EFL Financial Fair Play Rules

[Guest Hornsby]

2 minutes ago, room0035 said:

Why would a company owned by the chairman, for close on a debt owned by the football club owned by the chairman when it too owns money to the football club.

 

I really do wonder about people on here sometimes.

 

If the club was placed into administration creditors would likely get no more than 10% of their outstanding monies owed can you see football being happy to take a 90% loss - no me neither.

 

The only real loser would be the fans who have purchased future season tickets, as the new owner or entity could decide not to honour the DC deals, but equally for a football club, as a new owner on day one, to ******** off the fan base you won't be the new owner very long.

 

The only way that we could have any administration issues is if DC is not paying the PAYE/NIC and VAT then the government HMRC would have no qualms about taking us to court and issuing winding up orders. But in the current climate with the government trying to save business not end them it is very unlikely.

What Wigan fans said .

 

As their owner poured cash in then put into Admin.

 

 

[Owl In Black]

11 hours ago, Morepork said:

I agree about investing albeit with an equal amount in Escrow to mitigate the financial risks. It’s important to note the scenario you mention has no relation to our plight, we are way past that.

You make to part of your competitions rules. To compete in said competition, these are the rules. 

There's nothing stopping them doing it legally, but if they do the Consequences in the competition are, points deduction, fines or expulsion. 

It would just be similar to how FFP is now. 

 

FFP is so badly configured. As a result of breaching the rules, the financial implications for our club have been enormous, effectively relegated, banned from transfers, so no one can leave coz we need them, reducing their market value unless we can Co vince them to. Sign a. New deal, but we now can't offer better terms because we have been relegated. Clubs are going to go out of existence as a direct result, which is the opposite of what FFP is meant to achieve??? 

[room0035]

14 minutes ago, Hornsby said:

What Wigan fans said .

 

As their owner poured cash in then put into Admin.

 

 

What are you on about???

[sheffsteel]

3 hours ago, Mcguigan said:

But surely every Championship club promoted to the PL needs to “gamble” on better players on bigger contracts, otherwise they’d come straight back down again. Look at WBA last season and Norwich season before.

 

At least £50m investment in players is needed, imo, to make a promotional Championship squad a PL one capable fighting relegation.

 

But a £50m investment in players also means a £50m investment in wages. Which Championship owner is going to invest that amount of money without PP’s.

Agree.

When I said “it encourages promoted clubs to gamble”

 

It was meant as a positive for the PL…hence why most of the PL clubs think parachute payments are beneficial.

There’s no cannon fodder in the PL…even the worse teams at the bottom can give the best teams a competitive game.

 

The whole point of FFP isn’t about fairness…to be honest Footall has never been fair….the bigger clubs have more money meaning they can afford better players. FFP is all about protecting fans and stopping their clubs from regularly going into admin and potentially going bust.

 

Since FFP was introduced….clubs going into admin has become rare…so it’s done it’s job.

The main problem is parachute payments were meant to prevent PL from going bust but in most situations they generally keep most of their players. So relegated PL always have an advantage over their Championship rivals. 

[sheffsteel]

34 minutes ago, Warringtonowl said:

You make to part of your competitions rules. To compete in said competition, these are the rules. 

There's nothing stopping them doing it legally, but if they do the Consequences in the competition are, points deduction, fines or expulsion. 

It would just be similar to how FFP is now. 

 

FFP is so badly configured. As a result of breaching the rules, the financial implications for our club have been enormous, effectively relegated, banned from transfers, so no one can leave coz we need them, reducing their market value unless we can Co vince them to. Sign a. New deal, but we now can't offer better terms because we have been relegated. Clubs are going to go out of existence as a direct result, which is the opposite of what FFP is meant to achieve??? 

Disagree…how can a club go out of business if they are being punished for ignoring FFP..

Clubs are being forced into staying within spending limits.

The result is a weaker squad and possibly relegation but at least the club exists.

FFP penalties are to ensure a club doesn’t go out of business.

 

Its like giving someone a credit card and setting a spending limit.

The person complains wanting the law changing so they can spend what they want and run up even bigger debts.

The government (in order to protect individuals) bring out bigger restrictions and punishments to prevent a continuous spending spree.

 

What penalties would you suggest to prevent clubs over stretching/gambling/ spending money they don’t possess?

If every club ignored FFP there would be chaos…transfers and salaries would increase and admins every year would be quite common.

Surely no one wants clubs to disappear?

 

The answer is transferring debts from the club to the owner BUT no owner would ever agree this.

[Raminpeace]

It’s a different game now.

Each year we look forward to the issue of the accounts in the same way that the issue of the fixture list used to excite.

the thrill you get when you see increased annual turnover is the same thrill you used to get by signing a star player or witnessing a great goal.

