PIF and RB Sports & Media

[WilliamPS]

2 hours ago, Isaksbigrightfoot said:

This explains why we are not spending and probably won’t unless we sell.

 

It is highly likely we sell Bruno you know. The income would hit FFP instantly swinging it 100m and allow us to buy two or three players.

 

Would you want that all?

At the start of next season the first -73 rolls off, so the club can spend again 

[nufcnick]

13 minutes ago, WilliamPS said:

At the start of next season the first -73 rolls off, so the club can spend again 

No it doesn’t 

[TheBrownBottle]

26 minutes ago, nufcnick said:

No it doesn’t 

It does - it’s for 21/22.  Next season it is 22/23, 23/24, 24/25 which counts for FFP

[nufcnick]

12 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

It does - it’s for 21/22.  Next season it is 22/23, 23/24, 24/25 which counts for FFP

Are you sure about that, how can you produce accounts for 2025 when we’re in 2024 

[Colos Short and Curlies]

31 minutes ago, nufcnick said:

Are you sure about that, how can you produce accounts for 2025 when we’re in 2024 

 

Because what we spend from the 1st July 2024 goes into the accounts for the year to 30th June 2025 (i.e. 2024/2025) which is what next seasons totals include. Its a retrospective use of accounts in FFP

 

[timeEd32]

There's been a lot of confusion about accounting years so here goes:

• The accounts we just released are for 2022/23 (aka last season). It includes PL prize money for finishing 4th and anything we earned from going to the League Cup final. 
• Anything that has happened since July 1, 2023 will be in this season's 2023/24 accounts. These will close on June 30, 2024 so we don't know the full story, but this includes the sales of Maxi and Wood, the new Sela sponsorship, and Champions League revenue (estimated at £37m per a comment in the latest accounts). It does not include Adidas. I think our revenue will exceed £300m for the first time ever. These accounts will be published ~January 2025.
• The 2024/25 accounting period will begin on July 1 of this year, so Adidas will be included moving forward. We don't know anything else yet about this accounting year, though we can probably assume there will be no Champions League payments. Even without European participation I think our revenue will be ~£300m. These accounts will be published ~January 2026.

Rolling three year periods (numbers below are from the Swiss Ramble, which are educated estimates):

• 2020/21 (Covid blend) > 2021/22 > 2022/23: This period is closed and we have all of the numbers. We took things to the limit with a £13m profit in 2020/21 (thanks to Covid write-offs), £60m loss in 2021/22, and a £58m loss in 2022/23 (these numbers are after allowed deductions for infrastructure, academy, community, and women's football). That's a total loss of £105m.
• 2021/22 > 2022/23 > 2023/24: We are into the final six months of this period and we know the previous one only balanced out with a £13m profit which we're dropping, so presumably that is our current aim for 2023/24 as well. We know revenue will be up considerably due to UCL participation, Sela, and player sales. Whether that's enough without selling a player in June I don't know. We could also increase the allowable deductions if it's close. 
• 2022/23 > 2023/24 > 2024/25: Starting July 1 this will be the three year period that matters. It will include the £58m loss in 2022/23, but also (assuming we don't fall foul of FFP) a ~£13m profit in 2023/24. So we'll be able to book a loss of £60m again if we want to push it to the limit.
• 2023/24 > 2024/25 > 2025/26: We're 18 months from this starting, but this should be a fun time. We will drop the £58m loss in 2022/23, so should be another good spending year after hopefully a more successful 2024/25 season, and all previously neglected parts of the club kicking into gear.

---------

 

There are a lot of things to be frustrated about right now, but this window through June 30 is also the most we are likely to be impacted by the Premier League's financial restrictions in the next couple years (UEFA rules tbd). And that's even if the rules don't change at all, which is starting to seem unlikely. I expect the next three windows - Summer 2024, January 2025, and Summer 2025 - to be far more eventful (and yes, it will include outgoings).

 

 

Edited January 16 by timeEd32

[Keegans Export]

10 minutes ago, Colos Short and Curlies said:

 

Because what we spend from the 1st July 2024 goes into the accounts for the year to 30th June 2025 (i.e. 2024/2025) which is what next seasons totals include. Its a retrospective use of accounts in FFP

 

This is correct. 

