You are currently browsing the football forums as a guest. Sign up now for free and benefit from totally ad-free browsing. Logged in members see no ads.

Financial Fair Play

Veggie Legs

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
3,337
Reaction score
1,590
Points
113
Location
Norwich
Supports
Ipswich
I've noticed a few times recently that discussions of FFP have cropped up in other threads, so I thought it might be good to have a separate thread just for this. People seem keen to point fingers at other clubs and suggest that there's no way they can pass FFP (Derby) or that they haven't been punished sufficiently for breaches (QPR).

On the subject of Derby (or any other big spending team), none of us know what their financial position is or how it might have changed compared to last season. Also, the FFP have been relaxed slightly this year and allow a bigger loss than previously. I don't really understand how people can claim that a team is breaking the rules when they don't have any other the knowledge required.

Does anyone know what's happening with QPR? The most recent news article I can find (here) says that they expect to be fined £8m, but I can't find anything to say that the decision has been finalised. It also doesn't mention a transfer embargo, which seems strange to me. To be honest, I find the whole situation a bit of a mystery, if anyone could enlighten me about what's happening and what might happen I'd be very grateful. (Facts and informed opinion rather than idle speculation, please.)
 

QPR_Matt

SpongeParr on Football Forum
Joined
Jun 22, 2015
Messages
1,398
Reaction score
262
Points
83
Location
Hampton
Supports
QPR
This was my reply to being told we should have a transfer embargo.

For a rule that got changed after just one year? We went up and spent money whilst in the top league as we wanted to survive. We got relegated and we still had people on high, long contracts. Yeah, we should not have offered out such stupid money and it has backfired on us (and a lot of QPR fans are unhappy with how we went about it, myself included) but when you get relegated, you cant just stop paying these people. We shipped out most of them when we got relegated and done what we can to lower what we were spending, but it isnt that easy.

Shaun Wright-Phillips is a prime example. We paid him around £4 million in wages alone in the year we got promoted yet he played about 2 games for us as we couldnt offload him.

My knowledge of the FFP is not the greatest, but it says a lot if the rules get changed so quickly.

I could be totally off with the above.

I believe we are going to be fined 8 million, but I think the Football League are worried about what the others team might do, especially those under embargoes.
 

HertsWolf

Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
3,557
Reaction score
2,131
Points
113
Location
Hampshire and Ethiopia
Supports
Wolves
This was my reply to being told we should have a transfer embargo.



I could be totally off with the above.

I believe we are going to be fined 8 million, but I think the Football League are worried about what the others team might do, especially those under embargoes.

I'm guessing that "the others" will play by the rules. Odd, that.

Still, you guys go and do whatever the fuck you like, because the rules might change next year. Apparently that's how rules work these days.
 

SF_

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
8,075
Reaction score
2,605
Points
113
Supports
Preston North End
Don't really give a shit how much other teams spend to be honest, Wigan spent about £3m on some unknown French striker last season, he was gash and they were relegated. Wolves also proved how possible it is be utterly wank despite having a massive wagebill the other year too.
 

HertsWolf

Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
3,557
Reaction score
2,131
Points
113
Location
Hampshire and Ethiopia
Supports
Wolves
Don't really give a shit how much other teams spend to be honest, Wigan spent about £3m on some unknown French striker last season, he was gash and they were relegated. Wolves also proved how possible it is be utterly wank despite having a massive wagebill the other year too.

Ah, you mean Andy 'Who The Fuck Are You' Delort who chose Wigan over Brentford and Wolves because "Wigan bring players on". There was something missing in the translation because it seems that in English it was "Wigan takes players down".

Wolves can be wank regardless of how much or how little we pay anyone. We have patented it. You're just borrowing the recipe from us.
 

QPR_Matt

SpongeParr on Football Forum
Joined
Jun 22, 2015
Messages
1,398
Reaction score
262
Points
83
Location
Hampton
Supports
QPR
I'm guessing that "the others" will play by the rules. Odd, that.

Still, you guys go and do whatever the fuck you like, because the rules might change next year. Apparently that's how rules work these days.

