The Albion posts losses of £14.7m

[B.W.]

Some costs don't qualify for FFP. Based on previous accounts I estimate these to be in the £2.5-3m range. Some costs are unlikely to be repeated, such as the catering contract issues and redundancies made. Let's say these are £750k.

Therefore the FFP loss (as opposed to the accounting loss) is in the range £11-11.5 million.

The club has to therefore increase income and reduce costs by about £3-3.5million this season. That is a hard task but achievable. The published accounts will give me a better chance of looking at the more precise figures.

Remember that the club is not paying for your mate Gus this season, or his chauffeur driven pram from which he can spit his dummy.

LoL! Love that bit. I guess Oscar doesn't need one of those, so makes sense! ;-)

 

[Behind Enemy Lines]

Funny that. Can you support this claim?
He said in The Argus article in which he branded Poyet as the worst person in football that he had an injury so wasn't available for selection.

Argus report says he was injured for 4 months but makes no specific mention of the Palace game. I'm pretty sure, but could be wrong, Vicente was fit then.

 

[B.W.]

Which, according to research of the top four divisions in English football dating back to around 1974 in the excellent book Soccernomics, a club's position will pretty much match their playing budget in around 90 per cent of cases.

Poyet certainly over-achieved in our first season in the Championship against budget and, considering the gulf in wage budget widens the higher up the table you go, I think a strong case could be made for him over-achieving last season, regardless of whether our budget was 9th best or 14th best in the division.

This is the crucial bit. "Pretty much" and "90%" being the key. 4 places difference is relatively insignificant.

 

[Brighton Breezy]

This is the crucial bit.

Indeed, the ten per cent left over were the cases where the authors suggested managers had over-achieved and thus indicated a talented manager - or under-achieved an indicated a terrible one.

Strangely, there was far less of a link between transfer fees paid and league position. It is the wages which make the bigger difference it seems. I guess in modern times that is down to clubs being able to compete for the best players on a free transfer and thus the bidding war moves onto the wage and the player rather than the fee and the selling club.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

A Unless you believe that club's positions will EXACTLY match their playing budget, that is?

That doesn't make any sense. If I believed that then the theory of over or underachieving wouldn't exist....

 

[Creaky]

Gus constantly moaned in the press about his budget throughout the season he received a 41% increase. Tw@t.

I guess you have links to those quotes - can't find any moans myself

I did find this from July 2012 but it is hardly a moan, more a statement of fact.

"He said: "It has been very difficult to find. There are not many and they are quite expensive - and the truth is we cannot afford them.
"We are going to be on the same budget as before, a bottom-half budget. There are going to be at least 12 teams who have more to spend than us."

 

[Westdene Wonder]

It is now becoming clear that Gus was made aware of the financial situation and that we would not be able to sign the players to get us into the playoffs, he had to make a choice either stay with us or move on to a Premiership side, he is doing very well at the moment and I wish him all the best.
Despite cut backs we have lost a large sum again and Bloom is covering it,all praise to him and I hope that there will be no further critism of him and our chief coach,we can maintain a decent position in our league,playing in a fine stadium, enjoy it there are many clubs who would be happy in our situation.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

This is the crucial bit. "Pretty much" and "90%" being the key. 4 places difference is relatively insignificant.

But it's not is it?

The teams at the top are better. I think we can agree on that. To finish 4th when you were expected to be 8th/9th is a much better achievement than say finishing 10th instead of 15th in a 24 team league.

It's also the same at the bottom. The teams are there because they will pick up the least points. A team who is expected to finish bottom who 1 place outside the relegation zone is, as you say, a 4/5 place jump but a HUGE overachievement.

 

[Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!]

OK. Right, sorry - I'm looking at the wrong accounts then. Shouldn't we be more worried about the consolidated accounts though? I suppose it depends what angle you're coming from. From an FFP angle, does FFP apply to the subsidiary only, adjusted for related party transactions (plus other stuff)?

Exactly and any stadium depreciation will appear in the accounts of CSL and the Holding Company (BHA Holdings Ltd). The football club, BHA Ltd, is a separate legal entity and is a member of the Football League (according to the Comp Hse listing).

I think that FFP must apply only to whatever entity is the member of the Football League and that is BHA Ltd.
BHA Holdings Ltd was set up by Archer I think (originally as Foray ) and CSL was formed to build/manage the proposed Falmer stadium when DK was chairman, well before TB took over the shooting match.

 

[The Large One]

I'm leaving this part of the thread.

B.W.'s barrel-scraping is akin to finger screaming down the blackboard. Without the subtlety, of course.

 

[jabba]

This probably shows my ignorance in matters financial, but is the value of the players (as club assets) taken into account?

 

[seagulls4ever]

Does no one take into account spending power as well as overall budget?

There may be, for example, ex Premier League clubs who had a higher budget budget than us last season, yet a lot of that budget was already taken up by average players who were on extortionate wages.

In any case, over or underachieving does not always align with budgets.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

This probably shows my ignorance in matters financial, but is the value of the players (as club assets) taken into account?

I personally would guess not as it is completely subjective and also the players can leave on a free?

I may be wrong (I probably am)

 

[B.W.]

"Pretty much" is a VERY loose term. How was that defined? Within 1 place? 2 places? 5? 4 is not a big difference IMHO.

Poyet hit the playoffs, as per his target. More importantly, will Oscar hit the top 6? Maybe some of Gus' biggest fans should focus on that? I support the Albion, NOT Gus FC.

 

[B.W.]

I'm leaving this part of the thread.

B.W.'s barrel-scraping is akin to finger screaming down the blackboard. Without the subtlety, of course.

Just pointing out your hero's minor over-achievement. Sorry you have to leave. It's been such a pleasure.

 

[B.W.]

Does no one take into account spending power as well as overall budget?

There may be, for example, ex Premier League clubs who had a higher budget budget than us last season, yet a lot of that budget was already taken up by average players who were on extortionate wages.

In any case, over or underachieving does not always align with budgets.

Indeed.

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

This probably shows my ignorance in matters financial, but is the value of the players (as club assets) taken into account?

Not since the Bosman ruling. Before that only certain {very few} clubs did, Tottenham being one

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

Oh do f*ck off.

seconded

 

[Mackenzie]

I'm beginning to think that TLO and BW are the same person, and all of this is an elaborate hoax.

 

[AZ Gull]

Argus report says he was injured for 4 months but makes no specific mention of the Palace game. I'm pretty sure, but could be wrong, Vicente was fit then.

It doesn't appear on the Argus website, but this is part of Vicente's interview in the Argus of Saturday May 18 (when he laid into Poyet) where he clearly explains how he wasn't fit for the second leg:-