Jump to content

SHEFFIELD WEDNESDAY - ACCOUNTS AND FFP THREAD


Recommended Posts

Guest mkowl
Just now, steelowl said:

 

thing I don't like is the vote to continue this course of action  that means we are afloat only on the whim /'determination' of DC

 

yet how can we continue doing this it's impossible isn't it  or is he going to chuck a motherload at it and damn the consequences 

Was always the case 

 

The choice was we had owners that weren't prepared to fund, banks equally, mortgaged to the hilt and HMRC chasing us to the High Court steps

 

MM stabilised but ran out of money he was prepared to put in and we started going down the same path

 

Now we are dependent on the Owner wanting to fund or not changing his priorities. 

 

Basically out of our control but it always has

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Geoffrey said:

For how long do you think he will be happy losing £400,000/week?

If he was in it for the long term why the lack of investment in the training ground and the academy which don't come under FFP rules?

Good points , but wouldn't underestimate power and pull of his kid, Wembley, etc.

 

On training centre , you gotta find one as Middlewood is too small and freeholder is Council so can't change much (ex Norton aerodrome, cheap as in green belt?).

 

Also, it may be he just aint that bright (his Dad built business - think Trump). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, mkowl said:

Was always the case 

 

The choice was we had owners that weren't prepared to fund, banks equally, mortgaged to the hilt and HMRC chasing us to the High Court steps

 

MM stabilised but ran out of money he was prepared to put in and we started going down the same path

 

Now we are dependent on the Owner wanting to fund or not changing his priorities. 

 

Basically out of our control but it always has

TBH I know this mate

but what we don't know is who is financing this and when will they consider it quits 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Plonk said:

We are only in the brown stuff, if he’s got no more money. Anyone really think that is the case?

 

if only we could lure someone like those chaps at Chesterfield to turn our club around eh?

 

Yes but even if Chansiri has got more money to spend if he does go on another spending spree we will fall foul of FFP rules (or whatever they are called).

I doubt someone as rich as Chansiri would be willing to fund £20m of debts each year forever.

 

I agree Chesterfield are being badly run but that doesnt make it ok for SWFC to be badly run.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

 

 

Thats ok till the Chairman has enough and walks away and needs his investment back 

 

I may be mistaken, but I thought part of FFP/P&S was that the owner couldn't simply "loan" the club the money effectively saddling them with unmanageable debt? It was done as share creation or the like so no debt to the club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, NorfolkNChance said:

First question " would this contravene FFP? "

 

Answer " Provided they cut back a bit in 2017/18 and 2018/19 they should be Ok"                    WRONG

 

We do people posting on Twitter like that, not read the FL's rules on Profit and sustainability. You can bet your bottom dollar you've already contravened them.

 

The three year rolling period is retrospectively based on actual accounts from 15/16 and 16/17 and then a set of estimated accounts for 17/18 (these will already have been submitted for evaluation by March 1st 2018). The following submissions each March will include two years of actual accounts and one year of forecast results for the current season.

 

2016 Accounts

9.7m loss

Less £2m exceptional items

£7.7m loss for FFP purposes

 

2017 Accounts

£20.7m loss

Less £2m exceptional items

£18.7m loss for FFP purposes

 

2018 Submitted forecast results (Reading the posts, most Owlstalk members believe that this seasons accounts will be either the same or even worse losses than the last).

So anything higher than a £13m loss ( after £2m exceptional items) will mean you've already breached the P&S rules and a punishment handed out before the end of this season. Most likely a transfer embargo for the beginning of next season, who knows. As I posted earlier, nothing is off the table punishment wise. Points deduction as well.

 

Selling players after June 1st 2018 will be irrelevant to this season accounts and won't be included in any submissions to the FL for this periods P&S results.

 

Makes it all the more puzzling for me to understand why your owner refused to sell any players in the January transfer window as these fees and wage bill reductions would have counted towards this periods results and may have averted an embargo or worse. Someone clearly didn't understand fully the new changes, maybe John Redgate?

 

 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Getting a bit bored with making this point but with all due respect to the OP the first para is just wrong.  We are not £8.7m from FFP.  We don't know the figure. 

 

The strategic choice remains though.  Retrench and rebuild.  Or go for it - again.

 

The Wolves example is always going to tempt us to think  - yes, but if we gamble this time and do it properly.  That would in my view be a big mistake.  Of course a gamble might work; but there is nothing inevitable about what Wolves have done.

 

And being in the premier league is not by any means the be all and end all.  Indeed, the problem is that when we do get there we'll have season after season defined by anxiety about whether this is the one where we get relegated.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mkowl
2 minutes ago, steelowl said:

TBH I know this mate

but what we don't know is who is financing this and when will they consider it quits 

Same for every Championship club 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mkowl
Just now, vulva said:

You know it’s a bad day when Leeds fans come on taking the financial moral high ground.

 

FFS. 

 

FFS. 

Yes what did their accounts show. Have they been published yet JV

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, i used to be sc_owl said:

What really makes me angry is the number of loan signings made that contributed nothing and due to them being loans had no resale value. 

 

Would love to know how much was spent on those players. 

Our use of the loan market in the last 2 years has been utter tripe. Which is ironic, as when we were skint loan signings and their impact probably kept us in business. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Geoffrey said:

For how long do you think he will be happy losing £400,000/week?

If he was in it for the long term why the lack of investment in the training ground and the academy which don't come under FFP rules?

Academy is doing pretty well at the moment is it not? That's already championship started, no point upgrading it further when we dont even use them kids anyway (or that was the plan).

 

Training ground again if say the same. Especially when chansiri will move us to a fancy new complex when/if we go up. What's point in investment in the case?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mkowl
Just now, steelowl said:

not every quite a few are parachuted 

Tbf though many of them are in worse do do 

 

Sunderland and Hull immediately spring to mind. There you have owners not prepared to subsidise as they unravel the finances and use the parachute monies to clear up historic issues

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...