We got relegated with a massive wage bill. Hardly doing what the fuck we like, we are tried to offload everyone after we stupidly bought everyone who was good once, but not when we got.

Anyway, this seems to really anger you, but I am sure you would have failed FFP when you got relegated as well.
 

HertsWolf

Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
3,557
Reaction score
2,131
Points
113
Location
Hampshire and Ethiopia
Supports
Wolves
We got relegated with a massive wage bill. Hardly doing what the fuck we like, we are tried to offload everyone after we stupidly bought everyone who was good once, but not when we got.

Anyway, this seems to really anger you, but I am sure you would have failed FFP when you got relegated as well.

Doesn't really anger me at all.
We wouldn't have failed FFP the season we were relegated. The big complaint at the time was that we **didn't ** spend big on wages compared to others. We made a profit in the PL and typically break even over any longer period. Google it to check. There was a period when Wolves were concerned that the club would fall foul of the L1 SCMP rules but we actually remained compliant.
 

Munkiki

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2015
Messages
1,700
Reaction score
703
Points
113
Location
Norwich
Supports
Norwich City
We got relegated with a massive wage bill. Hardly doing what the fuck we like, we are tried to offload everyone after we stupidly bought everyone who was good once, but not when we got.

Anyway, this seems to really anger you, but I am sure you would have failed FFP when you got relegated as well.

Probably but only because not everyone is able to just write off £60m to fiddle the numbers.

QPR 2013 vs Wolves 2012 (relegation seasons)
Turnover: £60.6m - £60.6m
Wages: £78m - £38m
Wages to turnover: 129% - 63%
Profit/loss: £65.3m loss - £2.2m profit
Net debt: £177.1m - none

QPR 2014 vs Wolves 2013 (Championship season)
Turnover: £38.7m - £32.1m
Wages: £75.4m - £31.1m
Wages to turnover: 195% - 97%
Loss: £9.5m (~£69.5m before cheating FFP) - £33.1m
Net debt: £179.6m - £36m

Some quite big differences there...

It'll be interesting to see the next lot of accounts to see if you were more sensible with your Premier League riches at the second attempt and if you've learnt from your mistakes. Presumably you'll have done something about that ridiculous wage bill? That season you were in the Championship (2013/14) only United, City, Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool, Spurs and Newcastle were paying out more!
 

QPR_Matt

SpongeParr on Football Forum
Joined
Jun 22, 2015
Messages
1,398
Reaction score
262
Points
83
Location
Hampton
Supports
QPR
Do not get me wrong, our spending was pathetic and laughable. Fernandes and Hughes were like kids in a sweet shop just picking players by name. no research into them. Bosingwa, SWP, Cesar etc just laughing at us weekly to the bank to cash in their cheques for 80 odd k. Absolute joke.

No wonder we couldnt get rid of them for free in the promotion season. We had to pay off Cesar, Bos, Park, Cisse. No one would take SWP, Barton, Green. We had to loan out everyone and still pay a lot of their wages. We did not go out and spend millions on a new team. We 'only' bought in Austin and Phillips. The rest were all freebies on mediocre wages, or pay as you play like Dunne.

We deserve a fine, purely for being dicks and buying past it players thinking they would get us into Europe (which is why none of them had relegation clauses).

The team this year though, does have relegation clauses and our accounts will look a lot better, without having to write off money.
 

Rammy

Lost Enthusiast
Joined
Aug 15, 2014
Messages
5,972
Reaction score
1,438
Points
113
Supports
Derby
Twitter
@James_DCFC
Forest and Fulham under an embargo for the rest of the season. Forest thought they were about to come out of it, I believe.

Bournemouth have been fined for also breaking the fair play rules.
 

HertsWolf

Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
3,557
Reaction score
2,131
Points
113
Location
Hampshire and Ethiopia
Supports
Wolves
Forest and Fulham under an embargo for the rest of the season. Forest thought they were about to come out of it, I believe.

Bournemouth have been fined for also breaking the fair play rules.

Rules out Fulham signing the rest of our defence in January "for footballing reasons", anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JJH

Rammy

Lost Enthusiast
Joined
Aug 15, 2014
Messages
5,972
Reaction score
1,438
Points
113
Supports
Derby
Twitter
@James_DCFC
Bolton also under an embargo, as they didn't submit their documents. Will remain so, until they do.
 

