/ I don't see how the author is fully squaring the circle when the underlying loss is £15m in half a year. Adding £5-6m still leaves a loss and the loss included I assume the Profit on Disposal. If they lost £48-50m pre tax in 2 years I wonder how that works. Extrapolated £50-55m in Operating Costs vs an £11-12m Profit on Disposal and £30m so in income. That is even assuming that the sudden sponsorship deal is ratified in full and as Fair Value. I assume that the underlying prior to one off transactions still similar. Edited March 1 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimonD Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 With regard to qualifying my (well Swiss Ramble's) estimate of disallowable costs, I was looking around for typical costs for the various levels of academies and found this on Swansea. The full extent of Swansea City's substantial academy saving revealed and the innovation club legend Alan Curtis will spearhead - Wales Online Does this sound about right to you? Level 1 £6m-£7m per season Level 2 £2m per season. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 2 Author Share Posted March 2 11 hours ago, SimonD said: With regard to qualifying my (well Swiss Ramble's) estimate of disallowable costs, I was looking around for typical costs for the various levels of academies and found this on Swansea. The full extent of Swansea City's substantial academy saving revealed and the innovation club legend Alan Curtis will spearhead - Wales Online Does this sound about right to you? Level 1 £6m-£7m per season Level 2 £2m per season. I always took it to he a bit lower, ie £5-6m for Category 1 and a bit higher ie £2-3m for Category 2. Clearly it can and does often go higher for Category 1 in the PL..Last accounts I think ie 2021-22, Aston Villa spent £13m iirc on theirs. Some of the longer term top and highest revenue clubs also spend 8 figures annually but our level that seems reasonable yeah. I believed ours to be £2.5m per season e.g., perhaps QPR likewise? Swansea have been rather cost conscious for a while. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 2 Author Share Posted March 2 (edited) Wolves, no wonder they didn't make a major play for Alex Scott! They couldn't. (Still curious about Bournemouth and how they sail clear of issues). I remember a lot of their fans were less than believing it was true..hierarchy look more sensible now. Edited March 2 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 2 Author Share Posted March 2 (edited) By Rotherham standards this is perhaps pushing the boat out a bit. Reckon Taylor got more of this than Warne. Could've included survival bonuses e.g. too. Otoh compensation from Derby for Warne. Always s tough challenge for Rotherham at this level though and manager permitting, they should be reasonably placed to bounce back again. Edited March 2 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted March 2 Share Posted March 2 50 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said: By Rotherham standards this is perhaps pushing the boat out a bit. Reckon Taylor got more of this than Warne. Could've included survival bonuses e.g. too. Otoh compensation from Derby for Warne. Always s tough challenge for Rotherham at this level though and manager permitting, they should be reasonably placed to bounce back again. Taylor kept them up. They lost less last season than getting promotion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 3 Author Share Posted March 3 Not sure Wolves fans fully grasp the FFP thing. Some are saying that because they made an £80 odd million Profit on Disposal they will make a major Profit this season. Well their Audited Accounts for laat season showed an underlying loss of some £100.659m and then Interest payable took it to £110-111m. Their wages may have come down and the Player Impairment may not be repeated but prior to Additions in 2023-24, cost of replacing Lopetegui they also had: *£244.908m in Book Value to amortise over time. *A £141m wage bill. Like I say they're fine for FFP now and their improvement on pitch will help but the underlying numbers are quite major. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 3 Author Share Posted March 3 In respect of the now overdue Aston Villa and Cardiff Accounts, they're still overdue... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 3 Author Share Posted March 3 (edited) Maybe we shall see them Monday for in particular Aston Villa and Cardiff. Any others whose Accounts due out by end of March or April, early release into the public domain would be welcome. Edited March 3 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1960maaan Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 Just seen Kieran Maguire's post about Southampton . Losses last year when relegated , then in Kieran's words.... Southampton are due to receive instalments of £4m on player sales but owe £93 million on player purchases. Bank loans are a further £93 million Southampton may have to pay up to £62m in add ons for appearances in relation to player purchases. Now I don't follow or understand the impact of this , or the timeline , but I imagine they could really do with Promotion . 