[Football] QPR Ruling

[Guy Fawkes]

Not 8 times more though. An (admittedly) quick Google search said QPR lost £65m, whilst the muff lost £38m.

Be good to have [MENTION=31]El Presidente[/MENTION] 's input, once he's put his special sock in the wash.

Not all the losses count towards FFP - Bournemouth for example spent £4.6m on ground improvements, and £2m in payouts to shareholders following promotion which were included in their £38m losses but didn't count towards their FFP figures

QPR obviously had a larger part of their debt as things which counted towards FFP (think i read they had the something like the 8th highest wage in the country when in the Championship - i can't find this now but i think it was something like that, maybe higher)

 

[Surrey Phil]

It’s an important message - cheats should never get away with it, no matter how creative their Accountancy is! Maybe Man City & Co need a little investigation?

 

[Official Old Man]

Didn't Leicester allegedly pay a 'marketing company' millions to promote their club abroad? It was then suggested that this 'company' didn't have a phone number or email address?

I believe Man City tried to tell everyone that they had a sponsor who paid them £lots to sponsor shirts.
There is now a table that effectively states how much each sponsorship is worth, on a sliding scale from Man Utd down, and so the PL & EFL use this as a guide. So getting Harveys to pay £50 million on paper to have a sign up wont work.

 

[Triggaaar]

I don't see how the fine can possibly be £50m+ now though, when the precedence has already been set to fine the cheats around £8m.

It's proportional to the losses, as in the article:

"Under the Football League's 2012 rules, Championship clubs were permitted losses of £8m in 2013-14, with clubs promoted to the Premier League subject to a fine if they exceeded that figure.

After a sliding scale of fines on losses between £8m and £18m, losses above £18m would be punished by a fine imposed on a strict pound-for-pound basis.

QPR's actual loss for the 2013-14 campaign, in which they won the Championship play-off final, was £9.8m.

However, then-owner Tony Fernandes, now co-chairman, and other shareholders also wrote off £60m in loans as an "exceptional item".[/QUOTE]

 

[Triggaaar]

I believe they have two more seasons of parachute payments left.

Isn't it supposed to be 3 years, and they're into their 3rd year now?

They will no doubt be planning how to write all debts off. No company should dream of lending them money.

 

[Triggaaar]

Yes. [MENTION=31]El Presidente[/MENTION] is clearly the best qualified pwrson to talk about this.

I'm not so sure, each time we've asked him about this case he's told us how QPR would get out of it with expensive lawyers threatening the FL. Seems he knows less than the rest of us.

 

[AZ Gull]

Isn't it supposed to be 3 years, and they're into their 3rd year now?

Teams relegated from the Premier League from 2015-16 and onwards will receive 3 years of payments (and only 2 if they are relegated after a single season in the top flight). But QPR were relegated in 2014-15 and, as far as I am aware, they will still receive 4 years of payments.

 

[Weststander]

It's proportional to the losses, as in the article:

"Under the Football League's 2012 rules, Championship clubs were permitted losses of £8m in 2013-14, with clubs promoted to the Premier League subject to a fine if they exceeded that figure.

After a sliding scale of fines on losses between £8m and £18m, losses above £18m would be punished by a fine imposed on a strict pound-for-pound basis.

QPR's actual loss for the 2013-14 campaign, in which they won the Championship play-off final, was £9.8m.

However, then-owner Tony Fernandes, now co-chairman, and other shareholders also wrote off £60m in loans as an "exceptional item".

Explained well.

With Fernandes claiming the £60m loan credit counted as football club income, that is, the same as ticket/sponsorship/TV turnover.

He failed.

 

[BensGrandad]

It will be interesting to see the final outcome as obviously they cannot and will not pay that fine. Will the FA now relegate them to Div 2 in May as has happened to other clubs falling foul of financial irregularities.

 

[afcb]

looking at the figures i have seen brighton losses in last 3 years
10.5m
24.44m
unknown
so if over 3 years you are allowed to lose 39m think brighton could be in the same boat unless they managed to stay under a 3m loss for there promotion year ? thoughts

You also have the stadium depreciation and academy 'pit' which with a bit of creative accounting can keep you on the straight and narrow...

 

[Triggaaar]

It will be interesting to see the final outcome as obviously they cannot and will not pay that fine.

Why can't they? He's shown he's had the money before.

 

[BensGrandad]

Will they now pursue other clubs that flaunted the FFP rules?

 

[Triggaaar]

looking at the figures i have seen brighton losses in last 3 years
10.5m
24.44m
unknown
so if over 3 years you are allowed to lose 39m think brighton could be in the same boat

No, those figures aren't the correct ones for FFP calculations. For example we've lost money on building the training facilities etc, which don't count. We're well within limits. The £39m over 3 years just started a year ago, and now we're in the PL it's more like £105 over 3 years.

 

[Weststander]

You also have the stadium depreciation and academy 'pit' which with a bit of creative accounting can keep you on the straight and narrow...

It's not creative accounting.

The 72 clubs set the very clear rules, which included adjustments for depreciation and academy spends. Depreciation is a real world and accounting phenomena of buildings diminishing in value through time. All regulated by the Companies Act and International Accounting Standards, then independently audited annually for each club. The FL then audit FFP aspects again.

The annual depreciation figure for clubs such as Brighton, Arsenal and Tottenham (to come) will be huge due to expensive stadia and academy infrastructure. Huges sums really were spent and must be written off over the life of a facility.

 

[Weststander]

Will they now pursue other clubs that flaunted the FFP rules?

It looks they are now:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2017/10/24/qpr-ordered-pay-world-record-40million-ffp-fine-losing-three/

Today's verdict opens the doors.

 

[studio150]

Loftus Road to be sold and a ground share looming?

 

[sandfacer]

bad reporting as Bournemouth payed there fine do think that they need to revise the timing that the accounts are taken into account as a couple of Bournemouth expensive signings after promotion were taken into account

 

[Couldn't Be Hyypia]

They denied another club the opportunity of going up by breaking the rules that everyone (including QPR) agreed to.
They made massive revenues in the Prem that they shouldn't have received
And they effectively stole this from another club
Then they bitched about the decision through the courts for three years.
Serves them right - an example needs to be set and the FL need to show some balls.

 

[Dirk Lehmann's Python]

bad reporting as Bournemouth payed there fine do think that they need to revise the timing that the accounts are taken into account as a couple of Bournemouth expensive signings after promotion were taken into account

Did they pay it? I thought it didn't need paying unless they went down?

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

[Triggaaar]

Did they pay it? I thought it didn't need paying unless they went down?

I don't know which clubs have paid, but it should be paid regardless of what league the team are in. A club in the PL can however ignore the FL and not receive points punishments.