MagpieBee

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2015
Messages
3,130
Reaction score
639
Points
113
Supports
Brentford, Newcastle, Chicago Bears
We apparently sailed through, not surprising given the £12m in transfer fees received + £3m in add ons to come from the summer.

Hoping we bring in a big signing in January (some rumblings about returning for Haller for £4.5m) but otherwise just try to keep everyone.

Wonder if Bournemouth will pay their fine, and when they will do so... seems QPR still haven't paid theirs, or the Football League has kept very quiet at the palty sum the will have managed to get from them.
 

AFCB_Mark

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2014
Messages
3,514
Reaction score
1,063
Points
113
Supports
A single unitary authority for urban Dorset
Disappointed with the news because the club worked very hard in our first season to be (skin of the teeth) compliant within our turnover. To get it wrong by a good few million in the second season is either very lax management, or a cynical decision. Unsure which at this stage. And unfortunately I doubt our glorious leader of a chairman will ever give us any more detail about it.

We will be fined around £3m (tbc) as a result. TBC because negotiations are ongoing as we apparently make whatever mitigating case we may have to the FL. So we aren't quite talking QPR levels of breakage or fine, but did they even pay that in the end?

If and when we pay £3m (or whatever it ends up as), does anyone know what happens to it? Is it charity? Or a grant fund of some sort? Or does it just pay for the Football League suits' Christmas party?
 
  • Like
Reactions: JJH

MagpieBee

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2015
Messages
3,130
Reaction score
639
Points
113
Supports
Brentford, Newcastle, Chicago Bears
Disappointed with the news because the club worked very hard in our first season to be (skin of the teeth) compliant within our turnover. To get it wrong by a good few million in the second season is either very lax management, or a cynical decision. Unsure which at this stage. And unfortunately I doubt our glorious leader of a chairman will ever give us any more detail about it.

We will be fined around £3m (tbc) as a result. TBC because negotiations are ongoing as we apparently make whatever mitigating case we may have to the FL. So we aren't quite talking QPR levels of breakage or fine, but did they even pay that in the end?
I'm guessing if you didn't go up you would have sold someone to make up the shortfall, probably Ritchie or someone like that. We would have been very close to failing this year apparently, we would have passed but only just, but we sold Gray and that allowed us to sail through.
 

Rammy

Lost Enthusiast
Joined
Aug 15, 2014
Messages
5,972
Reaction score
1,438
Points
113
Supports
Derby
Twitter
@James_DCFC
Disappointed with the news because the club worked very hard in our first season to be (skin of the teeth) compliant within our turnover. To get it wrong by a good few million in the second season is either very lax management, or a cynical decision. Unsure which at this stage. And unfortunately I doubt our glorious leader of a chairman will ever give us any more detail about it.

We will be fined around £3m (tbc) as a result. TBC because negotiations are ongoing as we apparently make whatever mitigating case we may have to the FL. So we aren't quite talking QPR levels of breakage or fine, but did they even pay that in the end?

If and when we pay £3m (or whatever it ends up as), does anyone know what happens to it? Is it charity? Or a grant fund of some sort? Or does it just pay for the Football League suits' Christmas party?

QPR are still challenging it through the courts, I believe.
 

MagpieBee

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2015
Messages
3,130
Reaction score
639
Points
113
Supports
Brentford, Newcastle, Chicago Bears
QPR are still challenging it through the courts, I believe.
The fact that in their press release the FL reiterate the same sanctions that they gave down to QPR would suggest they've not weakened their stance yet... really hope they get their ridiculous fine

Sanctions for promoted clubs:

Any club exceeding the maximum permitted deviation that wins promotion to the Premier League will receive a fine equivalent to:

- 1% of the excess amount between £1 and £100,000
- 20% of the excess amount between £100,001 and £500,000
- 40% of the excess amount between £500,001 and £1,000,000
- 60% of the excess amount between £1,000,001 and £5,000,000
- 80% of the excess amount between £5,000,001 and £10,000,000
- 100% of any excess over £10,000,000

Read more at http://www.football-league.co.uk/ne...al-fair-play-2867176.aspx#GXOpxc2DqPKuFVaE.99
 

MagpieBee

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2015
Messages
3,130
Reaction score
639
Points
113
Supports
Brentford, Newcastle, Chicago Bears
Disappointed with the news because the club worked very hard in our first season to be (skin of the teeth) compliant within our turnover. To get it wrong by a good few million in the second season is either very lax management, or a cynical decision. Unsure which at this stage. And unfortunately I doubt our glorious leader of a chairman will ever give us any more detail about it.

