SHEFFIELD WEDNESDAY - ACCOUNTS AND FFP THREAD

[HarrowbyOwl]

In light of the published accounts I think the club should make a statement

For this year's P&S assessment the audited accounts for 2015-16 and 2016-17, plus a projection for 2017-18 had to be submitted on 1 March.
Allowed losses are 13m per year or 39m over the 3 year assessment period. So we are already in breach of the rules.
Punishment for non-compliance is determined by an independent panel (the ‘Fair Play Panel’).
A wide range of punishments are available.The EFL can:

• Impose a points deduction during the current season
• Demote a club from an automatic promotion position into the play-offs
• Demote a club out of the play-offs 
• Transfer embargoes are also available, with the earliest one potentially applying during the Summer 2018 Transfer window.

Don't want the bar stewards diddling us out of automatic 

[Jeffjohnsonmyhero]

1 hour ago, hasthagotanycheese said:

There will have to be a major cull in the summer.

 

Wouldnt be surprised to see our most saleable assets Bannan, Winnall Forestieri, Westwood & Lee's all flogged. If you look at recent transfers in this division then if we could get 25-30 million into the coffers that would get us back on the right side of FFP, giving Jos some spare cash to work his magic using some sensible signings from Germany & Holland.

 

If Carlos comes calling for some of his favorites then we need to have his (and Swansea's) trousers down. 

Project Carlos was an expensive failure ,Any manager Jos or who ever let him sell any player to rebuild the team . 

[room0035]

2 minutes ago, Hookowl said:

 

Not necessarily because the cost of buying players is amortised, therefore this cost is spread over the length of contract and when the contract ends the value is nil.

Therefore if we have any players with contracts ending this year there will be no costs for this in next years accounts.

The only problem is I don't think we have many players falling into this category. 

We have Loovens, Nuihu, Wallace, Clare, Hirst and Pudil all out of contract only Pudil cost a fee that of note , I think Nuihu cost a few hundred grand so not expect much cost in this years accounts (unless we paid £3m for Pudil)

 

For me the problem we have is a double edge sword - Abdi is costing us £25-30K a week in wages but was £4m to buy so far me has cost us over £6m in fees and salaries, but if he is on a 4 year deal only £2m of his fee will have been released into the accounts figures so far by the end of this season, if we get rid of his to save the £25-30k a week we have to release his £2m fee left when we dispose of him. A very worrying state of affairs.

 

[sonofbert2]

We could sell AW, BB, FF, TL and GH and offset our losses and be in with a good shout of winning the league next year with a good reduction in average admission prices thrown in too so I can't see what the fuss is all about.

 

We need to go all out for relegation!

 

 

[kristmace]

20 hours ago, Hitcat said:

I'm anticipating this thread being overrun by the panicking wet blouse brigade. Minimum 50 pages of hyperbole, hot wind and guff.

 

Called it!! 

[thewookieisdown]

1 hour ago, hasthagotanycheese said:

There will have to be a major cull in the summer.

 

Wouldnt be surprised to see our most saleable assets Bannan, Winnall Forestieri, Westwood & Lee's all flogged. If you look at recent transfers in this division then if we could get 25-30 million into the coffers that would get us back on the right side of FFP, giving Jos some spare cash to work his magic using some sensible signings from Germany & Holland.

 

If Carlos comes calling for some of his favorites then we need to have his (and Swansea's) trousers down. 

Genuinely puzzled by that final line.  Who are the Carlos "favourites" you have in mind here?  Is there a distinction between them and our best players?

 

Westwood doesn't look a very saleable asset to me, sadly

[Hookowl]

1 minute ago, room0035 said:

We have Loovens, Nuihu, Wallace, Clare, Hirst and Pudil all out of contract only Pudil cost a fee that of note , I think Nuihu cost a few hundred grand so not expect much cost in this years accounts (unless we paid £3m for Pudil)

 

For me the problem we have is a double edge sword - Abdi is costing us £25-30K a week in wages but was £4m to buy so far me has cost us over £6m in fees and salaries, but if he is on a 4 year deal only £2m of his fee will have been released into the accounts figures so far by the end of this season, if we get rid of his to save the £25-30k a week we have to release his £2m fee left when we dispose of him. A very worrying state of affairs.

 

 

Yes that's the problem if we sell the high value players although we don't have their wages to account for, their original cost is then accountable immediately.

[room0035]

2 minutes ago, sonofbert2 said:

We could sell AW, BB, FF, TL and GH and offset our losses and be in with a good shout of winning the league next year with a good reduction in average admission prices thrown in too so I can't see what the fuss is all about.

 

We need to go all out for relegation!

 

 

Slight problem with your idea is this season accounts end 31 May 2018, the transfer window does not open until 1st July 2018, so we will be under embargo unless our losses are less than £9m, so we will then have to probably make a profit next season in order to not still be under FFP embargo the following season. Very unlikely with the wage bill we currently have.

 

Also will the volume of fans still turn up if they are watching a team of kids and free agents at £35-40 a game - in the best of worlds this is unlikely.

[Geoffrey]

1 hour ago, steelowl said:

 

I haven't a clue you'd hope  (well we'd hope ) they have thought this through and spent quite a few million on the stuff

as i said is doyen a charity? that would solve a prob methinks

Do you think fraud would solve the problem?

[Mr Farrell]

29 minutes ago, Hughthecone said:

To be fair not a lot ,I just leave the financial problems to the wife.Also sorry for delay in replying but IPad locked up.

 

What are the wife's thoughts on our accounts ?

 

 

[Mr Farrell]

1 minute ago, Geoffrey said:

Do you think fraud would solve the problem?

 

It worked for Carlos. He's still telling everyone he knows what he's doing.

 

[Hookowl]

12 minutes ago, Hookowl said:

 

Yes that's the problem if we sell the high value players although we don't have their wages to account for, the remainder of their original cost is then accountable immediately.

 

[steelowl]

27 minutes ago, HarrowbyOwl said:

In light of the published accounts I think the club should make a statement

For this year's P&S assessment the audited accounts for 2015-16 and 2016-17, plus a projection for 2017-18 had to be submitted on 1 March.
Allowed losses are 13m per year or 39m over the 3 year assessment period. So we are already in breach of the rules.
Punishment for non-compliance is determined by an independent panel (the ‘Fair Play Panel’).
A wide range of punishments are available.The EFL can:

• Impose a points deduction during the current season
• Demote a club from an automatic promotion position into the play-offs
• Demote a club out of the play-offs 
• Transfer embargoes are also available, with the earliest one potentially applying during the Summer 2018 Transfer window.

Don't want the bar stewards diddling us out of automatic 

 

that's the one I fear  

 

does it say anything about fines and how they are calculated ?

[WhiteOwl91]

21 minutes ago, thewookieisdown said:

Genuinely puzzled by that final line.  Who are the Carlos "favourites" you have in mind here?  Is there a distinction between them and our best players?

 

Westwood doesn't look a very saleable asset to me, sadly

Think a few people miss this when saying we should sell Westwood just because we have Wildsmith and Dawson

 

1 year left on his deal at the end of the season, been injured most of this...Hardly going to command a huge fee for a player of his quality. 

 

Would inevitably strengthen any other side in the division once fit, and if our aim is promotion, then selling him for a pittance wouldnt help our cause. 

 

Loan out one of the young keepers for me and Westwood first choice next season, then assess at the end of next season depending on how the other 2 have developed, where we finish in the league etc. 

[thewookieisdown]

Just now, WhiteOwl91 said:

Think a few people miss this when saying we should sell Westwood just because we have Wildsmith and Dawson

 

1 year left on his deal at the end of the season, been injured most of this...Hardly going to command a huge fee for a player of his quality. 

 

Would inevitably strengthen any other side in the division once fit, and if our aim is promotion, then selling him for a pittance wouldnt help our cause. 

 

Loan out one of the young keepers for me and Westwood first choice next season, then assess at the end of next season depending on how the other 2 have developed, where we finish in the league etc. 

Agree.  I assume KW is on a decent wage so there'd be that saving but he can't be worth much fees wise.  Wildsmith and Dawson can both potentially develop into highly sellable assets

[WhiteOwl91]

1 minute ago, thewookieisdown said:

Agree.  I assume KW is on a decent wage so there'd be that saving but he can't be worth much fees wise.  Wildsmith and Dawson can both potentially develop into highly sellable assets

Even if KW is on 30,000 a week, 1.5m a season, probably 2-3m in a fee (4.5m saving tops). 

 

Hardly feels worth it when we would have to replace him anyway in the event anything happened to JW or CD. So that would come off the Westwood saving. 

 

Put it this way, if youre challenging for promotion in this division next season youd absolutely snap SWFCs hand off if you could sign KW for £2-3m. 

[HarrowbyOwl]

10 minutes ago, steelowl said:

 

that's the one I fear  

 

does it say anything about fines and how they are calculated ?

Couldn't find anything about fines.

They did apply under the old FFP regime.

But maybe they realized that fining a club that's already hemorrhaging money does't help them get their finances back under control

[pazowl55]

41 minutes ago, room0035 said:

We have Loovens, Nuihu, Wallace, Clare, Hirst and Pudil all out of contract only Pudil cost a fee that of note , I think Nuihu cost a few hundred grand so not expect much cost in this years accounts (unless we paid £3m for Pudil)

 

For me the problem we have is a double edge sword - Abdi is costing us £25-30K a week in wages but was £4m to buy so far me has cost us over £6m in fees and salaries, but if he is on a 4 year deal only £2m of his fee will have been released into the accounts figures so far by the end of this season, if we get rid of his to save the £25-30k a week we have to release his £2m fee left when we dispose of him. A very worrying state of affairs.

 

Funny how it works out. Think if we get rid of Rhodes we would actually be worse off with FFP this season as it goes over the length of his contract.

[HarrowbyOwl]

25 minutes ago, steelowl said:

 

that's the one I fear  

 

does it say anything about fines and how they are calculated ?

 

Another common misunderstanding is the 39m limit.

In any given year the maximum allowed loss is 5m  - or 13m if the owner puts in 8m.
So if you max out on the losses (15m) and the owner is willing to chuck in another 24m you are allowed to lose up to 39m over the 3 year assessment period.
What it doesn't mean though is that if you lose 10m in year 1, 10m in year 2 and 19m in year 3 (total 39m) then you are compliant.
In this case you are still in breach for exceeding the 13m annual limit in year 3.

Edited March 2, 2018 by HarrowbyOwl

[steelowl]

Just now, HarrowbyOwl said:

 

Another common misunderstanding is the 39m limit.

In any given year the maximum allowed loss is 5m  - or 13m if the owner puts in 8m.
So if you max out on the losses (and the owner is willing to chuck in 24m) you are allowed to lose up to 39m over the 3 year assessment period.
What it doesn't mean though is that if you lose 10m in year 1, 10m in year 2 and 19m in year 3 (total 39m) then you are compliant.
In this case you are still in breach for exceeding the 13m annual limit in year 3.

* where's my paracetomol