SWFC SUMMER 2022 TRANSFER RUMOUR MEGATHREAD - in memory of Gurujuan

[Jack of Clubs]

6 minutes ago, WalthamOwl said:

Hope we get the contract situations sorted in the next few days. Pre season just over a week away. 

Pre season is just over a week away but the first couple of weeks are always fitness related so any new additions won't be missing out as they will be training wherever that are beforehand.

[Tewkesbury]

7 minutes ago, ChapSmurf said:

 

SCMP only covers new signings in L1 & L2. Not players whose contracts were signed in the October prior to relegation.

 

There are also some massive loopholes in this rule, meaning much of this constraint can be very easily avoided.

But the players need to have been signed for 12 months on a 2+ year contract, meaning you can't sign them after you're relegated.

 

Yes, those players don't count towards the 70% for the first season, but if you want to sign anyone else, the funds have to be there, so unless you come down with 24 players with 12 months left, you're still limited to paying out only what you can guarantee.

[ChapSmurf]

3 minutes ago, Tewkesbury said:

But the players need to have been signed for 12 months on a 2+ year contract, meaning you can't sign them after you're relegated.

 

Yes, those players don't count towards the 70% for the first season, but if you want to sign anyone else, the funds have to be there, so unless you come down with 24 players with 12 months left, you're still limited to paying out only what you can guarantee.

 

That's why I said they have to be signed in the October prior to relegation.

 

But like I said, there are loopholes in this ruling that can very easily be exploited.

[mogbad]

18 minutes ago, ChapSmurf said:

 

SCMP only covers new signings in L1 & L2. Not players whose contracts were signed in the October prior to relegation.

 

There are also some massive loopholes in this rule, meaning much of this constraint can be very easily avoided.

Correct. 
 

A club owner can put as much money into the club as he wants as long as it's in the form of equity or donations with no loans registered against the club.

[Tewkesbury]

4 minutes ago, ChapSmurf said:

 

That's why I said they have to be signed in the October prior to relegation.

 

But like I said, there are loopholes in this ruling that can very easily be exploited.

 

Just now, mogbad said:

Correct. 
 

A club owner can put as much money into the club as he wants as long as it's in the form of equity or donations with no loans registered against the club.

But that's not going to break the club is it? 

If the owner does a bunk, the money's already in the club with nothing owing.

 

Yes, you can put as much money in as you want, but you can't get the club into enough debt to sink it as you get audited every 6 months to make sure that the money actually goes into the club.

[ChapSmurf]

1 minute ago, mogbad said:

Correct. 
 

A club owner can put as much money into the club as he wants as long as it's in the form of equity or donations with no loans registered against the club.

 

Bang on the money. Pun intended.

 

1 minute ago, Tewkesbury said:

 

But that's not going to break the club is it? 

If the owner does a bunk, the money's already in the club with nothing owing.

 

Yes, you can put as much money in as you want, but you can't get the club into enough debt to sink it as you get audited every 6 months to make sure that the money actually goes into the club.

 

A loan isn't classed as turnover and SCMP only deals with a clubs turnover. So this is just one way of avoiding this rule. Others include the finacial vehicles players use to avoid paying more tax than necessary. This is why good accountants cost you a lot of money, and save you even more.

[mogbad]

7 minutes ago, mogbad said:

Correct. 
 

A club owner can put as much money into the club as he wants as long as it's in the form of equity or donations with no loans registered against the club.

From the SCMP Rules
 

Turnover definition 

 

Under the SCMP rules, the definition of 'Turnover' is particularly important as Turnover is used to determine the maximum wage-spend. Within a traditional accounting perspective, there are usually only three elements of turnover: 

 

Match-day Income 

Commercial Income (such as sponsorship) 

TV revenue (and any 'merit payments' based on league position)

 

However the Football League use a is broader definition of Turnover. Crucially, the FL Turnover figure includes donations from the owners to the club and injections of equity. Loans from club owners are understandably not included in the Turnover figure as these would result in growing club debts. up club debts.  In League 1 and League 2, a wealthy owner can therefore fund the club spending in a way that is not permitted in other divisions.

