EFL Statement - Club has no obligation to submit and agree business plan

[LFEFox23]

I'm assuming the forecast loses wouldn't include any potential prize winnings? Which you would think are £20m +

[DJ Barry Hammond]

3 minutes ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

He's playing because there's no one else available, I just don't think he's significantly contributed.

If no one else is available - he’s by default making a significant contribution is he not? 

[Ricey]

So as I understand it, we are at risk of two sanctions. One for this season in the EFL, which if we get promoted will probably only be a fine as the EFL's hands will be tied, and a second sanction for the 3 PL seasons ending in 22/23, which will become clearer later this month.

 

On the latter, the Merc article states this:

 

Quote

 

As things stand, City are actually at risk of two breaches, and they could come with two separate punishments.

 

Because the finances for the 22-23 season have not yet been made public, it is still not clear if City are within PSR for the three years up to June 2023. Over the previous two campaigns, City lost a combined £120.5m, and so would need to make a profit of more than £20m to be under the allowable losses of £105m.

 

However, within that, some spending is not factored in, such as that for infrastructure or on the academy. So City’s three-year losses may exceed £105m but they could be within the threshold and avoid punishment.

 

We lost a combined total of £120.5m for the first two years of this period, but not all of that will count towards PSR. Important to factor in that both of those seasons included European competition money.

 

With the sales of Fofana and Maddison coming within the 22/23 period, it sounds like it could be tight. The fact the club spent so much in January 23 and didn't force through the Barnes sale by the end of June suggests that we might be ok. Either that or the club is run by idiots, which come to think of it, is more likely.

[TrentFox]

35 minutes ago, CosbehFox said:

If you want an example of how dim they are at the top.....

 

it's going to be a tight fit financially on the 23/24 accounts - why have we committed ourselves upon promotion to spending £16-18 million on two players with obligation clauses? One of which isn't very good. 

 

That's absolute madness by whoever executed that deal considering players will need to be sold. 

Yunus hasn’t been good enough for the championship, never mind the PL. If this rumour of him having exceeded the number of games to trigger an obligatory purchase is true, then I can only conclude there is no leadership in the club whatsoever given the potential seriousness of our context. It just beggars belief. 

[DJ Barry Hammond]

3 minutes ago, K789 said:

Yunus I get, cannon seems like madness tho when we knew daka wasn't going 

What was it, £8 million over 5 years so £1.6 million a year on the PS&R.

 

That’s hardly significant in the scheme of things - and as things turned out with injuries / Afcon we have needed a fourth striker during the season.

[Ricey]

Imagine if the reason we failed PSR for the three Premier League seasons was because we gambled survival on the January transfers of Souttar, Kristensen and Tete. What a masterstroke that would have been.

[SamA27]

[Daggers]

[Parker Pen]

Need to sell some academy team players to Leuven at over inflated prices to move some money around!

[James_lcfc]

25 minutes ago, moore_94 said:

Both are

I thought Fatawu's obligation was based on promotion?

 

Be good if we can wriggle out it if we need to.

 

 

[TrentFox]

30 minutes ago, pkonline said:

I don't think there's been much of that - think most fans are pretty sympathetic to their issues - because it can happen to anyone.

That’s where I want to scream. It CANNOT happen to anyone.  The rules are interpretable by the league accountants. Why aren’t they interpretable by club accountants? If you’ve broken the rules, you’ve broken the rules. Whether it’s us, Forest or Man City. No excuses.  But everyone needs dealing with in a consistent manner. Don’t extend the permissible losses. Or you’ll be doing it again every year. Draw a line in the sand and enforce the rules. And if we were incompetent enough to not adhere to those rules then we deserve whatever punitive measure comes our way. 

[moore_94]

Just now, James_lcfc said:

I thought Fatawu's obligation was based on promotion?

 

Be good if we can wriggle out it if we need to.

 

 

Both are based on promotion but only if they each make a certain number of appearances/starts as well

[Lambert09]

50 minutes ago, CosbehFox said:

If you want an example of how dim they are at the top.....

 

it's going to be a tight fit financially on the 23/24 accounts - why have we committed ourselves upon promotion to spending £16-18 million on two players with obligation clauses? One of which isn't very good. 

 

That's absolute madness by whoever executed that deal considering players will need to be sold. 

not really, the club can just stop playing them and not have to pay. 

 

We’d make a profit on fatawu if we sold him on

 

Whats madness is splashing 7m on coady when wolves probably would have let him go for about 3m. I’m not sure anyone in football felt there was value in that deal 

Edited 7 March 2024 by Lambert09

[Lambert09]

10 minutes ago, James_lcfc said:

I thought Fatawu's obligation was based on promotion?