The pubs are full of chat about the stated values for amortisation and impairment. Passing ffp is like getting to a cup semi-final. When the f.a. Cup draw is made the first priority is to ensure that rivals have got a nice low value tricky away tie. Denting their income stream.

Young fans have the pictures of the club accountants plastered all over their bedroom walls, and social media is awash with debate about total salary as a % of income, and any unusual one-off disbursements generate plenty of chat too . The best club accountants from the 70s couldn’t compete with the demands of the new game. It’s all moved on. All we need next is transfer fees for the best accountants and the best auditors. 

 

[Guest Hornsby]

17 hours ago, room0035 said:

What are you on about???

Thrash Google.

 

Crazed owners poor squillions into Wigan , then put into Admin a bit later for a bet.

 

Only difference with Chansiri is we don't know what he's up to yet.

 

And don't say just incompetent cos no one with this dosh that bad , or without top consultants. 

[room0035]

2 hours ago, Hornsby said:

Thrash Google.

 

Crazed owners poor squillions into Wigan , then put into Admin a bit later for a bet.

 

Only difference with Chansiri is we don't know what he's up to yet.

 

And don't say just incompetent cos no one with this dosh that bad , or without top consultants. 

DC we were told was a business man but no one seems to be able to find any businesses he owns with actual employees other than us and he has done such a great job here.

 

His Dad and Uncle formed the largest fish production company in the world. I suspect DC has been the son that has spent his whole life with Daddy cleaning up his mistakes, he is one of the only male family members, to have no day to day involvement in the running of the family business and his share holding is less than 1%.

 

And yes as you say I do believe he is that incompetent, after 6 and 1/2 years he it still making the same mistakes season after season. He told us all a few months ago no planning had been done for next season, we have no team, no preseason friendlies, no tickets deals for POTG, no shirts, no filed accounts, we are under a transfer embargo and we appear to still not have sorted the players wages issues out how difficult does he want to make it for the new manager etc. What business of any level in any market is currently not planning for what could happen in the next 1 or 3 years, did we not have a plan for being in league one of the championship, did we not have different recruitment options depending on the league were in, i bet Rotherham and Wycombe and Derby did not plan in this way. He has made the cardinal sin in business, he has not paid his staff on time and has done this on multiple occasions, he has not communicated with anyone why this is happen other than its Covids fault, there are 91 other teams in the same position as us but I do not hear the same issues from them. 

 

I have suspected for quite some time now that is source of funds be it a family trust fund or a family financier has been cut off, as why would any one raise a debt against a £60m asset for just a 10th of its value, why would players not get paid, why when we need a striker in January and a few new faces to avoid relegation were no players signed, ultimately the £1-2m that may have cost would have saved him £8m in lost tv revenue next season (i.e. £6m better off than now), often the simple answer is the most likely he simply does not have he finances for the job.

 

We will see in the next 6 weeks we have about £10-15m of salaries leaving the club tomorrow, about £500k of compensation claims coming in,  we will need about 6 or 7 players just to be competitive next season, or will we go with what we have then blame the manager when the team are in the bottom 6, for the whole season again fighting to stay in the league with a team full of kids and players in the final months of their contracts. But of course the fans will be paying the top prices in the league for this standard of football.

 

[maidstoneowl]

 

I say this as Maurice tell me

 

so the Delfone say to MILAN 

 

"I have what this takes ..   I can give what needed"

 

MILAN goes "I see please"

 

Delfone say "hear see this" and show banks papers   nearly 300 millions

 

MILAN VERY PLEASE.    Take his 30 millions

 

so then this plan was made

 

"GO PREMIER LEAGUE BUT MusT take just 3 years"

 

Team build - mid 20yr old player already at best. Some 26 and 27.   3 year go - end. No PREM.

 

You see, Maurice say player can not be sold for value.  Delfone did not under stand "why player at 29 or 30 or 31 who can play - why he not for 6 millions"  ??   ?

 

ANSWER - he no under stand football

[Guest Hornsby]

1 hour ago, room0035 said:

DC we were told was a business man but no one seems to be able to find any businesses he owns with actual employees other than us and he has done such a great job here.

 

His Dad and Uncle formed the largest fish production company in the world. I suspect DC has been the son that has spent his whole life with Daddy cleaning up his mistakes, he is one of the only male family members, to have no day to day involvement in the running of the family business and his share holding is less than 1%.

 

And yes as you say I do believe he is that incompetent, after 6 and 1/2 years he it still making the same mistakes season after season. He told us all a few months ago no planning had been done for next season, we have no team, no preseason friendlies, no tickets deals for POTG, no shirts, no filed accounts, we are under a transfer embargo and we appear to still not have sorted the players wages issues out how difficult does he want to make it for the new manager etc. What business of any level in any market is currently not planning for what could happen in the next 1 or 3 years, did we not have a plan for being in league one of the championship, did we not have different recruitment options depending on the league were in, i bet Rotherham and Wycombe and Derby did not plan in this way. He has made the cardinal sin in business, he has not paid his staff on time and has done this on multiple occasions, he has not communicated with anyone why this is happen other than its Covids fault, there are 91 other teams in the same position as us but I do not hear the same issues from them. 

