The Championship FFP Thread (Merged)

[chinapig]

16 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Since they announced the change of PPs from £48m to £90m+ in summer of 2015 (PPs came in at end of 2006-07), here are the clubs that went up:

Dark green - straight back up (8 in 8 seasons)

Light green - promoted whilst still getting PPs (6 in

Pink - relegated straight away (9 in 7 seasons, this season tbc)

Definitely as you say (@rob26) 1 team bouncing straight back up.

For me a more useful comparison is between the probability of clubs with PPs being promoted vs clubs without PPs. I suspect the former would be significantly higher.

Steve Parish likes to claim that the average position of PP clubs is 8th but of course the mean can be skewed by an outlier.

So if PP clubs finish 1st, 2nd and 24th their average position would be 9th. Completely misleading.

[Sir Geoff]

1 hour ago, Rob26 said:

I don't think it makes a closed shop, only feel its common that only 1 of the 3 teams that go down usually bounce back at first time of asking.

but do think they should be phased out and force clubs to make provisions for if the worst happens, by either making rules or letting them deal with it the hard way, if a club can't plan for however unlikely scenario of relegation then they deserve to get stuck in the championship or worse for not having a contingency in their club.

It was totally introduced as a closed shop according to Richard Scudamore in an interview on the Athletic pod last November. The whole intention of PP's was to keep the Premier League as strong as possible (thus more marketable to overseas broadcasters) with the same teams coming back up. They did not want a repeat of Derby / Swindon stinking the place out.

[Davefevs]

33 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

It was totally introduced as a closed shop according to Richard Scudamore in an interview on the Athletic pod last November. The whole intention of PP's was to keep the Premier League as strong as possible (thus more marketable to overseas broadcasters) with the same teams coming back up. They did not want a repeat of Derby / Swindon stinking the place out.

Yep, I see the PL as a group of 24 clubs of which they allow 20 to partake each season.

[Sir Geoff]

51 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Yep, I see the PL as a group of 24 clubs of which they allow 20 to partake each season.

Me too, thus the reluctance to relinquish parachute payments.

[Mr Popodopolous]

On the Parachute Payments front, did a bit of research earlier. Seems the earliest mention of them that I can find is interestingly 2004, whixh sort of cuts timeline wise with my comparative accounts. You maybe interested too @Davefevs though I will concede it goes against the accepted narrative, the grain but surely T.V. fees alone can't explain a £6-7m difference in TV money in the early to mid 2000s for relegated sides.

Seems like it maybe was £6-7m a year for 2 years then over.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2004/nov/07/newsstory.sport13

[Mr Popodopolous]

Paragraph 124 is also interesting to see.

Still think it's open to debate as to when exactly they started.

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmcumeds/792/79207.htm

Edited May 3, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Davefevs]

Certainly looks like they were in place in some shape or form from what you’ve posted above.

FWIW I wasn’t suggesting £6-7m gap was all tv appearance money the season after,

[Mr Popodopolous]

3 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Certainly looks like they were in place in some shape or form from what you’ve posted above.

FWIW I wasn’t suggesting £6-7m gap was all tv appearance money the season after,

That final bit of the jigsaw was hard to piece together tbh, the whole did they exist before and how much. My own interpretation is thst they have existed on some level of another since the early PL days but by far the gap was not so decisive then and FFP didn't exist either.

Now the gap and timings are and can be huge while FFP though IMO not too bad in itself, in conjunction with Parachute Payments in their current form I don't see how there is a competitive balance.

[Mr Popodopolous]

The Burnley situation, is this becoming mildly interesting?

Now early May and still no accounts or even numbers in the public domain or clearly in the case of last season, with the EFL themselves.

Doubtful that it is P&S and could all be totally innocent but maybe it's linked to Cash Losses, huge hole in the Balance Sheet with the MSD loans?

Even if not at CH is a bit meh, it is a full 2 months and 3 days overdue with the League now.

Possibly if a lack of equity their Upper Loss Limit to 2022 and especially 2023 is £15m plus allowables...Covid losses do need to be fully funded or with equity of course!! That  is one of the stipulations in the P&S regs.

Seen it speculated that maybe the Loan has been impaired via Profit and Loss but it was just a post on a forum.

Edited May 3, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

The other thing to note and again I still think they haven't exceeded Loss Limits but as with Swansea and this weird July end, a number of the sales the big sales were up to or before July 31st...it should all compute out but hmm.

Pope, Collins and McNeil all fell into LAST season of the big money sales ie the PL one. Only Cornet for this.

