FFP latest predictions

[Driver8]

I'm still not entirely sure how increasing the level of loss allowed helps level the playing field with those clubs coming down.

Surely they will also be allowed to lose more (on top of their parachute payment) so the advantage will be maintained?

 

[lawros left foot]

I'm still not entirely sure how increasing the level of loss allowed helps level the playing field with those clubs coming down.

Surely they will also be allowed to lose more (on top of their parachute payment) so the advantage will be maintained?

I agree, the best for our club would be FFPas it is now, and parachute payments only to be used for the relegated squad, , notnew additions (McCormack at Fulham) or to increase salaries for existing players. In a perfect world there would be no parachute payments all clubs would have relegation clauses built into players contracts
to

 

[jgmcdee]

You're assuming there are 23 other clubs in the Championship who have owners willing to spunk £13 million on a gamble to get promoted. I don't see that myself.

Or just willing to take on higher levels of debt. Seems like a retrograde step to me if the aim is a sustainable and non-loss-making (can't say profitable) Championship.

 

[Lower West Stander]

I posted this on the other thread - but think it may be relevant here.

FFP is never, ever going to work until football clubs have sustainable business models.

The whole idea of running a business is to make a profit, but the way the game is set up there is no way this is going to happen unless you are a massive organisation with different revenue streams. Man U are the best example of this where only a third of their revenue stream is from match day income. The rest is from advertising, sponsorship etc. If you aren't Man U, the only way you are going to get on is by spending money outside of the revenue capacity of the business which means rich owners chucking money around in the form of interest fee shareholder loans. This is not how business works.

So we either have to look at the fair division of revenues in the US system (ie much tighter regulation) or just let teams get on with it and accept that each club is going to have different owners who can do what they want. Does anyone really think Man City's performance improved on the back of its business model?

I was never convinced that using p&l was the best way to measure the financial performance of a club (why not use cashflow? - much better pointer), but now these numbers have been changed anyway, it makes the whole thing a complete joke. Where have these numbers come from? £13m, £39m they are all unsustainable losses in the medium term. Given Barber is a CEO with a good understanding of financial management, I have never understood his constant reference to FFP as something which is sustainable and needs to be adhered to. It is not sustainable and it already hasn't been!

I also don't understand why the club voted to increase the loss "for the greater good". What "greater good"??

 

[jgmcdee]

I'd agree with your analysis of TB's options, but presumably he was aware of them before giving the go ahead to PB to vote in favour? If so, the implication is that TB will be prepared to fund increased losses, at least in the short term, though whether his appetite will extend to the full £13m is debatable, especially as the club would have preferred the increase to have been lower...

But it's not £13m, it's £13m a year. What if TB has the appetite for a year, or two, but no more?

I think we'll see more clubs changing hands as one is taken over, money pumped in to it in an attempt to reach the PL, and eventually the owners realise they can't compete without continued investment and lose interest. Hardly the sustainable model that people were hoping for.

 

[Diego Napier]

Businesses go into administration due to cash, not profit, issues though.

Not sure what the point is you're making el P? I'm suggesting that the impacted businesses lose out because they don't get paid their cash. If you're referring to the football clubs then I'm not sure what process could be realistically put in place to monitor cash flow. Does such a mechanism exist in the real business world to prevent administration/bankruptcy?

 

[El Presidente]

Does such a mechanism exist in the real business world to prevent administration/bankruptcy?

A lot of businesses have their cash flow monitored carefully by lenders.

The point I am making is that you can spend a lot of money outside of the allowable deficits, such as the money TB has invested in the Amex and Lancing, so FFP is nothing more than a crock of shit.

 

[nwgull]

A lot of businesses have their cash flow monitored carefully by lenders.

The point I am making is that you can spend a lot of money outside of the allowable deficits, such as the money TB has invested in the Amex and Lancing, so FFP is nothing more than a crock of shit.

I disagree with your last point. The main reason infrastructure such as the stadium and academy is outside of FFP limits is that it produces income, both now and in the future, whilst developing the game for the better. They're both going to still be there in 50 years time and won't sit on a bench sulking because they don't like the cold weather and then piss off back to Spain in 2-3 years (£5 million richer).

