FFP charges? | Page 99 | Vital Football

FFP charges?

12.27 From around the end of January 2023, Forest decided that it would need to sell one of its most important players to ensure PSR compliance. Player A was the obvious and only single player whose sale could achieve compliance and it was always planned to sell him. The majority of the discussions about sounding out other clubs and sporting directors in respect of Player A took place around May and June, after the appointment of Mr Ross Wilson (Forest’s Sporting Director) on 12 April 2023. As at June 2023, Forest had valued Player A at £50m. Because Player A was a “homegrown” player practically the whole of that sum, less any capitalised agent fees, would be treated as profit for the purposes of the PSR calculation.

12.28 Forest was aware that Player A was in the process of changing agents (which was completed only on 4 July 2023), which made an early deal more difficult. However, Forest continued to seek out buyers for Player A in June 2023, engaging with Unique Sports Management (Player A’s new agents), Brentford, Spurs, Manchester United, Aston Villa, Manchester City, and Atlético. Forest submitted that by 30 June 2023, it had made every effort to generate a formal offer for Player A but none had been received at that stage that were capable of being completed in time.
 
The first formal offer from a Premier League club was from Brentford on 21 July 2023 at £32.5m, which then increased on 24 July 2023 to £35m. A third offer was received by Brentford on 28 August 2023 for £40m. Each of those offers from Brentford were well below the value placed on Player A and were, in any event, after the financial year end.

Seems the scuttlebutt that Bentfarce knew exactly what our PSR standing was is close to the truth.
 
chandos9 said:
The Commission noted that there were few documents that demonstrated what Forest was doingabout its PSR issue. There were no board meeting minutes and only a few emails or messagesincluded within disclosure. Most communications were apparently oral. Mr Bonser, the FinanceDirector at Forest, did produce some forecasts of its PSR position. The first was on 22 August2022, the next was a week later and the next was on 29 September 2022. During this period,Forest was investing in players, so the PSR forecast was changing, but the last of thesecommunications from Mr Bonser was forecasting a significant breach, absent intervention fromthe Club. These communications did not deter the Club from bringing further players in overthe January 2023 transfer window (see paragraph 5.12 above).
Click to expand...
That's incredible. Marinakis has to answer for that , as does Cooper
 
Phatnovice said:
The first formal offer from a Premier League club was from Brentford on 21 July 2023 at £32.5m, which then increased on 24 July 2023 to £35m. A third offer was received by Brentford on 28 August 2023 for £40m. Each of those offers from Brentford were well below the value placed on Player A and were, in any event, after the financial year end.
Click to expand...
...and there you go...had to be binding before 30th June to make any difference...basically the gamble came in Jan as it doesnt look like we even had an offer before 30th June
 
If it didn't need clarifying, things are obviously a shit show behind the scenes:

"The four points sanction is not to punish Forest so much as it is to be fair to the other clubs...and that when a club like Forest took the risk of effectively ignoring the PSR warning from its Finance Director before the January window in2023, and rather than looking to sell players, it added players to its squad, ultimately leavingi tself with just two weeks to sell Player A in the summer 2023 window"
 
chandos9 said:
Does n't this show at 5.14 that if Forest had sold Brennan Johnson for €50M on 30th June, there would have been no breach, or a much lesser one that might attract no penalty?.
Click to expand...
Yes-that would have been fine but doesn't look to have been an offer before 30th June anyway
 
What a fucking mess of a club we are.
Ignoring all the warnings and leaving ourselves in a position where we were just hoping for an offer for Brennan seem to be the things that have fucked us. Decisions we made, rather than circumstances we couldn't avoid.
The problem is, if heads roll because of this, they will be the wrong ones, because with EM they always are.
 
Absolutely bang to rights. If anything, reading all of this makes the four points feel quite lenient imo.

Are the rules unfair? Yes. Are they prejudiced against newly promoted clubs? Yes. Are they creating a completely uneven playing field? Yes.

But we knew those rules, we broke them by a country mile, we ignored the warnings, and then we tried to be cute about it. What's more, we continued wheeling out comms to deceive supporters along the way. This is a humbling day for those in charge, and it paints a very unflattering picture of the administration of the club.

If we stay up, we've got away with it. I hope lessons are learned, but I'm not sure they will be. Our card's been marked now.
 
weejockmcplop said:
What a fucking mess of a club we are.
Ignoring all the warnings and leaving ourselves in a position where we were just hoping for an offer for Brennan seem to be the things that have fucked us. Decisions we made, rather than circumstances we couldn't avoid.
The problem is, if heads roll because of this, they will be the wrong ones, because with EM they always are.
Click to expand...
His own head needs to roll. We can now all understand why Coops was worried for the club and why he fell out. To be honest, if he knew about this he should have told the owners look lets forget these deals
 
Those Feet said:
Absolutely bang to rights. If anything, reading all of this makes the four points feel quite lenient imo.

Are the rules unfair? Yes. Are they prejudiced against newly promoted clubs? Yes. Are they creating a completely uneven playing field? Yes.

But we knew those rules, we broke them by a country mile, we ignored the warnings, and then we tried to be cute about it. What's more, we continued wheeling out comms to deceive supporters along the way. This is a humbling day for those in charge, and it paints a very unflattering picture of the administration of the club.

If we stay up, we've got away with it. I hope lessons are learned, but I'm not sure they will be. Our card's been marked now.
Click to expand...
:clap::clap::clap:
 
Those Feet said:
Absolutely bang to rights. If anything, reading all of this makes the four points feel quite lenient imo.

Are the rules unfair? Yes. Are they prejudiced against newly promoted clubs? Yes. Are they creating a completely uneven playing field? Yes.

But we knew those rules, we broke them by a country mile, we ignored the warnings, and then we tried to be cute about it. What's more, we continued wheeling out comms to deceive supporters along the way. This is a humbling day for those in charge, and it paints a very unflattering picture of the administration of the club.

If we stay up, we've got away with it. I hope lessons are learned, but I'm not sure they will be. Our card's been marked now.
Click to expand...
You're spot on, i think we take the 4 points and try to do things more thoughtfully and strategically henceforth.
 
Sells more copy, keeps more teams in relegation battle longer, increases gates and tv audience all good for PL and Lawyers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.