New Forest CEO makes FFP a priority

[Sleaford Seagull]

http://www.nottinghampost.com/New-N...ecutive-Paul/story-22868197-detail/story.html

The new Forest CEO has decided to make FFP a priority but it seems like he is confident it won't be enforced.

Some quotes from the article:


After taking up his new post at the City Ground, former Aston Villa CEO Faulkner says getting to the bottom of the issue will be one of his first priorities.


"I am hoping to talk to people at the Football League to get my arms around that side of things. It is an important part of the club,"

"There is a starting point, which will be to spend some time with the people at the Football League, to make sure we understand the nuances of it.

"There are a lot of debates and discussions around it. There is still a question mark there.


Seems a very different stance to us that's for sure.

 

[Daffy Duck]

Let's hope he's in for a nasty little surprise when he checks the books at Forest.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

http://www.nottinghampost.com/New-N...ecutive-Paul/story-22868197-detail/story.html

The new Forest CEO has decided to make FFP a priority but it seems like he is confident it won't be enforced.

Some quotes from the article:


After taking up his new post at the City Ground, former Aston Villa CEO Faulkner says getting to the bottom of the issue will be one of his first priorities.


"I am hoping to talk to people at the Football League to get my arms around that side of things. It is an important part of the club,"

"There is a starting point, which will be to spend some time with the people at the Football League, to make sure we understand the nuances of it.

"There are a lot of debates and discussions around it. There is still a question mark there.


Seems a very different stance to us that's for sure.

So they spend the money then go running asking for some clarfication on the rules, shouldn't they have done this right at the start. Hope FFP comes down hard on the clubs that broke the rules. Only reason they are top is because they have overspent. By the time anything gets around to being sorted out they will probably have been promoted.

 

[Everest]

I think he may be a little too late to make it a proirity

 

[Rod Marsh]

I was under the impression they had a 500m sponsorship deal over 10 years, so a lovely 50m a year from the chairman/company. These are exactly the nuances he's talking about i'm sure, who decides what market value of a sponsorship deal is I dont know.

I'm willing to bet they meet the FFP requirments.

 

[skipper734]

We have a New Forest down here. That has Verderers not CEO's.

 

[The Wizard]

Convenient after spunking ridiculous money on untold amounts of players in the past 2 years. It won't be enforced anyway, pathetic loopholes will be found and clubs will just take it to court if it came to it.

 

[spanish flair]

I don't understand this quote from him

"Even if Forest were hit with an embargo, they could, in theory, sign new players, under specific circumstances.

If a player leaves the club, they can be replaced as long as any new player does not earn more money than the one who has departed"

Is this not what clubs do to stay within a clubs budget anyway?

 

[Sleaford Seagull]

I think it will be even sweeter if we finish above teams like Forest this season, working within FFP and still finishing top 6 would be a great achievement.

 

[Pinkie Brown]

Seems to be so many definitions of FFP and different views on how to adhere - or appear to be adhering. Some clubs would appear to be attempting to abide by the letter of the regulations whilst others seem to be dedicated looking for loopholes and grey area's. The Forest sponsorship scheme last year was an example.

QPR went for broke last year and got away with it. I refuse to accept they came close to complying. There's been plenty of questions regarding Forests Compliance too. Will the Football League or Premier League have the balls to really financially clobber those clubs who have taken the piss? We await with interest.......

 

[hans kraay fan club]

I don't understand this quote from him

"Even if Forest were hit with an embargo, they could, in theory, sign new players, under specific circumstances.

If a player leaves the club, they can be replaced as long as any new player does not earn more money than the one who has departed"

Is this not what clubs do to stay within a clubs budget anyway?

Absolutely NOT the case, so far as has been explained previously.

Paging [MENTION=31]El Presidente[/MENTION] ??

 

[GingerBeerMan]

What's stopping Forest or any other team buying a very low level league club, buying players through them, and then loaning (or selling if that's allowed) the players to the parent club for free straight away?

 

[Deleted member 22389]

I think the best punishment of all would be to stop teams going up if they have broken FFP rules.

 

[Gullflyinghigh]

What's stopping Forest or any other team buying a very low level league club, buying players through them, and then loaning (or selling if that's allowed) the players to the parent club for free straight away?

Pretty sure it's spectacularly against the rules.

I could be wrong (and am happy to be shown so) but I'm fairly certain feeder club agreements aren't currently permitted within the English game, and that only really involves a formal agreement around loaning players. To actively buy players through a separate club would be a whole new level.

 

[Herne Hill Seagull]

What's stopping Forest or any other team buying a very low level league club, buying players through them, and then loaning (or selling if that's allowed) the players to the parent club for free straight away?

The rules that prohibit ownership of more than 50% of more than one club, i think, would stop that?

 

[Icy Gull]

Getting in the "we're doing our best guv" excuse to limit the fines and challenge the rulings of FFP.

 

[Norman Potting]

I suspect they will introduce a "tick box" so that Club's can confirm they have observed ffp, similar to the "are you a right and proper person to own a football club" one on the equivalent form for owners.

 

[perseus]

We have a New Forest down here. That has Verderers not CEO's.

Robin Hood vs the County Sheriff up there,

 

[father_and_son]

Seems strange that he's talking about this as if its something they didn't know anything about.


I do hope that the punishments are reinforced by a rule that says you can't enter any FL division unless you have paid the fines previously levied at least one full season before entering that league. That way a team that gets promoted to the PL and subsequently relegated falls all the way to non-league status if they wait and only settle previous fines once they know they are being relegated. This rule would ensure full compliance very quickly!

 

[GingerBeerMan]

The rules that prohibit ownership of more than 50% of more than one club, i think, would stop that?

I wasn't sure if that extended all the way down to the low levels such as sunday league. Perhaps buying an amateur Spanish side would get around this. Players would never actually have to travel there, you can just label all the paperwork as the amateur club and then immediately loan/sell the players on for free.