 

[rgb]

Of course there are ups and downs, and that in itself doesn't account for Bournemouth doing well. The players still have to do the business on the pitch, and they evidently are. Credit is due for that.

I maintain, however, that if Bournemouth were paying wages commensurate with their income, then a fair few of those players wouldn't be with the club. If the club chooses to gamble in the hope of promotion, that's up to them.

But please: just spare us the "plucky little old Bournemouth, it's a miracle" stuff, because it really isn't. That's the sort of rubbish I'd expect to hear from one of your most famous former managers.

Hey. Each to their own I suppose. I hope you'll come back to this thread when the FFP accounts are revealed next month.

I shall indeed return then. I'll eat humble pie if we fail too.

You seem to be deliberately ignoring the facts I presented with respect to the players. The vast majority of AFCB's squad, was playing in the 3rd division the season before last. Eunan O'Kane was in the 4th with Torquay. You have no way - along with anybody on this board - of knowing what the players at AFCB (or for that matter BHA) are actually paid.

There's a signing on fee (percentage of the transfer fee);
an amount for being in the 1st-team squad;
an amount for being in the 16;
an amount for being in the starting 11;
an amount for coming on as a sub;
an amount for scoring;
an amount for drawing;
an amount for winning;
an amount for position in the table

How on earth do you know all these amounts for each AFCB player?

At the moment, AFCB sit top of the table, having won their last 5 x games, utilising 10 players in the starting line-up, who were playing in the 3rd divsion the season before last. Wages have nothing to do with it; because AFCB have coached and trained those 10 players to be as good as they are now. They are predominantly British Isles players, led by an English manager.

BHA have spunked £millions on foreign players and managers for years and sit 1-point above the drop-zone. Your spending is far in excess of ours but because your chairman has spent £100 million+ on a shiny new ground and facilities, you have the automatic right to assume you deserve to be above plucky little Bournemouth?

You're where you are now because you've been crap this season and AFCB have played well. Live with it, get over it and ask yourself if Steve Foster would've whinged as much as you.

 

[GreersElbow]

Nope, it's because the figures quoted, as I pointed out in post #3, were from 2012/13, not last season. They won't be announced until next month.

No? That's what it says on the website.....I'm not giving my two pence, that's literally what has been said on the site...

 

[Everest]

No? That's what it says on the website.....I'm not giving my two pence, that's literally what has been said on the site...

I know what it says on the site. I was replying to YOUR reply to Granny. He asked why we are unlikely to be punished, but Boro are when they had a lower loss figure - those figures have nothing to do with last season.
Leniency because we're pro ffp has absolutely nothing to do with it.

 

[El Presidente]

I disagree with your last point. The main reason infrastructure such as the stadium and academy is outside of FFP limits is that it produces income, both now and in the future, whilst developing the game for the better. They're both going to still be there in 50 years time and won't sit on a bench sulking because they don't like the cold weather and then piss off back to Spain in 2-3 years (£5 million richer).

All very well, but a lender couldn't give a stuff about whether the property is there in 50 years time, it is concerned about getting it's money back.

 

[Pantani]

I shall indeed return then. I'll eat humble pie if we fail too.

You seem to be deliberately ignoring the facts I presented with respect to the players. The vast majority of AFCB's squad, was playing in the 3rd division the season before last. Eunan O'Kane was in the 4th with Torquay. You have no way - along with anybody on this board - of knowing what the players at AFCB (or for that matter BHA) are actually paid.

There's a signing on fee (percentage of the transfer fee);
an amount for being in the 1st-team squad;
an amount for being in the 16;
an amount for being in the starting 11;
an amount for coming on as a sub;
an amount for scoring;
an amount for drawing;
an amount for winning;
an amount for position in the table

How on earth do you know all these amounts for each AFCB player?

At the moment, AFCB sit top of the table, having won their last 5 x games, utilising 10 players in the starting line-up, who were playing in the 3rd divsion the season before last. Wages have nothing to do with it; because AFCB have coached and trained those 10 players to be as good as they are now. They are predominantly British Isles players, led by an English manager.

