Ghost of Clough

Doing us a favour whether we had money to spend or not. Based on my calcs, we would have had to sell players in the summer just to meet P&S. Given the size of our squad already, we would have been in very serious trouble... so everyone should be thanking Gibson for helping us ?
We now need to wait for 5 sets of accounts to be released to have a clearer picture of where we'll be in terms of P&S for 21/22, but I estimate about £12m better off.

A competent organisation wouldn't simply look at the bottom line figure, which is what you're suggesting. At the very least they should skim read the accounts for any obvious irregularities - the new amortisation being one.
It also has to be stated that the EFL made no attempt to clarify/understand the amortisation policy prior to the charge.
Also, the original DC revealed that the EFL claimed to have only been made aware of the different amortisation policy shortly before bringing the charges in January 2020. Please also note that Kieran Maguire wrote to the EFL regarding the amortisation policy in June 2018.
Incompetence.

Maybe one of the side's was trying to lose so that we can now re-jig the amortisation to our advantage, now we know the stadium sale is accepted. Why do you think we didn't bother with an "expert" for the LAP? ?
(Joking by the way... or am I....)

As we all suspect they must have a pretty good idea what the figs will look like.  Did you read the inadmissible evidence paper from LAP, that's got some good data in it and shows what their thoughts are.  I am not so confident that we will pass but that is merely a hunch and hopefully very wrong
you are right, they thought the DC would find us guilty on charge 1 and I think both sides fought so hard on that one, neither side did enough on charge 2.

Croatia had a midfield starting 2 players from Real Madrid and 1 from Barcelona and another from Inter. Defenders from Atl Madrid and Liverpool. Forwards from Juventus and Inter.
Our squad included Rose, Cahill, Jones, Delph, Young, Dier, Loftus-Cheek and Welbeck.

3. That we anticipate an economic benefit (sale)
4. Reliably estimate ERVs (values)

I was thinking about this in bed last night (?). 
They were almost certain they would win charge 1 (stadium sale), but they didn't know how much would be knocked off the sale value. If it only dropped it to £65m for example, we still would have passed P&S for the period. However, if they could also get us to restate our amortisation figures, then we would certainly have failed P&S as a result.
Perhaps they're trying to push for a harsher penalty for now, because they know/think we'll pass with the restated figures.

I was thinking about this in bed last night (?). 
They were almost certain they would win charge 1 (stadium sale), but they didn't know how much would be knocked off the sale value. If it only dropped it to £65m for example, we still would have passed P&S for the period. However, if they could also get us to restate our amortisation figures, then we would certainly have failed P&S as a result.
Perhaps they're trying to push for a harsher penalty for now, because they know/think we'll pass with the restated figures.

It'll be sweet justice if/when we don't breach. We'll be making savings for the following seasons 2018/19 & 2019/20 by re-doing the figures so they'll have done us an inadvertent favour.

The DC originally deemed the only wrong-doing was not detailing the policy adequately in the accounts. [Note: the DC were a group of accountants]
The LAP deemed the policy to not be compliant with FRS102, hence why we now have to resubmit the P&S figures with a standard amortisation policy. [Note: the LAP were a group of lawyers]
I think that only apllied to the stadium sale to be fair

A competent organisation wouldn't simply look at the bottom line figure, which is what you're suggesting. At the very least they should skim read the accounts for any obvious irregularities - the new amortisation being one.
It also has to be stated that the EFL made no attempt to clarify/understand the amortisation policy prior to the charge.
Also, the original DC revealed that the EFL claimed to have only been made aware of the different amortisation policy shortly before bringing the charges in January 2020. Please also note that Kieran Maguire wrote to the EFL regarding the amortisation policy in June 2018.
Incompetence.

A competent organisation wouldn't simply look at the bottom line figure, which is what you're suggesting. At the very least they should skim read the accounts for any obvious irregularities - the new amortisation being one.
It also has to be stated that the EFL made no attempt to clarify/understand the amortisation policy prior to the charge.
Also, the original DC revealed that the EFL claimed to have only been made aware of the different amortisation policy shortly before bringing the charges in January 2020. Please also note that Kieran Maguire wrote to the EFL regarding the amortisation policy in June 2018.
Incompetence.

A competent organisation wouldn't simply look at the bottom line figure, which is what you're suggesting. At the very least they should skim read the accounts for any obvious irregularities - the new amortisation being one.
It also has to be stated that the EFL made no attempt to clarify/understand the amortisation policy prior to the charge.
Also, the original DC revealed that the EFL claimed to have only been made aware of the different amortisation policy shortly before bringing the charges in January 2020. Please also note that Kieran Maguire wrote to the EFL regarding the amortisation policy in June 2018.
Incompetence.

Bayern, Liverpool, Ajax, or.... Derby
Has he signed yet?

Never knew we qualified from the Group of Death. 
No wonder Scotland celebrated their point. 

