FFP latest predictions

[halbpro]

Read the report.
The new rules come into force for the 2016/17 season.
The existing Championship FFP framework will remain in place for the 2014/15 and 2015/16 seasons.
Any sanctions for accounts relating to the 2013/14 season will continue to take effect as intended (and in accordance with the amounts specified at the time).

Just to clarify, is that sanctions will be applied in 2014/15 and 2015/16 seasons, or will be applied for accounts over those periods?

 

[KZNSeagull]

I do, yes.

The clubs agreed to the FFP thing in the first place. If they thought it wasn't going to be attainable, why not make them more achievable at the start? That's what I don't grasp. Or vote unilaterally against the whole concept of FFP from the off.

Has this change come about because parachute payments have been massively increased since the time these rules were first brought in?

 

[Miami Seagull]

1. The rules don't change for 2 years.
2. Brighton have been making losses for years
3. Whatever FPP adjusted accounts look like they don't change the real world losses that your Chairman have to bear ie why on earth do any rule changes on artificial accounting mean you will have more money to spend if you are still losing loads in the real world
4. TB has spent 150m that he has totally gifted the club so you don't pay any interest and yet you still make losses (and you take all the income from the stadium but ignore the costs that anyone else would need to account for if they got a new stadium on an arms length basis)
5. You get 4.8m pa from the Premier League. You ticket income is 8.7m. You wages and social security costs are 21m
6. Your accounts will look even worse when you have to start depreciating the stadium (though not for FPP)

Obviously I'll get slaughtered for posting this but everything above is true (source: Brighton's accounts !)

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?

 

[Easy 10]

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?

Did you not notice the CLADDING ?

 

[GreersElbow]

So why are we unlikely with £14.9 million loss, but middles boro likely with £14 million loss?

Also the notts forest comment is interesting....they sold players to reinvest in new players...surely that is the only way a team can survive. Are they now talking about restricting transfer values so the ins and outs fall withing a FFP threshold?

Leniency because we're pro ffp, but also we've been making obvious attempts to cut costs. It doesn't sound like other clubs have been.

 

[GreersElbow]

1. The rules don't change for 2 years.
2. Brighton have been making losses for years
3. Whatever FPP adjusted accounts look like they don't change the real world losses that your Chairman have to bear ie why on earth do any rule changes on artificial accounting mean you will have more money to spend if you are still losing loads in the real world
4. TB has spent 150m that he has totally gifted the club so you don't pay any interest and yet you still make losses (and you take all the income from the stadium but ignore the costs that anyone else would need to account for if they got a new stadium on an arms length basis)
5. You get 4.8m pa from the Premier League. You ticket income is 8.7m. You wages and social security costs are 21m
6. Your accounts will look even worse when you have to start depreciating the stadium (though not for FPP)

Obviously I'll get slaughtered for posting this but everything above is true (source: Brighton's accounts !)

lol, point 6.

All assets depreciate...

 

[drew]

Looking at the new rules, clubs can basically lose what they want from 2016-17 so FFP has pretty much been scrapped.

Is there a link to the new rules?

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

Did you not notice the CLADDING ?

Don't mention the CLADDING

 

[KZNSeagull]

Is there a link to the new rules?

http://www1.skysports.com/football/...nship-clubs-are-set-to-change-their-ffp-rules

Not detailed though.

 

[Gordon Smith's Paperboy]

So, have I got this right?

Next year clubs can make a loss of £13million? If I remember correctly, it was orignally £4million.

We all seem to think that Birghton were on course to meet FFP rules, so, if that is the case, if TB wants to, he can throw £9million at the playing budget next year and still keep in the FFP parameters.

It's his money, and he's already paid millions into the club, but the opportunity is there...

 

[chaileyjem]

Slightly more detail via
http://www.football-league.co.uk/ne...hip-financial-fair-play-rules-rg-2066799.aspx

 

[KZNSeagull]

So, have I got this right?

