Mr Popodopolous Posted March 25 Author Report Share Posted March 25 At least Fulham sold Mitrovic e.g. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 27 Author Report Share Posted March 27 Seen a suggestion by Stefan Borson that the PL could retrospectively raise the FFP Threshold or clubs vote for it. That would be even more ridiculous than changing the Rules mid cycle as they might look to do. Plus how would it effect it down here? Rules are sort of but not entirely harmonised. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 27 Author Report Share Posted March 27 (edited) Would also fly in the face of the purported intent to move closer to UEFA Rules- 90-80-70 and the UEFA Upper Loss limit is €60m in 3 seasons post adjustments- rising to €90m for good financial managment etc. Edited March 27 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 27 Author Report Share Posted March 27 (edited) Edit. Wrong thread. Edited March 27 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimonD Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 5 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said: Seen a suggestion by Stefan Borson that the PL could retrospectively raise the FFP Threshold or clubs vote for it. That would be even more ridiculous than changing the Rules mid cycle as they might look to do. Plus how would it effect it down here? Rules are sort of but not entirely harmonised. Who? Regardless of the answer, I'd put that is the same category as those who say that the thresholds need to be increased in line with inflation. Totally missing the point! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 27 Author Report Share Posted March 27 (edited) 13 minutes ago, SimonD said: Who? Regardless of the answer, I'd put that is the same category as those who say that the thresholds need to be increased in line with inflation. Totally missing the point! He is on Twitter and he is called slbsn, ie that is the user name. He is a former Man City Financial Advisor and he regularly appears on White and Jordan. I do totally agree with you, it's just a prediction by him. However I'd say that wouldnt suit at minimum Brentford, Brighton, Liverpool, Tottemahn. Then maybe West Ham wouldn't like it and Wolves made major cuts to comply. I think his thinking is that a critical mass may either fail or be hamstrung so tip the limit to this year and make it higher. PL Rules stipulate minimum 14 clubs must vote for something to change it. I also suspect some or all of Burnley, Luton, Sheffield United would also disagree with it. Leeds and Southampton who knows, Leicester I expect would welcome it. Arsenal? I'd be looking to keep the status quo until summer 2025 at the earliest, anything else is a huge risk of moral hazard. Possibly even until summer 2026 ie to run until 2025-26. Edited March 27 by Mr Popodopolous 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 27 Author Report Share Posted March 27 (edited) Let me get this straight, does this mean the Premier League may raise it and the League merely must apply the % rise? Does there need to be no mutual agreement here. Edited March 27 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 27 Author Report Share Posted March 27 What a load of shit some Bournemouth fans spout. Apparently their rise is "Roy of the Rovers" stuff. You'll like this @GrahamC think you've mentioned their Russian funded cheating before. Cheat FFP under a Russian, propped up in FFP Terms subsequently in no small part due to said cheating in 2015 ie Parachute and PL cash while still spending big under said Russian while latterly selling to a Yank who is richer. I'd love to know their mindset down there, they really do seem like pious hypocritical idiots. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimonD Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 2 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said: He is on Twitter and he is called slbsn, ie that is the user name. He is a former Man City Financial Advisor and he regularly appears on White and Jordan. I do totally agree with you, it's just a prediction by him. However I'd say that wouldnt suit at minimum Brentford, Brighton, Liverpool, Tottemahn. Then maybe West Ham wouldn't like it and Wolves made major cuts to comply. I think his thinking is that a critical mass may either fail or be hamstrung so tip the limit to this year and make it higher. PL Rules stipulate minimum 14 clubs must vote for something to change it. I also suspect some or all of Burnley, Luton, Sheffield United would also disagree with it. Leeds and Southampton who knows, Leicester I expect would welcome it. Arsenal? I'd be looking to keep the status quo until summer 2025 at the earliest, anything else is a huge risk of moral hazard. Possibly even until summer 2026 ie to run until 2025-26. I guess if 14 clubs were seriously concerned about breaching next season then it would be a shoo-in. If there aren't I can't see why they would vote for it as it would be allowing others to get away without making the same level of "sacrifice". 