FFP embargoes for Forest and Fulham

[Triggaaar]

FFP fines will never be collected as the owners of the clubs that are to be fined are happy to throw a few more millions at their lawyers and therefore the effectively toothless authorities will never go toe to toe with them. See QPR for proof that it's easy to get around any regulations if you are willing to throw enough money at it.

I think we should sue the League for not enforcing the rules, and thus preventing us from having a reasonable chance of promotion, as other teams are continually allowed to cheat.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

As a point of interest could we become one of the fails in January, some of the figures being bandied about on targets are pretty big

Surely we would be in danger of failing ffp if that were the case, next year?

 

[mikeyjh]

I will be astounded if both haven't already broken FFP rules, but doubt they will be too worried as long as they go up.

Without wanting to sound like one of the Bournemouth fans (and we are somewhat different) Mel Morris, our CEO and our FD were clear at a recent forum that we would comfortably be compliant.....

 

[the wanderbus]

Be interested to see Boros results,they've waved a nice few quid at players with pathetic crowds.

Bang on. As I posted on a thread at the time, I spoke to some Boro fans before last seasons home game and when I asked where all the money was coming from they just shrugged their shoulders .

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Rather than giving the FFP fine to charity, why doesn't the league simply put it in an account to fund lawyers to defend against future FFP challenges ?

60 million from QPR would fund a lot of lawyers if, say, Bournemouth then want to take action, and so on.

 

[El Presidente]

Rather than giving the FFP fine to charity, why doesn't the league simply put it in an account to fund lawyers to defend against future FFP challenges ?

60 million from QPR would fund a lot of lawyers if, say, Bournemouth then want to take action, and so on.

Because the likes of QPR would take the FL to court over the fighting fund. I'm not sure why you think that giving lawyers even more money is somehow better than giving it to the poor, sick homeless and so on though?

The original FFP fines were supposed to be distributed between the remaining clubs in the Championship. The FL then took legal advice which suggested that such an approach would make it difficult to enforce the rules should there be an appeal, so the rules were changed so donate the money to charity instead.

The current position is that the two main QPR owners, who are worth an estimated£1,600,000,000 between them, are paying lawyers tens of thousands of pounds to ensure that charities do not receive the money that would appear to be due if the FFP principles of restricting owner contributions were applied.

 

[Hampster Gull]

This is being played at, not truely enforced. A joke

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Because the likes of QPR would take the FL to court over the fighting fund. I'm not sure why you think that giving lawyers even more money is somehow better than giving it to the poor, sick homeless and so on though?

The original FFP fines were supposed to be distributed between the remaining clubs in the Championship. The FL then took legal advice which suggested that such an approach would make it difficult to enforce the rules should there be an appeal, so the rules were changed so donate the money to charity instead.

The current position is that the two main QPR owners, who are worth an estimated£1,600,000,000 between them, are paying lawyers tens of thousands of pounds to ensure that charities do not receive the money that would appear to be due if the FFP principles of restricting owner contributions were applied.

OK, I thought the issue was that the FL couldn't afford the lawyers to challenge the QPR ones, so were letting QPR get away with it.

 

[Ernest]

If FFP was enforced QPR would have had to sell Austin so he wouldn't have been able to score twice against us so get the lawyers onto it Barber

Funny how the two Sky favourite PLUCKY little teams Leicester and Bournemouth both CHEATED their way up

 

[perseus]

FFP is almost a waste of time. It is not likely to prevent another Portsmouth scenario. More likely I would have thought

Bolton are naughty not having produced their accounts as my betting, i.e. allegedly, they have transferred leisure (but non-footballing) assets to a parent company.

I only think it is unethical as the players are not getting paid. Otherwise I see no problem in having extra curriculum income included as basically football is a leisure industry (arguable).

Bolton fans may think that the transfer of assets is unethical, but I think the owner just wants to give away (sell at huge loss) the football part of Bolton Wanderers. Fair dues as he has subsidised the club to a hefty tune.

As the Bolton model is not unlike the Albion, investing in money making leisure (non-football) activities is a fair risk to take. Making use of the brand name. The big risk is if non-football investments do not show a profit and then it is a millstone.

 

[perseus]

I think that FFP was a badly constructed idea. If the penalties were deducted points it would have achieved its aims.

I don't care if QPR get away with it. Bloody stupidly implemented scheme.

 

[El Presidente]

OK, I thought the issue was that the FL couldn't afford the lawyers to challenge the QPR ones, so were letting QPR get away with it.

I don't think so.

I suspect that QPR have lawyers who are using delay and distraction as a means of avoiding a settlement being made.

This is because should they be promoted they don't have to pay the fine whilst in the PL.

My understanding is that QPR are arguing on two fronts

1: FFP is anti-competitive and therefore unenforceable in law (although the Football League is a private members club and therefore entitled to apply its own rules).

2: The £60 million debt written off by the owners does not constitute an owner's contribution and therefore can be treated as general revenue.

It is messy, whoever wrote the rules may have left a loophole that QPR's advisors are trying to exploit. It does appear inconsistent with the approach taken to FFP by other Championship clubs though.

 

[El Presidente]

I think that FFP was a badly constructed idea. If the penalties were deducted points it would have achieved its aims.
.

No it wouldn't, as you would need to produce accounts and agree the FFP profit within a couple of weeks of the end of the season.

That's not realistic.

 

[ManxSeagull]

I don't think so.

I suspect that QPR have lawyers who are using delay and distraction as a means of avoiding a settlement being made.

This is because should they be promoted they don't have to pay the fine whilst in the PL.

My understanding is that QPR are arguing on two fronts

1: FFP is anti-competitive and therefore unenforceable in law (although the Football League is a private members club and therefore entitled to apply its own rules).

2: The £60 million debt written off by the owners does not constitute an owner's contribution and therefore can be treated as general revenue.

It is messy, whoever wrote the rules may have left a loophole that QPR's advisors are trying to exploit. It does appear inconsistent with the approach taken to FFP by other Championship clubs though.

All the clubs signed up and agreed to FFP and likewise 3 teams promoted, three points for a win, one for a draw etc.

How can they retrospectively challenge the rules they have previously agreed to?

 

[El Presidente]

All the clubs signed up and agreed to FFP and likewise 3 teams promoted, three points for a win, one for a draw etc.

How can they retrospectively challenge the rules they have previously agreed to?

I agree with you, but Tony Fernandes seems to think QPR are above those rules.

 

[Triggaaar]

Without wanting to sound like one of the Bournemouth fans (and we are somewhat different) Mel Morris, our CEO and our FD were clear at a recent forum that we would comfortably be compliant.....

And no doubt the QPR chairman said they were compliant too.

 

[BensGrandad]

All the clubs signed up and agreed to FFP and likewise 3 teams promoted, three points for a win, one for a draw etc.

How can they retrospectively challenge the rules they have previously agreed to?

This was the argument that the High Court put when we challenged the FL over Steve Foster that the FL was a club and autonomous as regards the enforcement of their rules, that had been agreed by all member clubs.

 

[Surrey Phil]

Just demote any team relegated from PL who breach FFP & start them in Div 1 - simples!!!!

 

[Ernest]

I wonder who is breaking it this season ?

 

[perseus]

I wonder who is breaking it this season ?

£39 million over three seasons.