FFP for the layman?

[CornwallRam]

From memory, this season we can 'lose' up to £13m as long as the owners inject £11m

Next season it changes again and is judged on a rolling three year period.

All embargoes end when the club can show that it back in compliance, and as compliance will be judged over three years in future it appears that we will be back in compliance immediately, so I can't see how they can impose any embargoes for this season. If we go up we might get a fine, but it would have been worth it and QPR might have killed that sanction in court by then anyway. That, I think, is why FFP is not figuring highly in this season's planning - or maybe we know we're getting £20m for Will and just spending it early.

[robglosta]

From memory, this season we can 'lose' up to £13m as long as the owners inject £11m

Next season it changes again and is judged on a rolling three year period.

All embargoes end when the club can show that it back in compliance, and as compliance will be judged over three years in future it appears that we will be back in compliance immediately, so I can't see how they can impose any embargoes for this season. If we go up we might get a fine, but it would have been worth it and QPR might have killed that sanction in court by then anyway. That, I think, is why FFP is not figuring highly in this season's planning - or maybe we know we're getting £20m for Will and just spending it early.

Bingo.  Thanks CR. 

[ramblur]

I'll start off with the assumption that we stayed within FFP for 14/15 (and we've been told that we did) and then make the further assumptions that 15/16 income will be at least as good as 14/15,and that running costs (other than labour) don't change much.If income goes down and/or running costs rise,then this should be deducted from the figure I'm about to give,conversely the reverse should be added. The total amount relating to loanees in 14/15 should also be added (or subtracted from the new activity).

The extra FFP allowance available in 15/16 amounts to £7m ,but you should bear in mind that amortisation,rather than transter fees,counts against this. However,if we were to utilise the full additional allowance this would have implications for following years and already commit us to the full allowance.This would mean that any incomings in future years would have to be matched by outgoings (promotion would change everything,however),unless income rose significantly and/or running expenses fell. In light of this,I don't think we'll avail of anything like the full extra £7m. In the following,transfer fees should be taken as being inclusive of agents' fees and League levy.

Changes thus far:-

Amortisation (divide any figures you want to imagine for the following by contract length in each case):-

Weimann,Carson - transfer fees.  Pearce,Baird,Bent - any agents' fees involved.

I doubt that any outgoings thus far have reduced amortisation much.

 

Wages :- Wages of all of the above (including any signing bonuses,which are really glorified wages and are often paid over length of contract) minus total cost of 14/15 loanees,minus any wage savings thus far on outgoings (which I think someone listed earlier).

Simply keep adding to the above as new incomings/outgoings arise. When the dust finally settles,I fully expect us to have utilised far less than the £7m.

Should any players be sold at a book profit,then this should be added to the £7m (converse applies for book losses) -any sales could (in certain circumstances) lead to amortisation savings in future years.

[eustonstation]

"We're Manchester City (of the Midlands) - we'll spend what we want"

 

Beat me to it!

[eddie]

Beat me to it!

By 3 days