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 27 Author Report Share Posted March 27 (edited) 38 minutes ago, SimonD said: I guess if 14 clubs were seriously concerned about breaching next season then it would be a shoo-in. If there aren't I can't see why they would vote for it as it would be allowing others to get away without making the same level of "sacrifice". Perfectly put. I struggle to see of they could carry a majority to change it- as well as the obvious of Chelsea, the potential Man United, Everton, Nottingham Forest, Aston Villa more than Newcastle and then the unknowns of Bournemouth and Fulham..I doubt any of Burnley, Luton, Sheffield United would vote to liberalise given their respective models, Leicester probably, Leeds and Southampton toss up. Edited March 27 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 27 Author Report Share Posted March 27 Why would Arsenal, Brentford, Brighton, Liverpool, Tottenham, West Ham vote to change a model that should benefit them. Man City too- that's 7. Any of Burnley, Luton, Sheffield United. The unknown of Wolves..one hand big losses, other hand major sales, restraint and lost Lopetegui due to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob26 Posted March 28 Report Share Posted March 28 (edited) 14 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said: He is on Twitter and he is called slbsn, ie that is the user name. He is a former Man City Financial Advisor and he regularly appears on White and Jordan. I do totally agree with you, it's just a prediction by him. However I'd say that wouldnt suit at minimum Brentford, Brighton, Liverpool, Tottemahn. Then maybe West Ham wouldn't like it and Wolves made major cuts to comply. I think his thinking is that a critical mass may either fail or be hamstrung so tip the limit to this year and make it higher. PL Rules stipulate minimum 14 clubs must vote for something to change it. I also suspect some or all of Burnley, Luton, Sheffield United would also disagree with it. Leeds and Southampton who knows, Leicester I expect would welcome it. Arsenal? I'd be looking to keep the status quo until summer 2025 at the earliest, anything else is a huge risk of moral hazard. Possibly even until summer 2026 ie to run until 2025-26. he's comes out with some good opinions if its who i'm thinking of, but I put this down as just some of the milage all the media and journos are trying to get out of these ffp cases on a daily basis, like they know they pump out headlines saying chelsea and city to be expelled from the league, then you click on it and see its someones opinion or they just say its a possibility, and you think ok so no real new news added for the 60th time in a row you have reported on the case football insider will do these reports more times than man city have been charged, and it will only take them another 2 weeks or so to hit 115 reports saying nothing new I reckon :laugh: Edited March 28 by Rob26 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 28 Author Report Share Posted March 28 Huddersfield. Some gains that won't be repeated such as a 2 part staged insurance payout, some sort if debt writeoff (surely excluded for FFP) and £8-9m in Player Sale bet Profit. Their Academy is now a Cat 3, surprisingly bumped it all the way down to Cat 4. £3-4m maybe a bit less in Allowables per year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 28 Author Report Share Posted March 28 2 hours ago, Rob26 said: he's comes out with some good opinions if its who i'm thinking of, but I put this down as just some of the milage all the media and journos are trying to get out of these ffp cases on a daily basis, like they know they pump out headlines saying chelsea and city to be expelled from the league, then you click on it and see its someones opinion or they just say its a possibility, and you think ok so no real new news added for the 60th time in a row you have reported on the case football insider will do these reports more times than man city have been charged, and it will only take them another 2 weeks or so to hit 115 reports saying nothing new I reckon Yeah definitely an element of Clickbait but given that PL or a range of PL clubs are looking to change the rules mid cycle I don't think we can rule anything out. My position remains as it always has, which is that the current rules should remain in play next and the following season and the new rules come into full force come summer 2026. Albeit the 3 year assessment ending 2025-26 still takes place in 2026-27. No Loss Limit adjustments, let the chips fall where they may. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted March 28 Report Share Posted March 28 So far: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 28 Author Report Share Posted March 28 (edited) Oh wow, no wonder Nottingham Forest ran aground last year albeit the numbers Provided for in the FFP add-backs appear to he all over the place?? £15m in Allowables costs up from £6m? Some of the numbers in there are quite baffling, to a degree for Everton too. Edited March 28 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 28 Author Report Share Posted March 28 (edited) Can we square the circle? Goes between...? £3-4m in the combined Covid years. (This is before known Covid add-backs and bizarrely a possible Allowance of the debt waiver). Perhaps £3-4m in 2021-22 (again not inclusive of the £2.5m Covid permitted add-back). Then £15m in 2022-23?? I accept you spend more on Allowables post Promotion and Category One helps too but? That being the case their Projected deficit from the Written Reasons is reduced from feared numbers this summer. Down to £6-11m and maybe less, although who knows if some of these were one-off costs that won't be reflected this year. Edited March 28 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 31 Author Report Share Posted March 31 (edited) We are approaching deadline day for the next batch of clubs (A few are end of April) and though we maybe able to extrapolate- see HKSE or VLL, we still await the official accounts. Couple of small updates for recent Championship clubs. Blackpool relegated last year, Peterborough back in League One having dropped in 2021-22. Edited March 31 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 31 Author Report Share Posted March 31 (edited) The following are yet to release to CH or in general and the technical deadline is today albeit it falls on Easter: Championship- plus those relegated last year Birmingham (Club and Parent etc) Blackburn (Club plus Women's Team etc) Leeds Leicester Millwall (Club and Parent) West Brom (Club, Parent etc). Premier League Brighton- (Club and Parent) Chelsea- (Headline numbers but not beyond that). Crystal Palace- (Club, Parent, associated companies). Everton- (Club and maybe others). Fulham- (Club, Parent). Tottenham- (Club and most Associated Companies). In addition, Sunderland and Swansea plus associated companies have not released at this level nor have Burnley but their Statutory Reporting date to CH is 30th April as their Accounts run until 31st July. In addition, relegated last year Reading (Club, Parent and Associated..in fact they appear to have somehow extended their deadline by 3 months). Will be interesting to see their Accounts in context of the 2023 P&S Test. Edited March 31 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 31 Author Report Share Posted March 31 (edited) Crystal Palace although when the full and or Group Accounts are out we shall get a full picture, seem to have lost £27m last season. https://www.cpfc.co.uk/information/financial-headlines/ It mentions CPFC 2010 Limited but they sit under Palace Midco Limited, who in turn sit under Palace Holdco Limited. Edited March 31 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corkonian Posted March 31 Report Share Posted March 31 (edited) I wonder if Burnley will succeed this season and remain in the Premier League. Vincent Kompany is doing an excellent job managing this team. Burnley this season has shown class and anger, but most of the time, they get unlucky. I have been analyzing their game via the Sport Score statistics platform, and based on the info, I see that their Burney is doing well. They are defending well and creating changes. But still, they need more consistency. I hope they will be able to remain in the PL for the next season. Edited April 3 by Corkonian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 31 Author Report Share Posted March 31 I hope at least one of Burnley, Luton and Sheffield United survive as they all appear to be compliant, although I think you're possibly giving them a bit too much credit. Burnley have improved in some areas for a few months now and officiating hasn't been in their side- Sheffield United had a goal disallowed for no sensible reason v Fulham Saturday whixh would've put them 4-1 up but instead they drew 3-3. Having said that both Burnley and Sheffield United had embargo(es) last year albeit for different reasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 31 Author Report Share Posted March 31 Burnley may have a decent case v Everton from 2022. Leeds may or may not have a case vs Everton and Leicester depending on the size of breach, deduction etc. If they were compliant as reports suggest they are.. They finished 19th, 3 points from Leicester and 5 from Everton. Inferior GD to each too. A 4 point deduction for Leicester and a -6 for Everton could he a starting point. Nottingham Forest getting-4 means they survive no matter what pretty much. They finished 2 above Everton and 4 above Leicester, fact at least one of these has breached means they can hardly take action against Nottingham Forest. Southampton are too far back for any realistic deductions to make a difference albeit they did comply. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted April 1 Author Report Share Posted April 1 (edited) Okay it is technically Easter Weekend but the following now show as overdue.... Championship- plus those relegated last year Birmingham (Club and Parent etc) Blackburn (Club plus Women's Team etc) Leeds Leicester Millwall (Club and Parent) West Brom (Club, Parent etc). Premier League Brighton- (Club and Parent) Chelsea- (Headline numbers but not beyond that). Crystal Palace- (Club, Parent, associated companies). Fulham- (Club, Parent). Tottenham- (Club and most Associated Companies). Everton aren't yet at CH but it is on their website so good enough. There are the snippets of detail about Crystal Palace too hut they aren't exactly front and centre or being too transparent thusfar. Full Accounts needed for a full judgement. In addition, Sunderland and Swansea plus associated companies have not released at this level nor have Burnley but their Statutory Reporting date to CH is 30th April as their Accounts run until 31st July. In addition, relegated last year Reading (Club, Parent and Associated..in fact they appear to have somehow extended their deadline by 3 months). Will be interesting to see their Accounts in context of the 2023 P&S Test. Edited April 1 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob26 Posted April 2 Report Share Posted April 2 all for this, cases that the journos can sit in like real courts. https://www.footballinsider247.com/leicester-city-lawsuit-could-now-force-huge-premier-league-u-turn-wyness/ obviousily they will have to get their man city pay off in private done first 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted April 2 Author Report Share Posted April 2 (edited) I actually welcome the idea of making it as public as possible. I do though think Leicester are being somewhat hypocritical and disingenuous. Not releasing your Accounts to the Premier League, missing the CH deadline to date along with several other clubs (Last time I checked- Brighton, Chelsea, Crystal Palace, Fulham, Birmingham, Blackburn, Leeds, Millwall and West Brom), arguing over jurisdiction, the EFL case in late Autumn/early Winter... Equivalent of resisting arrest really. The League would have certain data I expect or Leicester would also be Embargoed for that. Edited April 2 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted April 2 Author Report Share Posted April 2 (edited) Burnley lost £28m in the Promotion year. https://www.burnleyexpress.net/sport/football/burnley-fc-post-losses-of-ps28m-in-financial-accounts-as-impact-of-premier-league-relegation-made-clear-4576498 Well clear of P&S. Shows they were wronged 9r further shows it by Everton in 2022...they should either pursue a case or look for a Settlement. The lawsuit from Leicester and Nottingham Forest vs Everton looks quite hollow. Southampton were probably too fat back and anyway finished bottom. Leeds who knows. However Burnley have been manifestly wronged here. £20m overspend almost to 2022, -6 the final settlement..Burnley finished 4 points off Everton. https://media-cdn.incrowdsports.com/bc77ff86-6028-430a-9e28-2905549f58f8.pdf Edited April 2 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted April 2 Author Report Share Posted April 2 In actual fact slightly sloppy Reporting, a loss of £35.999m pre tax. Still within P&S. Wronged by the Everton over expenditure in 2021-22. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted April 2 Author Report Share Posted April 2 (edited) Not sure whether the takeover has served them so well. They were so well run albeit some of that was priming for a takeover clearly. Genuinely Bank Loans. external Loans, Factoring- this is more honest in a sense from a Business sense even Cash wise albeit Factoring is borrowing from the future on one level so not ideal. Edited April 2 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted April 2 Author Report Share Posted April 2 Birmingham Accounts have arrived but...arrived not necessarily up yet, tomorrow maybe although based on HKSE they lost £23-25m last season. 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.