The College Dropout Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said: All of these reporters have been talking about June 30th as a deadline, now he's saying 'well they can declare a near miss deal', which there isn't any provision for in the rules (although I don't lnow if it the income could be put into the previous year in accounting terms?) Seem like he's setting it up so if sales don't happen by Sunday he's not shown to be wrong. True. We don't know what will happen. But if Teams make sales in early July to become compliant, will they still be hit with points deductions? Forest played Johnson 3 times when they sold him and it was months after the deadline passed which I think is a big difference. Who knows. If we need to sell. We are cutting it fine. Everything about FFP has seemed arbitrary. Clubs are shuffling because now we know points deductions will follow. Edited June 28 by The College Dropout Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Broon Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 2 minutes ago, Colos Short and Curlies said: I think he's saying the PL will make it up as they go along They will, but that definitely wouldn't involve giving us any leeway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Broon Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 5 minutes ago, The College Dropout said: True. We don't know what will happen. But if Teams make sales in early July to become compliant, will they still be hit with points deductions? Forest played Johnson 3 times when they sold him and it was months after the deadline passed which I think is a big difference. Who knows. If we need to sell. We are cutting it fine. Everything about FFP has seemed arbitrary. Clubs are shuffling because now we know points deductions will follow. And we won't actually know anything until at least March, which is when this year's accounts are submitted to the PL. Any punishment probably wont come until 25/26. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
timeEd32 Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 If we’ve left it this late then it’s gross mismanagement unless our intent is to start challenging the rules (which we’ve shown no interest in doing directly). Given that we’ve displayed no sign of being mismanaged thus far then I can only assume we have no problem. It’s not hard to fathom that our revenue is higher than most are projecting. You can comfortably estimate around £330m. Not insane to think it’s actually £340-350. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keegans Export Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 17 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said: And we won't actually know anything until at least March, which is when this year's accounts are submitted to the PL. Any punishment probably wont come until 25/26. Didn't they change that this season to make sure any punishment was dished out the season after the breach? That's why Everton ended up with two deductions in one season. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Upthemags Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 Begs the question - why weren't these deals in the pipeline sooner than 48 hours before breach? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 1 minute ago, Upthemags said: Begs the question - why weren't these deals in the pipeline sooner than 48 hours before breach? Probably wanted them to count towards next year not this. This is probably pur safety net....Oz and a couple of small sponsor deals. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 I still think it was only £6m, and we've covered that now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe1984 Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 4 minutes ago, Upthemags said: Begs the question - why weren't these deals in the pipeline sooner than 48 hours before breach? Because its the Newcastle way isn't it? Last minute drama and heartbreak usually! 😅 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 Do we know anything about our actual situation and how much we might need to raise by when? It not then….. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe1984 Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 Just now, AyeDubbleYoo said: Do we know anything about our actual situation and how much we might need to raise by when? It not then….. No we don't. But plenty of 'experts' do... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Broon Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 21 minutes ago, Keegans Export said: Didn't they change that this season to make sure any punishment was dished out the season after the breach? That's why Everton ended up with two deductions in one season. 25/26 would be the next season, the PSR caculation isn't submitted until 31st March. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eveready Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 Hopefully we're looking at doing all the smartarse shit we can. Not sure if there's any precedent, but we could try argue Tonali's fee shouldn't be amortised whilst he's under a ban as he's not a useable asset, which could save us close to £10m this year. Also, when selling, as cash isn't an issue, could we sell the player but have the entire payment due after 5 years? Assuming 3% inflation - a £40m sale at the start of year 1, which could be banked as profit, would only be an equivalent £34.5m payment by the end of year 5 after adjusting for inflation. Helps us on FFP and also helps the buying club with cash. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keegans Export Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 (edited) 28 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said: 25/26 would be the next season, the PSR caculation isn't submitted until 31st March. I believe Everton's second points deduction (2pts) was relating to the period ending June 2023 (22/23 season) and was applied in the 23/24 season. That would suggest that if we were over the limit this season (23/24), it'd be applied in the coming season (24/25) Edit - This is the article I'm using as a source Quote Everton have been deducted two points for a second breach of Premier League financial rules. Profit and sustainability rules (PSR) permit clubs to lose £105m over three years and an independent commission found Everton breached that by £16.6m for the three-year period to 2022-23. Edited June 28 by Keegans Export Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 £16m for 2pts seems a good deal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUPERTOON Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 57 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said: Do we know anything about our actual situation and how much we might need to raise by when? It not then….. The most recent from today was from Ben Jacobs, 30 million by Sunday. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUPERTOON Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 1 hour ago, Dokko said: I still think it was only £6m, and we've covered that now. Don’t think we would be trying to sell Minteh this soon if that was the case. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 Just now, SUPERTOON said: Don’t think we would be trying to sell Minteh this soon if that was the case. In installments. So does add up when you think of the fee we paid, any sell to his old club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaztoon Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 Feck um.. take the points then take them to task.. Time clubs with ambition and the owners to fulfil that ambition fight back. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
midds Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 Comes back to the exploitation of the loopholes to the maximum imo. If Chelsea can get away with (legally) selling themselves a hotel for £80m to dodge a breach of PSR then why can't we (legally) sign 50 1-year sponsorship deals for all manner of shite for £999,999 each? Each one is below a million so exempt from PL validation and there's nothing that I'm aware of that could be done to block it. They'd probably have to look at the rules again to stop others doing it but the first club to do it should get away with it. This is a completely rigged situation, this is not normal for clubs to be flat-out prevented from investing it's own cash. I was all for playing nice and doing things the 'right' way but that's not working. Fuck it. Take the piss. The more ridiculous the better. Sponsor fucking everything that's not nailed down Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 1 hour ago, timeEd32 said: If we’ve left it this late then it’s gross mismanagement unless our intent is to start challenging the rules (which we’ve shown no interest in doing directly). Given that we’ve displayed no sign of being mismanaged thus far then I can only assume we have no problem. It’s not hard to fathom that our revenue is higher than most are projecting. You can comfortably estimate around £330m. Not insane to think it’s actually £340-350. Why do you think our top youngster is linked to so many clubs? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUPERTOON Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 2 minutes ago, midds said: Comes back to the exploitation of the loopholes to the maximum imo. If Chelsea can get away with (legally) selling themselves a hotel for £80m to dodge a breach of PSR then why can't we (legally) sign 50 1-year sponsorship deals for all manner of shite for £999,999 each? Each one is below a million so exempt from PL validation and there's nothing that I'm aware of that could be done to block it. They'd probably have to look at the rules again to stop others doing it but the first club to do it should get away with it. This is a completely rigged situation, this is not normal for clubs to be flat-out prevented from investing it's own cash. I was all for playing nice and doing things the 'right' way but that's not working. Fuck it. Take the piss. The more ridiculous the better. Sponsor fucking everything that's not nailed down Or just sponsor the obvious, training kit/ground. Quite frustrating we haven’t done that already. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terraloon Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 2 hours ago, Colos Short and Curlies said: So in a discussion on when a transfer becomes final you've brought in a piece of text that relates to a different matter altogether. What a player agrees for the end of their contract is irrelevant here, a transfer will be completed once all obligations are completed including passing a medical. It is at that point all of the conditions have been met and transfer of the players registration takes place. Here’s how this all started 6 hours ago, Colos Short and Curlies said: But thats not a legally binding sale until the medical concludes terraloon said: Interesting enough it’s one of the reasons why pre contracts aren’t all they seem in that if a pre contract is agreed then even if there is a subsequent medical issue that issue can not usurp the pre contract. Also there actually isn’t any obligation for a buying club to have the player conduct a medical it is just that it makes good business sense to do one I can’t be arsed to discuss this topic further save saying that yes most registrations are concluded at the same time as a transfer but many transfers don’t result in players being registered with their parent club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DahnSahf Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 2 minutes ago, midds said: I was all for playing nice and doing things the 'right' way but that's not working. Fuck it. Take the piss. The more ridiculous the better. Sponsor fucking everything that's not nailed down Agreed, but why can't it be nailed down? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Duper Branko Strupar Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 1 hour ago, AyeDubbleYoo said: Do we know anything about our actual situation and how much we might need to raise by when? It not then….. You already know the answer to that question. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now