 

The most recent period (the one Everton and Forest are in bother over) is 20/21 21/22 and 22/23.

 

The next period is 21/22, 22/23 and 23/24 and the one including next season will be 22/23, 23/24 and 24/25 so all that spending we did in 21/22 will no longer go into the FFP calculation. 

 

The hope is that we'll have made enough money this year from CL, Sela deal and the Wood & ASM sales to keep us out of bother, then once 1st July 2024 rolls round that big loss in 21/22 is no longer in the figures.

[duo]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-12970945/OLIVER-HOLT-Premier-League-Richard-Masters-Man-City-case-doubt-champions.html

 

How is this man in the job he comes across as totally incompetent? ....Oh wait...

[Yorkie]

Appreciate your summaries, @timeEd32 

[The Bonk]

4 hours ago, timeEd32 said:

There's been a lot of confusion about accounting years so here goes:

• The accounts we just released are for 2022/23 (aka last season). It includes PL prize money for finishing 4th and anything we earned from going to the League Cup final. 
• Anything that has happened since July 1, 2023 will be in this season's 2023/24 accounts. These will close on June 30, 2024 so we don't know the full story, but this includes the sales of Maxi and Wood, the new Sela sponsorship, and Champions League revenue (estimated at £37m per a comment in the latest accounts). It does not include Adidas. I think our revenue will exceed £300m for the first time ever. These accounts will be published ~January 2025.
• The 2024/25 accounting period will begin on July 1 of this year, so Adidas will be included moving forward. We don't know anything else yet about this accounting year, though we can probably assume there will be no Champions League payments. Even without European participation I think our revenue will be ~£300m. These accounts will be published ~January 2026.

Rolling three year periods (numbers below are from the Swiss Ramble, which are educated estimates):

• 2020/21 (Covid blend) > 2021/22 > 2022/23: This period is closed and we have all of the numbers. We took things to the limit with a £13m profit in 2020/21 (thanks to Covid write-offs), £60m loss in 2021/22, and a £58m loss in 2022/23 (these numbers are after allowed deductions for infrastructure, academy, community, and women's football). That's a total loss of £105m.
• 2021/22 > 2022/23 > 2023/24: We are into the final six months of this period and we know the previous one only balanced out with a £13m profit which we're dropping, so presumably that is our current aim for 2023/24 as well. We know revenue will be up considerably due to UCL participation, Sela, and player sales. Whether that's enough without selling a player in June I don't know. We could also increase the allowable deductions if it's close. 
• 2022/23 > 2023/24 > 2024/25: Starting July 1 this will be the three year period that matters. It will include the £58m loss in 2022/23, but also (assuming we don't fall foul of FFP) a ~£13m profit in 2023/24. So we'll be able to book a loss of £60m again if we want to push it to the limit.
• 2023/24 > 2024/25 > 2025/26: We're 18 months from this starting, but this should be a fun time. We will drop the £58m loss in 2022/23, so should be another good spending year after hopefully a more successful 2024/25 season, and all previously neglected parts of the club kicking into gear.

---------

 

There are a lot of things to be frustrated about right now, but this window through June 30 is also the most we are likely to be impacted by the Premier League's financial restrictions in the next couple years (UEFA rules tbd). And that's even if the rules don't change at all, which is starting to seem unlikely. I expect the next three windows - Summer 2024, January 2025, and Summer 2025 - to be far more eventful (and yes, it will include outgoings).

 

 

 

 

Thanks for posting this! 

[The Prophet]

 

[r0cafella]

10 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

 

Proper pulling the ladder stuff up this. We would be massively punished, Europa league qualification would be an absolute disaster. 

[Whitley mag]

11 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

 

Surely just means if you all of a sudden qualify for Europe you’ve got a problem straight away, and rather than invest you’ll be looking to reduce costs.

[r0cafella]

1 minute ago, Whitley mag said:

Surely just means if you all of a sudden qualify for Europe you’ve got a problem straight away, and rather than invest you’ll be looking to reduce costs.

Absolutely, the revenue brought up by those lower competitions brings in basically nothing. Also; the extra games means a larger squad is needed. 