My more serious current starting lineup (assuming renewals go ahead):
Roos
Byrne   Wisdom   Davies   Buchanan
Knight    Shinnie
Jozwiak   Sibley   Lawrence
Kazim
Subs: Marshall, Ebosele, Solomon, Forsyth, Bird, LThompson, Waghorn, Ibe, Stretton

Why likely? Thanks to the stadium sale, we were £17.5m within the limit.
Signings which will have a significant impact on the change in amortisation are: Thorne, Johnson, Butterfield, Blcakman, Vydra, Anya, Nugent, Lawrence, Wisdom, Huddlestone
Total amount spent on signings was about £58m.
Derby amortisation: £15m
Transfer profit: £20m (not including add-ons)
At most that's a £23m swing (£5.5m over the limit). However, if we adjust the amortisation, we also need to adjust the transfer profits, notably Ince by approx £2.3m and £1.9m for Weimann. Minor changes for the likes of Jerome, Shotton, Christie and Albentosa add up for the rest.
 
 
We started using the new amortisation method for the 15/16 season, so in use since 1 July 2015
Stadium was sold in June 2018, I believe (someone can double check the exact month if they're that bothered)

My more serious current starting lineup (assuming renewals go ahead):
Roos
Byrne   Wisdom   Davies   Buchanan
Knight    Shinnie
Jozwiak   Sibley   Lawrence
Kazim
Subs: Marshall, Ebosele, Solomon, Forsyth, Bird, LThompson, Waghorn, Ibe, Stretton

My more serious current starting lineup (assuming renewals go ahead):
Roos
Byrne   Wisdom   Davies   Buchanan
Knight    Shinnie
Jozwiak   Sibley   Lawrence
Kazim
Subs: Marshall, Ebosele, Solomon, Forsyth, Bird, LThompson, Waghorn, Ibe, Stretton

"difficult to have sympathy for Derby given their indiscretions" - indiscretions originally approved by the EFL for 3 consecutive accounting periods.
"independent body has now opted to dole out a fine alone and not a points deduction like the twelve points Sheffield Wednesday were docked last year" - yeah, that's probably because the charge wasn't related to overspending ?
"clear examples of points being an appropriate sanction for such rule breaks and that should happen" - really? I don't think any club has ever been charged for using an improper amortisation policy. 
"that should mean the penalty being applied for last season which would see Derby relegated to League One" - based on what exactly? Because a verdict for SWFC was arrived at just after the end of last season and had their penalty applied to 20/21?
 
The problem is the perception of us "cheating P&S", which automatically means points deduction in people's minds.

"difficult to have sympathy for Derby given their indiscretions" - indiscretions originally approved by the EFL for 3 consecutive accounting periods.
"independent body has now opted to dole out a fine alone and not a points deduction like the twelve points Sheffield Wednesday were docked last year" - yeah, that's probably because the charge wasn't related to overspending ?
"clear examples of points being an appropriate sanction for such rule breaks and that should happen" - really? I don't think any club has ever been charged for using an improper amortisation policy. 
"that should mean the penalty being applied for last season which would see Derby relegated to League One" - based on what exactly? Because a verdict for SWFC was arrived at just after the end of last season and had their penalty applied to 20/21?
 
The problem is the perception of us "cheating P&S", which automatically means points deduction in people's minds.

Then that would be a double punishment in the event of overspending.
This is 'charge 1', essentially relating to using an improper amortisation policy. Punishment should be suitable to that and not have any bearing on whether we have overspent or not. You're either guilty or you're not. It can't be a case of being guilty IF you're also guilty of something else.
'Charge 2' would be relating to possible overspending. Penalties are already well defined, although mitigations and aggravating factors are not which could decrease of increase the basic penalty.

"difficult to have sympathy for Derby given their indiscretions" - indiscretions originally approved by the EFL for 3 consecutive accounting periods.
"independent body has now opted to dole out a fine alone and not a points deduction like the twelve points Sheffield Wednesday were docked last year" - yeah, that's probably because the charge wasn't related to overspending ?
"clear examples of points being an appropriate sanction for such rule breaks and that should happen" - really? I don't think any club has ever been charged for using an improper amortisation policy. 
"that should mean the penalty being applied for last season which would see Derby relegated to League One" - based on what exactly? Because a verdict for SWFC was arrived at just after the end of last season and had their penalty applied to 20/21?
 
The problem is the perception of us "cheating P&S", which automatically means points deduction in people's minds.

"difficult to have sympathy for Derby given their indiscretions" - indiscretions originally approved by the EFL for 3 consecutive accounting periods.
"independent body has now opted to dole out a fine alone and not a points deduction like the twelve points Sheffield Wednesday were docked last year" - yeah, that's probably because the charge wasn't related to overspending ?
"clear examples of points being an appropriate sanction for such rule breaks and that should happen" - really? I don't think any club has ever been charged for using an improper amortisation policy. 
"that should mean the penalty being applied for last season which would see Derby relegated to League One" - based on what exactly? Because a verdict for SWFC was arrived at just after the end of last season and had their penalty applied to 20/21?
 
The problem is the perception of us "cheating P&S", which automatically means points deduction in people's minds.

If such draconian measures are attached to any deviation from policy, it most definitely needs to be their responsibility and definitely shouldn't be revisited after 3 years. A firm and direct policy as to calculation should also have been in place from the get go.