[Archived] Ffp Embargo

[Kamy100]

If I have understood the FFP calculation mechanism correctly then Rovers have until Tuesday 30th June to sell players if they want those sales to be included in the 2014/2015 FFP calculations and to have the embargo lifted in January.

The FFP period if 1st July 2014 to 30th June 2015, so Rovers will submit accounts for that period in August, these will then be considered by the football league auditors and they will deliver a judgement in Late November/Early December as to whether Rovers have done enough to get the embargo lifted. So if Rovers sell say Jordan Rhodes on 1st July, that sale cannot be included in this submission.

So there is no point selling players after Tuesday as they cannot be included in this year's submission, we could keep hold of these players until January and sell them in the January window, those sales can be included in what is called an "interim judgement", these accounts can be submitted in March 2016 for consideration. to have the embargo lifted for the summer 2016 transfer window. Leeds did this to have their embargo lifted this summer.

[T J Hooker]

I'm sure our players are loving(not!) being seen as absolutely nothing more than financial assets by the club, no wonder there's no real team spirit or morale in the place, I'm pretty sure they'd all now jump at the chance of leaving(apart from gb's chosen ones that are never gonna get it better than they currently do here under gb) and getting away from this this soulless regime.

[tomphil]

Just what is going to happen when the embargo is lifted anyway ? A spending spree from our paper billionaire owners ? Never been any sign of that in the past 5 years when you look at the outgoings as well. It'll just be another anti climax of nothingness when/if it gets lifted.

[den]

If I have understood the FFP calculation mechanism correctly then Rovers have until Tuesday 30th June to sell players if they want those sales to be included in the 2014/2015 FFP calculations and to have the embargo lifted in January.

The FFP period if 1st July 2014 to 30th June 2015, so Rovers will submit accounts for that period in August, these will then be considered by the football league auditors and they will deliver a judgement in Late November/Early December as to whether Rovers have done enough to get the embargo lifted. So if Rovers sell say Jordan Rhodes on 1st July, that sale cannot be included in this submission.

So there is no point selling players after Tuesday as they cannot be included in this year's submission, we could keep hold of these players until January and sell them in the January window, those sales can be included in what is called an "interim judgement", these accounts can be submitted in March 2016 for consideration. to have the embargo lifted for the summer 2016 transfer window. Leeds did this to have their embargo lifted this summer.

This is mentioned in a LT article this morning. It does point out that transfer fees aren't usually paid in full, up front - meaning that the impact of any sales wouldn't have such a dramatic effect anyway.

[mustard]

Whilst on the subject of the FFP embargo, can we just clarify we CAN NOT spend a penny on player purchases. The £600k per annum relates to wages, agent fees, signing on fees etc. We can not spend any money on transfer fees, it's clear as day on the Football League website.

http://www.football-league.co.uk/news/article/2014/championship-financial-fair-play-season-201314-submissions-2144136.aspx

Clubs will be prohibited from registering any new professional players (permanent contract or loan) unless they have:

• 24 or fewer established players (players aged 21 or over that have made at least 5 starting appearances for the club).

Where clubs have fewer than 24 established players, they will only be permitted to sign players in the following circumstances (with the player in question being added to the club’s list of established players regardless of his age or previous playing experience):

• Where the employee costs of a player being signed are less than £600,000 per annum (or pro-rata if signed on a shorter contract).

Where clubs have 24 established players, they will be permitted to trade on a ‘one out, one in’ basis but only if the employee costs of the player coming in to the club are no more than whichever is the lower amount of:

• 75% of the equivalent costs of the player going out.
• Or a maximum of £600,000 per annum (or pro-rata if signed on shorter contract)

In addition:

• Clubs under an FFP embargo will be permitted to sign a goalkeeper on an emergency basis (in line with existing regulations).
• Clubs under an FFP embargo will not be permitted to pay transfer fees or compensation fees for professional players.
• Clubs under an FFP embargo will not be permitted to pay a loan fee to another club, they may only pay the player’s wage (or a contribution towards it).
• For incoming players, clubs can only pay Agents’ Fees as a benefit in kind to the player in question (as long as they do not exceed the £600,000 employee costs limit).

[chris_h]

How can a private company operating within the laws of the land have its trading restricted in this fashion?