Weghorst to Besiktas loan again last season even if June 2022, whereas his Man United loan this one.

Edited May 3, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Rob26]

23 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Since they announced the change of PPs from £48m to £90m+ in summer of 2015 (PPs came in at end of 2006-07), here are the clubs that went up:

Dark green - straight back up (8 in 8 seasons)

Light green - promoted whilst still getting PPs (6 in

Pink - relegated straight away (9 in 7 seasons, this season tbc)

Definitely as you say (@rob26) 1 team bouncing straight back up.

I dont think its the parachute payments, its clubs managing themselves better that usually bounces them back up at first chance, after all teams that come down do not always have their shit together in the first place.

Without parachute payments I think premier league clubs are still going to be at an advantage and the trend I bet would remain at these numbers maybe at 90% or so without PPs, just because they will still have more money and bigger FFP allowance without the same level of payments, it still wouldn't level the playing field, but football will never be on a level playing field financially  

I think some teams the expectation is smash the league, reality is the rebuild even with the money is much harder than you expect, 

almost 2 down from 3 up each year on average shows how much that no year 3 parachute payment rule is saving them too, 

 

[Rob26]

22 hours ago, Sir Geoff said:

It was totally introduced as a closed shop according to Richard Scudamore in an interview on the Athletic pod last November. The whole intention of PP's was to keep the Premier League as strong as possible (thus more marketable to overseas broadcasters) with the same teams coming back up. They did not want a repeat of Derby / Swindon stinking the place out.

even with that its not a closed shop tho, plenty of teams have shown over that you can break through and earn your place there with great management from the owners and coaching staff. few examples out there that have done it the hard way and its paid off well for them. might be designed that way, but really even if there was no parachute payments I think teams would still bounce back just as much because they will have more money anyways and better players if they retain them

more fun at west brown, minority shareholders have 38 questions for the owner to answer 

https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/xu-ke-asked-answer-38-26833082

not a nice tone of some of these they have asked very publicly 

[Davefevs]

Swansea’s accounts not yet on CH.

What company name to Derby go under now?

[ExiledAjax]

7 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Swansea’s accounts not yet on CH.

What company name to Derby go under now?

Company number 14190771

"Derby County (the Rams) Limited"

Edited May 4, 2023 by ExiledAjax

[Mr Popodopolous]

Burnley accounts now at CH although not publicly viewable yet.

I assume all will be well, no exceeding P&S limits e.g. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Burnley £36m pre tax profit last season although this did include some £54m in transfer profit. Wage bill and amortisation didn't increase by much.

Their cash reserves have fallen quite drastically though from £80m pre takeover to £12-13m as of end of July 2022! Covid will have played a part too of course. Not looked properly yet. There isn't a negative balance sheet or anything like that however.

Can't see there being any P&S issues to 2023 at all. Even if at the lower limit plus all the usual allowances.

Expect the embargo to be lifted imminently?

 

Edited May 5, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Rob26]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/65479942

who would buy them for 16m? crazy money, that owner sounds like he has backed both sides of the coin if he sells or winds it up

[Rob26]

53 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Burnley £36m pre tax profit last season although this did include some £54m in transfer profit. Wage bill and amortisation didn't increase by much.

Their cash reserves have fallen quite drastically though from £80m pre takeover to £12-13m as of end of July 2022! Covid will have played a part too of course. Not looked properly yet. There isn't a negative balance sheet or anything like that however.

Can't see there being any P&S issues to 2023 at all. Even if at the lower limit plus all the usual allowances.

Expect the embargo to be lifted imminently?

 

keiren says the owners paid back 20m, 3rd party loans down 20m,  fan income was up, wages were up a bit, made 28m on transfers, currently owed 64m on transfer instalments, and the big loan they paid off in feb was with another loan at a much better interest rate and payment terms (I think it was a 39m loan they got)

[W-S-M Seagull]

On 03/05/2023 at 10:28, Davefevs said:

Since they announced the change of PPs from £48m to £90m+ in summer of 2015 (PPs came in at end of 2006-07), here are the clubs that went up:

Dark green - straight back up (8 in 8 seasons)

Light green - promoted whilst still getting PPs (6 in

Pink - relegated straight away (9 in 7 seasons, this season tbc)

Definitely as you say (@rob26) 1 team bouncing straight back up.

