coolhandfox

They haven't got time, if it takes as long as the first Everton charge. It took 11 months.

Because they are full of holes and have a lot of grey areas. They would have helped themselves if they had done a better job including outlining the punishment.

In the Everton appeal, the panel decided that 10 points were wrong " and did not take into account available benchmarks," saying that a six-point sanction was broadly in line with English Football League guidelines. They have sent a benchmark with the 6 points. You don't sell subscriptions to articles without making a story sound big. Both sources have to drive traffic, so you have to create headlines to hook people in.

Yes, I can't see them turning around Everton's second change or Forest in this season. So they and Forest could start on -6

It could be us, Everton and Forest all starting with -6 if we go up. It's an awful look for the PL; there's a real stain on their product.

Unlikely as it is not set out in the rules. You can't make up punishment on the fly; in the Everton appeal, the panel decided that 10 points were wrong " and did not take into account available benchmarks," saying that a six-point sanction was broadly in line with English Football League guidelines.

We have a subscription service to sell; come and read the big stories. Firstly, let's think about this logically. The Everton case has set the bar for a point deduction, so it is unlikely that they would give any club more than 6 points for a breach. It is unlikely that it will be applied this season. We have to be charged, dealt with and then have the chance to appeal. Everton's case was sent to the independent commission on 24th of March 2023 Everton: Premier League refers club to independent commission over alleged breach of financial rules - BBC Sport They got docked points on the 17th of November 2023. Everton receive immediate 10-point Premier League deduction for financial rules breach - BBC Sport Their appeal was completed on 26 February 2024 and had the point reduction reduced Everton points deduction appeal verdict: What happens next? - BBC Sport. That 8 months to have the points deducted, and nearly 12 months later to finish the appeal. It is very unlikely they can dock points this season without creating chaos in two leagues due to timescales.

Last two away games, I've been Coventry and Leeds. Concerned I could be an unlucky omen.

14m odd million over a 5-year contract is only a 2.4m swing on the accounts. I wouldn't worry about it.

That makes it sound like you think the club is telling everyone internally that we are going to a point deduction when they could just be as easily explaining why we will not be getting one. Could read his comment either way.

If we had to follow the PL rules of submitting accounts to them by the 31st of December of 2023 for the 22/23 season, like all other clubs, there would have been a verdict or charge already. Everton and Forest were changed without officially releasing their accounts on the back of their December submission. The grey area is whether we had to submit PL on December 31st, 2023, for the 22/23 PL season because we were in the Championship.

Whilst I think they could do better. I think you have to look at the bigger picture. This isn't just a Leicester City problem, Forest and Everton are already in trouble. Us, Villa, Wolves, and Chelsea all have problems or will have next season. It is not just a PL problem either; lots of clubs in Europe have issues.

From what I've heard, plans are a step toward changing it. They are looking for a way to readdress the balance as they see it as a loophole clubs like Man C and Chelsea can exploit.

Maddison counts to 22/23.

Most of the debt was to the owner, Leicester City: The Chairman relieved the club of outstanding debts of £194m to King Power International—BBC Sport. He made a debt-to-equity transfer to KPI to relieve the club of some of its outstanding debts. This was done to reduce our interest against the accounts; I suspect the only interest we have to worry about is the Macquarie bank loan. Our wage-to-turnover ratio will have increased from around 85% in the 21/22 accounts to a high of 90-95% in the 22/23 accounts as our turnover dropped. However, we offset the turnover reduction in the accounts with around 66m pounds profit from the Fofana and Maddison sales.

My point was we offload a higher earner of around 7m per annum. Smithies wages are around 1.5m per annum, so there would have been a net saving of some description.

The turnover was 214 m for 21/22, and I suspect it will drop to around 180m for our last season in the PL. Swiss Ramble thinks we or Leeds could be the first Championship Club to break the 100m revenue barrier this season. The wage bill of 180m was for 21/22; how much of that was a bonus for finishing 5th, qualifying for Europe and winning the FA Cup? I suspect the 22/23 last PL wage bill to be smaller, so we need to worry about getting to 50% of the 22/23 wage bill, not 21/22. Just moving Kasper on saved around 7m per season.

It is a minefield; even when clubs admit to breaking the rules, like Everton and Forest, it is not straightforward. They need to simplify it, which I think they will do in the summer.

No need to apologise; likewise, I was being over-sensitive. I love this place, but sometimes I find the negativity overwhelming, makes me a bit tetchy.

It comes down to narrative and interpretation, Everton argued they were the PL and argued they were not, part of which I believe was down to the timing of the loans. As far as I'm aware, you can't deduct Stadium expenses if they are pre-planning permission. I think I read somewhere some Everton loans pre-dated planning permission being granted. There are so many shades of grey in this which makes it a mess.

My numbers are for the 22/23 PL FFP window, people are talking about. Which we can't impact now other than arguing allowable deductibles. For the Championship P&S for 23/23, I have us around 4-5m over if we have cut wages with relegation clauses to around 50% of the previous wage bill, so find more income, commercial or sell a player, cut cost or argue more allowable deductibles.

This is why people need to be careful listening to 99% of the reports on this. We can make a loss and still be ok, it's the size of the loss and what is deductible that important.

I will stick this in here as I post it in another thread. My view is it's pretty tight. It could go either way. Using The Swiss Ramble data, as he is far better than me, as a starting point for the previous report period ending in 21/22, we were around 1m under FFP limits (See Table 1) * (19/20 and 20/21 are combined and taken as an average due to COVID so its actual a 4 year period rather than 3) For the 22/23, the 19/20 accounts drop out, and then I've made some assumptions/guesses about our income and expenditure for 22/23 and I have us going over by 8m (See Table 2) Many variables could nudge us 10m either way, largely down to what we can convince the PL are allowable deductibles. All PL clubs must submit their accounts for the 22/23 season by December 31, 2023. The Premier League has charged Everton and Nottingham Forest with breaching its financial rules based on that submission before they have published their official accounts. So my question is, why haven't we been charged? Is it because we didn't have to do the December 31, 2023 submission because we are no longer a PL club, or are we ok? The short answer is nobody knows other than the club and the PL.

That's what they are secure on, if we can't pay they loan company has first dibs on that money. The purpose of the loan is to give is operating cash flow to do things; what the money has been spent on is the key.

Depending on what the loans are for, if they are for allowable deductibles, you can discount the interest for FFP as far as I can tell.