[Archived] FFP to be reviewed

[K-Hod]

Well, given this news, we'll see just how much truth there was in this open letter yesterday.....

[Rover-the-Top]

But if Venkys were willing to put £20m cash into the club, then we get a transfer embargo.Does investment in infrastructure count towards FFP? Imagine if you have to build a new stadium, how do you do that with FFP?

It doesn't count.

The Fair Play Result is based on the club's profit or loss before tax with the exception of:

• Investment in Youth Development (as defined in the Elite Player Performance Plan)

• The profit affecting element of the purchase, sale and depreciation of fixed assets excluding players (e.g. a club's stadium)

• Investment in a club's Community Scheme

• Promotion related bonus payments

http://www.football-league.co.uk/page/FLExplainedDetail/0,,10794~2748246,00.html

[den]

We've known these rules were coming in some time now - and that was part of the reason some people argued that the club didn't have the time that Bowyer wanted.

[JBiz]

Having read the David Conn article this morning - see the championship finances thread - are FFP fines just added to general losses?

It seems that plenty of companies seem to be using clubs as a vehicle to aid tax reduction on their investments and overall turnover. This seems plausable for us considering our owners are "probably worth £2bn" Daily Mail 2011 Nick Harris.

[perthblue02]

Don't think there is anything to worry about after yesterday's "apology". Sure that Venky's will break the bank this transfer window to get us out of the championship and quite happily pay any fines we receive because they are sorry about the mess they have created. Good as their word Desai and the Rao's as we have seen previously. So really FFP can not be used as an excuse if they are as committed as Everton they wrote

[stanhillrover]

I think that the powers-that-be know that the rules as they stand are going to be very difficult if not impossible to enforce across the Championship, that's why we are seeing more and more suggestions of 'revisions' to the rules.

If there were only two or three clubs breaking the rules then that might be manageable, but at the moment there are about half the clubs in the division losing more than the allowed £8 million. See Bolton, QPR, Forest, Brighton, Bournemouth, Leeds, Birmingham, Reading, Middlesbrough for others. This becomes even more ridiculous when you get Cardiff, Fulham and Norwich being relegated from the Premier League with massive amounts of money going their way to splash out on an immediate return, knowing that the other clubs in the Championship won't be allowed to do the same due to these rules. This will encourage more teams to try and buy their way straight back up after relegation.

Putting 10-12 clubs under an embargo is going to make a mockery of the Championship and significantly damage what is at present the most popular second division in world football.

Whilst Rovers' losses are among the highest in the division, we are by no means alone, and we can say that we are making efforts to reduce our spending and comply with the rules, and have been doing for the last 12 months. In contrast to QPR who have clearly shown no effort whatsoever to comply. Departing players like Givet, Pedersen, Murphy etc. and arrivals on sensible wages point to efforts to comply. I don't see how we can be expected to go from a Premier League financial structure with no limits on debt/investment to a Championship wage structure and very little investment in the space of two years.

I still don't understand what clubs are supposed to do if they cannot reduce their losses to try to meet these rules. For example, of our 'big' earners (Rhodes, Robinson, Best, Etuhu, Campbell) the only one we want to keep is Rhodes. The other four I'm sure the club would love to get rid of, but for a variety of reasons nobody will take those players off our hands. As long as those players remain at the club then we will find it virtually impossible to comply with the rules. Nobody will take Etuhu because he is a permanent crock. Nobody will take Robinson because he has had an illness and is at the back end of his career. Nobody will take Campbell because of his ongoing legal issues. Other than running their contracts down and ensuring that we don't hand out further massive contracts I'm not sure what more the club can be expected to do. I would imagine by the summer of 2015 things would look a lot better once Robinson and Etuhu/Best are out of contract.

Likewise if a clubs three biggest earners all sustain long term injuries, what then? They become impossible to get rid of.

I think there's going to be a lot of amendments over the coming 6 months.

[yoda]

We've known these rules were coming in some time now - and that was part of the reason some people argued that the club didn't have the time that Bowyer wanted.

Correct

[den]

Stanhill, far from the powers that be "enforcing" FFP, as I understand it, the rules are accepted or amended by the clubs themselves.

[yoda]

I suppose the further back you can see helps you look further forward,

good to read some of the posts and take stock of where we are now.

[tomphil]

I know a few Huddersfield lads a get to see a bit of their stuff on twitter and it seems their chairman is now hiding behind FFP. I think plenty of chairmen and owners are going to love it.

[den]

QPR cheating on FFP

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2994248/QPR-woes-continue-club-fear-58million-Financial-Fair-Play-fine-possibility-losing-star-striker-Charlie-Austin.html

[thenodrog]

Just as an aside I'd imagine Allardyce will be all over Charlie Austin like a rash at the moment.

[Amo]

Just as an aside I'd imagine Allardyce will be all over Charlie Austin like a rash at the moment.

Whatever floats your boat, Gordy boy.

[K-Hod]

Not getting much better for QPR, 3-0 down at Palace and it isn't even half time yet....