 

I have suspected for quite some time now that is source of funds be it a family trust fund or a family financier has been cut off, as why would any one raise a debt against a £60m asset for just a 10th of its value, why would players not get paid, why when we need a striker in January and a few new faces to avoid relegation were no players signed, ultimately the £1-2m that may have cost would have saved him £8m in lost tv revenue next season (i.e. £6m better off than now), often the simple answer is the most likely he simply does not have he finances for the job.

 

We will see in the next 6 weeks we have about £10-15m of salaries leaving the club tomorrow, about £500k of compensation claims coming in,  we will need about 6 or 7 players just to be competitive next season, or will we go with what we have then blame the manager when the team are in the bottom 6, for the whole season again fighting to stay in the league with a team full of kids and players in the final months of their contracts. But of course the fans will be paying the top prices in the league for this standard of football.

 

Thanks so much for this , both informative and original.

 

For me, I just can't accept anyone this daft and if so, family would not trust him with dosh.

 

I take the Lee Strafford thoughts that TUF may own club and could recover losses against Thai tax.

 

On dosh, yes wages down soon but so is income. Losing £6 million Championship payment and £6 million Newcastle comp, plus £ 3 million rent to Chansiri firm, means revenue to spend now about £5 million gross.

 

£3 million of that gross goes to Baz and Josh alone. Gonna be really , really difficult.

[Drewswfc]

There's only 2 things fůčking football up, mainly insane wages and secondly ridiculous transfer fees.... Oh hang on another one. fůčking agents!

 

Why oh why do the clubs have too pay the agents? They're working for the player. 

[mark1948]

On 29/06/2021 at 03:12, Tollertonowl said:

Why don't the EFL FFP rules just allow monies to be invested into football clubs at the risk of the investors rather than basing the rules on turnover?1? For example if someone buys a football club and then wants to £millions in the purchase of players then the EFL should just ensure that this money isn't borrowed against the club and putting it at risk... As all this turnover crap is just making football unaffordable due to inflated ticket prices and consolidating the difficulties of those clubs like us who failed to gamble on promotion to the point of non existence... Then those clubs who gamble and succeed like Leicester, Villa and Wolves are fined mediocre amounts if the gamble pays off... Plus the parachute payments for those demoted is hardly fair to other EFL clubs... It's just a joke and destroying football, as it's made the prices ridiculous, stopping clubs success and also consolidating their financial positions e.g. you are under embargo so can't sell players because you can't replace them and then they leave for free - so rather than recouping money from selling a player you lose more money and subsequently suffer further penalties...

This is what any other type of business does and is.

[Tollertonowl]

15 hours ago, room0035 said:

DC we were told was a business man but no one seems to be able to find any businesses he owns with actual employees other than us and he has done such a great job here.

 

His Dad and Uncle formed the largest fish production company in the world. I suspect DC has been the son that has spent his whole life with Daddy cleaning up his mistakes, he is one of the only male family members, to have no day to day involvement in the running of the family business and his share holding is less than 1%.

 

And yes as you say I do believe he is that incompetent, after 6 and 1/2 years he it still making the same mistakes season after season. He told us all a few months ago no planning had been done for next season, we have no team, no preseason friendlies, no tickets deals for POTG, no shirts, no filed accounts, we are under a transfer embargo and we appear to still not have sorted the players wages issues out how difficult does he want to make it for the new manager etc. What business of any level in any market is currently not planning for what could happen in the next 1 or 3 years, did we not have a plan for being in league one of the championship, did we not have different recruitment options depending on the league were in, i bet Rotherham and Wycombe and Derby did not plan in this way. He has made the cardinal sin in business, he has not paid his staff on time and has done this on multiple occasions, he has not communicated with anyone why this is happen other than its Covids fault, there are 91 other teams in the same position as us but I do not hear the same issues from them. 

 

I have suspected for quite some time now that is source of funds be it a family trust fund or a family financier has been cut off, as why would any one raise a debt against a £60m asset for just a 10th of its value, why would players not get paid, why when we need a striker in January and a few new faces to avoid relegation were no players signed, ultimately the £1-2m that may have cost would have saved him £8m in lost tv revenue next season (i.e. £6m better off than now), often the simple answer is the most likely he simply does not have he finances for the job.

 

We will see in the next 6 weeks we have about £10-15m of salaries leaving the club tomorrow, about £500k of compensation claims coming in,  we will need about 6 or 7 players just to be competitive next season, or will we go with what we have then blame the manager when the team are in the bottom 6, for the whole season again fighting to stay in the league with a team full of kids and players in the final months of their contracts. But of course the fans will be paying the top prices in the league for this standard of football.

