Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
UpTheLeagueFox

EFL, LCFC and FFP

By UpTheLeagueFox, in Leicester City Forum

Recommended Posts

Foxxed

Foxxed

Posted
Posted

Hold on. So we broke the rules, but we didn't deliberately break the rules, we just misinterpreted the rules?

 

I'm with Fox92. Sounds dodgy. Purely because there's no football to moan about, I want to know how we misinterpreted the rules.

 

"Oh! You said DON'T spend loads of money. I thought you said DO spend loads of money. My mistake. Here's three million pounds. We good?"

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Foxxed

Foxxed

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Ted Maul said:

Result, we can pay that off with the change down the side of Top's sofa.

 

FFP is a load of old nonsense anyway- it stops clubs growing and improving themselves more than it protects them.

 

Besides, we deserved a bit of leniency- the rules were implemented when we were a mess and hemorhaging money, and we did well to get ourselves down to the level we did.

Yes unless, of course, it's Man City in which case they should be BANNED FOR LIFE and possibly sent to a debtors prison or even a fate worse than that, sent to play their football in Scotland.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rogstanley

Rogstanley

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Foxxed said:

Hold on. So we broke the rules, but we didn't deliberately break the rules, we just misinterpreted the rules?

 

I'm with Fox92. Sounds dodgy. Purely because there's no football to moan about, I want to know how we misinterpreted the rules.

 

"Oh! You said DON'T spend loads of money. I thought you said DO spend loads of money. My mistake. Here's three million pounds. We good?"

I’d guess it’s all about the Trestellar company that was probably funded but not owned by the owners and then used to buy the overseas rights at a heavily inflated price. The club probably said “that’s business”, the league probably said “yeah but we want some of that cash otherwise we’ll make life difficult for you”. Eventually settled on the £3.1m.

 

The biggest irony of all this is that FFP was supposed to be about preventing clubs getting into financial difficulty. Now we’re one of the only clubs to have fallen foul of it despite now being one of the most financially successful former championship clubs in history. What is it that they are actually punishing here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Foxxed

Foxxed

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Rogstanley said:

I’d guess it’s all about the Trestellar company that was probably funded but not owned by the owners and then used to buy the overseas rights at a heavily inflated price. The club probably said “that’s business”, the league probably said “yeah but we want some of that cash otherwise we’ll make life difficult for you”. Eventually settled on the £3.1m.

 

The biggest irony of all this is that FFP was supposed to be about preventing clubs getting into financial difficulty. Now we’re one of the only clubs to have fallen foul of it despite now being one of the most financially successful former championship clubs in history. What is it that they are actually punishing here?

I never understood what went on there. We paid for a company to inflate the price of our overseas (I'm assuming we mean television) rights? Didn't Trestellar get the rights anyway? If we payed them to increase their price that doesn't seem like fraud but more like stupidity. But then I guess I'm missing something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rogstanley

Rogstanley

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Foxxed said:

I never understood what went on there. We paid for a company to inflate the price of our overseas (I'm assuming we mean television) rights? Didn't Trestellar get the rights anyway? If we payed them to increase their price that doesn't seem like fraud but more like stupidity. But then I guess I'm missing something.

For FFP there are limits on how much money the owners were allowed to put into the club. The story goes that Trestellar was set up specifically as a way for the owners to put more money into the club, without it looking like it came from them. So Trestellar was fronted by someone else (a former LCFC director iirc), but funded by the owners. Trestellar then paid the club an inflated price for overseas rights (just for merchandising I believe), ie the money went from the owners, to Trestellar to the club. It’s all legal but is a grey area when it comes to FFP.

 

Disclaimer: this is all patched together from things I’ve heard and could well be completely wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Foxxed

Foxxed

Posted
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, Rogstanley said:

For FFP there are limits on how much money the owners were allowed to put into the club. The story goes that Trestellar was set up specifically as a way for the owners to put more money into the club, without it looking like it came from them. So Trestellar was fronted by someone else (a former LCFC director iirc), but funded by the owners. Trestellar then paid the club an inflated price for overseas rights (just for merchandising I believe), ie the money went from the owners, to Trestellar to the club. It’s all legal but is a grey area when it comes to FFP.

