Discuss ffp here.

[SuperGran]

would be nice if Fosun just paid the fine like everyone else, or got a better legal team like Man City

Man City were banned from Europe for lying about there incomings which they then got let off though still fined 20m not the same situation as wolves
We can breach the sanctions pay the fine and carry on with spending restrictions which would make absolutely zero sense

 

[MattH]

It seems set up to stop clubs like Wolves with wealthy owners ever challenging the self titled ‘elite’ by buying their way in.

A scam basically, no club “organically” can ever break into the dirty six with any long term impact… look at Leicester, won the league and the team was then dismantled by the bigger clubs pretty quickly.

It’s completely manufactured to maintain the status quo for those dining at the top table, dressed up as protecting the other club’s finances.

It also unfairly punishes good owners who might want to invest more in the team. Fosun are clearly a stable business and a million miles away from some of the charlatans who've driven clubs into the ground, but are subject to the same restrictions because of them.

FFP is a **** system, sooner its binned off in favour of proper stringent checks on owners the better.

 

[PolishWolf]

I think there are two options personally:
1.) we really are being strung up by the double occurrence of FFP for UEFA and coronavirus losses and will spend big next year when we're high and dry.
2.) This has been seen as an opportunity to limit our spending and move us towards a self sustaining model and things won't much change in a year time

That said 'self sustaining' doesn't mean no spend, just working within our means so no quick rises.

 

[Oh When the Wolves]

How can wolves be breaching UEFA ffp but villa be complaint if they do manage to keep grealish ?

 

[Oh When the Wolves]

Aston Villa announce £99.2 million loss​

Not in breach despite similar loss the year before, and already spending 70 million this summer.

 

[JayStringer]

Discuss ffp to your hearts content here.

I was wondering how I started a thread without remembering it

 

[JayStringer]

It also unfairly punishes good owners who might want to invest more in the team. Fosun are clearly a stable business and a million miles away from some of the charlatans who've driven clubs into the ground, but are subject to the same restrictions because of them.

FFP is a **** system, sooner its binned off in favour of proper stringent checks on owners the better.

Agreed. We do need a system in place to stop bad owners destroying clubs and leaving fans with nothing. We don't need a system that stops good ambitious owners from being able to put money into the club. Jeff She himself has said it before, the correct system would be to measure equity & debt.

 

[ombyman]

I prefer the javelin

 

[whitnash wolf ex.dewsbury]

I prefer the javelin

jowett? did a jupiter as well I think

 

[ombyman]

jowett? did a jupiter as well I think

More Olympics than cars.
Like watching the big broads throwing things

 

[whitnash wolf ex.dewsbury]

More Olympics than cars.
Like watching the big broads throwing things

like a certain wolves player`s aunt!

 

[AndyWolves]

He didn’t lie as such though did he? He said we are restricted by FFP, which we interpret as meaning we can’t spend jack ****. Man city are constrained by FFP, but there constrain is probably at about £500mill, not £100mill or whatever ours is. My last post on this, people can make their own interpretations.

I'd have to watch it back, the sentiment was certainly that FFP was the reason.

 

[WeAreTheWolvesII]

I mean, they don’t though do they. Granted equally no one knows it definitely is the case that FFP is the issue but their here say and conjecture that FFP is the problem (which the club itself explicitly states) is no different to your here say and conjecture that it’s all a lie.

The only difference is your conjecture includes calling the club out as liars where as others is choosing to believe them. But sure, you’re definitely right and others are naive. You may well be right of course, but you can’t be any more certain than anyone else with any differing view to you.

It’s literally all conjecture. Every single opinion on this is conjecture as there’s no way any of us have the full information to accurately form our opinions.

Spiers' article is based on a conversation with the club, so why am I saying they're liars? Or are you saying Spiers is a liar?

When I say deep down everyone knows it, it's because no one will be willing to come out and say we will definitely spend next year.

If you think so, say so. If you're right, and I really, really hope you are, I will come on here and apologise, stating FFP must've been a reason. So, do you? Will we have a significant net spend next summer (say £50m+)? Absolutely no chance, IMO. You?

 

[Sussex Wolf]

Spiers' article is based on a conversation with the club, so why am I saying they're liars? Or are you saying Spiers is a liar?

When I say deep down everyone knows it, it's because no one will be willing to come out and say we will definitely spend next year.

If you think so, say so. If you're right, and I really, really hope you are, I will come on here and apologise, stating FFP must've been a reason. So, do you? Will we have a significant net spend next summer (say £50m+)? Absolutely no chance, IMO. You?

As I said, the article is more than a year old, and things didn’t pan out over the last 12 months in the way that perhaps the club hoped. So it’s perfectly possible for the club to tell Tim what they did last year, and for that to now be different.