Next year clubs can make a loss of £13million? If I remember correctly, it was orignally £4million.

We all seem to think that Birghton were on course to meet FFP rules, so, if that is the case, if TB wants to, he can throw £9million at the playing budget next year and still keep in the FFP parameters.

It's his money, and he's already paid millions into the club, but the opportunity is there...

From 2016/17, not next year. The rules for this season and the next remain - 6m loss this season, 5m next.

 

[Goldstone1976]

So, have I got this right?

Next year clubs can make a loss of £13million? If I remember correctly, it was orignally £4million.

We all seem to think that Birghton were on course to meet FFP rules, so, if that is the case, if TB wants to, he can throw £9million at the playing budget next year and still keep in the FFP parameters.

It's his money, and he's already paid millions into the club, but the opportunity is there...

Yep, that is precisely how I read it.

It will be interesting to see if Tony's continuing largesse extends to stumping up an extra £9m next year (assuming, of course that we don't get promoted this season - sorry, couldn't resist). I've always wondered to what degree Tony was hiding behind the FFP rules as a convenient way of limiting his ongoing funding as opposed to being prepared in the short term to fund losses up to the limit, irrespective of what it is. I guess we're going to find out. If the club decide to tell us how they voted in today's meeting, that might provide an early clue...

 

[KZNSeagull]

Slightly more detail via
http://www.football-league.co.uk/ne...hip-financial-fair-play-rules-rg-2066799.aspx

Nice contradiction in that story:

- The existing Championship FFP framework will remain in place for the 2014/15 and 2015/16 seasons.
- The maximum deviation under the regulations will remain at £6m for 2014/15 and will increase to £13m in 2015/16, in line with the maximum loss (£39m over 3 seasons) permitted under the new rules.

 

[Goldstone1976]

Nice contradiction in that story:

- The existing Championship FFP framework will remain in place for the 2014/15 and 2015/16 seasons.
- The maximum deviation under the regulations will remain at £6m for 2014/15 and will increase to £13m in 2015/16, in line with the maximum loss (£39m over 3 seasons) permitted under the new rules.

I thought that initially. I've now changed my mind. The framework of FFP can remain in place for the next two seasons, after which it becomes profit and sustainability, with the limit having increased from £4m next season to £13m. It's badly worded, but I don't think there's an internal conflict.

 

[jgmcdee]

I dunno but if they want to change FFP then change it. Having acceptable losses drop so low for the next two seasons and then ramping them back up again seems to be sending confusing signals of the highest order.

Can't see any decent players moving around in the 2015/16 transfer windows the way things stand, as they'll all be holding out for a better deal when more money is available.

 

[KZNSeagull]

I thought that initially. I've now changed my mind. The framework of FFP can remain in place for the next two seasons, after which it becomes profit and sustainability, with the limit having increased from £4m next season to £13m. It's badly worded, but I don't think there's an internal conflict.

But the article states at the beginning "From the beginning of the 2016/17 season........" which ties in with the "The existing Championship FFP framework will remain in place for the 2014/15 and 2015/16 seasons."

 

[Everest]

Leniency because we're pro ffp, but also we've been making obvious attempts to cut costs. It doesn't sound like other clubs have been.

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.

 

[Goldstone1976]

But the article states at the beginning "From the beginning of the 2016/17 season........" which ties in with the "The existing Championship FFP framework will remain in place for the 2014/15 and 2015/16 seasons."

Yes, exactly. From 16/17, the new framework (profit and sustainability) is introduced, with new (as yet unspecified) precise rules, but with the ability to lose up to £39m over 3 years (£13m pa). As a transitional measure the FFP rules will remain place for next year, but the acceptable loss increases from £4m to £13m...

 

[TWOCHOICEStom]

The only punishment they could hand out to the teams that have so far ignored FFP is to prevent promotion. Everything else is a relative waste of time if you ask me. ESPECIALLY if the rules are to be relaxed in 2 years.