 

Disclaimer: this is all patched together from things I’ve heard and could well be completely wrong.

So - allegedly - Top bought our merchandising rights through a third company thereby giving us loads new cash, and we thought this was a legitimate way to put money in the club, whereas the FFP says it's not, but we proved we misinterpreted the rules rather than deliberately broke them? Alright then.

 

I suppose you could say Top's flogging our tops in Thailand anyway. And if he can't directly buy our merchandising rights, because he's the owner, then what's the harm in doing it through a third party? After all, who the hell else is going to buy our tops, apart from Top anyway, since he's attempting to advertise the glamour and the glitz of King Power.

 

Top tried to sell our tops in Thailand for loads of money, but fifa said he's not allowed. It's all legit guys. It's fine.

Edited by Foxxed
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve_Walsh5

Steve_Walsh5

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Foxxed said:

So - allegedly - Top bought our merchandising rights through a third company thereby giving us loads new cash, and we thought this was a legitimate way to put money in the club, whereas the FFP says it's not, but we proved we misinterpreted the rules rather than deliberately broke them? Alright then.

Couple of years old but this explains some of it. https://amp.theguardian.com/football/2016/apr/11/leicester-city-finances-football-league-financial-fair-play-investigation?__twitter_impression=true

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chocolate Teapot

Chocolate Teapot

Posted
Posted
38 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Oh he's already having it... and intentionally misleading the moronic masses again as well.

By presenting facts?

 

Any other clubs we'd all lost our shit with this. Pleased as a Leicester fan but it's a joke of a decision.

 

Trestellar was dodgy as ****, fronted by the wonderful and not dodgy at all Dave Richards.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
orangecity23

orangecity23

Posted
Posted

The rules were a load of shit anyway. No investing in your business, got to not make a loss. Right, so we just needed to reduce our wage bill - oh wait, we can't, because once you have the players, they've got guaranteed contracts for X amount of years, and you can't just make them redundant, you need to sell them to other clubs, which you might not be able to do because they can't afford it. We were never ever going to avoid falling foul of FFP, the expenditure had already happened in earlier years and we were stuck with it once the rules were introduced after the fact. The rules were written deliberately so that we would fail them. The reason it took this long was because the Football League clearly ballsed up their attempt to write the rules and left them too vague, so we've managed to get them to back down a bit on the amount.

 

I notice no-one in the media bangs on about Bournemouth failing FFP, or Forest, or the many other Championship clubs that have failed them since. Its a set of crap rules which prevents a level playing field as it gives a massive advantage to ex Prem clubs with parachute payments whilst preventing smaller clubs growing by preventing investment.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ted Maul

Ted Maul

Posted
Posted (edited)

Just been having a browse for the responses on Twitter and I'd forgotten how bitter and twisted fans of clubs in the championship are. Everyone hates everyone else with a passion lol

 

I thought Sheff United were bad, but there's some serious saltiness from the fine citizens of Nottingham, Derby and Leeds aimed in our direction. 

Edited by Ted Maul
Link to comment
Share on other sites
orangecity23

orangecity23

Posted
Posted
Just now, Ted Maul said:

Just been having a browse for the responses on Twitter and realised I'd forgotten how bitter and twisted fans of clubs in the championship are. Everyone hates everyone else with a passion lol

 

I thought Sheff United were bad, but there's some serious saltiness from the fine citizens of Nottingham, Derby and Leeds aimed in our direction. 

Could probably just refer to them as citizens of "the long distant past" as short hand to save typing the place names lol

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ted Maul

Ted Maul

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, orangecity23 said:

Could probably just refer to them as citizens of "the long distant past" as short hand to save typing the place names lol

There's more of those types of fanbases in that division than the 3 mentioned- the league is a graveyard for clubs who had a bit of success once upon a time, when televisions were black and white (or not even invented yet, in some cases). Everyone feels entitled to their place in the top flight though, obviously. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...