[Kamy100]

This is mentioned in a LT article this morning. It does point out that transfer fees aren't usually paid in full, up front - meaning that the impact of any sales wouldn't have such a dramatic effect anyway.

My understanding is that you can include the full fee (excluding performance related payments) in the submissions even if it is paid in instalments as it guaranteed income.

[Paul]

How can a private company operating within the laws of the land have its trading restricted in this fashion?

I imagine it is because said company is a MEMBER of the Football or Premier League and must therefore abide by the rules of membership.

This isn't a restriction of trade, the clubs can employ whoever they wish, but a question of complying with FL or FA regulation.

Out of interest does anyone know if FFP applies to other employees? As a daft example could Rovers offer JW £2m to return and sort out the mess while complying with FFP?

[den]

My understanding is that you can include the full fee (excluding performance related payments) in the submissions even if it is paid in instalments as it guaranteed income.

I can't argue this point, because I simply don't know. Still, if for example, the entire fee of say £7m for Gestede was declared on this years accounts, it couldn't be declared on next years accounts. So the losses this year would be lower, but the losses next year would be higher.

[yoda]

I imagine it is because said company is a MEMBER of the Football or Premier League and must therefore abide by the rules of membership.

This isn't a restriction of trade, the clubs can employ whoever they wish, but a question of complying with FL or FA regulation.

Out of interest does anyone know if FFP applies to other employees? As a daft example could Rovers offer JW £2m to return and sort out the mess while complying with FFP?

That status has been challenged in the past in court i.e. Bosman,

Just needs someone to do it with FFP

[tomphil]

I think it's been said it's allowed the owners can pay for that type of thing out of their own pocket.

[JBiz]

As a daft example could Rovers offer JW £2m to return and sort out the mess while complying with FFP?

This needs to happen. I've said it before, it will unite the fans and owners. A skeptic would say it's never going to happen.

I'm tempted to write to the bloke but I'm not sure I could construct the prose suitable! I waffle..

[Rover_Shaun]

It's never going to happen.

[Stuart]

This needs to happen. I've said it before, it will unite the fans and owners. A skeptic would say it's never going to happen.

I'm tempted to write to the bloke but I'm not sure I could construct the prose suitable! I waffle..

I agree - although I can't imagine Williams ever working for Venkys again. That said, who'd have thought Mourihno would return to Abramovic?

Writing to Williams isn't the answer though, it's Venkys that need to start listening to the fans - or at least people who have Rovers wellbeing at heart.

At them moment we have sycophants working within the current parameters that they and FFP have laid down. What we need are people prepared to challenge the parameters for the good of BRFC. The last time we saw that was Paul Hunt's misjudged letter, which by asking for a payrise at the same time left him open and resulted in his departure. The time before was John's letter to Venkys that also resulted in his departure. Challenge Venkys and you are out seems to be the message. But that needs to happen.

Maybe the person to write to is Jerome Anderson because, as daft as it sounds, he seems to be the only person they listen to. Perhaps he could convince them to write to John Williams. Now that would be the very definition of ironic.

One thing is for sure, the return of John Williams - and exit of Derek Shaw - would see 5,000 season ticket sales on its own.

Keep dreaming...

[JBiz]

One thing is for sure, the return of John Williams - and exit of Derek Shaw - would see 5,000 season ticket sales on its own.

Keep dreaming...

Money talks. If you could prove that we would sell a bucket full more st's by even just having him as an advisor or board member - maybe they would listen.

[Stuart]

Money talks. If you could prove that we would sell a bucket full more st's by even just having him as an advisor or board member - maybe they would listen.

Attendances are not the inducement but the byproduct. Delivery of successful business model whilst football being the club's raison d'être is the reason to do it - and we have proof of John's ability in this regard.

Wasn't being arsey by the way. Having JW back is a dream I share. Seems like a modest one but also, at least for now, unrealistic.

[Gav]

John Williams would ask for certain guarantees, Venkys would possibly agree to those in theory and break them at the first hurdle.

It won't happen whilst they remain in charge.

Venkys Out

[Mercer]

If I have understood the FFP calculation mechanism correctly then Rovers have until Tuesday 30th June to sell players if they want those sales to be included in the 2014/2015 FFP calculations and to have the embargo lifted in January.