In 6 of the 8 seasons two of the 3 promotion places has gone to clubs in receipt of PP. But that confirms what I've always thought in my mind. It leaves the rest of us (including others in receipt of pp) to fight for the one remaining promotion spot. If that's not a closed shop then I don't know what is.

Interesting that there hasn't been a season where 3 clubs with pp have gone up. 

I'd imagine that if this graphic showed the top 6 then there would be in most cases be about 4 clubs in receipt of PP? 

[Mr Popodopolous]

I wonder if Burnley's owners or similar will deign to repay them.

[chinapig]

Wigan have failed to pay their players on time yet again.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2023/may/06/wigan-players-left-unpaid-by-troubled-club-for-fifth-time-this-season

[Davefevs]

Here’s the Champ / Lg1 ups and downs:

Sunderland in blue as they went down 2 successive seasons.

Pink shading - relegated first season up

Green shading - promoted at first attempt

[bcfc01]

First time in seven seasons that Rotherham haven't been involved in promotion or relegation.

Boring season for them..

[Mr Popodopolous]

Although the great irony there for me is that as soon as the guy who was working a minor miracle in the first  5th of the season unbeaten by late September international break left, his successor got a lot more in the way of backing or profile of players relative to Warne.

I'm not even sure if their squad after the summer window was wholly as strong as the one which went up.

I'm a broken record but 3 possible reasons behind tbis at least IMO:

1) They took Warne and his ability to make a little go some way for granted a bit.

2)  Warne is less assertive than Taylor when it comes to requesting a bit to spend- saw a Rotherham fan suggest this on Twitter.

3) Warne and again a Rotherham fan suggested it, perhaps is more choosy about the characters he brings.

Credit to Rotherham and Taylor but the two windows are chalk and cheese.

Summer, notable ins and outs:

In:

Cuffey-Taylor (Loan), Hall (Loan), Eaves (Free) and Washington Free. Maybe one or two more but how notable? High Huddersfield maybe one.

Out:

Iheweke and Smith (Sheffield Wednesday, Free).

Ladapo (Ipswich Free).

Mattock also left but Maybe he had run his course.

Oh come January Barlaser was sold and helped to fund the following but:

In:

Morrison (Free), Wright (Loan), Hjelde (Loan) and Blackett (Free).

Fosu (Loan)

Watford midfielder whose name escapes.

Hugill

Out:

Barlaser (Middlesbrough), plus of course the departures of Norton-Cuffey and High elsewhere.

They were blatantly IMO underpowered last summer as far as depth etc went. Taylor did well of course and perhaps argued his case better?

[Mr Popodopolous]

On another planet truly words do fail in terms of what PSG seem to get away with although tbis story seems to change now and then. This was a month ago.

https://psgpost.com/posts/psg-won-t-be-limited-by-financial-fair-play-constraints-until-2026-01gxqmkg5xet

Talk today that they may try and keep Messi after all..cutbacks what cutbacks??

Even if we accept the premise that they accelerated a good chunk of the Mbappe wave into last season, why no meaningful punishment for a €369m pre tax one year loss wheb prior losses put them waaaaay over.

Then even if you reset that and the prior year I expect the €30m failed again tbis year. The pre tax loss in 2019-20 was €124m and €224m in 2020-21. Average €174m.

They then in summer 2021 proceeded to add and yes a lot of post Covid revenue streams had bounced back:

Donnaruma- Free

Ramos- Free

Wijnaldum- Free

Messi- Free

Pereira and Hakimi for fees, millions and then Nuno Mendes loan to buy.

Wages over 100 pct of turnover. Could go on.

Renewed Mbappe on the bumper contract laat summer although worked backwards into last season?? I eagerly await Swiss Ramble and his breakdown. The Mbappe amortisation disappears of course.

[Mr Popodopolous]

There is more btw. SwissRamble and his analysis to 2021...

Even with the principle of reset They still fail I expect to 2022 and 2023 but no?? The breakeven rule.

Oh yes their "austerity" in this season additions wise.

€97.5m in fresh additions and the turning the loan to permanent of Nuno Mendes.

Even with their reported revenue spike it still leaves a likely big to decent shortfall.

Their revenue figures also seem..interesting.

Edited May 7, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Few clubs with some interesting financial positions and for different reasons too.

Birmingham

Their headroom is shrinking by the year but will the Bellingham sell on solve some difficulties? They lost £24m pre tax in 2021-22 and think 1st half seasonal loss via HKSE was £11m something like. A potential takeover should not affect this.