BHA have spunked £millions on foreign players and managers for years and sit 1-point above the drop-zone. Your spending is far in excess of ours but because your chairman has spent £100 million+ on a shiny new ground and facilities, you have the automatic right to assume you deserve to be above plucky little Bournemouth?

You're where you are now because you've been crap this season and AFCB have played well. Live with it, get over it and ask yourself if Steve Foster would've whinged as much as you.

With all these 3rd Division Players you lost £15.3m in 2012/13 (the year you got promoted) Source

You had an average attendance of 6,852

This year you average 9,606. Last year you averaged 9,952.

How much are those extra 3,000 paying? One thing is for certain your wage costs did not go down after promotion. So have Bournemouth found an extra £7.3m (minimum) after promotion to bring those losses back to the £8m FFP target?

 

[eaglejez]

Nothing wrong with the post. A question though. It has been claimed that your owners are worth billions. Is there any frustration that they haven't invested in the infrastructure of the club as Bloom has, despite early claims in their tenure that this would happen?

I don't think they are worth billions. Most info suggests combined they are prob worth a few hundred million but a lot of that is on paper via the value of their shareholdings in their companies. They said up front that they were not willing to chuck away their fortunes on the Club, more like holding it in 'trust' until an approved owner came along.

I reckon they spent 4m buying the club and like all clubs in the Championship we were losing >5m pa which they covered for 2-3 years. They got 10m of that back from the sale of Zaha so were probably a few mill down before we somehow got promoted !! Obviously that was an unbudgeted windfall (even if we go down bottom it will get the club over 200m which is insane, some might say disgusting). We have spent more on wages but not that much (comparatively) on player costs which is why we have American businessmen sniffing around for 70m (big cash pile - at the moment - plus future Sky money even if we go down).

Re the infrastructure a new stadium is not financially viable so is not going to happen unless someone takes over and is happy to blow money out of the window. The sensible strategy is to do Selhurst up (max 30K capacity) and not blow money on Peter Crouch's on 70K pw. Worked last year but we had a load of luck with injuries and the bonus that at least 5 of our team that came up turned out to be Premiership quality. Its a risky strategy though, as can be seen by how things are going this season. We definitely have a better squad but we are struggling to compete with the teams that have chucked money around such as Hull and QPR.

As for FPP. As many have said on this thread its a ridiculous artificial rule that's never going to work whilst the whole essence of football finances are screwed ! All clubs lose money big time and visits to the Premiership delay a club's financial problems for a period defined by how much they chuck at their players in a desperate bid to stay up.

For all our rivalry the one thing we have in common are having owners who are as big a supporters as us and will have to do the best for their clubs long term viability however much it screws them up in the short term. Not sure I'd want that to be given up to an American with no feelings for the Club

 

[Grombleton]

You're where you are now because you've been crap this season and AFCB have played well. Live with it, get over it and ask yourself if Steve Foster would've whinged as much as you.

toysoutofpram.jpg

 

[GreersElbow]

I know what it says on the site. I was replying to YOUR reply to Granny. He asked why we are unlikely to be punished, but Boro are when they had a lower loss figure - those figures have nothing to do with last season.
Leniency because we're pro ffp has absolutely nothing to do with it.

Okay, I never mentioned figures. I mentioned our obvious cost cutting measures as being evidence of our commitment, I never bought the figures in to disrepute.

As stated here "

-£14.8m
Unlikely
Advocates for FFP who have cut costs to meet thresholds. Equity injection will probably be required."

Us cutting costs is a factor, never bought figures into disrepute, continue down that line if you wish.

 

[Dave the OAP]

toysoutofpram.jpg

. To be fair he made some very good points. We seemed to be gripped with the delusion that because we have a shiny stadium and a chairman who is a fan, we somehow are owed premiership football. And this pathetic rubbishing of Bournemouth is really unwarranted. They are a good club, with a very good team and decent fans.

They deserve as much sucess as anyone does. Good luck to them.

