BREAKING - Sheffield Wednesday under ANOTHER transfer embargo

[Guest whowantstoberich]

Just now, kobayashi said:

Nothing stopping anyone investing £100m or any other amount. What they are not allowed to do is generate losses which exceed the agreed limits.

Why not? Almost all businesses make losses early on. 

[Guest whowantstoberich]

Just now, @owlstalk said:

How?

Place the club in a trust of some sort. I don't know but there will be a way if they wanted to find it. My question is, why don't they want it to happen?

[kobayashi]

3 minutes ago, whowantstoberich said:

Why not? Almost all businesses make losses early on. 

SWFC was formed in 1867...

[Guest whowantstoberich]

3 minutes ago, Grandad said:

 

That was the case for many many years - and yet in the 20 years from 1990 til FFP's introduction in 2020 - there were 50 administrations (some clubs doing it more than once).

 

And with every administration there is a huge knock on effect as local businesses, charities, pension funds of club staff are all victims

 

 

 

In the 10 years since then there has been just 12.

Yes I agree administration is disastrous for all. However, the current supposed cure is not a cure its a restriction of trading based on what might or might not happen. They need to find a better solution.

[Guest whowantstoberich]

Just now, kobayashi said:

SWFC was formed in 1867...

I doubt they've had the same business plan since 1867.

 

The point is, any other company in the world could invest as much as they see fit. Football should be the same.

[Guest Grandad]

Just now, whowantstoberich said:

They need to find a better solution.

That I can agree with

 

Not allowing FFP & Parachute payments together could be one way.

 

But the clubs themselves should choose to police themselves. Usually the clubs are run by successful businessmen *cough* - who seem to lose all sense when getting involved in football

[kobayashi]

Just now, whowantstoberich said:

I doubt they've had the same business plan since 1867.

 

The point is, any other company in the world could invest as much as they see fit. Football should be the same.

SWFC can invest as much as they see fit. 

[HarrowbyOwl]

9 minutes ago, whowantstoberich said:

Why not? Almost all businesses make losses early on. 

Oldest start-up in the world

[Guest whowantstoberich]

2 minutes ago, kobayashi said:

SWFC can invest as much as they see fit. 

How can they if placed under an embargo?

[kobayashi]

Just now, whowantstoberich said:

How can they if placed under an embargo?

They could start by following the rules that they have agreed to follow and submitting the necessary financial data to the EFL on schedule.

[Guest whowantstoberich]

2 minutes ago, kobayashi said:

They could start by following the rules that they have agreed to follow and submitting the necessary financial data to the EFL on schedule.

So if they submitted everything they could invest £250million this summer without any consequences from the EFL eg a future embargo?

Edited April 6, 2021 by whowantstoberich

[SiJ]

Tbf, whether one agrees with the rules or not, it doesn't excuse the continually cack handed manner in which we've tried to circumvent said rules.

 

I do think they need to go back to the drawing board, but then do we go back to the old days of clubs splashing cash they do not have?

 

 

[FreshOwl]

21 minutes ago, kobayashi said:

Nothing stopping anyone investing £100m or any other amount. What they are not allowed to do is generate losses which exceed the agreed limits.

But why is it anyone’s business? 

[flo]

12 minutes ago, whowantstoberich said:

I doubt they've had the same business plan since 1867.

 

The point is, any other company in the world could invest as much as they see fit. Football should be the same.

I think football clubs are different to regular business etc. Because they have fans and a community so can't just have an owner blast big dollar and then dump it if it fails or something like that but I'm no expert. Got to be in the fans best interest. 

[Guest Grandad]

2 minutes ago, FreshOwl said:

But why is it anyone’s business? 

Because the club's agreed for it to be everybody's business and for their businesses to be run in a sustainable way

 

All of them

[FreshOwl]

Just now, Grandad said:

Because the club's agreed for it to be everybody's business and for their businesses to be run in a sustainable way

 

All of them

Fair. I just meant in the grand scheme of things. It’s his business, let him spend how much he sees fit. Why should there be a cap? Admittedly I don’t know enough about FFP, but it just all seems bizarre, like it’s easier to get punished then to just swim along 

[Guest whowantstoberich]

9 minutes ago, FreshOwl said:

Fair. I just meant in the grand scheme of things. It’s his business, let him spend how much he sees fit. Why should there be a cap? Admittedly I don’t know enough about FFP, but it just all seems bizarre, like it’s easier to get punished then to just swim along 

It is over policing to the max. The punishment is in any other business, if your investment didnt work out, you lost your money.

 

Simple as that, or at least it should be.

[Manwë]

3 hours ago, Lawrie’s Left Peg said:

... and the 9 other owners in the same boat. 3 of which have copped for an embargo despite receiving parachute payments. Consider also that Norwich, Watford, Bournemouth, Swansea have potentially avoided embargo’s due to receiving parachute payments. I’m no fan of DC. I want him to leave and hand the club on. However, when 12 of 24 teams are under scrutiny by the EFL we must also consider the impact of CoVid and the well intentioned but terribly conceived FFP, P&S and parachute payments. 

While there are specific issues right now, re:Covid, this is Wednesday's third transfer embargo in Chansiri's six years.

 

We've signed Green and Hutchinson from the DWP and it's still too much to tip us over the line.

 

There's a club just north east of Wednesday, who have less income, have suffered equally from Covid, who are in the playoffs, who don't receive parachute payments and who are not under an embargo.

[prowl]

I thought we were being monitored already by the EFL as part of the deal after our breach that led to the points deduction.

 

As a Wednesday fan I've got used to s h i t happening, water off a ducks back these days, I just take it as it comes. If it can go wrong we will manage to have it go wrong here. We will survive one way or the other. If we can survive DC we can survive anything.

[Lawrie’s Left Peg]

10 minutes ago, Manwë said:

While there are specific issues right now, re:Covid, this is Wednesday's third transfer embargo in Chansiri's six years.

 

We've signed Green and Hutchinson from the DWP and it's still too much to tip us over the line.

 

There's a club just north east of Wednesday, who have less income, have suffered equally from Covid, who are in the playoffs, who don't receive parachute payments and who are not under an embargo.

Fair point & I don’t look to make any excuses for DC. It’s clearly possible to run a club as a going concern but I still maintain that if half of a division is affected then the system is broken.