| FFP question 17:57 - Aug 7 with 5067 views | LazyFan |
Apologies if this was already answered.
Derby FC have sold their ground for £40m to themselves and to keep themselves inside FFP.
But what is to stop them buying back the ground 1 year later for say £10m as infrastructure costs do not count under FFP and thus having a transfer kitty and also 3 years of possible losses reset every couple of years or so?
Are there any rules against this? Can they rinse and repeat?
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz |  |
| |  |
| FFP question on 18:21 - Aug 7 with 3813 views | Northolt_Rs |
Of course they can and will....it’s only our dopey lot who got shafted with FFP. Everybody else has craftily circumvented.... |  |
| Scooters, Tunes, Trainers and QPR. |
| |
| FFP question on 18:22 - Aug 7 with 3808 views | DavieQPR |
The ground was valued at £40m but their owner actually bought it for £8om. This meant they showed a small profit for the year. FL aren't bothered as a couple of other clubs have done this. FL only go after small income clubs. |  | | |
| FFP question on 19:05 - Aug 7 with 3695 views | Jeff |
| FFP question on 18:21 - Aug 7 by Northolt_Rs |
Of course they can and will....it’s only our dopey lot who got shafted with FFP. Everybody else has craftily circumvented.... |
No, they can't. They can only buy it back at what it's worth, not an arbitrary peppercorn fee. Otherise, we could circumvent FFP by getting Tune / Air Asia to sponsor us for £50m a season or similar.
as for 'Dopey lot getting shafted...' would you rather we sell literally the *one* asset the club has to it's name? sand would you sell it to the people currently running our club? |  |
| |
| FFP question on 19:11 - Aug 7 with 3667 views | PunteR |
| FFP question on 19:05 - Aug 7 by Jeff |
No, they can't. They can only buy it back at what it's worth, not an arbitrary peppercorn fee. Otherise, we could circumvent FFP by getting Tune / Air Asia to sponsor us for £50m a season or similar.
as for 'Dopey lot getting shafted...' would you rather we sell literally the *one* asset the club has to it's name? sand would you sell it to the people currently running our club? |
"would you sell it to the people currently running our club?"
Nope.
(Sorry i know you wasnt asking me that question) |  |
| Occasional providers of half decent House music. |
| |
| FFP question on 19:15 - Aug 7 with 3648 views | DWQPR |
That’s is what angers me the most. That clubs cannot accept huge sponsorship deals from businesses owned by their owners, like Air Asia, which would be genuine money coming into the club but can clog their ground to the owner, which frankly provides more risk for the club as they become tenants with the risk of becoming homeless (Brighton, Coventry to name a couple of examples). Please someone tell me that I’m wrong and those cûnts at the FL are right. |  |
| |
| FFP question on 22:28 - Aug 7 with 3314 views | Benny_the_Ball |
Thanks LazyFan, I've been asking this question for a number of weeks now and to date no one has provided a definitive answer. I'm no expert but I can't find anything in the rules to suggest otherwise meaning that potentially Derby could periodically repeat the trick to balance the FFP books. Id be delighted if someone more enlightened than me could prove otherwise quoting the appropriate rule. |  | | |
| FFP question on 22:34 - Aug 7 with 3308 views | Benny_the_Ball |
| FFP question on 19:05 - Aug 7 by Jeff |
No, they can't. They can only buy it back at what it's worth, not an arbitrary peppercorn fee. Otherise, we could circumvent FFP by getting Tune / Air Asia to sponsor us for £50m a season or similar.
as for 'Dopey lot getting shafted...' would you rather we sell literally the *one* asset the club has to it's name? sand would you sell it to the people currently running our club? |
Air Asia sponsoring QPR is a totally different thing to someone on the board 'buying' the stadium from QPR and then later selling it back.