 

[AZ Gull]

. To be fair he made some very good points. We seemed to be gripped with the delusion that because we have a shiny stadium and a chairman who is a fan, we somehow are owed premiership football. And this pathetic rubbishing of Bournemouth is really unwarranted. They are a good club, with a very good team and decent fans.

They deserve as much sucess as anyone does. Good luck to them.

"Pathetic rubbishing"? I have just read back through this entire thread [MENTION=20]granny weatherwax[/MENTION], and there isn't a single post that "rubbishes" Bournemouth in any way, let alone pathetically. What I did see, though, were a number of well-observed posts about the size of Bournemouth's loss in their League 1 promotion season (a loss that even we have not managed to "achieve" in recent seasons!), and some posts raising very legitimate questions about the size (and sustainability) of Bournemouth's spending on players in the meantime (along with a poster claiming somewhat detailed knowledge of the remuneration of one member of the Bournemouth squad).

We won't know the full truth of Bournemouth's wage bill until their next accounts get published, but given that the opening post of this thread contains a link to an independent website that estimates that the Cherries will fall foul of the FFP regulations and are "very likely" to have a transfer embargo imposed, I think all the questions raised in this thread with regard to AFCB have been relevant, fair and pertinent.

 

[AZ Gull]

[MENTION=28828]rgb[/MENTION] - interesting comments from you on this thread. It is always informative to have a dialogue with supporters from other clubs, and I would like to raise a couple of points that I would love to hear your thoughts on. In that spirit, I will ignore the posturing that seemed to creep into your last post.

Firstly, I'm very intrigued what has caused your complete about-face with regard to AFCB meeting the FFP criteria. Back on January 14, on here, when you were asked how AFCB were doing in regard to FFP, and whether they were likely to be in-line, you stated:-

No idea. Not privy to the accounts. Were I to have a punt on it, I'd say 'poorly' and 'no' .........

However, today you posted:-

I am very confident that AFCB will NOT fail FFP.

What is the evidence you have that has caused this dramatic shift? It would seem that even your Chairman doesn't share your confidence. This is a report on the BBC back on May 6 - AFC Bournemouth: Jeff Mostyn hopes for Financial Fair Play change

A quote from the article:-

Mostyn says under the current structure the club would struggle to come inside the limitations when they get audited.

And one can understand his concern when you look at the detail of their finances from season 2012-13 (when promotion was won): AFCB's wage bill increased BY MORE THAN £7 MILLION to £11 million. Yes, the wage bill TRIPLED in one year!!! AFCB's revenue was ..... £5.2 million. Your wages alone were more than twice your revenue!!!

[Here is the link, from the Bournemouth Echo, for these numbers - AFC Bournemouth: Cherries post £15million losses]

There is no reason to believe the spending has been reigned in; Grabban had his contract renewed TWICE last season, in the space of two months. There is anecdotal evidence, on here, of at least some of the squad receiving inflated wages as a result of promotion.

Given that AFCB lost £15.3 million in 2012-13, and the maximum permissible loss in 2013-14 is £8 million, how the heck do you expect to bridge that gap?


I am also very bemused by this comment you made today:-

BHA have spunked £millions on foreign players and managers for years

The facts: Albion have paid a transfer fee for precisely ONE foreign player, namely Leo Ulloa. He cost around £2 million in January 2013. He scored 26 goals in 58 appearances, and he was sold to Leicester City in July for £8 million (potentially rising to £10 million, with add-ons). It was fantastic business by the club, from both a footballing and a financial perspective. Of the other foreign players we have signed in recent years: Inigo Calderon is perhaps the most loved player (and club ambassador) since the days of Peter Ward; Andrea Orlandi was so popular that when he was released in the summer there were calls on here for a petition to have the club change it's mind; David Lopez, after a slow start in his first season, had such a successful second half of the campaign that supporters virtually demanded that he was re-signed in 2013; Bruno has been a first-team regular for 3 seasons and is one of the classiest players we have; and Vicente, although he spent nowhere near long enough on the pitch, provided probably the most compelling moments the Amex regulars have seen.
AFCB: In August last year you signed Tokelo Rantie, a striker, for a similar sum to that which Ulloa cost, on a four-year deal. So far, he has scored 5 goals in 41 appearances. I am not aware of any bids of £8 million for him.