 

As we are now tied to rules - maybe not paying wages on time is to push back costs to the following tax year?!?

[room0035]

7 hours ago, Tollertonowl said:

As we are now tied to rules - maybe not paying wages on time is to push back costs to the following tax year?!?

Unfortunately mate you cannot do that.

 

If a cost is due in this year even if you don't pay it, you have to accrue for that cost in your financial figures.

 

The not paying the wages is simply because we have an unprofessional person running the business. Anyone who has ever been in business knows the one thing you make sure happens every month is your staff get paid on time, as often for most business your staff are your biggest asset.

 

If the players had been paid on time each month for the last season we would still be a championship team. As many pundits, managers and ex players said throughout the season, they could not understand why the team under performed so often, a team that could demolish Cardiff one week then got pasted by QPR the next. When on paper they were are mid table team at worst, we now of course know, because the fool running the club was not paying them then expecting them to give everything for the cause.

 

This one act by the chairman probably has done more harm to the team than anything else he mucked up last season and now it will be a big issue trying to get players to join the club when the chairman is know for not paying is players on time or in some cases at all.

[Guest Hornsby]

23 hours ago, Drewswfc said:

There's only 2 things fůčking football up, mainly insane wages and secondly ridiculous transfer fees.... Oh hang on another one. fůčking agents!

 

Why oh why do the clubs have too pay the agents? They're working for the player. 

And the club in our case, with Doyen.

 

And the team manager with Carlos.

 

No conflicts though.

[Owl In Black]

On 29/06/2021 at 16:27, sheffsteel said:

Disagree…how can a club go out of business if they are being punished for ignoring FFP..

Clubs are being forced into staying within spending limits.

The result is a weaker squad and possibly relegation but at least the club exists.

FFP penalties are to ensure a club doesn’t go out of business.

 

Its like giving someone a credit card and setting a spending limit.

The person complains wanting the law changing so they can spend what they want and run up even bigger debts.

The government (in order to protect individuals) bring out bigger restrictions and punishments to prevent a continuous spending spree.

 

What penalties would you suggest to prevent clubs over stretching/gambling/ spending money they don’t possess?

If every club ignored FFP there would be chaos…transfers and salaries would increase and admins every year would be quite common.

Surely no one wants clubs to disappear?

 

The answer is transferring debts from the club to the owner BUT no owner would ever agree this.

Agree about debts, but the point is the owners are t allowed to cover them under the rules. 

So if we spent 100m generated 50 we're in breach with 50% deficit. But the owner isn't allowed to plug that gap... 

[kirksandallowl]

3 minutes ago, Warringtonowl said:

Agree about debts, but the point is the owners are t allowed to cover them under the rules. 

So if we spent 100m generated 50 we're in breach with 50% deficit. But the owner isn't allowed to plug that gap... 

 

 

Seems the Accrington Stanley chairman agrees

 

 

[Tollertonowl]

On 29/06/2021 at 08:00, room0035 said:

Before FFP rules and Profit and Sustainability rules clubs were going into administration very frequently, Leeds United did it during a match.

 

The people losing out were not the clubs, the players or the fans but the small business that were getting screwed over so millionaire chairman could avoid paying debts they had built up.

 

Look at our situation had DC been left to his own devices, he is not competent to run a bath no matter a football club we would now have gone bust, we still could and you want to allow people like him to do what he wants with no constraints.

 

The system works its the parachute payment that need scrapping not the losses rules. Oh and there should be yearly checks of owners competent and that they still have the funds to run a football club.

 

 

I think that an owner like in the PL should be able to invest as much money as he wants rather than being tied to the clubs reduced EFL turnover... They only issue is ensuring that businesses are protected and that the money is available... I think that this would be better than trade embargoes and the clubs assets such as the stadium being sold to them at extortionate prices to Work around the rules... The other issue with FFP is that it spirals clubs that take a risk into a consolidated hardship of being unable to sell players and recoup their signing on fees along with the clubs being unable to replace them...  

[Utah Owl]

In answer to the OP.

 

It's done the way it is to give relegated EPL clubs an advantage over everyone else, pure and simple.

 

Their is nothing 'fair' about it whatsoever. 

[Guest Mcguigan]

On 01/07/2021 at 22:18, kirksandallowl said:

 

 

Seems the Accrington Stanley chairman agrees

 

 

That’s the thing though. The owners, or at least representatives of the owner, get together 3 or 4 times a year.

 

They have ample opportunity to say enough is enough, so why don’t they.

 

Its a member club with voting rights on issues causing conflict.

 

FFP was voted on and agreed as was the solidarity payment distribution. Parachute payments are down to the PL.