P.S. I'm not suggesting for a second that QPR should follow Derby's lead as it runs the risk of an unscrupulous owner asset stripping the club. I'm just interested in knowing whether clubs like Derby could potentially buy their stadium back and repeat the trick periodically as a crafty way of injecting owner money into the club and meeting FFP thresholds. | | | |
| FFP question on 22:43 - Aug 7 with 3289 views | LazyFan |
| FFP question on 19:05 - Aug 7 by Jeff |
No, they can't. They can only buy it back at what it's worth, not an arbitrary peppercorn fee. Otherise, we could circumvent FFP by getting Tune / Air Asia to sponsor us for £50m a season or similar.
as for 'Dopey lot getting shafted...' would you rather we sell literally the *one* asset the club has to it's name? sand would you sell it to the people currently running our club? |
Well, what is worth is relative at the time. And as we know with valuers they could get it revalued and then revalued until its lower. Especially if they say buy it in a stronger currency, which was injected from other accounts as is, because of course infrastructure costs are not subject to FFP.
And this is without the City boys coming in and working their shell company magic double Isle of Man dodgems no doubt. Often once a loophole is created then others seek to sell value by making it ever bigger and bigger......
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| FFP question on 07:38 - Aug 8 with 3145 views | jonno |
| FFP question on 19:05 - Aug 7 by Jeff |
No, they can't. They can only buy it back at what it's worth, not an arbitrary peppercorn fee. Otherise, we could circumvent FFP by getting Tune / Air Asia to sponsor us for £50m a season or similar.
as for 'Dopey lot getting shafted...' would you rather we sell literally the *one* asset the club has to it's name? sand would you sell it to the people currently running our club? |
So they can only buy it back for it's worth - doesn't stop them immediately re-selling it again to their owners for double (or more) than it's worth though does it? |  | | |
| FFP question on 07:52 - Aug 8 with 3125 views | Northernr |
| FFP question on 22:34 - Aug 7 by Benny_the_Ball |
Air Asia sponsoring QPR is a totally different thing to someone on the board 'buying' the stadium from QPR and then later selling it back.
P.S. I'm not suggesting for a second that QPR should follow Derby's lead as it runs the risk of an unscrupulous owner asset stripping the club. I'm just interested in knowing whether clubs like Derby could potentially buy their stadium back and repeat the trick periodically as a crafty way of injecting owner money into the club and meeting FFP thresholds. |
If they can, they will. Derby are trying every trick in the book. Apparently 80% of Rooney's wages are being paid by 32Red online casino, and he's going to play in the 32 shirt in return. |  | | |
| FFP question on 08:06 - Aug 8 with 3101 views | colinallcars |
Wouldn't it be luvverley if we, fully compliant with FFP had a tilt at the playoffs and Derby fail ? It was good that two low spenders in Norwich and Chef United went up. How about us and Bristol this season ? |  | | |
| FFP question on 08:21 - Aug 8 with 3073 views | Northernr |
| FFP question on 08:06 - Aug 8 by colinallcars |
Wouldn't it be luvverley if we, fully compliant with FFP had a tilt at the playoffs and Derby fail ? It was good that two low spenders in Norwich and Chef United went up. How about us and Bristol this season ? |
From what I can gather the Hoos plan is for us to be uber compliant with FFP and suffer a few seasons of pain with it while everybody else burns themselves out. Because they can't all get promoted and you're already seeing at Sheff Wed and Birmingham, and probably soon Middlesbrough and West Brom, that if you spend big, ignore FFP, assume you'll get promoted within the three years and then don't, well then you're in a bit of a state with transfer embargoes, points deductions, having to offload players before you can buy and so on. In theory that's when the playing field levels out for clubs that have been cutting their cloth accordingly.
It does of course rely on the league imposing the transfer embargoes and points deductions properly. And when you see Reading and Sheff Wed supposedly under embargoes splashing cash again this week, and Birmingham getting a meaningless nine points off despite a flagrant breach and then ignoring the embargo, it's not much of an incentive to comply is it? | | | |
| FFP question on 08:31 - Aug 8 with 3049 views | TacticalR |
That reminds me of Wenger's plan to wait for the United Arab Emirates to run out of oil. |  |
| |
| FFP question on 08:34 - Aug 8 with 3037 views | jonno |
| FFP question on 08:21 - Aug 8 by Northernr |
From what I can gather the Hoos plan is for us to be uber compliant with FFP and suffer a few seasons of pain with it while everybody else burns themselves out. Because they can't all get promoted and you're already seeing at Sheff Wed and Birmingham, and probably soon Middlesbrough and West Brom, that if you spend big, ignore FFP, assume you'll get promoted within the three years and then don't, well then you're in a bit of a state with transfer embargoes, points deductions, having to offload players before you can buy and so on. In theory that's when the playing field levels out for clubs that have been cutting their cloth accordingly.
