EFL Statement

[steelcityowlsfan]

4 minutes ago, matthefish2002 said:

 

Surely if SWFC win the case the points deduction will be zero?

I mean if the EFL win.

[kobayashi]

1 hour ago, Essix Blue said:

Exactly. 
 

Parachute payments are there to HELP teams newly promoted to the PL. They ensure the team can invest adequately (mainly player wages) to give themselves a chance of staying up, with a safety net should they go back down.  If PP didn’t exist far more teams would come straight back down - would that be a good thing? 

 

Also - has been proven many times - parachute payments give no guarantee that a relegated team would go straight back up. 

Exactly, but you are wasting your time trying to explain it as it doesn’t fit into the anti Wednesday victim story that many people have taken up.

[Essix Blue]

39 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

I think the rationale is that to get Premier League players, you have to sign petulant manchilds on 5 year contracts to satiate agents and said manchilds and get them to sign for you.

 

Without the buffer of parachute payments, you can't offer those contracts (even if within those there is say a 1/3rd drop in wages upon relegation) and therefore it becomes nightmarishishly difficult to stay up.

 

The system probably works to protect promoted clubs, but we of course all know it just further perpetuates this ridiculous race to overspending in both the Prem and Championship 

exactly 

[sweetsheri]

52 minutes ago, prowl said:

There's a difference, Tesco is a publicly traded company, SW is solely owned by DC. Only people who could prosecute him would be HMRC for tax evasion but he didn't avoid tax, the company lost money, his actions in selling the ground reduced the loss.

 

False accounting. maybe but doubtful in the circumatances . mkowl is the expert

It's not his actions in selling the ground that is the problem

It's the fact he MAY have placed a transaction from a different accounting year to hide a problem with the accounts.

 

[Blatter]

5 hours ago, matthefish2002 said:

5 hours ago, matthefish2002 said:

Might not be a bad thing he is keeping a low profile at the moment

I don't think Chansiri can afford to just walk away. If he wants out he will have to take a big loss on the money he has put n and sell the club.
Chansiri has been a bit quiet lately, normally do a fans forum about this time of the season.
Might not be a bad thing he is keeping a low profile at the moment.

Might not be a bad thing he is keeping a low profile at the moment

 

Better to keep your mouth shut and look a fool than open it and remove all doubt.

[gypsyowl]

our player recruitment model is not sustainable to get us to the PL, if you don't go up, you sell players and re-invest in the team, Leeds sold Wood, Roofe, Jansen, pigs sold brookes etc etc

 

we sign players on high wages at the peak of their career or after their peak, we then can't sell them for what we want for so they just rot, it can't go on.

 

let this be a lesson to chansiri, we have to SELL players to remain relevant in the top end of the Championship.

 

 

[Caliban]

1 minute ago, Blatter said:

Might not be a bad thing he is keeping a low profile at the moment

 

Better to keep your mouth shut and look a fool than open it and remove all doubt.

 

Advice Prince Andrew should have heeded

[Guest]

The Chairman’s biggest failure is not selling players, golden boy should’ve gone for a start even though at the time there would’ve been uproar

 

A more experienced chairman would have stood his ground regardless of the outrage and pocketed a transfer fee we could only dream of now  

[vulva]

Scrapping parachute payments is the football version of turkeys voting for Christmas. 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, vulva said:

Scrapping parachute payments is the football version of turkeys voting for Christmas. 

Aye, agreed 

 

They say it makes the PL a closed shop, which I do think is the intention , but look at some of clubs who’ve come down and struggled, and continue to do in a few cases 

[Yellowbelly]

1 hour ago, Essix Blue said:

Exactly. 
 

Parachute payments are there to HELP teams newly promoted to the PL. They ensure the team can invest adequately (mainly player wages) to give themselves a chance of staying up, with a safety net should they go back down.  If PP didn’t exist far more teams would come straight back down - would that be a good thing? 

 

Also - has been proven many times - parachute payments give no guarantee that a relegated team would go straight back up. 

What they do is drive up prices in the market, meaning average players are valued more than they should be forcing clubs to spend more than they should do. It’s essentially financial doping and with the arbitrary figure the efl put on “losses” it has caused an uneven playing field.

Edited November 18, 2019 by Yellowbelly

[sweetsheri]

41 minutes ago, Royal_D said:

The Chairman’s biggest failure is not selling players, golden boy should’ve gone for a start even though at the time there would’ve been uproar

 

A more experienced chairman would have stood his ground regardless of the outrage and pocketed a transfer fee we could only dream of now  

Who is this Golden boy thou speaks of?

I Can't think of any

[room0035]

35 minutes ago, Yellowbelly said:

What they do is drive up prices in the market, meaning average players are valued more than they should be forcing clubs to spend more than they should do. It’s essentially financial doping and with the arbitrary figure the efl put on “losses” it has caused an uneven playing field.

Parachute payments are not doing this, money in football is and the introduction of transfer windows.

 

The worse thing to happen to football other than the parachute payments, was the changes to the transfer window.

