Jump to content

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, terrytini said:

Before experiencing the joy of early retirement I spent my life as an Investigator.

I opened countless investigations where someone looked like they’d done something on the edge of permissible. In the end there’s a judgment as to whether it is, or isn’t permissible.

If it’s decided it’s permissible it’d be wholly inappropriate to then describe the person of having “ cheated”, “ got around the rules”, “ gamed the system”, or anything else.

So I’ve no issue with anyone asking “ look into this”......but I’ve no time for the idea that you can comply and be cheating at the same time.

That’s where I’m at, and I’d imagine and hope that’s where the businessmen are at.....

I think Terry the reference is to "creative Accountancy" which can be dubious, but sold as legitimate.

I will leave everyone to make their own mind up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

If FFP is meant to be protecting clubs how are Bolton in such a mess? Did they just breaking the rules?

FFP seems to only "work" if you break the rules over a long enough span of time. FFP cannot protect a club such as Bolton, or Villa for that matter if the owner lies and hides a lack of funds until the rug is pulled out from under the club in one go. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, OutByEaster? said:

I absolutely agree with what you're saying here. It's vitally important that we find a way to protect clubs who are in the position that Bolton are in, or that we ourselves were in during the summer - the problem is that the current rules both fail to allow that protection and at the same time prevent clubs being able to bridge the gap to promotion whilst keeping within the rules.

There are other, better methods for protection - debt measures for example, that would still allow for investment and still allow a club to run at a large loss if that loss were covered in other ways. it's worth noting that the Bolton problem, and ours both exist within FFP - those rules didn't prevent either problem.

As things stand, we're heading for a point where the championship will be three groups; those breaking the rules to try to get promoted, those starting the season with a points penalty for breaking the rules and those that are desperately struggling to survive - and on top of that, we're approaching a point where getting up and staying up is becoming harder and harder as the gap between Premier League money and Championship money grows - for me, those are rules that are manifestly not working in promoting a healthy and competitive EFL.

I'm not saying have no rules, I just think the current rules don't work and they need looking at again.

Whats wrong with each club having to lodge at least 6months wroth of money to cover running costs of club with EFL.  Cut out alot of this rubbish.  Give clubs 2-3 years to get up to this mark but if your club is working on a month to month bases regards finances you are already in serious trouble.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with the financial fair play rules IMO, is that they have always been a load of bollocks. By the very name alone, you expect it to be some sort of rules protecting those who are less financially fortunate, and possibly levelling the playing field to the super rich clubs. Instead in reality it's literally the opposite that's taking effect. They have (and this was probably been the intention all along) made the super rich clubs even richer and made sure breaking through from nowhere to be close to impossible. When you can spend money relative to what you make and you know the difference in earnings power between the leagues and European cups, then what the hell are they talking about. If I remember correctly PSG and City were fined (so having to much money, spending too much money, the solution they come up with is a fine - **** me), and they could only name a reduced European squad or something. Just a piss take. The PL FFP is even dumber. When they can cover up losses by investing in infrastructure and club development. Yeah that doesn't offer gray areas at all. 

Load of bollocks. Ideally all teams should just ignore the entire thing. 

Edited by KenjiOgiwara
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, blandy said:

Gibson's basically right, as far as I can work it out. He's been a good owner, and he's funded his club when he was allowed to and able to, and then he's complied with FFP rules once that became the priority/way of the world. He's been a well behaved, honourable owner.

WIth Villa, we've had a chancer took over who made a massive gamble and nearly bankrupted us, we just scraped inside last season's FFP rules. Since then we've seen a drop in income this season due to the last, smaller, parachute payment, we've seen a drop of 26 million in the allowable losses figure on top of that, and nothing like a reduction in costs of around 40 million which would be needed to meet FFP this season. Whether it's Steve Gibson, me (not a bena counter), various financial boffins - we're all wondering "How's Villa going to claim to meet FFP this season?" He's spot on. Where have we found 40 million plus in cost savings to comply?

I agree with the top paragraph. He has been a good example of how someone can run a club very well. Certainly he has been an awful lot better than owners that we have had before the present ones.

What I don't like now and I admit that I went a little over the top yesterday, is the way he seems to now be pointing the finger at us. He is giving the appearance of being someone who is prepared to act as a Witchfinder General, leading a mob with torches ablaze, seeking out other football clubs that he suspects may be in breach of FFP. Why not leave it to the EFL and just get on with running Boro?   

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didnt Gibson and Boro spout tripe when they went down on how much money they were going to spend and blow other teams out of the water?

Looks like they spent money but didnt get the desired results, and now are crying everyone else is cheating.

Every Team will look at how they can push the limit on FFP and get away with it.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every successful team in the Championship has to cheat, there is no money in this league unless you pump it in yourself or loan it.

Get over it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, KenjiOgiwara said:

The problem with the financial fair play rules IMO, is that they have always been a load of bollocks. By the very name alone, you expect it to be some sort of rules protecting those who are less financially fortunate, and possibly levelling the playing field to the super rich clubs. Instead in reality it's literally the opposite that's taking effect. They have (and this was probably been the intention all along) made the super rich clubs even richer and made sure breaking through from nowhere to be close to impossible. When you can spend money relative to what you make and you know the difference in earnings power between the leagues and European cups, then what the hell are they talking about. If I remember correctly PSG and City were fined (so having to much money, spending too much money, the solution they come up with is a fine - **** me), and they could only name a reduced European squad or something. Just a piss take. The PL FFP is even dumber. When they can cover up losses by investing in infrastructure and club development. Yeah that doesn't offer gray areas at all. 

Load of bollocks. Ideally all teams should just ignore the entire thing. 