So, when you look at both of our clubs, if you are going to accuse one of them of "spunking" money on foreign players, the evidence would very strongly suggest that it is not, in fact, Brighton and Hove Albion who are the guilty party.


Just to be clear: I have no axe to grind with Bournemouth fans. You have a team who are currently doing the business on the pitch, and you deserve to enjoy it while it lasts. But you and I both know that AFCB's spending is significantly in excess of their revenue, and that they are almost certainly going to fail to meet the FFP criteria. I hope you are prepared for whatever consequences might follow as a result of that.

 

[spence]

[MENTION=28828]rgb[/MENTION] - interesting comments from you on this thread. It is always informative to have a dialogue with supporters from other clubs, and I would like to raise a couple of points that I would love to hear your thoughts on. In that spirit, I will ignore the posturing that seemed to creep into your last post.

Firstly, I'm very intrigued what has caused your complete about-face with regard to AFCB meeting the FFP criteria. Back on January 14, on here, when you were asked how AFCB were doing in regard to FFP, and whether they were likely to be in-line, you stated:-



However, today you posted:-



What is the evidence you have that has caused this dramatic shift? It would seem that even your Chairman doesn't share your confidence. This is a report on the BBC back on May 6 - AFC Bournemouth: Jeff Mostyn hopes for Financial Fair Play change

A quote from the article:-



And one can understand his concern when you look at the detail of their finances from season 2012-13 (when promotion was won): AFCB's wage bill increased BY MORE THAN £7 MILLION to £11 million. Yes, the wage bill TRIPLED in one year!!! AFCB's revenue was ..... £5.2 million. Your wages alone were more than twice your revenue!!!

[Here is the link, from the Bournemouth Echo, for these numbers - AFC Bournemouth: Cherries post £15million losses]

There is no reason to believe the spending has been reigned in; Grabban had his contract renewed TWICE last season, in the space of two months. There is anecdotal evidence, on here, of at least some of the squad receiving inflated wages as a result of promotion.

Given that AFCB lost £15.3 million in 2012-13, and the maximum permissible loss in 2013-14 is £8 million, how the heck do you expect to bridge that gap?


I am also very bemused by this comment you made today:-



The facts: Albion have paid a transfer fee for precisely ONE foreign player, namely Leo Ulloa. He cost around £2 million in January 2013. He scored 26 goals in 58 appearances, and he was sold to Leicester City in July for £8 million (potentially rising to £10 million, with add-ons). It was fantastic business by the club, from both a footballing and a financial perspective. Of the other foreign players we have signed in recent years: Inigo Calderon is perhaps the most loved player (and club ambassador) since the days of Peter Ward; Andrea Orlandi was so popular that when he was released in the summer there were calls on here for a petition to have the club change it's mind; David Lopez, after a slow start in his first season, had such a successful second half of the campaign that supporters virtually demanded that he was re-signed in 2013; Bruno has been a first-team regular for 3 seasons and is one of the classiest players we have; and Vicente, although he spent nowhere near long enough on the pitch, provided probably the most compelling moments the Amex regulars have seen.
AFCB: In August last year you signed Tokelo Rantie, a striker, for a similar sum to that which Ulloa cost, on a four-year deal. So far, he has scored 5 goals in 41 appearances. I am not aware of any bids of £8 million for him.

So, when you look at both of our clubs, if you are going to accuse one of them of "spunking" money on foreign players, the evidence would very strongly suggest that it is not, in fact, Brighton and Hove Albion who are the guilty party.


Just to be clear: I have no axe to grind with Bournemouth fans. You have a team who are currently doing the business on the pitch, and you deserve to enjoy it while it lasts. But you and I both know that AFCB's spending is significantly in excess of their revenue, and that they are almost certainly going to fail to meet the FFP criteria. I hope you are prepared for whatever consequences might follow as a result of that.

We paid a decent fee for Colunga, also small fees for Bergkamp and two young players one from Norway(now left) the other Latvia(not sure where he is) i believe