Notts F & Everton admit to breaking rules and face points deduction

[CosbehFox]

https://josimarfootball.com/2024/01/15/endgame/
 

Everton and 777 is a time bomb 

[KingsX]

PL and EFL clubs are an absolute magnet for chancers.  Even in 2024, it's the wild west.

 

The independent regulator is years too late.  But better late than never!

[Chrysalis]

19 hours ago, Babylon said:

You think we got relegated because Rodgers wasn’t allowed to waste even more money?

I think it all contributed to the relegation.  It wasnt just lack of signings, we pretty much had a freeze on contract renewals as well.  Many people think we would have stayed up if Kasper stayed.

[Saxondale]

On 15/01/2024 at 02:33, gurru991 said:

It's all about balancing the books. Chelsea know what they are doing but Forest & Everton are just amateurs playing in a big boys world.

You think Todd Boehly knows what he’s doing? The man who proposed they play a 4-4-3 formation? 
 

[phoneticerror]

12 hours ago, jonny_wright said:

New tactic, spend frivolously on getting a quality side together, stay up and take the 10 point penalty…. It’s actually a better option than scrimping, getting relegated and doing it the hard way! 

Problem is, neither Everton nor Forest have a quality side 😂

[Saxondale]

13 hours ago, UniFox21 said:

 

 

 

The cheek of that fat Greek crook and his cronies. Where do you the draw the line? Two months? Two years? Two decades? Two billion?

 

They’ve also literally admitted that they benefitted to the tune of £12.5m by breaking the rules.
 

We’ll be having that back, thanks.

 

Back down to League 1 lads. You’ll love it; you can play Derby for the Brian Clough trophy again.

[Jon the Hat]

25 minutes ago, Saxondale said:

You think Todd Boehly knows what he’s doing? The man who proposed they play a 4-4-3 formation? 
 

They know how to balance the books with the help of their prolific youth system (mostly buying developing and selling) then using that to pay large transfer sums.  I guess it won't last forever.  Was year 1 of the 3 also the transfer embargo under Lampard?  Whether they can make a success of those players on the pitch is another matter.

[Saxondale]

3 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

They know how to balance the books with the help of their prolific youth system (mostly buying developing and selling) then using that to pay large transfer sums.  I guess it won't last forever.  Was year 1 of the 3 also the transfer embargo under Lampard?  Whether they can make a success of those players on the pitch is another matter.

Yeah, their academy makes some money, but not the sort of sums they need to splash the cash the way they have been doing.

 

This business with the eight year contracts and amortising the ‘assets’ over extended periods is a model that could only work if they’re building an all-conquering team and essentially not rebuilding the team for the next eight years. 
 

Football doesn’t work like that. They will be in big trouble at some point over the next few years.

[Pliskin]

it’s hardly a surprise to see Forest’s name up there. Their owner is a maniac and they were spending money like it was going out of fashion. They can’t punish Everton and then let Forest off, they breached and that is that, if anything it looks even worse, they had a chance to sell Johnson within the window, and chose not to, so they’ve only got themselves to blame. So absolutely punish them.

 

They cant not, how is it fair that we curb our spending, and end up going down, and they spend like someone on a come down from acid with the munchies in McDonalds and get away with it. 
 

Light the match and watch them burn!

 

 

[nnfox]

10 hours ago, when_you're_smiling said:

I’ve not seen any mention that Everton were one of the clubs that voted for FFP to be implemented in the first place.

 

They wanted the laws in but then don’t want them to apply to themselves.

That's because they knew that FFP wouldn't really be applied to the big clubs.  The only problem is that it turns out Everton aren't actually that big of a club in the grand scheme of things.

[Jon the Hat]

40 minutes ago, Saxondale said:

Yeah, their academy makes some money, but not the sort of sums they need to splash the cash the way they have been doing.

 

This business with the eight year contracts and amortising the ‘assets’ over extended periods is a model that could only work if they’re building an all-conquering team and essentially not rebuilding the team for the next eight years. 
 

Football doesn’t work like that. They will be in big trouble at some point over the next few years.

I don't think the funds are the issue per se, they seem to have deep pockets.  The issue is more getting the fund through the P&S / FFP rules.  If you buy a player for peanuts, develop and sell them, you get to bank nearly 100% of their fee as profit in the year.  Say you do that with 5-10 young players and generate $50M.  You can then spend $250M that year on players, because their value is amortized over 5 years.  If you happen to be willing to sell a home grown first team player for $50M as well you can spend $500M.  They have done exactly that.

 

Also worth noting the player academy / development costs is not in the FFP as far as i know..

Edited 16 January by Jon the Hat

[AKCJ]

55 minutes ago, Saxondale said:

The cheek of that fat Greek crook and his cronies. Where do you the draw the line? Two months? Two years? Two decades? Two billion?

 

They’ve also literally admitted that they benefitted to the tune of £12.5m by breaking the rules.
 

We’ll be having that back, thanks.