 

[WeAreTheWolvesII]

As I said, the article is more than a year old, and things didn’t pan out over the last 12 months in the way that perhaps the club hoped. So it’s perfectly possible for the club to tell Tim what they did last year, and for that to now be different.

Will we spend next year when the FFP 'restrictions' are over, in your opinion?

 

[Sussex Wolf]

Will we spend next year when the FFP 'restrictions' are over, in your opinion?

Honestly, I don’t know. I think it depends on lots of factors, and lots of unknowns. For instance, what league and competition we will be in the following season.

If we assume we are still in the PL, and we’re not competing in Europe the following season, then I do think we will have more flexibility to spend within Fosun’s broader financial aims for the club. From what Jeff said, and what we’ve been doing, the aim is to grow the club’s turnover, and through that, our ability to spend. In part this is driven by Fosun’s objective to grow the value of the club within their portfolio. However it’s also what the club needs to do to compete with the more wealthy clubs for players - transfer fees and wages - because of FFP. We can’t do a Chelsea or Citeh, because FFP was created to stop it happening again and protect the status quo.

 

[JohnB]

Anyone got a transfer rumour?





More seriously, we have FFP and are stuck with it. A few thoughts.

1) Daft that Europe FFP is different to PL FFP.
2) Reasonable concept of FFP to ensure clubs spend within means but problem is it creates a glass ceiling which is very hard to break.
3) So what could you do?
a) Allow as big a debts as you want? Not great - creates big Spanish teams who then want to break away and earn more money to pay off their debts. Doubt that Fosun would create massive debts.
b) Allow as big an equity injection as you want but retain FFP? Risk of sovereign backed clubs - cannot think of any….again wouldn’t help us.
c) Tinker with FFP? Still likely to leave the Big 6 et al in the strongest position.
d) Change ownershio structure (ala German model). Sounds too tricky to achieve to me and will out off new owners.
e) Amend player wages/transfers - set a maximum wage, maximum transfer fee or limit transfers. European court would have a field day re employment law.

Feels like little will change other than a tinkering with FFP when big 6 et al want it.

 

[VancouverWolf]

First, I don’t try to fully understand FFP rules, we’ll, because I’m lazy and secondly, I don’t understand how the PL fully functions….again for the same reason. I have the basics of both topics. Others on here are better able to discuss these two issues.
……………………..


I‘m not sure what the status of the case is but the PL is/was pursuing the case against City even though UEFA ruled in their favour. From the Athletic…..

“Explained: The latest on PL probe into Manchester City FFP claims, its implications for transparency and what next?”

Explained: The latest on PL probe into Manchester City FFP claims, its implications for transparency and what next?

City had their UEFA punishment for FFP breaches overturned by CAS but now they could be headed for arbitration with the Premier League case

theathletic.com

………………………..

The move by 6 rich clubs to set up a super league must have diminished their previous clout among the 14 other owners. A move like that must have caused friction, even among the Championship owners.
Basically, the move could have had a disastrous impact on the value of all clubs excluded by the super league and maybe there’s some hard feelings still near the surface.

With that in mind, at future PL G.M. meetings, agendas, both formal and informal, maybe new discussions can take place without the Big 6 voting block dominating everything. Where once they could use their leverage to get votes their way, perhaps that influence is diluted or gone.

Which brings us back to FFP. The big questions …….what do the owners want, ..do they want any changes, more or less oversight, ….

 

[Chris H]

Spiers' article is based on a conversation with the club, so why am I saying they're liars? Or are you saying Spiers is a liar?

When I say deep down everyone knows it, it's because no one will be willing to come out and say we will definitely spend next year.

If you think so, say so. If you're right, and I really, really hope you are, I will come on here and apologise, stating FFP must've been a reason. So, do you? Will we have a significant net spend next summer (say £50m+)? Absolutely no chance, IMO. You?

I think, as has been said, that article is based on info that’s 12 months old and the past 12 months has probably been worse than the club would have hoped financially. I don’t think FFP is the sole issue, but I think FFP combined with the current situation is the main cause.

I always felt we’d front loaded our spending when we got promoted, we pushed our amortisation costs high quickly hoping to benefit from a surge of spending and then that spending curve flattening over the next couple of years. That worked well as rather than drip feed a couple of good players a season we transformed our squad and it worked wonders.

The problem is as fans we got giddy about that and expected it season on season. That’s why I don’t feel their plans have vastly changed, I think they always anticipated a slow down in spending before possibly making another jump in spending. Obviously a worldwide pandemic will have an affect on that too.

So no I can’t say FFP is the sole reason for our lesser spend, I do believe that it is a factor that was always planned for in the way they’ve developed the squad though.

But yes, to answer your question outright though, rather than be a politician and avoid it! I reckon we will have a larger net spend next season. How much that is will obviously depend on the financial situation football is in in 12 months time but as it stands, greater than £50m, sure.

There’s no saying we’ll only break even this summer either by the way, as I say, it’s all conjecture currently. I can understand if we don’t have a big spend again because whilst everyone hopes it’s going to be better this coming year no one knows that for sure so being cautious is likely the way they go but it wouldn’t surprise me if we were to have a net spend of say £20m + depending on how the window develops in its final few weeks.

 

[the 15th Wanderer]

How can wolves be breaching UEFA ffp but villa be complaint if they do manage to keep grealish ?

Villa haven't been in Europe recently.

 

[Oh When the Wolves]

Villa haven't been in Europe recently.

But if they were to qualify, they would instantly be in a massive breach and banned? No ?

 

[SuperGran]

How can wolves be breaching UEFA ffp but villa be complaint if they do manage to keep grealish ?

When villa were in Europe ffp hadn’t been invented

 

[LetTheBullLoose]

Aston Villa announce £99.2 million loss​

Not in breach despite similar loss the year before, and already spending 70 million this summer.

Can someone please explain, and please keep it simple ‘cause I’m a bit thick (!), how Villa can have such big losses but be lauded because they are one of only two clubs who are debt-free?

 

[WS10Wolf]

Don’t forget Villa effectively cheated FFP by selling the ground to themselves at much more than it’s worth. The EFL and Premier League have since clamped down on this.

 

[Oh When the Wolves]

Don’t forget Villa effectively cheated FFP by selling the ground to themselves at much more than it’s worth. The EFL and Premier League have since clamped down on this.

Yep. Cheating ****s. Nothing I want more than them to go down and have these high wages stuck on their books

 

[Joshwolf218]

Can someone please explain, and please keep it simple ‘cause I’m a bit thick (!), how Villa can have such big losses but be lauded because they are one of only two clubs who are debt-free?

They also lost large sums of money in the last two years in the Championship. In getting promoted they lost £68m.

“But they will be able to reduce those losses when it comes to FFP. They sold Villa Park and they managed to get compensation for the part of the training ground that was sold for the HS2 rail project. Those have helped.

“The advantage of being in the Premier League is that you’re allowed to lose £35m a year over the rolling three-year assessment period.

“If we take a look at the 2020-21 assessment period, they’ve got two years in the Premier League and one year in the Championship.

So that’s two years at £35m and one year at £13m, which is all you’re allowed to lose in the Championship.

“So that’s £83m in total. Next season, it will go up to £105m because of the three-year rolling assessment period.”

From football insider

In terms of being debt free, i think they borrow all money from the owner, rather than say a bank etc, their owner owns an NBA team who have just won their league so he isnt short of cash

 

[the 15th Wanderer]

But if they were to qualify, they would instantly be in a massive breach and banned? No ?

I would presume so. The Premier league allows you to lose 105 million over 3 seasons, Europe is break even I believe.
They have also sold their ground to themselves and got cash from the training ground I think but not sure on the detail.

 

[Superted]

It also unfairly punishes good owners who might want to invest more in the team. Fosun are clearly a stable business and a million miles away from some of the charlatans who've driven clubs into the ground, but are subject to the same restrictions because of them.

FFP is a **** system, sooner its binned off in favour of proper stringent checks on owners the better.

If I'm buying a house and someone gifts me some money toward the deposit (i.e. my folks), that person has to sign a letter to say that it isn't a loan and they don't want the money back.

I don't see why there shouldn't be something similar with an investor in a football club. If they're daft enough to want to gift funds to the club then let them as long as they're not expecting it back later. However, it doesn't make good commercial sense for anyone because the club would have to pay tax on the value of the gift, putting them at a disadvantage.

 

[Oh When the Wolves]

I would presume so. The Premier league allows you to lose 105 million over 3 seasons, Europe is break even I believe.
They have also sold their ground to themselves and got cash from the training ground I think but not sure on the detail.

How can they be allowed to see their ground and training ground then the rules change? Isn’t their director on the ffp panel?

stinks

 

[Ned]

There’s something about this that doesn’t sit right. I get FFP is an obstacle but the tightening of the purse strings coincided with Jeff saying (I want to say after the 1st season) that we need to be self sufficient and won’t be bank rolled by Fosun any more (paraphrasing). This statement was at least 2 seasons too early in terms of laying foundations to mean we aren’t selling to buy big every window. Granted we haven’t sold yet but the general feeling is that we will.

 

[Joshwolf218]

There’s something about this that doesn’t sit right. I get FFP is an obstacle but the tightening of the purse strings coincided with Jeff saying (I want to say after the 1st season) that we need to be self sufficient and won’t be bank rolled by Fosun any more (paraphrasing). This statement was at least 2 seasons too early in terms of laying foundations to mean we aren’t selling to buy big every window. Granted we haven’t sold yet but the general feeling is that we will.

The club has spent £303,264,000 on transfers sunce Nuno was appointed

 

[Ponty]

If I'm buying a house and someone gifts me some money toward the deposit (i.e. my folks), that person has to sign a letter to say that it isn't a loan and they don't want the money back.

I don't see why there shouldn't be something similar with an investor in a football club. If they're daft enough to want to gift funds to the club then let them as long as they're not expecting it back later. However, it doesn't make good commercial sense for anyone because the club would have to pay tax on the value of the gift, putting them at a disadvantage.

This is why Abramovic is technically owed over a billion pounds by Chelsea, a sum he will never see as the club in its entirety isn’t worth that.

 

[LetTheBullLoose]

They also lost large sums of money in the last two years in the Championship. In getting promoted they lost £68m.

“But they will be able to reduce those losses when it comes to FFP. They sold Villa Park and they managed to get compensation for the part of the training ground that was sold for the HS2 rail project. Those have helped.

“The advantage of being in the Premier League is that you’re allowed to lose £35m a year over the rolling three-year assessment period.

“If we take a look at the 2020-21 assessment period, they’ve got two years in the Premier League and one year in the Championship.

So that’s two years at £35m and one year at £13m, which is all you’re allowed to lose in the Championship.

“So that’s £83m in total. Next season, it will go up to £105m because of the three-year rolling assessment period.”

From football insider

In terms of being debt free, i think they borrow all money from the owner, rather than say a bank etc, their owner owns an NBA team who have just won their league so he isnt short of cash

Thanks! So because their owners have covered the losses they don’t owe that money to a bank etc? I still can’t get my head around the fact that they can rack up some massive losses but not have any debt!

 

[Mile End Wanderer]

This is why Abramovic is technically owed over a billion pounds by Chelsea, a sum he will never see as the club in its entirety isn’t worth that.

Chelsea are still in debt too apparently. Abramovic just pays the interest on the debt and guarantees the money.

 

[Oh When the Wolves]

They also lost large sums of money in the last two years in the Championship. In getting promoted they lost £68m.

“But they will be able to reduce those losses when it comes to FFP. They sold Villa Park and they managed to get compensation for the part of the training ground that was sold for the HS2 rail project. Those have helped.

“The advantage of being in the Premier League is that you’re allowed to lose £35m a year over the rolling three-year assessment period.

“If we take a look at the 2020-21 assessment period, they’ve got two years in the Premier League and one year in the Championship.

So that’s two years at £35m and one year at £13m, which is all you’re allowed to lose in the Championship.

“So that’s £83m in total. Next season, it will go up to £105m because of the three-year rolling assessment period.”

From football insider

In terms of being debt free, i think they borrow all money from the owner, rather than say a bank etc, their owner owns an NBA team who have just won their league so he isnt short of cash

They lost 99 million last season alone .

They will breach soon unless big players are sold

 

[Hoganstolemywife]

How can they be allowed to see their ground and training ground then the rules change? Isn’t their director on the ffp panel?

stinks

Concur.

Introduce a rule and there will be loop holes pronto.

 

[AndyWolves]

If I'm buying a house and someone gifts me some money toward the deposit (i.e. my folks), that person has to sign a letter to say that it isn't a loan and they don't want the money back.

I don't see why there shouldn't be something similar with an investor in a football club. If they're daft enough to want to gift funds to the club then let them as long as they're not expecting it back later. However, it doesn't make good commercial sense for anyone because the club would have to pay tax on the value of the gift, putting them at a disadvantage.

I don't think it's a gift, I think the club create more shares which the owners then buy

 

[Joshwolf218]

Thanks! So because their owners have covered the losses they don’t owe that money to a bank etc? I still can’t get my head around the fact that they can rack up some massive losses but not have any debt!

my partnernalso tells me they have a guy om the board who helped develop ffp, so would know the legal loopholes

 

[Mile End Wanderer]

my partnernalso tells me they have a guy om the board who helped develop ffp, so would know the legal loopholes

Iv heard that too Purslow I think?!

 

[Superted]

I don't think it's a gift, I think the club create more shares which the owners then buy

Fair point, I hadn't considered that method.

With that method there would be no mechanism to prevent the owner/major shareholder withdrawing funds if things turned sour which is why I assume it isn't allowed under FFP.