We will be fined around £3m (tbc) as a result. TBC because negotiations are ongoing as we apparently make whatever mitigating case we may have to the FL. So we aren't quite talking QPR levels of breakage or fine, but did they even pay that in the end?

If and when we pay £3m (or whatever it ends up as), does anyone know what happens to it? Is it charity? Or a grant fund of some sort? Or does it just pay for the Football League suits' Christmas party?

If it is a £3m fine, then following the "fine structure" outlined above, you would have had to be £5.4m over the limit of £6m, so carrying a loss of £11.4m last year.
 

AFCB_Mark

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2014
Messages
3,514
Reaction score
1,063
Points
113
Supports
A single unitary authority for urban Dorset
Yes that tallies up with what I roughly understand MrBee.
 

Tom_ITFC

Active Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2015
Messages
968
Reaction score
170
Points
43
Supports
Ipswich
If it is a £3m fine, then following the "fine structure" outlined above, you would have had to be £5.4m over the limit of £6m, so carrying a loss of £11.4m last year.

I'd say that's more of a show of two fingers to the rules than lax management :bl:
 

Madejski

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2015
Messages
1,963
Reaction score
349
Points
83
Location
Leicester
Supports
Reading
Hardly surprising with Bournemouth, their debts went up about £30m+ in three seasons (admittedly most of that time was in L1 with different FFP rulings) so there was big money being spent there and this was going to happen.

Shame they break FFP but will make tens of millions more back now, makes the rules pointless. That's at least two clubs who have done it in three seasons of FFP.
 

KevinMcallister

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2015
Messages
2,841
Reaction score
884
Points
113
Location
Leeds
Supports
Bielsa's bucket
so the 1st season Cellino is full in charge we sail through FFP?

GFH were a complete joke!!! but passed Fit and Proper with ease :D
 

M Dogg

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2014
Messages
977
Reaction score
317
Points
63
Supports
Nottingham Forest
It's a complete joke. We will come out in the summer
 

hodge

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
4,574
Reaction score
1,289
Points
113
Location
Somerset
Supports
Bristol City
Bolton could be well and truely doomed then if all they can do is loans and free transfers. Not sure how we will fair for the next one if we're still around though.
 

AFCB_Mark

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2014
Messages
3,514
Reaction score
1,063
Points
113
Supports
A single unitary authority for urban Dorset
The Liebherr funded rise of Saints back up the leagues, with training ground et all, budgets far larger than any rival, was also a wonderful miracle.

:)
 

KevinMcallister

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2015
Messages
2,841
Reaction score
884
Points
113
Location
Leeds
Supports
Bielsa's bucket
hang on wasn't all the Bournemouth fans telling us Eddie Howe was working within the budget?
 

AFCB_Mark

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2014
Messages
3,514
Reaction score
1,063
Points
113
Supports
A single unitary authority for urban Dorset
hang on wasn't all the Bournemouth fans telling us Eddie Howe was working within the budget?

All information up until this, I.e. the last companies house accounts earlier this year and the FFP football league scrutiny late last year, had us within rules and budgets. Losing plenty of money yes most certainly, but "acceptable" amounts. Likewise the few soundbites we're told from the chairman.

Far as i can work out, at some point in the last 9-12 months it seems either a calculated decision was made to push the boat out and risk breaking rules, or someone screwed up the maths and forgot to carry a 1 or something. The former seems more likely than thr latter, but I would never underestimate AFCB off field incompetence.

That should be caveated by the fact that the club is in talks with the FL to explain themselves somehow and appeal, the decision at this stage isn't final.
 