Blackburn

A bit closer this time to the top 6 but again no cigar. Lost Nyambe, Lenihan and Rothwell on a free transfer last season, had he not extended Kaminiski was also in the final year of his deal.

Add to that Brereton-Diaz leaving on a free. Showed intent to keep but given a £10-11m pre tax loss in 2021-22 despite and including the Armstrong sale, that could easily be doubled before sales. Where is the saleable asset coming from?

We ourselves could be a bit tight to 2024 if no sales occur and we add some, although wages and amortisation coming off means compliance to 2024 looks fine, clearly if Scott goes surely a fair chunk can from an FFP perspective be reinvested back in. I have no particular concerns about breaching though even if the Covid losses are the standard. Had Semenyo not been sold perhaps a breach to 2023 would have been possible.

Cardiff

Their fans talk of the need to spend but how exactly. Their headroom is shrinking by the year and no notable sales last season. In which incidentally they made a £26m pre tax loss in 2021-22 as a starting point. I suspect that they should be fine to 2023 given the Covid season losses were low but tbis is a post Parachute Payments world.

Starting point swings from an £11-12m pre tax pre deduction loss inclusive of Parachute Payments to a £26m pre tax loss, the former had the standard averaged £5m in Covid costs and add-backs, the latter £2.5m. Their income last year was £19-20m but by how much have costs fallen.

Possibly they are still in part relying on something related to Sala (RIP) to fix their books.

QPR

Lost £23-24m pre tax in 2021-22, notable sales were lacking both this and last season. Compensation for Beale will have helped, otoh hiring and firing Critchley and compensation for Ainsworth will have added a bit.

Headroom has shrunk massively, to 2024 will be of interest.

Swansea

Lost £13m in 2021-22, Kieran Maguire reckons that without sales it would have been £23-24m.  Not sure of any notable sales this season although costs will have fallen I'm sure and accounts running until end of July still gives some time.

They also went from Category One to Two, saving on headline costs of £4m but also removing £4m per year from the FFP add-backs.

West Brom

Obviously there is a gap between higher and lower, dunno if it's £15m or £55.5m this year that they are working towards. Either way it'll be £15-39m next year.

This double whammy is completed by Year 2 of Parachute Payments being the final one and the EFL revenues being the new benchmark. At best turnover of £25-30m next year I would say, possibly also looking at the £20-25m range.

They made a small profit in the post relegation season but that was incisive of a £16m profit on disposal ie mainly Pereira and full 1st year Parachute Payments. Of course it was actually a loss but the shenanigans with their owner played a role.

Some other notables next level down include Norwich and Watford, loss limit to this year £72m, next year £61m..Plus a fall in parachute payments to the 2nd and if not going up final year. Watford sacked two managers, adds to cost.

Both made a PL loss in 2021-22 and unlike as usual Norwich didn't really have major sales. Watford had more but one of them is under investigation ie Kamara sale and loan back and that Fair Value maybe challenged. Joao Pedro for £30m to Brighton helps a lot however.

Middlesbrough may have posted large headline losses but a Category One Academy, all adds to it and subtracts from the P&S deficit.

Spence and Tavernier £20-30m sales at pure profit last season (free agent and academy), helps a hell of a lot. Wouldn't be thinking of them failing any time soon the £39m rule.

Huddersfield, Sheffield United and possible potential yoyo club Peterborough have all delayed accounts.

Other contenders to return Sheffield Wednesday have done the same.

[Sir Geoff]

Question for @Mr Popodopolous and or @Davefevs If he is sold are we better off re FFP selling Alex Scott before or after June 30th. i.e which years accounts will it be better for the sale to be shown in ?

[Mr Popodopolous]

17 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

Question for @Mr Popodopolous and or @Davefevs If he is sold are we better off re FFP selling Alex Scott before or after June 30th. i.e which years accounts will it be better for the sale to be shown in ?

Will give it a go @Sir Geoff

For us the accounts run until end of May. Our good work in the last two years means that there is no ticking clock scenario to sell by then it fail. I would say best in 2023-24 accounts because it shows an extra year to utilise that headroom, ie the cycle from 2023-24 to 2025-26.

Depending on which system is used it's Either £39m plus allowables inclusive of a likely large profit or the instalments to add as they fall due if the new system comes in as expected ie wages and amortisation as a percentage of turnover.

If we were on track to fail to 2022-23 then definitely this year!

Talking of that reform, there has not been anything official at a domestic level yet, wonder if the PL and EFL still haggling not least due to the presence of Parachute Payments.

[Davefevs]

What he said