 

Back down to League 1 lads. You’ll love it; you can play Derby for the Brian Clough trophy again.

Nah.

 

How can you be done for breaching "Profit and Sustainability" laws by waiting one month to make another £12.5m? Surely that's the definition of profit and sustainability?

[Wasyls Pec Deck]

Forest do look increasingly reckless, and surely require at least the same as Everton. I think financial irregularity on that scale in such a short time frame deserves more personally. 
 

As a comparison, look at Luton, Burnley and Sheff U. I’m sure their seasons would be panning out very differently if they’d have gone gung ho like Forest.

[fox in the sox]

It now appears that both teams who finished above us in the table were spending beyond their means.

We scored plenty of goals last season but the big problem was defending after the loss of Schmeichel and Fofana. People will argue that we still should have stayed up with the players we had but the tightening of the belt obviously had a big effect with the sales mentioned above, Rodgers losing interest because he couldn’t take us forward and contracts up in the air. 

[ozleicester]

Easy fix for ""dont punish the fans"... the fines should be enough to make every season ticket free for the next 5 years. Dont send the fines into fa revenue

[coolhandfox]

Amount of Everton and Forest fans who don't seem to understand it has nothing to do with transfer net spend, it simple about overall profit and loss. 

 

 

 

[Dahnsouff]

2 hours ago, AKCJ said:

Nah.

 

How can you be done for breaching "Profit and Sustainability" laws by waiting one month to make another £12.5m? Surely that's the definition of profit and sustainability?

So ignore the rules because you were, at your leisure, trying to do the right thing?

[Dahnsouff]

51 minutes ago, ozleicester said:

Easy fix for ""dont punish the fans"... the fines should be enough to make every season ticket free for the next 5 years. Dont send the fines into fa revenue

So basically just give the money back to the club?

 

#secretcapitalist  

[Les-TA-Jon]

What's clear is that the system is a little broken. 

• The £105m allowable losses is out of date. How can that figure have stayed the same for so long? It doesn't seem to have accounted for general inflation, rising costs across all streams for clubs, and rising wages and transfer fees. 
• £35m losses per season really isn't much breathing room for much of the PL's Other14 clubs - that's just a couple of signings 'gone wrong'
• The PL is right to fast track the process, so that everything must be reported by 31st Dec and resolved by the 30th June (the PL season is 'officially' over on this date as the club's certifications change, so promotions and relegations are enacted)
• This is especially pertinent after the issue of Everton getting a deduction this season for a transgression last season
• The 3 year reporting period disproportionally strangles promoted sides, and particularly those that aren't yo-yoing between the PL and Championship
• Forest for example are struggling purely because 2 out of their last 3 years have been in the Championship (less income) vs, say Fulham who have had 1 out of 3 years in the Championship.
• These new rules are really going to make it really difficult for non-yo-yo clubs to come up and stay up

[Chelmofox]

2 hours ago, AKCJ said:

Nah.

 

How can you be done for breaching "Profit and Sustainability" laws by waiting one month to make another £12.5m? Surely that's the definition of profit and sustainability?

Does the same apply if i don't pay my invoices, or my mortgage? Or if I dip 10 million into my overdraft for 3 months. Can i tell my bank i was simply trying to do the right thing by holding back cash for 3 months.  They might listen to me but i will still be penalised with the boundaries of any agreement i have with them. 

 

There is an established framework and rules to stick to. 

 

Whats clear to me is that, like businesses not paying invoices or playing silly buggers with their suppliers or banks, breaking these rules will be part of the operating tactic. For example, if Forest get a 6 point deduction and don't get relegated, then the tactic paid off and for us it didn't. 

Edited 16 January by Chelmofox

[AKCJ]

12 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

So ignore the rules because you were, at your leisure, trying to do the right thing?

So we just blindly follow and accept clearly flawed rules?

[Dahnsouff]

Just now, AKCJ said:

So we just blindly follow and accept clearly flawed rules?

Pleading injustice in the face of known rules does not look like its for the greater good. By all means take every opportunity to challenge them, but not when you are charged with breaking them.

[ozleicester]

14 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

So basically just give the money back to the club?

 

#secretcapitalist  

No, the club must give the tickets away to the existing holders at no cost. So the club essentially loses however much they were worth.

Rough estimate... 25,000 seats at $600 = $15 million fine

[Dahnsouff]

Just now, ozleicester said:

No, the club must give the tickets away to the existing holders at no cost. So the club essentially loses however much they were worth.

Rough estimate... 25,000 seats at $600 = $15 million fine

Yeah, seems reasonable actually, just imagine the club would try some weird underhand tricks to recognise the spend somehow and protect themselves

 

#secretsocialist  

 

[Stadt]

12 hours ago, CosbehFox said:

https://josimarfootball.com/2024/01/15/endgame/
 

Everton and 777 is a time bomb 

I wanted them to invest in us at one stage because of Sormaz's role there, I got that one wrong