| Brucie bonus 20:32 - Dec 14 with 12428 views | Damo1962 |
Just seen an article, where we are to benefit as a club by half a million large, because of Chair and Diengs non contribution to their countries World Cup adventure...which is nice. | | | |  |
| Brucie bonus on 08:43 - Dec 16 with 2778 views | SimonD |
The £10m shortfall Clive talks about is not unreasonable.
The standard £17m loss that 1JD is a reasonable starting point although I think will prove to be a little light as there are a number of volatile costs included in that. However, last season we added Austin's and Johansen's (believed to be substantial) wages to that and, because we bought some players, have significantly increased our amortisation cost. Therefore a loss of £23m would not be a total shock.
Remove Austin and a few other costs could see that dropped to a £19m loss this season. After deducting the disallowable costs of £4m we are looking at
£19m + £15m = £34m for those two season.
Therefore the loss has to be reduced to £5m for next season giving a £10m saving that needs to be found.
We will know far more when the 21/22 accounts are published. | | | |
| Brucie bonus on 09:15 - Dec 16 with 2726 views | enfieldargh |
re sell on fees. Should Newcastle pay c.£35million for him and we get say 10%, then we get 10% of the difference that Palace paid and the new transfer fee.
In this scenario we would receive 10% of 16 million?
Think this is how things generally work.(Price of Football Kieran Maguire) | |
| |
| Brucie bonus on 09:21 - Dec 16 with 2716 views | Northernr |
Yeh there are two types - 10% of the fee and 10% of the profit. I think we've got the former (better one) with Eze. | | | |
| Brucie bonus on 09:32 - Dec 16 with 2684 views | Rangersw12 |
Didn't Hoos come out at the start of last season saying the deals we did were very good and far cheaper than people think | | | |
| Brucie bonus on 09:40 - Dec 16 with 2667 views | danehoop |
What Hoos said at that point was likely true. However, I suspect the subsequent decision to go for it last Christmas under Warbs chucking in largely underperforming and expensive loans, has probably cost us quite a bit. Then add on the pot bellied pig loans at the start of this season as well (some of which may not have been cheap) and you can see where the additional pressure may have come from. | |
| Never knowingly understood |
| |
| Brucie bonus on 10:14 - Dec 16 with 2608 views | francisbowles |
Yes it's good to be optimistic but better to be realistic.
On the compensation point, in my opinion, it's unlikely we got much or any extra compensation for the backroom staff as Sevco, according to reports, were playing hardball on paying any compensation for MB. They apparently did finally agree but probably rolled the others into the figure.
Btw one of the reasons that most of us come onto this board is to be informed as Clive has various contacts and sources, so he is better informed than virtually anyone not employed by the club. | | | |
| Brucie bonus on 10:35 - Dec 16 with 2559 views | 1JD |
Good spot- was a typo apologies.
Should of read 19m, not 9m allowance. Which yes, improves the picture in terms of what we could lose up to for last seasons as yet unposted accounts.
The loss for the two seasons together I didn’t state explicitly. I added them together to get the 20m figure. They are;
- 19-20: 16m loss (includes a one-time charge for 4.5m Warren Farm write off, so in FFP terms, and in “normal” years is actually a 11.5m loss)
- 20-21: 4m loss.
Both together = 20m loss.
In summary, we can lose a further 19m (or more if you discount the warren farm charge) in FFP terms for the biggish year of accounts we are expecting (thanks to Johansen, Austin big wages) to be posted for last season (21-22). It seems we’ll be close, but I trust the club.
Going forward, say we are right on the line at a circa 19m loss for 21-22, that then gets included into the 3-year rolling period. Which would leave 20m to play with in terms of losses over this season, and next season.
But again, if you deduct the warren farm charge, that boosts by another nearly 5m. So for rough figures you’ve got 25m to play with. Which would enable a 12.5m loss for this season and next, without any player sales. Not impossible if wages are being more tightly managed again, which is what we heard this summer.
The last point, is that most transfer fees are spread over multiple years, so the 17m figure for player sales in 20-21, might not be all of the Eze money accounted for, despite it being remarkably similar in fee.
