13 Jan 2021 21:18:12
Posters saying we are not buying due to ffp regulations but Chelsea spent a shed load in the summer. No one said a word.
{Ed001's Note - they sold Hazard for well over £100m plus a load of fringe players.}
13 Jan 2021 21:27:48
And Everton and Villa and West Ham sold errrm.
13 Jan 2021 23:13:32
I think Villa may find themselves in hot water tbh, regarding Chelsea they had a 2 or 3 window ban so they would have had 3 transfer windows worth of funds on top of Hazards money too.
Everton have never been short of cash they were just reluctant to spend in the past.
14 Jan 2021 11:57:50
Wombourn - We examined Chelsea's FFP situ on here last summer and they are well within their limits due to as Ed says huge transfer profits but also the sheer amount of money the club makes from operations ( mainly commercial and sponsorship) .
However as Realist points out Everton are an odd one.
One of the Eds - sorry can't recall which one but not Ed 1 - made it clear that you can only lose £30m over any rolling 3 year period. Everton have now reported their 3rd successive year of losses totalling well over £250m. They are therefore surely in breach now and should have been in breach last year as their 3 year rolling losses then were north of £80m.
Anyone know what is happening here- i. e. with Everton?
{Ed002's Note - So as Ed001 explained Chelsea raised funds through the sale of Hazard (for more than £100M) and Morata and others (totalling close to £100M). They are also, as you say, very profitable. Everton have issues because their wages are too high and their spending has been an issue; Wolves have been accumulating debt. Aston Villa addressed their FFP issue by selling Villa Park. The losses because of the pandemic will be far more significant and will start being detailed soon.}
14 Jan 2021 12:47:18
Tks Ed 02. So what is happening with Everton? Why were they allowed to make further extensive signings this summer if they were in breach?
If they weren't in breach despite huge rolling losses why weren't they?
{Ed002's Note - Nothing is happening with any of the clubs that have PL and EFL FFP issues at this time - the plan will be to start dealing with the clubs once the pandemic has ceased to be a major issue.}
14 Jan 2021 15:10:13
Tks. It will be interesting to see what action is taken. V cynical of them though knowing that they were "in-breach", but for the CV amnesty, to make a series of transfers that will almost certainly make matters far worse?
But also whilst I hear you about June 2020 surely they were heavily in breach in June 2019, rolling 3 year losses in excess of £80m, long before C.V. came along? Why weren't they punished then?
To then "deliberately" lose £139m in the year to June 2020 (taking rolling losses to north of £250m), but still splash the cash in August 2020 is outrageous.
Given the draconian punishments Wolves were threatened with for a modest breach which was immediately cured this flagrant and deliberate on going breaching of regulations must surely attract the most serious of punishments - massive fines, removal from European competition, barring from transfer market, heavy point deductions and maybe even relegation?
Makes their "Professional fouling" against Wolves last week quite understandable. Not sure that this is the way a club should be run and one has to hope that the authorities make an example of them to stop others behaving this way?
{Ed002's Note - I am not sure you are entirely understanding the rules. The rules allow for £45M losses per annum so in any three year period the FFP accounts (not the club accounts given to Companies House) can show a total of £105M in losses and for June 2019 Everton were below that (about £95M). The figure for June 2020 will be far higher due to the pandemic and they will need to justify losses against the pandemic - as will all clubs.}
14 Jan 2021 16:05:46
ok - thanks --- didn't realise that there was a difference between FFP accounts and companies house accounts.
Also didn't realise that it was £45m per annum for 3 years i. e. £105m
Is that new?
I thought, when it was discussed in detail earlier on this season, it was £30m on a 3 year rolling basis - an awfully lot different to £105m
Wolves surely were never anywhere near the £105m 3 year rolling loss figure (indeed it seemed that we were only just above £30m and that was due to the one off big increase in spending in the promotion season. However accept I am looking at companies house accounts not FFP accounts - are they public? ) and yet were punished?
Odd?
{Ed002's Note - all clubs need to provide a second set of accounts specifically for the purpose of Financial Fair Play. These are based on the ordinary accounts but adapted for the provisions for FFP - so certain things can be deducted as allowable costs (infrastructure charges (doing stuff to the stadium as an example), spending on youth sides, wages of players signed prior to 2010 etc.). They are not publically available.}
14 Jan 2021 20:17:41
cheers and tks.