It does of course rely on the league imposing the transfer embargoes and points deductions properly. And when you see Reading and Sheff Wed supposedly under embargoes splashing cash again this week, and Birmingham getting a meaningless nine points off despite a flagrant breach and then ignoring the embargo, it's not much of an incentive to comply is it? |
Well exactly. You just know that by the time any such punishment is due to take place FFP wlll no longer be in existence or will have materially changed to allow them to get away with it. | | | |
| FFP question on 08:34 - Aug 8 with 3038 views | GetMeRangers |
| FFP question on 07:38 - Aug 8 by jonno |
So they can only buy it back for it's worth - doesn't stop them immediately re-selling it again to their owners for double (or more) than it's worth though does it? |
I am not sure this is possible without running into issues with the tax man. Stamp duty would be perceived as being dodged on the lower sale and HMR would pursue the balance at the very least
In addition, I am fairly sure they could not have valued the site at £40 million and paid 80. That would have reduced stamp duty plus the 40 that wasn't part of the valuation would be seen aa the chairman putting £40 million into the club.
It would be similar to you selling your house to your kids for a pound to evade inheritance tax. And similarly, even if you gibe your house to your kids (to avoid inheritance tax under seven year rule) you have to pay the market rent for the property if you hntinue to live in it. So it would prudent of the EFL and/or the inland revenue to check that DCFC are aging a market rent??? Otherwise, this is just the chairman pumping money into the club
It at least, this is how I think it is |  | | |
| FFP question on 08:54 - Aug 8 with 2986 views | Northolt_Rs |
| FFP question on 07:52 - Aug 8 by Northernr |
If they can, they will. Derby are trying every trick in the book. Apparently 80% of Rooney's wages are being paid by 32Red online casino, and he's going to play in the 32 shirt in return. |
There is taking the piss and the there is Derby County FC and FFP. They are making the EFL look ridiculous. | |
| Scooters, Tunes, Trainers and QPR. |
| |
| FFP question on 09:26 - Aug 8 with 2946 views | 18StoneOfHoop |
| FFP question on 08:21 - Aug 8 by Northernr |
From what I can gather the Hoos plan is for us to be uber compliant with FFP and suffer a few seasons of pain with it while everybody else burns themselves out. Because they can't all get promoted and you're already seeing at Sheff Wed and Birmingham, and probably soon Middlesbrough and West Brom, that if you spend big, ignore FFP, assume you'll get promoted within the three years and then don't, well then you're in a bit of a state with transfer embargoes, points deductions, having to offload players before you can buy and so on. In theory that's when the playing field levels out for clubs that have been cutting their cloth accordingly.
It does of course rely on the league imposing the transfer embargoes and points deductions properly. And when you see Reading and Sheff Wed supposedly under embargoes splashing cash again this week, and Birmingham getting a meaningless nine points off despite a flagrant breach and then ignoring the embargo, it's not much of an incentive to comply is it? |
Even if we're compliant with all that, doesn't the concept,existence and practise of parachute payments ensure that there will never be a level playing field?
The same clubs getting promoted..round and round again..[sigh] [Post edited 8 Aug 2019 9:28]
|  |
| 'I'm 18 with a bullet.Got my finger on the trigger,I'm gonna pull it.."
Love,Peace and Fook Chelski!
More like 20StoneOfHoop now.
Let's face it I'm not getting any thinner.
Pass the cake and pies please. |
| |
| FFP question on 09:59 - Aug 8 with 2884 views | terryb |
| FFP question on 07:52 - Aug 8 by Northernr |
If they can, they will. Derby are trying every trick in the book. Apparently 80% of Rooney's wages are being paid by 32Red online casino, and he's going to play in the 32 shirt in return. |
If Rooney is an employee of Bet32 & Derby Couny would this bring third party ownership into play?
As the majority of his salary was paid by the bookies wouldn't they be his mnajor employer? Or would he be operating as a self employed consultant?
At the very least, surely there is a conflict of interest between his two employers? It must be against the "spirit" of the rules that don't allow participation in football betting as well. | | | |
| FFP question on 10:14 - Aug 8 with 2861 views | DavieQPR |
| FFP question on 09:59 - Aug 8 by terryb |
If Rooney is an employee of Bet32 & Derby Couny would this bring third party ownership into play?
