The squad as it stands....... | Page 2 | Vital Football

The squad as it stands.......

Here’ s confirmation of the finance league, skewed by loan write off but looks good none the less ?
 

Attachments

  • 3AC0AEE9-209A-4912-84DD-0505832C3900.jpeg
    3AC0AEE9-209A-4912-84DD-0505832C3900.jpeg
    324 KB · Views: 61
Here’ s confirmation of the finance league, skewed by loan write off but looks good none the less ?

The loan write off is irrelevant; it was accrued losses over a period of time that were written off.

We still made an operating loss that was offset by transfer income; that is what the FL will appraise us on.
 
Here’ s confirmation of the finance league, skewed by loan write off but looks good none the less ?

These are the figures you should have been looking at:

EBITDA gives an over all view of profitability.

These will be the last set of accounts from the Fawaz era, so I would expect there to be a considerable improvement in the next set of figures published.

1530551803946.png
 
Anything can look like a crock of shit if you take it out of context.

To start with only four of the top seven loss makers managed to get promotion.

Newcastle's losses have been well documented and comply fully with FFP

Ditto Wolves

Brighton would have had losses of 10m for that season had they not managed to get promoted; they paid out a total of 9m in promotion bonuses

Huddersfield paid out nearly 12m in promotion bonuses, they lost another 7m operationally.

Promotion bonuses are clearly allowed because they are paid out after promotion and not before.

Just because you do not understand or like something does not make it a crock of shit.

Its not perfect but it is manifestly better than what we had previously.
 
Anything can look like a crock of shit if you take it out of context.

To start with only four of the top seven loss makers managed to get promotion.

Newcastle's losses have been well documented and comply fully with FFP

Ditto Wolves

Brighton would have had losses of 10m for that season had they not managed to get promoted; they paid out a total of 9m in promotion bonuses

Huddersfield paid out nearly 12m in promotion bonuses, they lost another 7m operationally.

Promotion bonuses are clearly allowed because they are paid out after promotion and not before.

Just because you do not understand or like something does not make it a crock of shit.

Its not perfect but it is manifestly better than what we had previously.

My point is FFP was partly brought in to try and level the financial playing field, yet 90% of the time, the teams that spend the most get promoted and in some cases like Leicester, QPR and possibly Newcastle, do so so by breaking the rules.
 
My point is FFP was partly brought in to try and level the financial playing field, yet 90% of the time, the teams that spend the most get promoted and in some cases like Leicester, QPR and possibly Newcastle, do so so by breaking the rules.

No Zed, that was never the intention.

The intention was to ensure clubs operated within their own means and to prevent clubs from using Administration to clear their debts.

There has never been a level playing field and there never will be; the clubs at the top will not allow it.

FFP is far from being perfect but it is infinitely better than what we had before.
 
No Zed, that was never the intention.

The intention was to ensure clubs operated within their own means and to prevent clubs from using Administration to clear their debts.

There has never been a level playing field and there never will be; the clubs at the top will not allow it.

FFP is far from being perfect but it is infinitely better than what we had before.

That's why I said partly brought in.
 
Nice to get Pantilimon in. I wonder whether it might be worth getting an experienced keeper in as back up (assuming Kapino, Evtimov and Kapino leave) as it'll not do Smith any good sitting on the bench. Would be nice to see him loaned to somewhere like Sunderland for a season.
 
No Zed, that was never the intention.

The intention was to ensure clubs operated within their own means and to prevent clubs from using Administration to clear their debts.

There has never been a level playing field and there never will be; the clubs at the top will not allow it.

FFP is far from being perfect but it is infinitely better than what we had before.

Surely FFP is at least partly aimed at giving a level playing field, otherwise the rules would simply say that as long as the owner has put in enough cash to cover all the bills for (say) three years everything is ok, rather than limiting what owners can spend.
 
Surely FFP is at least partly aimed at giving a level playing field, otherwise the rules would simply say that as long as the owner has put in enough cash to cover all the bills for (say) three years everything is ok, rather than limiting what owners can spend.

Why should it level the playing field?

The playing field has never been level!

What you are suggesting is not levelling the playing field; "we have a rich benefactor", "fuck you, we will spend what we like."

The problem with all rich benefactors is that they don't spend their own cash; they borrow the money because they have easy access to it, and then they load the debt on to the club.

FFP prevents that happening; clubs have to limit their spending to what they earn plus 8m.

There was no level playing field prior to FFP; Manchester United spend more than we do because they have more money; we spend more than Burton because we have more money than they do, and it will always be thus.
 
The only aspect that appears unfair is the parachute payment; and it only appears unfair because we do not qualify for it.

Once we have been promoted no one will give a fuck about parachute payments and how unfair they appear.
 
When we get promoted this is what we'll sing, we are Forest, we are Forest Karanka is our King

EIEIEIO


Been a while since that rang out
 
Why should it level the playing field?

The playing field has never been level!

What you are suggesting is not levelling the playing field; "we have a rich benefactor", "fuck you, we will spend what we like."

The problem with all rich benefactors is that they don't spend their own cash; they borrow the money because they have easy access to it, and then they load the debt on to the club.

FFP prevents that happening; clubs have to limit their spending to what they earn plus 8m.

There was no level playing field prior to FFP; Manchester United spend more than we do because they have more money; we spend more than Burton because we have more money than they do, and it will always be thus.

There will never be a level playing field, but whatever you say FFP is a small step towards it. It penalises the rich owners and makes it harder for them to out invest the other clubs. The ridiculous situation is the parachute payments then unlevel it all again. Rich owners should at least be able to match the spending of parachute clubs. I agree the main aim of FFP is to stop clubs going bust though. When did the last club go into administration?