Prior years and transfers have been an accumulation. So there may be more to drip feed which would improve the allowable loss further.
Net conclusion from where I’m sitting, there is no desperate need to sell this summer. Next summer might be a more pushing situation, but if the wage bill is tightened, we might even be ok and in line. | | | |
| Brucie bonus on 11:35 - Dec 16 with 2463 views | SimonD |
"The last point, is that most transfer fees are spread over multiple years, so the 17m figure for player sales in 20-21, might not be all of the Eze money accounted for, despite it being remarkably similar in fee."
Transfer fees paid are amortized over the length of the player's contract, fees received are accounted for immediately, even if they are paid in installments. | | | |
| Brucie bonus on 12:41 - Dec 16 with 2358 views | DavieQPR |
I would imagine at least half the teams in this Division are going to struggle to reach FFP targets, therefore something will be adjusted to save EFL embarassment. | | | |
| Brucie bonus on 12:48 - Dec 16 with 2339 views | BostonR |
I've been watching since 1972/3 and I have run-out of optimism with this club, especially over the past 2 months. Watching Fulham and Brentford develop, just makes its so much worse!
We are essentially a club going no-where, other than to stay afloat in a shite Championship league, which is esentially fixed, thanks to parachute payments.
I have disagreed with Clive on many things (Ian Holloway), but in my opinion, he is pretty much on his A-game when he scribes stuff about the club and seems well connected.
I long for the day when he reports that FFP is no-more and our owners (who have been magnificent) can take off the hold on the purse strings and throw some cash about. | | | |
| Brucie bonus on 12:55 - Dec 16 with 2314 views | R_from_afar |
"...Some £16m..."
Or roughly a year's worth of Kevin De Bruyne. Insane! | |
| "Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1." |
| |
| Brucie bonus on 13:15 - Dec 16 with 2273 views | Hunterhoop |
I think the bit where we disagree, and it is material, is your feeling that getting from a Warburton run rate loss of somewhere between £21-19m p.a. to 12.5m p.a. Is doable through cost tightening.
I don’t think it is or will happen. A a conservative estimate it’s 30% reduction in opex from one year to the next. Business simply do not achieve that, let alone football clubs. A couple of million shaved off, maybe. The lowest total staff costs the club has reached in the FFP era is £17m. 2 years of that means a £9m gap. And that is factoring in Warren Farm and a reduction in salaries from today’s figure. That’s the low end of of what we need to find in transfer fees. It could be £8m more if we can’t reduce the wage bill.
We will have to sell a player or two this year or next, or go up. FFP cannot and will not be achieved through belt tightening. | | | |
| Brucie bonus on 13:39 - Dec 16 with 2240 views | Sakura |
There was a separate thread to debate that and if you are suggesting that backing Hall to be appointed manager would have been cause for optimism and a good way to back the club. Then you and I have a very different view of Hall as a manager. Since it didn’t happen and the whole issue has been concluded within a few days of that then I don’t see it as comparable to a multi year constant repetition based always on the most pessimistic view point
I explained my reasons in more detail in that thread so if you want to debate that then go for it on that thread and stay on topic here.
My own feeling on this is we need to deal in facts at the appropriate time and retain a sense of optimism in the present. When the accounts are published we will know and that is for me the fair and reasonable time to debate it. Not multiple times a week.
My own feeling is that the clubs actions and comments at fans forums from Hoos is that we are skating pretty close to the line and I hold a more optimistic view that we aren’t as far away as we thought.
And that’s before we picked up the thick end of a £2m bonus this month. That’s equivalent to £38,500 a week for a year. How much do we think Johansen is on…
I think at a certain point your realism was a good thing. The Harry Redknapp Tony Fernandes sign another player mentality did need to be knocked out of a chunk of our fan base. But now I think its going too far the other way.
Be nice to see more of an emphasis on the side that you raised in response to Loftgirl above.
A win tomorrow and we could be back in the play offs!!!!! | | | |
| Brucie bonus on 13:42 - Dec 16 with 2235 views | Sakura |
Not all add ons are guaranteed or defined instalments though.
How about transfer fee that is based on a performance statistic or achieving something? For example its often referred to (dont know if true), that we get paid some amount if Eze gets an England cap. So that type of thing or a when /f he plays 50 game for the club you get a payment. Would that be included? [Post edited 16 Dec 2022 13:42]
| | | |
| Brucie bonus on 13:45 - Dec 16 with 2223 views | 1JD |
I agree there does look to be a deficit that needs to be filled by the end of next season. The next set of accounts, from last season, should shed some light on what that looks like.
Im keeping a positive outlook, as we have lots of talent to work with. Not only to help our cause for promotional aspirations, but also to help generate sales if need be. Contracts are a concern, however, and that is an area that needs improvement.
As per this original thread, there is also the bonus of an extra 2m in unplanned revenue (Beale comp + World Cup Fees) that certainly helps the cause! [Post edited 16 Dec 2022 13:46]
| | | |
| Brucie bonus on 13:51 - Dec 16 with 2192 views | Northernr |
Yeh I'm sure you would like that left on that thread, no sht  | | | |
| Brucie bonus on 13:59 - Dec 16 with 2142 views | Sakura |
… [Post edited 16 Dec 2022 14:05]
| | | |
| Brucie bonus on 14:07 - Dec 16 with 2101 views | Northernr |
Errr, ok I'll wait and see what I'm replying to next then.
This post has been edited by an administrator | | | |
| Brucie bonus on 14:11 - Dec 16 with 2089 views | SimonD |
Those would generally only be included it they had either happened or were imminent; the latter being very hard to push past a decent auditor. Sadly neither apply here. An Eze cap would help, but not as much as him getting a serious transfer. | | | |
| Brucie bonus on 17:48 - Dec 16 with 1933 views | silverbirch |
“Don't try and make forecasts years ahead. Too much to happen between now and then”
NorthernR is using the information he has access to, that most of us don’t, to alert us to what might happen. That’s the point of a forecast and no one is saying it’s definitely going to happen. You have a different forecast? Great. I don’t get the criticism of someone who devotes so much time to giving us information and insight we wouldn’t otherwise have. | | | |
| Brucie bonus on 21:58 - Dec 16 with 1842 views | LongsufferingR |
Yes maybe a good way for them to save face would be to deduct every team 6 points at the start of next season. Everybody wins! | | | |
| Brucie bonus on 23:04 - Dec 16 with 1785 views | WatfordR |
Did I imagine that some kind of adjustment to the calculation of losses for FFP purposes was allowed for 19-20 and 20-21 due to Covid/lockdown? Does that adjustment not carry forward for subsequent FFP calculations? | | | |
| Brucie bonus on 09:49 - Dec 17 with 1616 views | terryb |
I believe that the two years are combined & the profit/loss is 50% of the total.
Thus next year will be based on the accounts for y/e 20/21, 22 & 23. As far as forecasting is concerned, I don't think that anyone is sure what can be claimed as a cost due to Covid. Everton have argued (so I'm told) that the lowering of players valuations when being transferred is due to Covid & should be allowable.
As for not making forecasts for two years in advance, I thought every business was required to do this for the auditors & many would regard five years planning as short term. | | | |
| Brucie bonus on 11:57 - Dec 17 with 1543 views | Wilkinswatercarrier |
I think the issue here, as you mention, is that the club is very close to breaching FFP.
If that is the case the club will be unable to sign anyone (sign a striker etc etc) in January or the summer unless we sell, sell, sell or are promoted.
However, I cannot see a single asset at the club who will bring in a Eze type fee. Willock was the hope, but he isn't going to sign a new contract and has hamstrings made of old elastic bands. Dieng? Chair? Nope, not good enough.
Dickie, who was the big hope last season has hardly kicked a ball this one.
I like the fact that we are kept informed on here regarding the financial issues at the club, it helps keep us grounded, but more importantly it ensures the owners etc are held accountable. Look at Derby, Sheffield Wednesday and Reading who's fans went along with it all.
Optimism is what keeps us, as football fans, going, but we also need that healthy dose of realism as well. | | | |
| Brucie bonus on 13:33 - Dec 17 with 1455 views | PinnerPaul |
Is the expense figure - non allowable expense - ie excludes Covid, training ground, academy, previous fine etc? | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