As the majority of his salary was paid by the bookies wouldn't they be his mnajor employer? Or would he be operating as a self employed consultant?
At the very least, surely there is a conflict of interest between his two employers? It must be against the "spirit" of the rules that don't allow participation in football betting as well. |
Bet 32 are paying the club who are in turn paying Rooney. The rules don't allow individuals to bet on football matches but sponsorship of clubs and competitions by betting companies is rife. Check the price what Morris payed for Pride Park if anyone doubts it. [Post edited 8 Aug 2019 10:16]
| | | |
| FFP question on 10:22 - Aug 8 with 2842 views | Northernr |
| FFP question on 09:26 - Aug 8 by 18StoneOfHoop |
Even if we're compliant with all that, doesn't the concept,existence and practise of parachute payments ensure that there will never be a level playing field?
The same clubs getting promoted..round and round again..[sigh] [Post edited 8 Aug 2019 9:28]
|
Yes. | | | |
| FFP question on 10:26 - Aug 8 with 2829 views | nick_hammersmith |
| FFP question on 08:06 - Aug 8 by colinallcars |
Wouldn't it be luvverley if we, fully compliant with FFP had a tilt at the playoffs and Derby fail ? It was good that two low spenders in Norwich and Chef United went up. How about us and Bristol this season ? |
There is no way Norwich were low spenders!
They've spent millions and were nearly as bad as us in the PL |  | | |
| FFP question on 10:50 - Aug 8 with 2803 views | stowmarketrange |
| FFP question on 08:54 - Aug 8 by Northolt_Rs |
There is taking the piss and the there is Derby County FC and FFP. They are making the EFL look ridiculous. |
There is no way that the efl will make themselves look even more stupid by kicking any fuss about England’s record goal scorer joining one of the clubs in their top division.Whether it is done legally or not. [Post edited 8 Aug 2019 10:51]
|  | | |
| FFP question on 11:01 - Aug 8 with 2770 views | colinallcars |
| FFP question on 10:26 - Aug 8 by nick_hammersmith |
There is no way Norwich were low spenders!
They've spent millions and were nearly as bad as us in the PL |
Hmm...I don't think they spent much last season and have spent the princely sum of one million this summer. | | | |
| FFP question on 11:58 - Aug 8 with 2726 views | Benny_the_Ball |
| FFP question on 08:21 - Aug 8 by Northernr |
From what I can gather the Hoos plan is for us to be uber compliant with FFP and suffer a few seasons of pain with it while everybody else burns themselves out. Because they can't all get promoted and you're already seeing at Sheff Wed and Birmingham, and probably soon Middlesbrough and West Brom, that if you spend big, ignore FFP, assume you'll get promoted within the three years and then don't, well then you're in a bit of a state with transfer embargoes, points deductions, having to offload players before you can buy and so on. In theory that's when the playing field levels out for clubs that have been cutting their cloth accordingly.
It does of course rely on the league imposing the transfer embargoes and points deductions properly. And when you see Reading and Sheff Wed supposedly under embargoes splashing cash again this week, and Birmingham getting a meaningless nine points off despite a flagrant breach and then ignoring the embargo, it's not much of an incentive to comply is it? |
I'm fine with that plan provided that if (and it's a big if) QPR are eventually promoted to the Premier League it remains financially prudent. Our problem in the past hasn't been splashing the cash to gain promotion, but spunking the cash on luxury players upon promotion and then being stuck with expensive contracts when subsequently relegated. | | | |
| FFP question on 12:07 - Aug 8 with 2702 views | terryb |
| FFP question on 11:58 - Aug 8 by Benny_the_Ball |
I'm fine with that plan provided that if (and it's a big if) QPR are eventually promoted to the Premier League it remains financially prudent. Our problem in the past hasn't been splashing the cash to gain promotion, but spunking the cash on luxury players upon promotion and then being stuck with expensive contracts when subsequently relegated. |
I think you will find we "splashed the cash " to gain promotion under Harold. Nearly £80 million on wages that season.
I definitely agree with you on "spunking the cash on luxury players upon promotion" though! | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
