Gringo

How many points deduction will Reading get based on these results?
Reading made operating losses of £43.5million, compared to £40.7million the previous year, while accumulated losses totalled £138million.
Wages were 211 per cent of revenue - slight progress somewhat compared with 226 per cent the previous year. Nevertheless, this is is still above the level recommended by UEFA, which is 70 per cent.
My guess is a fixed penalty £100 fine and a kindly reminder to keep their losses under £100million next submittal.

Yes depreciation and amortisation which is a fancy word for depreciation of a non capital item i.e. intangible such as a players contract can be offset against tax

How many points deduction will Reading get based on these results?
Reading made operating losses of £43.5million, compared to £40.7million the previous year, while accumulated losses totalled £138million.
Wages were 211 per cent of revenue - slight progress somewhat compared with 226 per cent the previous year. Nevertheless, this is is still above the level recommended by UEFA, which is 70 per cent.
My guess is a fixed penalty £100 fine and a kindly reminder to keep their losses under £100million next submittal.

The answer is "blowing in the wind"

An intangible asset sits on your balance sheet, if that asset no longer exists, i.e. the player leaves then the auditors would insist on removal from the balance sheet crystallising a loss of the outstanding balance sheet figure, if you sell the players registration for more than the balance sheet figure you register the difference as a profit. Therefore I would stand up all day in court and defend the Rams policy, the EFL would fail if they went through a court of law, however I assume that  one of the rules of association of being a member of the football league is that you cannot sue in a court of law you can only be judged by a kangaroo court.

You are correct about the HMRC, as anything that increases the profit through your amortisation policy would mean more tax paid to them, although in the case of the Rams, that is not the case because we still lost money.
You are also correct that Amortisation policy of an intangible asset i.e. the players contract, is up to the company concerned and is not covered by FRS 102, so the EFL's stance has no legal basis on fact. Just because the other clubs do straight line amortisation is irrelevant, we did not break any laws or regulations, so my view is "see you in court axs wipes"  
 

The EFL really want Mel out of the football league, he is the stone in their shoe, the fly in their soup, constantly telling them how they screwed up the TV deal and reminding them that they could not organise a pishup in a brewery. My opinion is that they are leaking this crxp whilst negotiating a punishment beating for such a dissident, it is in the EFL's best interests to keep the Rams in the championship we are by a country mile one of the biggest clubs in the division and generate great interest in the league, I surmise therefore that they will not screw up an incoming change of ownership if it gets rid of Mel.
So my own personal view is that as long as I was able I would keep on fighting; and so I am reminded of the words of the greatest living Englishman of my lifetime; 
  "We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender,"  
 

An intangible asset sits on your balance sheet, if that asset no longer exists, i.e. the player leaves then the auditors would insist on removal from the balance sheet crystallising a loss of the outstanding balance sheet figure, if you sell the players registration for more than the balance sheet figure you register the difference as a profit. Therefore I would stand up all day in court and defend the Rams policy, the EFL would fail if they went through a court of law, however I assume that  one of the rules of association of being a member of the football league is that you cannot sue in a court of law you can only be judged by a kangaroo court.

Birmingham then drove a coach and horses through the business plan they were given as the EFL tried to make them sell Che Adams for peanuts, 

I did not know that putting on free ttransport for an owner was in the job description, the club will still be here even when you are gone, 

The EFL really want Mel out of the football league, he is the stone in their shoe, the fly in their soup, constantly telling them how they screwed up the TV deal and reminding them that they could not organise a pishup in a brewery. My opinion is that they are leaking this crxp whilst negotiating a punishment beating for such a dissident, it is in the EFL's best interests to keep the Rams in the championship we are by a country mile one of the biggest clubs in the division and generate great interest in the league, I surmise therefore that they will not screw up an incoming change of ownership if it gets rid of Mel.
So my own personal view is that as long as I was able I would keep on fighting; and so I am reminded of the words of the greatest living Englishman of my lifetime; 
  "We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender,"  
 

With the greatest of respect and my OCD, until very recently it stated 2020 accounts were overdue as well, that has now been removed. To my mind this makes lots of sense as the 2019 accounts will be part of the P&S calculations whereas by 2020 overheads were under better control. Finally my assumption is because of the timelag between filing and public availability for viewing there will now be a gap of 6-10 days, due to civil servants working from home etc. 

no Larry Grayson

The EFL really want Mel out of the football league, he is the stone in their shoe, the fly in their soup, constantly telling them how they screwed up the TV deal and reminding them that they could not organise a pishup in a brewery. My opinion is that they are leaking this crxp whilst negotiating a punishment beating for such a dissident, it is in the EFL's best interests to keep the Rams in the championship we are by a country mile one of the biggest clubs in the division and generate great interest in the league, I surmise therefore that they will not screw up an incoming change of ownership if it gets rid of Mel.
So my own personal view is that as long as I was able I would keep on fighting; and so I am reminded of the words of the greatest living Englishman of my lifetime; 
  "We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender,"  
 

You may well be correct, and in return I am giving it about 10 months until you post something positive about the manager..

"Better to die on your feet than live on your knees" as Emiliano Zapata said,

"Better to die on your feet than live on your knees" as Emiliano Zapata said,

"Better to die on your feet than live on your knees" as Emiliano Zapata said,

You may well be correct, and in return I am giving it about 10 months until you post something positive about the manager..

You may well be correct, and in return I am giving it about 10 months until you post something positive about the manager..

You may well be correct, and in return I am giving it about 10 months until you post something positive about the manager..

You may well be correct, and in return I am giving it about 10 months until you post something positive about the manager..

You may well be correct, and in return I am giving it about 10 months until you post something positive about the manager..

You may well be correct, and in return I am giving it about 10 months until you post something positive about the manager..

You may well be correct, and in return I am giving it about 10 months until you post something positive about the manager..