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 4 Author Share Posted March 4 (edited) It helps to explain their activity summer. They also needed to fall in line with FFP/P&S. £83m plus Allowables. Which brings me onto Leicester wh9 the media have barely mentioned. like them their loss limit will be some £83m plus Allowables. Already before Allowables lost £92.4m pre tax in 2021-22. (Season in which they finished 8th, turned over £214m and reached a Europa Conference League semi final). Edited March 4 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 Wow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 4 Author Share Posted March 4 (edited) Some Aston Villa fans just don't get it do they.. "Spent moderately"?? Are we sure? In any event as already mentioned it isn't reportedly £138m it is €138m. If they had spent moderately they wouldn't have lost anything approaching that, especially with the £100m Grealish buffer set to run out. Granted the devil will be in the detail as to how the losses were comprised, just how much is FFP allowable but what a contradictory post. It's a perfectly valid Regulatory position to hold but it it completely contradicts itself on one level. Edited March 4 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 4 Author Share Posted March 4 (edited) Okay apologies for the source but well well. CFRP?? https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/26331802/leicester-points-deduction-loophole-financial-promotion/ My own view is that they are and were fine to LAST season but THIS season could see a major question mark. Edited March 4 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 4 Author Share Posted March 4 (edited) In actual fact EFL and PL rules imply that they DID have to submit as a newly relegated club in late December. However this would be one hell of a problem if they went up in clear breach of one let alone 2 Periods. I had a strong view since the Autumn btw. Edited March 4 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 4 Author Share Posted March 4 The PL rules actually state that this should be more live..will look for the EFL equivalent later. E.50.2 suggests that this should be all in hand in terms of submissions to the EFL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 4 Author Share Posted March 4 If Leicester have breached to last year, bang goes their compensation claim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 4 Author Share Posted March 4 I believe that there is alignment so the article I dunno.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 4 Author Share Posted March 4 Aston Villa have reportedly suggested that the UEFA Report on their losses is wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 4 Author Share Posted March 4 (edited) Reportedly Aston Villa lost £119.8m last season!? Presumably the Accounts published on the site or similar. Albeit the link isn't working. Can access via the below. https://www.avfc.co.uk/news/ Edited March 4 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimonD Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 11 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said: It helps to explain their activity summer. They also needed to fall in line with FFP/P&S. £83m plus Allowables. Which brings me onto Leicester wh9 the media have barely mentioned. like them their loss limit will be some £83m plus Allowables. Already before Allowables lost £92.4m pre tax in 2021-22. (Season in which they finished 8th, turned over £214m and reached a Europa Conference League semi final). Leicester will have the sale of Fofana to Chelsea to help with the accounts due out shortly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 4 Author Share Posted March 4 (edited) 11 minutes ago, SimonD said: Leicester will have the sale of Fofana to Chelsea to help with the accounts due out shortly. Yep albeit their income will very much be down year on year. Obviously this year especially but last year too somewhat. They didn't hit the top 30 in the Deloitte Money League..remember 10 places lower and no Europan revenue. Fofana was £70m, less Book Value and Sell-on. Maddison £40m, less Book Value and Sell-on. My prediction is fine to 2022-23, huge question mark to 2023-24. Edited March 4 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimonD Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 (edited) 32 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said: Yep albeit their income will very much be down year on year. Obviously this year especially but last year too somewhat. They didn't hit the top 30 in the Deloitte Money League..remember 10 places lower and no Europan revenue. Fofana was £70m, less Book Value and Sell-on. Maddison £40m, less Book Value and Sell-on. My prediction is fine to 2022-23, huge question mark to 2023-24. This season they sold Barnes and Castagne I think, but bought a few too Edited March 4 by SimonD 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 4 Author Share Posted March 4 36 minutes ago, SimonD said: This season they sold Barnes and Castagne I think, but bought a few too Barnes pure profit, think Hirst was too. Castagne Fee Minus Book Value. Some loan fees. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 5 Author Share Posted March 5 @Hxj What is your take? The Leicester story, surely with the rules being harmonised the idea that they could slip through the cracks is somewhat crazy? You know about the CFRP. I outlined the areas in which these rules have been harmonised and aligned. Notably rule E.50.2, whixh seems to indicate that relegated clubs who have lost X have to submit to the EFL by 31st December. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.