[gbandit]

What the fuck is going on in football governance? Some extremely dodgy stuff happening 

[r0cafella]

Just now, gbandit said:

What the fuck is going on in football governance? Some extremely dodgy stuff happening 

Short answer, everyone is happy with the status quo apart from those who want to challenge. Those who want to challenge are the minority so they are rule takers. 

[Conjo]

12 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

Proper pulling the ladder stuff up this. We would be massively punished, Europa league qualification would be an absolute disaster. 

 

Isn't the 70% to be in line with UEFA requirements that will go into effect in 2 years?

[r0cafella]

2 minutes ago, Conjo said:

 

Isn't the 70% to be in line with UEFA requirements that will go into effect in 2 years?

Maybe but given Uefa give out fines as punishment they can be ignored. Last I checked psg are in the CL every year despite losing more money than god and cooking the books.

[FloydianMag]

12 minutes ago, gbandit said:

What the fuck is going on in football governance? Some extremely dodgy stuff happening 

I’ve said it many many times the only way to halt this shit is to legally challenge the rules. 

[Unbelievable]

1 hour ago, The Prophet said:

 

In isolation this would actually not be too bad, as long as they abolish stuff like the 3 year rolling loss limit and “fair” market value based on the perceived current size and reputation of the club rather than limiting it to not exceed the outright highest non-related party reference. In short, if owners can invest in their club a squad cost/wage cap, which in theory is the same for everybody as long as revenue is not capped, is the way to go.

[r0cafella]

1 minute ago, Unbelievable said:

In isolation this would actually not be too bad, as long as they abolish stuff like the 3 year rolling loss limit and “fair” market value based on the perceived current size and reputation of the club rather than limiting it to not exceed the outright highest non-related party reference. In short, if owners can invest in their club a squad cost/wage cap, which in theory is the same for everybody as long as revenue is not capped, is the way to go.

Yeah, I mean in the scenarios you mentioned it would be ok for us as we just juice our related party sponsors so we can catch up. If they continue with FMV and implement this we are in trouble. 

[Isaksbigrightfoot]

10 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

Yeah, I mean in the scenarios you mentioned it would be ok for us as we just juice our related party sponsors so we can catch up. If they continue with FMV and implement this we are in trouble. 

Fair market value is fine provided that past deals set the precedent for future ones.

 

And that is really all they should be allowed to do. If we get a stadium sponsor for 50m and it’s legit. Then it’s fair because Other teams have done it.

[Unbelievable]

2 minutes ago, Isaksbigrightfoot said:

Fair market value is fine provided that past deals set the precedent for future ones.

 

And that is really all they should be allowed to do. If we get a stadium sponsor for 50m and it’s legit. Then it’s fair because Other teams have done it.

Exactly. It can’t (continue to) be: you’re only allowed a stadium sponsor for 20m because your revenue is currently smaller than Manchester United’s, who have a 50m stadium sponsor. That’s a self-sustaining rule.

[r0cafella]

Just now, Unbelievable said:

Exactly. It can’t (continue to) be: you’re only allowed a stadium sponsor for 20m because your revenue is currently smaller than Manchester United’s, who have a 50m stadium sponsor. That’s a self-sustaining rule.

It’s a reinforcement of FFP.  Don’t you dare have ambition pleb, the established order isn’t to be disturbed. 

[nufcnick]

23 minutes ago, Unbelievable said:

In isolation this would actually not be too bad, as long as they abolish stuff like the 3 year rolling loss limit and “fair” market value based on the perceived current size and reputation of the club rather than limiting it to not exceed the outright highest non-related party reference. In short, if owners can invest in their club a squad cost/wage cap, which in theory is the same for everybody as long as revenue is not capped, is the way to go.

It’s bollocks mate and would be an utter disaster, and means no other club except the 6 greedy cunts at the top would try in the league or cup. It would be too much of a risk, going from 85% to %70 is a massive drop. take us for example our turnover is £250m with likely no Europe this season meaning we could spend £212m on wages and amortisation,  even if we grew our turnover to £300m(£50m increase on the season before) , qualifying for European competition the season after, would mean we would have to reduce our wages and amortisation by £2m to £210m.
It’s a farce and would totally close the shop to everyone except the 6 greedy cunts. 

 

 

Edited January 17 by nufcnick