| Ffp 06:59 - Aug 23 with 2514 views | Stu_boy |
Delighted with clarke coming in, think he'll be a very good signing, one thing which has crossed my mind though is having spent in circa 100 mil and yet another cb to come in approx 10 mil again, how do we get round ffp?
I know it's that you can't lose a certain amount over a rolling 3 year period but in a year or 2 will we then find ourselves having to sell to balance the books? Next summer I believe we've already committed to a spend of circa £40 mil if we stay up from the cajuste and broja deals so would they be the only real signings so help bring down the average costs between this summer and next? Could someone who understands ffp explain how we'll get round ffp or would we at some point potentially face a 4 pt penalty like forest did |  | | |  |
| Ffp on 07:05 - Aug 23 with 2440 views | BlueOura |
I don't know but Ashton does and I have full faith in him to ensure we comply with FFP. |  | | |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 07:06 - Aug 23 with 2442 views | smithy69 |
The purchases are spread over the longevity of their contract, so a £100m window - with everyone on 5 year contracts - is only 20m a year for PSR . Obvs there are wages etc on top
I think the club will use the land around the ground cleverly for accounting reasons ala Chelsea [Post edited 23 Aug 2024 7:09]
| | | |
| Ffp on 07:14 - Aug 23 with 2336 views | JakeITFC |
Think we’ll be fine as long as we stay up (as we will receive another £100m+ of revenue and an extra £26m of allowable loss on our rolling 3-year window), but think we’d be in a Leicester style predicament if we go down.
That said some of our transfer business is obviously back-loaded with the obligations if we stay up, and you’d have to think we’d have a strong asset base to be able to sell players if we needed to. I’d also be fairly sure that the rules are going to change around this fairly shortly so maybe they are banking on that too. |  | | |
| Ffp on 07:25 - Aug 23 with 2255 views | Guthrum |
So long as we get promoted again, we'll be fine. |  |
| |
| Ffp on 07:51 - Aug 23 with 2087 views | Ftnfwest |
If chelsea can spread transfer fees over contracts can't we (on a smaller scale of course)? |  | | |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 08:23 - Aug 23 with 1945 views | Basuco |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 07:06 - Aug 23 by smithy69 |
The purchases are spread over the longevity of their contract, so a £100m window - with everyone on 5 year contracts - is only 20m a year for PSR . Obvs there are wages etc on top
I think the club will use the land around the ground cleverly for accounting reasons ala Chelsea [Post edited 23 Aug 2024 7:09]
|
And amortisation on top of that, so again takes a good lump off PSR, two players signed on loan but with set buy fees locked in if we stay up helps spread cost's over future season's as well. |  | | |
| Ffp on 08:45 - Aug 23 with 1874 views | Lion |
You don't have to worry about it Stu_boy, that's what the board are for. Trust in the board, trust in Kieran, trust in MA and enjoy it | |
| |
| Ffp on 09:07 - Aug 23 with 1790 views | BloomBlue |
They spread the cost across the years of the contract, plus in 2 cases if the worst happens and we're relegated that £40m (or whatever it is) isn't going to be spent.
The strange thing we could be in a worse position if we stayed for a couple of years and then relegated. Leeds being a perfect example, where they spread the costs and then after relegation and loss of income, even with parachute payment, those yearly transfer payments hit them hard.
But on the flip if we're still in the Prem in 2-3 years (and I think we will) the Yanks will sell out to even richer owners |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Ffp on 09:15 - Aug 23 with 1726 views | JammyDodgerrr |
Loads of threads on this the past few days and lots of excellent posts in them about why we probably won't be close. Go read those ones! |  |
| |
| Ffp on 09:19 - Aug 23 with 1693 views | pointofblue |
| Ffp on 08:45 - Aug 23 by Lion |
You don't have to worry about it Stu_boy, that's what the board are for. Trust in the board, trust in Kieran, trust in MA and enjoy it |
In fairness, I’m sure fans of Everton, Forest and Leicester said the same to start with. And if Manchester City do get found guilty of the 115 charges (stop sniggering at the back)…
But I imagine, as said, we’ll be using the same methods as Chelsea to spread out the fees. I’m also not sure how being in three divisions across three years affects the budget as the Premier League, Championship and League One all have different financial rules in place. | |
| |
| Ffp on 09:26 - Aug 23 with 1643 views | Lion |
| Ffp on 09:19 - Aug 23 by pointofblue |
In fairness, I’m sure fans of Everton, Forest and Leicester said the same to start with. And if Manchester City do get found guilty of the 115 charges (stop sniggering at the back)…
But I imagine, as said, we’ll be using the same methods as Chelsea to spread out the fees. I’m also not sure how being in three divisions across three years affects the budget as the Premier League, Championship and League One all have different financial rules in place. |
 Don't worry, have the board not earned your trust? Just enjoy it | |
| |
| Ffp on 13:48 - Aug 23 with 1469 views | portmanking |
| Ffp on 07:14 - Aug 23 by JakeITFC |
Think we’ll be fine as long as we stay up (as we will receive another £100m+ of revenue and an extra £26m of allowable loss on our rolling 3-year window), but think we’d be in a Leicester style predicament if we go down.
That said some of our transfer business is obviously back-loaded with the obligations if we stay up, and you’d have to think we’d have a strong asset base to be able to sell players if we needed to. I’d also be fairly sure that the rules are going to change around this fairly shortly so maybe they are banking on that too. |
I don't see us being in a Leicester predicament whatsoever:
£110m TV money
£35-£40m commercial revenue
£10m matchday revenue
TOTAL: £155m minimum
£100m transfer fees
£80m wages
TOTAL: £180m (£25m loss)
That's more than acceptable PSR-wise. | | | |
| Ffp on 14:07 - Aug 23 with 1400 views | MK1 |
According to Chelsea, you can sign as many for as much as you like. |  |
| |
| Ffp on 15:31 - Aug 23 with 1250 views | ITFCMonk |
I could be wrong but I think in the case of Forest they had something like 45 or so players on their books or transferred in at one point? As with Everton, it seemed obvious they had been overspending for a number of years when you look at some of the fees or wages they were paying.
I wonder how many of our deals will be paid up front as well. Looks like in Szmodics case at least that one will be instalments. So maybe we might just be in the clear further down the line. [Post edited 23 Aug 2024 15:33]
|  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
