FFP - Can we get a consensus as to what it really means ?

[Dave_Kitson]

As stated above this from the Mail this morning seems to indicate quite a big relaxation of the FFP rules.

Reading between the lines it would seem to make it easier for our new owners to invest.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... clash.html

Is this partially the reason for our surge in investment?

[OldBiscuit]

Many of the current threads speculate as to whether the owners will / won't put money in but I would question as to whether they even have an option. Can we pool any knowledge we have on FFP to try to figure out the budget constraints Steve Clarke may have for next year ? It would be interesting to see what people would then do given those constraints. Some rough starting points based on a quick visit to the football league website

> Published accounts run on a calendar year. Reading just scraped through last year in terms of compliance.
> Allowable losses fall from £3m last year to £2m this year.
> Parachute payments are staggered £15m, £17m, £8m, £8m.
> So this year we have a £9m fall in income and we have to reduce losses to £2m so a net £10m cost reduction / income increase required.
> In terms of income we may have around £2m from the cup run and we may lose £1m in lower season ticket renewals. It will be very interesting to see if the stadium is renamed next year to Thai airlines along with shirt sponsorship. But we'll hold on that for now
> We can lose an additional £3m providing that the Thai's write it off and don't burden the club with debt. Let's assume they will for now

On that basis a very rough cut budget is that we'll need to see £6m cost reduction at least for next season. So how might that come about ?

> Players leaving being replaced by youngsters coming into the squad. The likes of Guthrie and Kelly alone for example will probably save north of £2m. Others such as Edwards will also leave of course.
> Players being offered reduced contracts. Pearce, Fedders, Jem. One key thing to remember here is that that all championship clubs are being squeezed so even a reduced offer has a good chance of being accepted since it is effectively at the new going rate.

Based on a very rough budget drawn from the above I would expect a summer of trying to sell some players with a few signings and some loans coming back in. So another tough year ahead. Longer term I think the club are well positioned in that academy investment has been made and that doesn't count towards FFP. Next summer the likes of Pog could be replaced by up to 10 youngsters at the same net cost for example. So next season I'd expect to see more of the youngsters start to emerge. The final clear out of big contracts then follows next summer and we'll have room to spend in the transfer market also. This is something that the club has clearly planned for.

All of the above is just to set a rough framework so please feel free to add thoughts and opinion. The debate about next season will then be somewhat more refined in terms of what budget is really available. Longer term I think we're in good shape !

Isn't that the same rule that SJM had been operating under for the previous 20 years or so, but it was then called 'The Common Sense Law' and the punishment for breaking that rule (although unofficial) was also severe with relegation and financial ruin being common (Leeds, Bradford, Wolves Etc.).

[Royalwaster]

As QPR sign another player for £2million, it's definitely worth asking the question what the f*&k are the FFP rules worth?

[Nameless]

As QPR sign another player for £2million, it's definitely worth asking the question what the f*&k are the FFP rules worth?

Indeed, the FL seem to be doing nothing regarding the massive breach by QPR last time. Presumably stuff is going on behind the scenes that will lead to a token fine ?
In terms of their spending now is it likely they will actually come in as net sellers once Austin and McCarthy go?

[No Fixed Abode]

As QPR sign another player for £2million, it's definitely worth asking the question what the f*&k are the FFP rules worth?

Quite. City were in 'breach' last year and thus far have spent approx 60m this transfer window. Liverpool were 'nearly' in breach and have spent over £30m.....

[Who Moved The Goalposts?]

As QPR sign another player for £2million, it's definitely worth asking the question what the f*&k are the FFP rules worth?

Indeed, the FL seem to be doing nothing regarding the massive breach by QPR last time. Presumably stuff is going on behind the scenes that will lead to a token fine ?
In terms of their spending now is it likely they will actually come in as net sellers once Austin and McCarthy go?

And they got circa £10m for Sterling as well, didn't they? 25% of £49 is quite a nice windfall!

[Ian Royal]

QPR are challenging the rules or their breach through legal channels. FL are playing it safe by waiting for the out come before applying any penalty.

Which suggests they're worried QPR have better lawyers and don't want to lose and then get claimed for the fine plus costs / loss of income etc.

[Who Moved The Goalposts?]

QPR are challenging the rules or their breach through legal channels. FL are playing it safe by waiting for the out come before applying any penalty.

Which suggests they're worried QPR have better lawyers and don't want to lose and then get claimed for the fine plus costs / loss of income etc.

They'll get away with it, as they have more money and clout. It's the way football works these days, it seems.

<WISHFUL MODE>Perhaps we should all pray for an overthrow in the Middle East so that when Man City fall over, they take a few more down with them. </WISHFUL MODE>