The FFP period if 1st July 2014 to 30th June 2015, so Rovers will submit accounts for that period in August, these will then be considered by the football league auditors and they will deliver a judgement in Late November/Early December as to whether Rovers have done enough to get the embargo lifted. So if Rovers sell say Jordan Rhodes on 1st July, that sale cannot be included in this submission.

So there is no point selling players after Tuesday as they cannot be included in this year's submission, we could keep hold of these players until January and sell them in the January window, those sales can be included in what is called an "interim judgement", these accounts can be submitted in March 2016 for consideration. to have the embargo lifted for the summer 2016 transfer window. Leeds did this to have their embargo lifted this summer.

There might just be a bit of leeway with that deadline.

It can be complex and it will be dependent upon how far down the line Rovers are with any particular transaction and also how switched on Rovers' FD is; there is always room for a bit of creative accounting at year end, you do have to be smart though, and I have known organisations switch £millions. Obviously, it will also be subject to scrutiny by KPMG and must be to their satisfaction.

[Stuart]

There might just be a bit of leeway with that deadline.

It can be complex and it will be dependent upon how far down the line Rovers are with any particular transaction and also how switched on Rovers' FD is; there is always room for a bit of creative accounting at year end, you do have to be smart though, and I have known organisations switch £millions. Obviously, it will also be subject to scrutiny by KPMG and must be to their satisfaction.

If our FD was that switched on one could argue that we wouldn't be under an embargo in the first place.

[USABlue]

If I have understood the FFP calculation mechanism correctly then Rovers have until Tuesday 30th June to sell players if they want those sales to be included in the 2014/2015 FFP calculations and to have the embargo lifted in January.

The FFP period if 1st July 2014 to 30th June 2015, so Rovers will submit accounts for that period in August, these will then be considered by the football league auditors and they will deliver a judgement in Late November/Early December as to whether Rovers have done enough to get the embargo lifted. So if Rovers sell say Jordan Rhodes on 1st July, that sale cannot be included in this submission.

So there is no point selling players after Tuesday as they cannot be included in this year's submission, we could keep hold of these players until January and sell them in the January window, those sales can be included in what is called an "interim judgement", these accounts can be submitted in March 2016 for consideration. to have the embargo lifted for the summer 2016 transfer window. Leeds did this to have their embargo lifted this summer.

Is anyone at the club smart enough to understand that and act accordingly. I have my doubts.

So the low ball bids for Rudy will be before Tuesday. After that we may as well hold out for a kings ransom. Again, if we are not able to have people in the club who can handle a fax machine I can see that getting cocked up too. Prolly sell him cheap AND miss the deadline.

[Mercer]

Is anyone at the club smart enough to understand that and act accordingly. I havey doubts.

So the low ball bids for Rudy will be before Tuesday. After that we mah as well hold out for a kings ransom. Again, if we are not able to have people in the club who can handle a fax machine I can see that getting cockex up too. Prolly sell him cheap AND miss the deadline.

Sadly, I doubt that the embargo is the sole reason driving the sale of players.

I suspect the V's want some cash back and quick.

[JBiz]

Sadly, I doubt that the embargo is the sole reason driving the sale of players.

I suspect the V's want some cash back and quick.

Trying to predict the Vs thoughts is dangerous for any reputation. Whilst silence is deafening, they've never made much sense when they did talk.

I'd like to know about how a big conglomerate of companies can save money on tax overall by accruing large debts in one of its businesses.

Also I'd love to know if my suspicions about the Cairney money, that it was solely to pay best off prior to next season, taking Robbo et al off with him and saving 5m a year. Would be a horrible example of the damage those deals after relegation did.

[DavidMailsTightPerm]

Sadly, I doubt that the embargo is the sole reason driving the sale of players.

I suspect the V's want some cash back and quick.

Why now and not last season when Hull offered big money for Rhodes ?

[Athlete]

Why now and not last season when Hull offered big money for Rhodes ?

Possibly something has changed even Kamy has alluded that something is amiss and it's not like the Rao's to not meet Bowyer etc as they normally do

[Pedro]

Why now and not last season when Hull offered big money for Rhodes ?

I bet a big chunk was a bonus payment if they avoided relegation - which we'd be regretting!

I expect Hull to come back in for him, with a clause linked to them getting promoted.