Like that Henry... "even Seriously Red says we are under FFP"... yes we are well within the envelope because we have dropped £1.5M off the wage bill - if I was spouting a party line I could cite a higher number... ticket revenue is up this season so we are looking at losses of c.£5M this year including depr'n (£1M) and Academy (£?) which don't count as part of FFP...
If we are looking at a £5m loss this year then we are still £2m over the FFP threshold unless the owner injects equity though aren't we ?
Not if you take off the depreciation and Academy costs? Very difficult to forecast accurately in the absence of last seasons numbets. Perhaps the Trust could ask the club to confirm ball park numbers?
At least the rate of increase on club debts overall (currently £40m) will slow which is clearly one of the intentions of FFP.
We have last season's numbers, accurate as far as necessary. We have their estimate that this season will be the same as last season, despite squad cost reductions, so for FFP purposes a loss of £4.3m - the club's own figures, not speculation or spin. That is £3.7m under the limit, but would mean £1.3m will need to go in as equity,
I am not sure I understand how losses will be the same even though the wage bill is down and ST prices are up?
And yes, the board have a maximum loan allowed of £3m so anything in excess needs to be injected as equity and cannot be returned easily...it is possible that the equity injection might not be at par thus shifting the ownership structure?
If accounts filed for this season (by 01.12.14) don't meet FFP then new player registrations not allowed.
Some clubs have already indicated (anonymously) that they won't comply!
Well I certainly feel better about things than I did a couple of weeks ago. The board will now start to get some big pats on the back no doubt which may be justified with their dealings in the last week. But it wouldn't hurt them once in a while, especially when the s**ts flying about, to give us a few words of reassurance would it?
carly, their communication approach is basically, diabolical, but we should not be surprised with that when you look at the structure. If you believe the club is majority owned by two individuals, one of them wants to stay completely out of the spotlight to the extent there is no known involvement and he has put his lawyer in as his front person, the other likes his name attached but has zero interest in speaking to fans, press and everything else that goes with being involved with a football club, whilst making enemies all over the shop.
That's the top of the club, so what little trickles down from that should not be a surprise if that is the ethos.
As i think i said a couple of weeks ago, i didn't expect any major departures and i expect us to just keep plodding on with the minimum of fuss neither showing noticeable signs of progressing or regressing.
carly, their communication approach is basically, diabolical, but we should not be surprised with that when you look at the structure. If you believe the club is majority owned by two individuals, one of them wants to stay completely out of the spotlight to the extent there is no known involvement and he has put his lawyer in as his front person, the other likes his name attached but has zero interest in speaking to fans, press and everything else that goes with being involved with a football club, whilst making enemies all over the shop.
That's the top of the club, so what little trickles down from that should not be a surprise if that is the ethos.
As i think i said a couple of weeks ago, i didn't expect any major departures and i expect us to just keep plodding on with the minimum of fuss neither showing noticeable signs of progressing or regressing.
A fair point mate and not such a likable one. I would say there's been more progress than regress though.
Comments
And yes, the board have a maximum loan allowed of £3m so anything in excess needs to be injected as equity and cannot be returned easily...it is possible that the equity injection might not be at par thus shifting the ownership structure?
If accounts filed for this season (by 01.12.14) don't meet FFP then new player registrations not allowed.
Some clubs have already indicated (anonymously) that they won't comply!
But it wouldn't hurt them once in a while, especially when the s**ts flying about, to give us a few words of reassurance would it?
That's the top of the club, so what little trickles down from that should not be a surprise if that is the ethos.
As i think i said a couple of weeks ago, i didn't expect any major departures and i expect us to just keep plodding on with the minimum of fuss neither showing noticeable signs of progressing or regressing.
I would say there's been more progress than regress though.