 

Change to the old system, clubs don't need to carry big squads and signing can be made anytime from July through till April this will bring prices down and help team compete again. But the likes of Sky and BT and agents make too much money to scrap a system which is basically outlawed in every other business model as a restriction on trade. 

[Guest wilyfox]

49 minutes ago, gypsyowl said:

our player recruitment model is not sustainable to get us to the PL, if you don't go up, you sell players and re-invest in the team, Leeds sold Wood, Roofe, Jansen, pigs sold brookes etc etc

 

we sign players on high wages at the peak of their career or after their peak, we then can't sell them for what we want for so they just rot, it can't go on.

 

let this be a lesson to chansiri, we have to SELL players to remain relevant in the top end of the Championship.

 

 

 

I agree. Trouble is...people say you don't improve by selling your best players. They miss the point entirely. How many cried at the prospect of losing Forestieri in 2016?! They can't get to grips with the notion of trading players for the right reasons - and nor can Chansiri. 

[billyblack]

21 hours ago, Mycroft said:

 

My simplistic take on it 

 

DC probably wanted to go up in two or three seasons but when the opportunity presented in the his first season he had to take the gamble and go for it.  Probably paying to much in wages, then in the second season he gambled again on Rhodes etc.

 

If he hadn't gone for it then the fans would be saying he's not prepared to invest in quality players.

 

Since then he's had to deal with FFP and now things have come to ahead with selling the club (why didn't the league warn him off about doing that?) which has signed off by the Accounts Company.  

 

He's got here by wanting to get the club promoted, the first chairman in years who wanted success for the club. 

 

Yes he's made mistakes (name a chairman who hasn't) but they are well intentioned ones.  I would have liked an experienced hand next to him, Howard Wilkinson type for instance to guide and advise him.

 

I know Im blowing in the wind but we need to look to the future not to the past.

Well one things for sure. With Rhodes he didnt invest in quality anyway

[billyblack]

1 hour ago, gypsyowl said:

our player recruitment model is not sustainable to get us to the PL, if you don't go up, you sell players and re-invest in the team, Leeds sold Wood, Roofe, Jansen, pigs sold brookes etc etc

 

we sign players on high wages at the peak of their career or after their peak, we then can't sell them for what we want for so they just rot, it can't go on.

 

let this be a lesson to chansiri, we have to SELL players to remain relevant in the top end of the Championship.

 

 

What model???

[prowl]

1 hour ago, sweetsheri said:

It's not his actions in selling the ground that is the problem

It's the fact he MAY have placed a transaction from a different accounting year to hide a problem with the accounts.

 

The problem with the accounts was that we lost too much money for EFL rules. EFL can't jail people, they can take action against the club and fine them, dock points, relegate the club or throw them out of the league. I've not seen anything so far that suggests they can incarcerate the owner of a club. That is down to the financial conduct authorites, HMRC all of whom use the courts. I don't think HMRC are bothered unless the club are trying to defraud the tax man. That's not the case here, the sale of the ground was used to reduce a loss, if it was in the following year maybe it would have resulted in a profit but that would be offset by the prior year loss.

 

The other possible charge would be false accounting but I doubt that would fly in the circumstances. I don't see DC getting locked up.which was the point of the previous poster who I replied to. I think the suggestion was that DC would keep a plane fueled and ready at an airport in case he had to flee the country. My point was that was extremely unlikely and scaremongering.

 

I am not a lawyer or an accountant so I'm ready to accept I might be wrong. It doesn't appear you are either. I'll leave it there.

[Guest mkowl]

2 hours ago, matthefish2002 said:

 

Surely if SWFC win the case the points deduction will be zero?

 

Be ruddy annoying otherwise - and unlike others I do not consider that the EFL can make their own rules up when it comes to the accounts. If the accounts have been prepared in accordance with accounting standards then that is the end of that test. 

[Guest mkowl]

17 minutes ago, prowl said:

The problem with the accounts was that we lost too much money for EFL rules. EFL can't jail people, they can take action against the club and fine them, dock points, relegate the club or throw them out of the league. I've not seen anything so far that suggests they can incarcerate the owner of a club. That is down to the financial conduct authorites, HMRC all of whom use the courts. I don't think HMRC are bothered unless the club are trying to defraud the tax man. That's not the case here, the sale of the ground was used to reduce a loss, if it was in the following year maybe it would have resulted in a profit but that would be offset by the prior year loss.

 

The other possible charge would be false accounting but I doubt that would fly in the circumstances. I don't see DC getting locked up.which was the point of the previous poster who I replied to. I think the suggestion was that DC would keep a plane fueled and ready at an airport in case he had to flee the country. My point was that was extremely unlikely and scaremongering.

 

I am not a lawyer or an accountant so I'm ready to accept I might be wrong. It doesn't appear you are either. I'll leave it there.

 

In terms of the disposal of the stadium then possibly HMRC could get interested just in how loss rules work. However that is a bit technical shizzle 

[Rogers]

1 minute ago, mkowl said:

 

In terms of the disposal of the stadium then possibly HMRC could get interested just in how loss rules work. However that is a bit technical shizzle 

I’m sure the HMRC are already all over it