[Tewkesbury]

30 minutes ago, ChapSmurf said:

 

Bang on the money. Pun intended.

 

 

A loan isn't classed as turnover and SCMP only deals with a clubs turnover. So this is just one way of avoiding this rule. Others include the finacial vehicles players use to avoid paying more tax than necessary. This is why good accountants cost you a lot of money, and save you even more.

The SCMP rules state any money spent on players, through financial vehicles or not.

Loans not counting as turnover means that only money in the bank or guaranteed can be used on players, so you can't get into debt paying big contracts.

 

I don't see where the issue is?

 

I don't care if the owner wants to blow all his money, as long as the club doesn't carry the can if it all goes wrong.

[WalthamOwl]

1 hour ago, El Toro said:

Pre season is just over a week away but the first couple of weeks are always fitness related so any new additions won't be missing out as they will be training wherever that are beforehand.

I was meaning the out of contract players we have, Luongo, NML, Hunt etc. 

[andypandy]

[areNOTwhatTHEYseem]

8 minutes ago, andypandy said:

 

Good.

 

We can do without the distraction of a protracted transfer saga involving one of our players.

[Guest mrbluesky]

 

[ChapSmurf]

9 hours ago, Tewkesbury said:

The SCMP rules state any money spent on players, through financial vehicles or not.

Loans not counting as turnover means that only money in the bank or guaranteed can be used on players, so you can't get into debt paying big contracts.

 

I don't see where the issue is?

 

I don't care if the owner wants to blow all his money, as long as the club doesn't carry the can if it all goes wrong.

 

It's the way a club can circumnavigate the 60% turnover I was referring to. Nothing else. But like you, as long as the limited company doesn't carry the can, I don't care if or how it is done.

[Jack of Clubs]

11 hours ago, casbahowl said:

Just give it up with the constant melodramatic, negative drivel!

 

[Tewkesbury]

22 minutes ago, ChapSmurf said:

 

It's the way a club can circumnavigate the 60% turnover I was referring to. Nothing else. But like you, as long as the limited company doesn't carry the can, I don't care if or how it is done.

SCMP should be a model of how FFP should be done.

Just guarantee the 2+ year contracts for relegation from the EPL instead of parachute payments, so teams up there can still sign decent players, then you're good to go.

 

If the owner wants to throw money at promotion, they can. But it's their own personal money at risk, not the club's.

[CourteenerOwl]

Looks like O'Nein has left Sunderland.

 

Whilst not technically the greatest player he would be a good addition to add to the depth of the squad. Can play pretty much anywhere in defense and midfield.

[paulrs]

1 minute ago, CourteenerOwl said:

Looks like O'Nein has left Sunderland.

 

Whilst not technically the greatest player he would be a good addition to add to the depth of the squad. Can play pretty much anywhere in defense and midfield.

Plus he’d be a great addition to the vegetable XI

[WorrallOwl17]

Although it might seem a bit pessimistic and negative, the Vaulks rumours were way too ambitious weren't they? We need to realise what league we're in, and even though we're a bigger club than a lot of teams in the championship, we just don't have that pull at the moment. The championship is way more appealing and the money is way better, even at clubs like Huddersfield, Preston, Blackpool, Hull etc. Vaulks was never going to drop to League 1, and i can't see Dean/Flint/Hector doing that either. I do think we need to lower our expectations a little and it pains me to say it because of the clubs in the champ, but it's just way more appealing unfortunately even at the smaller clubs up there

[CourteenerOwl]

On 10/06/2022 at 13:35, WalthamOwl said:

I may be getting confused in my old age but have you mentioned a few other deals in the past that have happened? 

Probably not me, as I have never posted we are after anyone mate, just something someone who supports Forest and works in the industry mentioned.

[sheffwed1]

2 minutes ago, CourteenerOwl said:

Looks like O'Nein has left Sunderland.

 

Whilst not technically the greatest player he would be a good addition to add to the depth of the squad. Can play pretty much anywhere in defense and midfield.

 He is w***.