 

Be good if we can wriggle out it if we need to.

 

 

what would be good about this? Fatawu is worth more than 6 points. What am i reading 

[pkonline]

What's annoying is that since this news broke, with a lot of hearsay and little fact, some of our fans and opposition fans are already in meltdown and criticising us for things that aren't true. Already seen stories on rival groups such as Leeds who seem to be having a field day over us "breaching FFP".

 

Hopefully, in a warped way, this could galvanize the team and the fans and re-focus on getting promoted.

[Bluetintedspecs]

After wading through pages of opinions from, people who appear to have attended, the Diane Abbott school of finance and accounting, I've decided to wait until there's  some actual concrete facts!

Until there is I'll chill and maybe pour a nice glass of wine later 🥂

[gw_leics772]

50 minutes ago, pkonline said:

I thought it would be breach 2 years PL + 1 year equivalent EFL pro rata?

But even rethinking that  l, how can they hold last uears revenue to this years rules when we were in a different league. Is everyone supposed to plan for relegation and spend accordingly. 

[James_lcfc]

3 minutes ago, Lambert09 said:

what would be good about this? Fatawu is worth more than 6 points. What am i reading 

Pretty obvious really, but...

 

Finances look like they'll be extremely tight.

 

We'll need to bring in quite a few players in the Summer - £15m on one player **might** not be ideal in our position. 

 

I'd like us to sign him permanently, which is why I said 'If we have to'.

[gw_leics772]

28 minutes ago, iancognito said:

This is what Everton argued and was part of the reason they got pts back. The new rules will still take another couple of points off.

 

So we're on for 8 point deduction when we go up?

 

Just go balls deep and sound everything we have now to make sure we can overcome it 🤣

[pkonline]

10 minutes ago, gw_leics772 said:

But even rethinking that  l, how can they hold last uears revenue to this years rules when we were in a different league. Is everyone supposed to plan for relegation and spend accordingly. 

That's one of the reasons why the FFP rules are silly, and why having different rules between the PL and EFL make it farcical - those teams getting promoted and those getting relegated.

[pkonline]

27 minutes ago, TrentFox said:

That’s where I want to scream. It CANNOT happen to anyone.  The rules are interpretable by the league accountants. Why aren’t they interpretable by club accountants? If you’ve broken the rules, you’ve broken the rules. Whether it’s us, Forest or Man City. No excuses.  But everyone needs dealing with in a consistent manner. Don’t extend the permissible losses. Or you’ll be doing it again every year. Draw a line in the sand and enforce the rules. And if we were incompetent enough to not adhere to those rules then we deserve whatever punitive measure comes our way. 

I agree with you, if we have broken rules, we should be judged as everyone else. However, football is football, the chief financial officers are often against other interests. Imagine being told the last 3 years not only can we not buy anyone but we need to sell - our fans wouldn't have it and wouldn't understand.

 

It's a lot harder. I'm sure we'll see other teams in similar situations, in the PL and EFL.

[st albans fox]

41 minutes ago, LFEFox23 said:

I'm assuming the forecast loses wouldn't include any potential prize winnings? Which you would think are £20m +

£20m for winning the championship??

I think it’s £100k 

[CosbehFox]

2 minutes ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

Wait - you’re criticising two deferred deals for players that have significantly  contributed to the teams efforts this season?

 

The clauses are triggered based on appearances and promotion, with the fees coming out of the following PS&R period.

 

I’d say that’s more astute than madness.

It's astute - if the players are of the relevant quality. I'd say Akgun isn't good enough and Fatawu isn't worth his agreed price. 

 

That PS&R is still falling into a three year window at some point - and if promoted, we are affectively starting with a permitted £20m loss allowance on Day 1 of 24/25 account. 

[st albans fox]

2 minutes ago, CosbehFox said:

It's astute - if the players are of the relevant quality. I'd say Akgun isn't good enough and Fatawu isn't worth his agreed price. 

 

That PS&R is still falling into a three year window at some point - and if promoted, we are affectively starting with a permitted £20m loss allowance on Day 1 of 24/25 account. 

20m?  Surely that’s over five years. Across the rolling three it’s £12m ?  And for 24/25 it’s £4m. 
 

I’ve been convinced for a long time that we won’t sign younus .  We’ll find a way not to. 

Edited 7 March 2024 by st albans fox

[CosbehFox]

11 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

20m?  Surely that’s over five years. Across the rolling three it’s £12m ?  And for 24/25 it’s £4m. 
 

I’ve been convinced for a long time that we won’t sign younus .  We’ll find a way not to. 

Fair point - and I'll concede on that with amortisation.