Ipswich losses for 2012 £16m, £79m in debt.....

[Brovion]

It is not as simple as that though. HMRC are taking a much firmer line than in previous years and the NewCo is unlikely to be given credit terms by suppliers if the administration is a pre-pack deal.

Good. We want no more clubs cheating death the way Palace did. The fact they're still in the Championship as opposed to the 'new' Palace working their way up toward the Blue Square Premier is an affront to human decency. Oh, and any Palace fans who disagree: don't bother replying as I don't give a toss what you think and shan't read any of your self-justifying lies.

 

[Triggaaar]

if you completely ignore FFP rules and make no effort to comply (like Palace!) with them

Palace aren't breaking the rules are they? They're doing quite well from an FFP point of view.

 

[les dynam]

Not the case, if you exceed the FFP rules (and the accounts have to be submitted by 31 December) then you are subject to a transfer embargo so would not be able to sign any players in the January window.

For example, Southampton and West Ham both exceeded the rules last season, and would therefore have been unable to sign Billy Sharp and Ricardo Vaz Te.

Is that workable? How quickly will it take to asses the accounts and then apply the embargo? Surely this could take weeks... so clubs can get their transfer business done in early Jan before the embargo appears?

Do you think FFP will make any difference?

 

[les dynam]

Palace aren't breaking the rules are they? They're doing quite well from an FFP point of view.

dunno. just thought i'd throw that in there for fun. i try and avoid the tedious palace threads so i have next to no idea how they're doing... other than something i read that suggested their 'business plan' involved losing millions every year, without ever addressing the issue of their crumbling stadium, whilst hoping that they could generate enough from player sales every year to plug the gaping gaps. Is that about right?

 

[El Presidente]

Is that workable? How quickly will it take to asses the accounts and then apply the embargo? Surely this could take weeks... so clubs can get their transfer business done in early Jan before the embargo appears?

Do you think FFP will make any difference?

Yes it will. The Football League should be in a position to review the accounts very quickly (after all, there are only 24 to check).

Any club who fails to comply with the rules will

(a) Have a transfer embargo from 1st Jan
(b) Have to pay a tax on a sliding scale of between 1-100% of the excess over the FFP target figures.

For example, QPR, in the season they were promoted, would have paid a tax of £19 million to the other Championship clubs. If clubs gamble on breaking the rules and do NOT get promoted, this would effectively destroy them the following season. Is it a gamble too far?

 

[Triggaaar]

dunno. just thought i'd throw that in there for fun. i try and avoid the tedious palace threads so i have next to no idea how they're doing

Lost a few £m 2010-11, expected to be around £2-3m loss for 2011-12. Not as bad as most.

... other than something i read that suggested their 'business plan' involved losing millions every year, without ever addressing the issue of their crumbling stadium, whilst hoping that they could generate enough from player sales every year to plug the gaping gaps. Is that about right?

Well, er yes, but...

 

[abujablue]

The Ipswich owner, Marcus Evans, owns Portman Road and their training ground so they've got no assets either.

Actually, the council owns Portman Road and an annual rent is paid to them.

 

[Bwian]

Taking the Palace route, then.

So does that mean we'll get loads of Tractor Boys signing up to NSC so they can brag about how long they've spent in the top 2 divisions? That is the Palace way isn't it? Administration followed by gloating.

 

[Bwian]

A nasty part of me wants them to be relegated this season so that Palace get to be the longest lasting club presently in the top 2 Divisions who shamelessly screwed their creditors twice in the process.

And then frigging brag about it.

Corrected for you.

 

[Bozza]

The loss is startling, obviously, but the revenue figure illustrates just what the Amex gives the Albion. Whilst they were bringing in £15m, we were earning almost 50% more at £22.2m. With the newly enlarged Amex and Paul Barber working the commercial strings, our results are only going to improve whilst it's hard to imagine how Ipswich can materially change theirs whilst they remain in the Championship.

It's astounding the number of 'big' clubs who are now trailling in our wake financially.

 

[Bwian]

The loss is startling, obviously, but the revenue figure illustrates just what the Amex gives the Albion. Whilst they were bringing in £15m, we were earning almost 50% more at £22.2m. With the newly enlarged Amex and Paul Barber working the commercial strings, our results are only going to improve whilst it's hard to imagine how Ipswich can materially change theirs whilst they remain in the Championship.

It's astounding the number of 'big' clubs who are now trailling in our wake financially.

What's even more astounding is the original business model for The Amex during the campaign years.

Dick Knight and Martin Perry played an absolute blinder in getting us planning permission. Only needed attendances of 12,500 to break even. DK-the master of spin during our troubled period.

 

[Pavilionaire]

Total financial mismanagement at Ipswich. And I thought Bristol City's figures were bad.

 

[El Presidente]

There have been a total of 54 administrations of current and former clubs.

Darlington have been in administration three times

Palace, Leeds, Rotherham, Pompey and Port Vale have managed it twice.

 

[El Presidente]

Tomorrow's opponents Leicester lost £29.7 million last year, and their wage costs were £27.7 million, almost twice those of the Albion.

 

[Saltydog]

Actually, the council owns Portman Road and an annual rent is paid to them.

