st albans fox Posted 1 April Share Posted 1 April Question next season in the PL, the psr rules change to become percentage of turn over does that mean the three year rolling total falls away? Or does the new measure simply deliver a figure calculated a new way and the three year rolling 105m max loss stays in place ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st albans fox Posted 1 April Share Posted 1 April 8 minutes ago, The Doctor said: Lil wes would fall into this one no? As he was sold in aug 22, and the previous accounts were to 30 jun 2022 Yes im saying that his income could be seen to cover the missing euro and PL finishing place income so that leaves us in line with the previous year of neg 92m if you take madders in then surely that should deliver a loss nearer 60m ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bear Posted 1 April Share Posted 1 April 14 minutes ago, st albans fox said: Question next season in the PL, the psr rules change to become percentage of turn over does that mean the three year rolling total falls away? Or does the new measure simply deliver a figure calculated a new way and the three year rolling 105m max loss stays in place ? AFAIK it means every year you have to be within the 70% figure. Not sure what leeway club's will get in the transition to that from the current rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st albans fox Posted 1 April Share Posted 1 April 6 minutes ago, The Bear said: AFAIK it means every year you have to be within the 70% figure. Not sure what leeway club's will get in the transition to that from the current rules. So does the three year rolling number fall away ? if so then you’re best to get as much rubbish as possible into one season and take the sanction ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bear Posted 1 April Share Posted 1 April 14 minutes ago, st albans fox said: So does the three year rolling number fall away ? if so then you’re best to get as much rubbish as possible into one season and take the sanction ? No idea unfortunately. They'll likely do whatever benefits teams like Chelsea and Man City. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrysalis Posted 1 April Share Posted 1 April (edited) 18 hours ago, st albans fox said: I think the club now has loans with lenders other than moshiri Anyway, my point is that Everton could be in a way worse financial position if they hadn’t been making efforts to meet psr over the past two seasons That is true but my point is, is the financial position bad when there is a sugar daddy ensuring the viability of the company. Its a bit like saying a company owned by a billionaire losing 1 million a year is in financial danger when its a pet project and the 1 million is pocket money to the owner. Thats a problem with FFP, its likely making certain financial situations seem like some sort of disaster when without FFP it would just be business as normal. In a unhindered business world, many companies routinely make losses now days. As an example I never felt Chelsea were at any kind of risk under Roman. Edited 1 April by Chrysalis 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrysalis Posted 1 April Share Posted 1 April 5 hours ago, st albans fox said: Question next season in the PL, the psr rules change to become percentage of turn over does that mean the three year rolling total falls away? Or does the new measure simply deliver a figure calculated a new way and the three year rolling 105m max loss stays in place ? Why cant they do the right thing, completely remove turnover from the financial rules. Many other sports implement flat caps on spending successfully, but this sport is obsessed with "turnover". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st albans fox Posted 1 April Share Posted 1 April 7 minutes ago, Chrysalis said: Why cant they do the right thing, completely remove turnover from the financial rules. Many other sports implement flat caps on spending successfully, but this sport is obsessed with "turnover". Turnover isn’t currently part of it will be from next season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrysalis Posted 1 April Share Posted 1 April (edited) 5 minutes ago, st albans fox said: Turnover isn’t currently part of it will be from next season It always been a part of it. Not only that, but by design for the benefit of the status quo. Unless you think its possible to do things like % of turnover for wages or permitted losses without looking at income. Every single variant of FFP they keep tinkering with does not change a key component, "club income". So to clarify, I mean an FFP like other sports do that take's absolutely no account of income. A FFP that allows Luton in the EPL to spend the same as Liverpool in the EPL. (But it would work downwards not upwards, significantly cut the spending of the big clubs to levels that are reasonable for the entire division). Edited 1 April by Chrysalis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spudulike Posted 2 April Share Posted 2 April So is today the day? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClaphamFox Posted 2 April Author Share Posted 2 April (edited) It seems we haven’t submitted them yet.. Edited 2 April by ClaphamFox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted 2 April Share Posted 2 April 13 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said: It seems we haven’t submitted them yet.. Foxes Trust understand Companies House website wasn't being updated over the Bank Holiday. We'll see today I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cadno'r Cymoedd Posted 2 April Share Posted 2 April Companies House doesn't do updates on Bank Holidays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClaphamFox Posted 2 April Author Share Posted 2 April (edited) 2 minutes ago, Matt said: Foxes Trust understand Companies House website wasn't being updated over the Bank Holiday. We'll see today I guess. Yes, it’s possible we submitted them over the weekend but they haven’t been uploaded yet, and the website has just automatically updated to state that they’re overdue. Edited 2 April by ClaphamFox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st albans fox Posted 2 April Share Posted 2 April 39 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said: Yes, it’s possible we submitted them over the weekend but they haven’t been uploaded yet, and the website has just automatically updated to state that they’re overdue. It can take a week or so for companies house to scan and upload to their system I assume that the ‘accounts overdue’ on the website is automated and doesn’t reflect if they’ve been filed or not I have no idea if companies house have a system where accounts which might be seen to be in the public interest are uploaded more quickly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spudulike Posted 2 April Share Posted 2 April 4 minutes ago, st albans fox said: It can take a week or so for companies house to scan and upload to their system I assume that the ‘accounts overdue’ on the website is automated and doesn’t reflect if they’ve been filed or not I have no idea if companies house have a system where accounts which might be seen to be in the public interest are uploaded more quickly Surely don't need to scan them? That would suggest they've been submitted in hard copy. A quick drag n drop or a couple of clicks on the mouse should do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenny Posted 2 April Share Posted 2 April 8 minutes ago, Spudulike said: Surely don't need to scan them? That would suggest they've been submitted in hard copy. A quick drag n drop or a couple of clicks on the mouse should do it. It's the civil service. They probably print them, retype them on a special typewriter then scan them in. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chelmofox Posted 2 April Share Posted 2 April 7 minutes ago, Spudulike said: Surely don't need to scan them? That would suggest they've been submitted in hard copy. A quick drag n drop or a couple of clicks on the mouse should do it. Its Companies House - they do what they like. A lot of businesses have their year end in March which has coincided with the long bank holiday. It's likely we will be hearing about the detail before we see it on Companies house. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langley Posted 2 April Share Posted 2 April 14 minutes ago, Spudulike said: Surely don't need to scan them? That would suggest they've been submitted in hard copy. A quick drag n drop or a couple of clicks on the mouse should do it. I can tell you haven't worked with the government before. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coolhandfox Posted 2 April Share Posted 2 April Southampton posted massive losses for 22/23 of 94m after tax they have probably met PSR for the 3 year period, but very tight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les-TA-Jon Posted 2 April Share Posted 2 April 10 minutes ago, coolhandfox said: Southampton posted massive losses for 22/23 of 94m after tax they have probably met PSR for the 3 year period, but very tight. But that’s £94m total losses, right? so it’ll be less once you add in all the PSR ‘add backs’? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cropwellfox Posted 2 April Share Posted 2 April 4 minutes ago, Les-TA-Jon said: But that’s £94m total losses, right? so it’ll be less once you add in all the PSR ‘add backs’? Yep probably closer to 65/70m PSR? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Flair Posted 2 April Share Posted 2 April 18 minutes ago, coolhandfox said: Southampton posted massive losses for 22/23 of 94m after tax they have probably met PSR for the 3 year period, but very tight. They'll be OK for 23/24 as a result because they've booked a huge amount of sales in this year. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muzzy_no7 Posted 2 April Share Posted 2 April Leeds are surely also being looked at. The Raphina and Phillips sales barely touch the sides of what they’ve lost over the past 4 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClaphamFox Posted 2 April Author Share Posted 2 April (edited) 20 minutes ago, Muzzy_no7 said: Leeds are surely also being looked at. The Raphina and Phillips sales barely touch the sides of what they’ve lost over the past 4 years. Companies House is showing their accounts as overdue, too. It's probably safe to assume that clubs that have delayed submitting their accounts until the very last minute aren't going to be posting healthy numbers. Edited 2 April by ClaphamFox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts