27,000 crowds and we still can't sign another striker!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Doc Lynam]

I put money down on us getting a centre forward. I also put a pony down on her winning Sticky cum dancing.

 

[bn1&bn3 Albion]

Bore off.......only one of them actually playing.....I watched Barker for the u21's today, not good enough, so that leaves us going nowhere fast. Low end of mid table, and I am not being melodramatic.

Oh I'm sorry, I didn't realize that we didn't have to pay their wages if they don't play... Silly me!

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

I am not being melodramatic.

You are

 

[Albumen]

Bore off.......only one of them actually playing.....I watched Barker for the u21's today, not good enough, so that leaves us going nowhere fast. Low end of mid table, and I am not being melodramatic.

Are you sure?

 

[Seagulltonian]

I think we may be waiting for the Premier squads to be sorted, and then we could probably get a young striker on loan, when the loan window opens

Just happy that no one decided to go today

 

[nwgull]

Maybe the accountants on here will confirm or deny, but the way in which the losses / profits are accounted for FFP won't necessarily be the same figure as the public reported one - since FFP (for good reasons) has it's own.

Also I understand any transfer fees in the current window are immune from FFP since although it has started in terms of reporting to the league, the penalties don't come into the end of the season and the current window is outside of the first FFP window. Basically it starts in December.
.

Wrong. FFP accounts for player contract amortisation. So if a club signs a player for 2m on a 2 year contract, it counts as a cost of 1m a year when looking at FFP.

Penalties and fines will come when clubs file financial reports for 13/14 season, which won't be until December 2014.

 

[clapham_gull]

Wrong. FFP accounts for player contract amortisation. So if a club signs a player for 2m on a 2 year contract, it counts as a cost of 1m a year when looking at FFP.

Penalties and fines will come when clubs file financial reports for 13/14 season, which won't be until December 2014.

I understand the amortisation but understood it as not being applicable to this window since the first period runs from November ?

Is there no starting point ? The historical transfer fees of all current squad member are spread over the length of the contract and are included in the FFP calculations next year ?

What happens in the case of a contract extension ?

 

[Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!]

Maybe the accountants on here will confirm or deny, but the way in which the losses / profits are accounted for FFP won't necessarily be the same figure as the public reported one - since FFP (for good reasons) has it's own.

Also I understand any transfer fees in the current window are immune from FFP since although it has started in terms of reporting to the league, the penalties don't come into the end of the season and the current window is outside of the first FFP window. Basically it starts in December.

Obviously huge wage bills will be factored in from December onwards.

This is what I find a bit odd about FFP. A club could theoretically budget for a fine take and prepare for a resulting transfer embargo whilst getting back into financial shape.

Let's see what happens in practice but I'd be happier if it included a points deduction element. Unfortunately it's often the only "language" football understands.

FFP is based on the a club's profit or loss before tax with the exception of:

a) Investment in Youth development (ie the cost of the current building works at Lancing is excluded)
b) Promotion related bonus payments
c) A club's community scheme (ie AITC)
d) The profit affecting element arising from the sale, purchase and depreciation of fixed assets excluding players. So any profit/loss arising from the stadium build is excluded but loss on player sales isn't and neither is the annual depreciation charge applied to player purchase. This is usually the purchase price divided by the term of their contract so in the case of Ulloa the charge is approximately £500,000pa (ie 25% of £2M).

However, these exclusions from FFP will all appear in the annual return/accounts submitted to Companies House.

FFP is currently in its third year but the first two years have been "penalty free". The financial year for most clubs starts on 1st July and the FFP "return" has to be submitted to the FL by the December after the end of the financial year -ie by December 2014 for the current (2013/14) financial year; incidentally BHA's annual returns/accounts for 2013/14 don't have to be submitted to Companies House until March 2015.

Unless excluded under a-d above, any financial transactions between 1st July 2013 and 30th June 2014 will come under the December 2014 FFP return.

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

 

[Pevenseagull]

Who is this striker we should have signed on a permanent deal?

anyone answered this yet?

FFS FFP

#sensible

 

[Mental Lental]

FFP is based on the a club's profit or loss before tax with the exception of:

a) Investment in Youth development (ie the cost of the current building works at Lancing is excluded)
b) Promotion related bonus payments
c) A club's community scheme (ie AITC)
d) The profit affecting element arising from the sale, purchase and depreciation of fixed assets excluding players. So any profit/loss arising from the stadium build is excluded but loss on player sales isn't and neither is the annual depreciation charge applied to player purchase. This is usually the purchase price divided by the term of their contract so in the case of Ulloa the charge is approximately £500,000pa (ie 25% of £2M).

However, these exclusions from FFP will all appear in the annual return/accounts submitted to Companies House.

FFP is currently in its third year but the first two years have been "penalty free". The financial year for most clubs starts on 1st July and the FFP "return" has to be submitted to the FL by the December after the end of the financial year -ie by December 2014 for the current (2013/14) financial year; incidentally BHA's annual returns/accounts for 2013/14 don't have to be submitted to Companies House until March 2015.

Unless excluded under a-d above, any financial transactions between 1st July 2013 and 30th June 2014 will come under the December 2014 FFP return.

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

Nice explanation.

It's a shame that NSC's thicky brigade (which seems to be getting larger and larger these days) still can't grasp the ramifications of all this.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

I've been dreading and thinking all Summer, we will end up Mid-table or worst. I think we are a Striker short and we can not wait till CMS is back to be even challenging for the Top Six. We will have to wrap Ulloa in cotton wool for the next few months, if we do struggle to sign a Loan Striker in the next Loan Window.

To suggest that you would be 'dreading' a mid-table finish in the championship in a new manager's first season is truly a sign that all is strange at the Albion these days

To paraphrase your Fawlty quote, "What did you expect to see from a Brighton and Hove Albion team? Champions by Christmas perhaps? Hordes of fans walking up Wembley Way?"

 

[Insel affe]

This thread should read.......

27,000 crowds means we don't have to sell our best players to premiership teams..... !

See what the pint half full man thinks.

 

[Rugrat]

Nice explanation.

It's a shame that NSC's thicky brigade (which seems to be getting larger and larger these days) still can't grasp the ramifications of all this.

I think most do grasp the intent and constraints of FFP. But none of us know where the club stand relative to what is "allowed", other than being told losses will be similar, which is somewhat mystifying.

I agree with others that we didn't need to sign a striker but we definitely need to pick someone up on a short term loan when window opens next week, and if FFP is trotted out again as a reason not to, then add me to the list of thicko's

 

[Gwylan]

Nice explanation.

It's a shame that NSC's thicky brigade (which seems to be getting larger and larger these days) still can't grasp the ramifications of all this.

I can understand the implications of FFP perfectly well. What I don't understand is why we (with our perfectably respectable) £8m loss have to stick to a set of financial restrictions while clubs losing many times that don't appear to. I can't believe that Forest or Middlesbrough, to name just a couple, are running at a loss of under £8m. Why can other clubs avoid the limitations of FFP and not us?

 

[DarrenFreemansPerm]

I

It's easy to spend someone else's money isn't it?

Well the club seem to think so, they keep finding ways to get us to spend more.

 

[fat old seagull]

Personally I think we will sign a loan striker to cover CMS recover etc. Two weeks to get every one fit we have a great squad.

very happy with Ince, Andrews, Augustien, Ward and mystery loan striker coming in keeping Barnes Ulloa and Bridcutt is good business. Bruno CMS to get fit we can do this..... lets hope we keep them all after the jan window

Sound common sense, a realistic appraisal. Keeping this squad together as a team hugely important and with good management I feel confident will reap rewards.
I have total confidence in the professional way the club is being run right through each level of expertise ...ok the catering needs to be a little more fan friendly, but that not going to effect our ambitions.

 

[Rugrat]

I can understand the implications of FFP perfectly well. What I don't understand is why we (with our perfectably respectable) £8m loss have to stick to a set of financial restrictions while clubs losing many times that don't appear to. I can't believe that Forest or Middlesbrough, to name just a couple, are running at a loss of under £8m. Why can other clubs avoid the limitations of FFP and not us?

I sense those 2 are taking a punt or, in Forests case, planning on showing a spurious sponsorship deal on its revenue line and will then argue the toss for the next few years!

We don't get to see the detailed accounts but our position relative to most others should be extremely good. If our finances are so dire I can only assume that the cost base put in place when we moved to the Amex was poorly thought through. Saying that, Barber would have addressed all that by now, he's shoved up prices across the board and our player activity might have even led to a reduction in wages. So I really struggle to see how our losses this year will be the same as last.

 

[somerset]

I can understand the implications of FFP perfectly well. What I don't understand is why we (with our perfectably respectable) £8m loss have to stick to a set of financial restrictions while clubs losing many times that don't appear to. I can't believe that Forest or Middlesbrough, to name just a couple, are running at a loss of under £8m. Why can other clubs avoid the limitations of FFP and not us?

Exactly, hence the frustration.....but of course asking that question will see you branded a Thicko by the all knowing brigade on here...........sadly, just typing Ffp each time without explaining how this doesn't apply to some of our competitors just doesn't cut it.

 

[KZNSeagull]

I can understand the implications of FFP perfectly well. What I don't understand is why we (with our perfectably respectable) £8m loss have to stick to a set of financial restrictions while clubs losing many times that don't appear to. I can't believe that Forest or Middlesbrough, to name just a couple, are running at a loss of under £8m. Why can other clubs avoid the limitations of FFP and not us?

As no sanctions have been imposed yet under FFP, I don't believe that these clubs have found a way around FFP. I think they are gambling that, when push comes to shove, the football league, or whomever it is that imposes sanctions, will bottle it. Dodgy sponsorship deals etc that some think will get around the rules have yet to be tested, so we will only truly know whether you can cheat and get away with it in about 18 months time when each clubs accounts are lodged and inspected. It will be a huge test of the resolve of the governing bodies, so let's hope that they are up to it!

Personally, i would rather we played by the rules because the consequences of not doing so SHOULD be dire.

 

[Rugrat]

Dodgy sponsorship deals etc that some think will get around the rules have yet to be tested, so we will only truly know whether you can cheat and get away with it in about 18 months time when each clubs accounts are lodged and inspected. It will be a huge test of the resolve of the governing bodies, so let's hope that they are up to it

Personally, i would rather we played by the rules because the consequences of not doing so SHOULD be dire.

I can see it taking way longer than 18 months as arguments and counter arguments are presented. I wouldn't be surprised if it takes years to settle, if indeed it ever does

Then there's the risk/reward position. I don't think the consequences of operating outside the rules are that dire. Why a points deduction relative to the degree of non compliance wasn't introduced is bewildering. Fines for some of these guys will be inconsequential and I'm sure a limited transfer embargo will either be circumvented or not be enforced rigidly (note Watford)