Rob26 Posted February 29 Report 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 Report 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 Report 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 Report 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 Report 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 Report 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 Report 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 Report 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 Report 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 Report 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 Report 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 Report 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 Report 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 Report 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 Report 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 Report 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 Report 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 Report 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 Report 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 Report 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 Report 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 Report 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 Report 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 Report 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 Report 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 Report 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 Report 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 Report 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 Report Share Posted March 4 Wow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 4 Author Report 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...
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.