Evans just owns the training ground I believe.

 

[Triggaaar]

There have been a total of 54 administrations of current and former clubs.

Shouldn't something be done to stop clubs benefiting from administration?

 

[Pavilionaire]

You wonder whether FFP has come in at the wrong time for the Albion. The days when the likes of Blackburn and Bolton will come down ridden with debt and be obliged to use the parachute payments to pay off a chunk - thus ruling them out of the promotion picture - are fast disappearing.

Sure, there will be exceptions like QPR, but there are a number of savvy chairmen of Prem clubs now who are ensuring net debt is small and manageable, i.e. Reading, West Brom, Swansea, Stoke, Southampton, Norwich. If these sides get relegated they will simply trouser the hefty parachute payments and mount a charge to come straight back up again.

Therefore, I believe the days of the Championship being as open as this are numbered and don't expect to be seeing too many sides bounding from League 1 to the Prem in two seasons like, say, Southampton.

Tomorrow's game is massive.

 

[KZNSeagull]

Yes it will. The Football League should be in a position to review the accounts very quickly (after all, there are only 24 to check).

Any club who fails to comply with the rules will

(a) Have a transfer embargo from 1st Jan
(b) Have to pay a tax on a sliding scale of between 1-100% of the excess over the FFP target figures.

For example, QPR, in the season they were promoted, would have paid a tax of £19 million to the other Championship clubs. If clubs gamble on breaking the rules and do NOT get promoted, this would effectively destroy them the following season. Is it a gamble too far?

I thought I read that clubs only got fined if promoted whilst breaking the FFP rules? Perhaps I imagined that..

Edit: No I didn't. From the Football league website:

From the 2014/15 season, sanctions will be introduced that will differ depending on whether the club ultimately remained in the Championship, was promoted to the Premier League or was relegated to League 1.
i. Sanctions for clubs remaining in the Championship
Clubs that fail to comply with the Financial Fair Play regulations (from December 1st 2014) will be subject to a transfer embargo. This embargo will come in to force ahead of the subsequent transfer window beginning on January 1, 2015.
The embargo will remain in place until the club is able to lodge financial information that demonstrates that it meets the Financial Fair Play regulations (either for the previous reporting period or a future reporting period).
ii. Sanctions for clubs promoted to the Premier League
Clubs promoted to the Premier League will be required to provide Financial Fair Play information for their promotion season by December 1. Any club found to have breached Financial Fair Play regulations will be required to pay a 'Fair Play Tax' on the excess by which the club failed to fulfil the Fair Play requirement, ranging from 1% on the first £100,000 to 100% on anything over £10m.
The Fair Play Tax will be applied at the following thresholds:
(a) 1% of the excess between £1 and £100,000;
(b) 20% of the excess between £100,001 and £500,000;
(c) 40% of the excess between £500,001 and £1,000,000;
(d) 60% of the excess between £1,000,001 and £5,000,000;
(e) 80% of the excess between £5,000,001 and £10,000,000; and
(f) 100% of the excess over £10,000,000
Any proceeds will be distributed equally amongst clubs that have complied with the Financial Fair Play regulations for the season in question.

 

[El Presidente]

Shouldn't something be done to stop clubs benefiting from administration?

They have not all benefitted though.

Many clubs have had points deductions and transfer embargoes, Maidstone went out of business half way through the season.

Football clubs also provide a lot of employment locally, they are no more or less cynical manipulators of company insolvency legislation than many other industries (with the exception of banks, who are CJTC's).

 

[El Presidente]

I thought I read that clubs only got fined if promoted whilst breaking the FFP rules? Perhaps I imagined that..

Edit: No I didn't. From the Football league website:

From the 2014/15 season, sanctions will be introduced that will differ depending on whether the club ultimately remained in the Championship, was promoted to the Premier League or was relegated to League 1.
i. Sanctions for clubs remaining in the Championship
Clubs that fail to comply with the Financial Fair Play regulations (from December 1st 2014) will be subject to a transfer embargo. This embargo will come in to force ahead of the subsequent transfer window beginning on January 1, 2015.
The embargo will remain in place until the club is able to lodge financial information that demonstrates that it meets the Financial Fair Play regulations (either for the previous reporting period or a future reporting period).
ii. Sanctions for clubs promoted to the Premier League
Clubs promoted to the Premier League will be required to provide Financial Fair Play information for their promotion season by December 1. Any club found to have breached Financial Fair Play regulations will be required to pay a 'Fair Play Tax' on the excess by which the club failed to fulfil the Fair Play requirement, ranging from 1% on the first £100,000 to 100% on anything over £10m.
The Fair Play Tax will be applied at the following thresholds:
(a) 1% of the excess between £1 and £100,000;
(b) 20% of the excess between £100,001 and £500,000;
(c) 40% of the excess between £500,001 and £1,000,000;
(d) 60% of the excess between £1,000,001 and £5,000,000;
(e) 80% of the excess between £5,000,001 and £10,000,000; and
(f) 100% of the excess over £10,000,000
Any proceeds will be distributed equally amongst clubs that have complied with the Financial Fair Play regulations for the season in question.

Apologies, you are right, if the club is not promoted it only has a transfer embargo.