It can't be ignored without consequences,its divide and conquer......all clubs have their owns issues, so subsequently their own agenda.

It appears the clubs at the top of the prem' are in the best position,as gate money now, is just incidental and TV money is the bread winner.....this puts clubs like ours at a disadvantage.....we have bigger gates than half the prem', so the imbalance in revenue has affected us more than most.You could have a club at the top with small gates in FFP clover,not sure the incentive to build a big fan base, is now so obvious,but TV companies want big crowds, so it seems a bit contradictory to me.

Our club, is obviously suffering from past administrations and I am not sure FFP was designed to be that punitive, but it is.We have wealthy owners and if they wanted to invest their own money in the club, that will be restricted by FFP, not sure it was designed for that either, unless such was the deal they could snatch it back, if things got tricky....maybe FFP would help protect against that,but FFP can also create a get out of jail card for any wealthy owner, who doesn't really want to spend any money on the club.

It kinda strikes me that if you are at the top table like Man city or Liverpool, you,re ok.....if you are a small club that has low overheads you are ok, If you are a club like ours with wealthy owners, great fan base and stadium, trying to put right bad times, you are fuched.

That of course is, if I have read the situation, right.

 

Edited by TRO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, John said:

Gibson really is a bitter little man. He was once hailed as one of the best football owner's around. He now comes over as someone who points the finger at other clubs simply because his own club are going down the pan. He's looking for a reason for that which is not too close to home to make it uncomfortable for him. He has not been shy to spend money in the past and has been forced to sell players following relegation as we were, but took a bit longer to do so. No doubt a few other smaller clubs will like the idea of having a pot at us as well. Sooner we get up the better.    

Gibson's just upset as Boro wasted the money the got for Adama on Paddy McNair whilst we spent our small chunk of it on McGinn!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Rds1983 said:

Gibson's just upset as Boro wasted the money the got for Adama on Paddy McNair whilst we spent our small chunk of it on McGinn!

I have said many times.....its all about making prudent signings....not necessarily expensive signings....some folk think expensive signings are automatically good, and they are not.

  • I think the CB's has transformed our team and cost us nothing in fee's.....that's prudent.
  • Expensive signings puts undue pressure on everyone attached to a club.

However, when you get to the stage of the top 6 of the Prem different views apply.

Edited by TRO
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FFP is too complicated for clever people not to work around, and too crude to actually protect clubs, except in extreme situations.

For example - youth development is not part of FFP as I understand it. I don't know the ins and outs, but does this mean for example that any player 23 and under is exempt? So Jack, Keinan, Green, Bree, McGinn (until October '18), Tshibola (until January '19)? Same with Tammy, Axel and Kortney? All the U23s and U18s obviously.
There is a lot of salary costs amongst that lot, and if we can exclude it, we're surely laughing.
I'm using 23 as that's the development squad age, and the Bosman age at which compensation for out of contract players still exists - and in law, these things tend to be consistent.

Could we claim Richards is an U23 coach? He does **** all else.

Personally, I think FFP is more focused on protecting the elite from new invaders (like Man City) than on saving clubs. If our owners want to gift us £100m, what's the problem? There would be no debt, no interest, etc. They would be doing it to try and grow their assets value. But FFP prevents it, which for my (limited) money shows its a sack of shit.

 

But the most surprising thing - McGinn was on 23 when we bought him? Tough paper round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The English Football League (EFL) are under increasing pressure to take a closer look at the financial conduct of its Championship clubs, Sky Sports News understands.

The development comes after Middlesbrough owner Steve Gibson called on the EFL to investigate Derby, Aston Villa and Sheffield Wednesday over possible breaches of financial regulations.

Sky Sports News has learnt that a majority of Championship clubs will next week demand increased transparency over the Profitability and Sustainability statements provided by clubs - and a change in league policy, allowing clubs to scrutinise each other's statements. At present, this information is unavailable to other clubs.

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11688/11697194/championship-clubs-demand-efl-policy-change-on-financial-transparency

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What has to be looked at is the monetary limits placed with this system, not the clubs themselves.

We all know that this limit is so far outdated its laughable but it's not only today's problem.

I'd hate to think just how far this league will fall behind the premiership in the next 5 years; It wont be worth trying to stay up soon as the gap will be too large to bridge in a single year.

How is this protecting clubs long term?

If the powers that be want to set a rule like this it must be realistic not to the clubs but to the market too. 

This mystical figure of 13m per year needs to be addressed yearly, that way you wont need to try and circumnavigate things.

Edited by Nigel
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just read that last season, the three teams that went up, Wolves, Fulham and Cardiff, lost £158m between them in the season they went up. FFP demands they lose no more than £117m between them - over three seasons. Wolves lost £50m+, Fulham lost £40m+ and Cardiff will have lost somewhere around £40m - Cardiff were still receiving parachute payments!

The current limits are bonkers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SSN reporting this meeting is taking place today thanks to Boro’s board. Ourselves, Sheff Weds and Derby are who Boro are targeting?! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The article on sky sports paints a more serious picture of today’s meeting, suggesting Purslow is lobbing to disregard a rule to force all clubs to openly publish Profitability/Sustainability figures.

lets face it, something doesn’t smell right about our position given how things panned out in the summer but all we can do is hope Purslow is right!

it would be annoying to be held back by half thought through rules and handful of bitter chairman who’ve just realised their investment was bad. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man I hate financial fair play. It really doesn’t work at all does it. How can we be umming and ahhing about spending £1.5m on Glenn Whelan whilst PSG spend £200m on Neymar???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't think we would have sanctioned a £7m purchase for a keeper if there was any danger of us falling foul of FFP. Seeing as Purslow helped write the rules, you'd think he would know what he was doing. 

Though, stranger things have happened. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â