stb1996

All change at the top is good change imo, but I'm worried that Whelan is the first to leave given this line in Percy's latest article: "Relegation the following season was a significant financial blow, coming shortly after record losses of £92.5m were announced. Susan Whelan, the club’s chief executive, had warned that the consequences “will be felt for some time”" She's by no means separated from the ineptitude of the senior management of the club, but I worry if she was the one sounding the alarm bells internally and now leaving that we're consolidating the echo chamber at the very top. Further worsened by Top himself stepping into the role for the time being....

I believe it'll be 12 months going forward, but our accounting date will always be end of July rather than June. So the 12 month period has shifted back by a month, and we had the one 13th month period to bridge the gap

It's a total guessing game at the moment. It would be a vindictive move from the PL/EFL to try and spin our defence for the breach in 22/23, but I certainly wouldn't put it past them to consider it

Think this was based on the wording of the rules being very ambiguous, and that the £35m is based on only being in the EFL for 1 season. But if we'd (successfully) argued we were an EFL club for the 22/23 period, then that's 2 seasons consecutively and therefore we're liable for the reduced allowable losses?

Is there danger that our defence of being a championship club for the breach in 22/23, combined with definitely being a championship club in 23/24 mean we're liable for T-1, and therefore subject to the £83m allowable losses rather than £105m?