MagpieBee

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2015
Messages
3,130
Reaction score
639
Points
113
Supports
Brentford, Newcastle, Chicago Bears
All information up until this, I.e. the last companies house accounts earlier this year and the FFP football league scrutiny late last year, had us within rules and budgets. Losing plenty of money yes most certainly, but "acceptable" amounts. Likewise the few soundbites we're told from the chairman.

Far as i can work out, at some point in the last 9-12 months it seems either a calculated decision was made to push the boat out and risk breaking rules, or someone screwed up the maths and forgot to carry a 1 or something. The former seems more likely than thr latter, but I would never underestimate AFCB off field incompetence.

That should be caveated by the fact that the club is in talks with the FL to explain themselves somehow and appeal, the decision at this stage isn't final.
Just goes to show that most of what we are told by chairmen is probably bollocks, and we shouldn't believe it.

You guys were swearing until the end of the season that you had done it all by the book, no way you make a £5m miscalculation or even a quick change in strategy that loses you that much. Had to come from the beginning of the season, which means almost all you were told wasn't true. Sure it happens to a lot of us.
 

Luke_1884

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,155
Reaction score
645
Points
113
Location
Doncaster
Supports
Derby County
Twitter
@Barraclive
We've released our figures today, scarily safe.

Derby County have today announced their financial results for the 2014/15 season, reporting a record turnover with the club maintaining its position as one of the best supported teams in the country.

Underpinning the best-ever Championship turnover (in non-parachute payment years) of £21.5m was another record year of ticketing and commercial revenues, up by 29% and 20% respectively.

The financial year July 1 2014 to June 30 2015 saw Derby County have the highest season ticket holders of any club in the Football League and the highest average attendance for any team across the competition.

The Rams reported a loss of £10.1m for the year, compared to £7m in the previous year. This is attributed to a number of factors including a £2m reduction in TV revenue (prior year figures included broadcast fees for the playoffs and playoff final), a £5.4m increase in wages to £21.8m, a net player trading expenditure of £3.8m in the year and substantial investment in the Academy.

Academy and training facility expenditure rose to £7.5m during the year. £4.1m was spent on training facility development which included a new gym, swimming pool/hydrotherapy area, full size and five-a-side floodlit all-weather artificial pitches and a floodlit grass pitch with under soil heating which is a replica of iPro Stadium.

During the year, the company settled the £15m secured mortgage element of the loan from Co-operative Bank Plc, who released its security of a fixed and floating charge over the company’s undertaking and assets. The settlement of the secured mortgage loan was funded by investment from shareholders. The non-interest bearing unsecured loan of £3m from the bank remains in place.

This financial year was the third in which the Football League Financial Fair Play regulations were in force. The loss for FFP purposes was £5.6m and the financial results were approved by the league in December.

President and Chief Executive Officer Sam Rush said: “The 2014/15 season was an important year for the club. A strong first half of the season was not matched by the second part of the campaign. We were disappointed with the failure of the team to make the play-offs but continue to make significant progress across all other sectors.

“Our supporters continue to back the team in incredible numbers and we are highly competitive against other Championship clubs and also many in the Premier League. Our commercial operations consistently thrive and are market leading in the Football League.

“The club remains in good health for season 2015/16 and is firmly focused on pushing for promotion in the last eight games of the league campaign.”

Obviously next year will be a different kettle of fish again but as a club we've got to be pleased with this. Securing players on high wage long term contracts, bringing in the likes of Bent (40k), Ince (25k) along with others like Lingaard, Albentosa etc and still sailing through.

10.1 million loss of which 5.4 million falls within FFP. A record breaking 21.5 million turn over, with ticketing and commercial revenues both rising.

A decent example of where we're at that I found on our forum, compared against our local rivals who are pissed we're not under embargo too and constantly call out for it...

Forest turned over £17.4m, lost £21.5m, spent £26m on wages and were £82m in debt, and rent their stadium

Derby turned over £21.5m, lost £10.1m, spent £21.8m on wages and were £3m in debt, and own our stadium outright
 

Forum statistics

Threads
15,584
Messages
1,015,551
Members
5,994
Latest member
IRFAN NUGRAHA
Top