FFP going into next season

[archied]

6 minutes ago, ramblur said:

You missed out Pearson,who had to sell before buying, which was probably part of the reason for his demise. I think he probably miscalculated how hard it would be to move players on (and I think you could probably say ditto Rowett) ,and the Hendrick transfer rumbled on for ages and left him little time to recruit in that window. I must say in his defence that the twin signings of Vydra and Anya,taken as a pair,was probably good business.

Might go some way to explaining mac2 sacking if he and Mel weren’t on the same page budget wise for the next window and perhaps Mel was an admirer of what rowett was achieving on a tighter budget with brum 

[ramblur]

2 minutes ago, archied said:

Ahh my mistake ,I had kind of zoned in on his purchases only 

I remember I was quite ill during that window and wasn't posting, but was viewing posts from time to time. I got a bit frustrated when I was reading posts such as 'why didn't he bring players in earlier' and was itching to reply, because I knew we'd have to sell first(but I knew that if I'd posted,it would have led to a string of replies,that I wasn't up to). A good clue to the position came in a DET piece about a couple of weeks before he got the chop. He was asked about any more incomings and said we had to balance the books (and I'm pretty sure the dreaded FFP was mentioned). Now a bit of logic tells me that if we had to balance the books after our transfer dealings,then we must have been in that position at the outset,thus vindicating my thoughts on the matter before the window had actually opened.

With the 16/17 results due soon,I'll put my head on the block and say that whatever our FFP result turns out to be, it would have been way over the threshold without the profit on sales+Martin loan fee. This is given as a global figure in the accounts,so it'll be easy enough to work out.

[ramblur]

10 minutes ago, archied said:

Might go some way to explaining mac2 sacking if he and Mel weren’t on the same page budget wise for the next window and perhaps Mel was an admirer of what rowett was achieving on a tighter budget with brum 

Maybe,but we'll probably never know.

[ramblur]

14 minutes ago, Boycie said:

I think Anya wasn’t good business. As much as I think he’s a really nice guy etc, I don’t think his supposed transfer cost represented a good deal.

That's why I said taken as a pair. I reckon their joint current values exceed the total paid for the two of them.

[Boycie]

But they were individual purchases?

We didn’t have to buy both.

obviously Vydras value has gone up, so are you saying that covers Anya’s loss in transfer value? Because he’s not increased in value?

[ramblur]

21 minutes ago, Boycie said:

But they were individual purchases?

We didn’t have to buy both.

obviously Vydras value has gone up, so are you saying that covers Anya’s loss in transfer value? Because he’s not increased in value?

Yes,but it's only my opinion.

[plymouthram]

Could be worse, we could be £100m in debt like Cardiff are.

[Boycie]

57 minutes ago, ramblur said:

Yes,but it's only my opinion.

Well, I know what you’re saying Ramblur, but look at some opinions on here for Will Hughes’s valuation pre him being sold.

Everyones got one.

[archied]

11 minutes ago, Boycie said:

Well, I know what you’re saying Ramblur, but look at some opinions on here for Will Hughes’s valuation pre him being sold.

Everyones got one.

It’s was all a little blurred in our minds with will going there then both them comming derby ,felt like one bid deal

[Boycie]

12 minutes ago, archied said:

It’s was all a little blurred in our minds with will going there then both them comming derby ,felt like one bid deal

Yeah, one cancelled out the other.

No true either I’m told.

[ramblur]

6 hours ago, Boycie said:

Well, I know what you’re saying Ramblur, but look at some opinions on here for Will Hughes’s valuation pre him being sold.

Everyones got one.

Yes, I did state it was purely my opinion and not fact. I always try to be fair to people,irrespective of any feelings I might have for them. Pearson appears to be almost hated by most on here, but I was merely trying to point out that it wasn't all bad, in that he gave us Vyds, who has turned out to be integral to our success this year. If you like,I can take Anya completely out of the equation,and just leave the Vyds comment in place.

For what it's worth,I think there was probably very little difference in the way Pearson wanted to play and the way Gary is now trying to get us to play,but I think there is a massive difference in the ways they've gone about it. It appears to me that Pearson adopted the 'Regimental SM' approach, whereas Gary was more of the persuader, trying to bring the players along with him.

Leicester fans did try to tell us that things might get a lot worse under Pearson before they got better,understandable if you're trying to completely change things.

If you look at this season under Gary, things were very dodgy for a while and many on here wondered what he was trying to do,but he and the players turned things round eventually,when the players appeared to be starting to buy into what he was trying to achieve.

[Boycie]

I agree, strict and defensive, we didn’t like it so Mac comes back, the old system still doesn’t work so we have to try the new way again.

Points mean prizes, possession not always. Unless you’re Barcelona or can finish every half chance.

[Derbylad92]

I wouldn' want GR to spend big money because I think the plays he brings in never really improve us so what' the point in giving him big money and he's never had it in his past at old clubs 

[Spanish]

so presumably if we have a player whose contract is about to end but the residual value is way overstated, eg Anya (referring to value), we will to prepare for the FFP hit.  I guess there are a number of players in that position and the only alternative would be to extend and then loan out to offset the salary.  I wonder how much insurance would help if we bought a player for multi millions and he suffers a career ending injury.

[ramblur]

2 hours ago, Spanish said:

so presumably if we have a player whose contract is about to end but the residual value is way overstated, eg Anya (referring to value), we will to prepare for the FFP hit.  I guess there are a number of players in that position and the only alternative would be to extend and then loan out to offset the salary.  I wonder how much insurance would help if we bought a player for multi millions and he suffers a career ending injury.

In Anya's case, because of his age, the RV may well have been fairly low, thus meaning that some annual amortization may have reduced his book value (only my guess, of course). I think a better example would probably be Butters, because I suspect that his RV may have been pretty high. My guess here would be that his RV is reduced at June 30 this year (thus introducing a charge to P/L,and therefore FFP) to soften any future blow (unless he suddenly rediscovers some form in the meantime).

Not sure it's a great idea to extend the contract of a player we don't want (if that's what you meant) in the hope that we might be able to loan him out -is there any guarantee we could manage this,and would we still end up paying a wedge of his wages?

I know little about insurance, but I do remember that in the original FFP guidelines there was talk of some kind of FFP relief in the circumstances you outlined,but there was no detail. Loss of a major sponsor was another example given.

[Spanish]

6 minutes ago, ramblur said:

 

Not sure it's a great idea to extend the contract of a player we don't want (if that's what you meant) in the hope that we might be able to loan him out -is there any guarantee we could manage this,and would we still end up paying a wedge of his wages?

 

if you had no headroom to cope with a hit from selling a player at less than value this may be you only option

 

I know little about insurance, but I do remember that in the original FFP guidelines there was talk of some kind of FFP relief in the circumstances you outlined,but there was no detail. Loss of a major sponsor was another example given.

sounds sensible but then again when has that had anything to do with football rules

[ramblur]

3 minutes ago, Spanish said:

if you had no headroom to cope with a hit from selling a player at less than value this may be you only option

 

I know little about insurance, but I do remember that in the original FFP guidelines there was talk of some kind of FFP relief in the circumstances you outlined,but there was no detail. Loss of a major sponsor was another example given.

sounds sensible but then again when has that had anything to do with football rules

After my latest flurry of posts,my head's starting to hurt and I can't concentrate as well as I'd like,so I'll have to skip the first point until I can think more clearly. However,it just instinctively seemed a bad idea. Don't understand the second half of your last sentence, but again that could be because I'm not thinking straight. Time for a long break methinks. If anyone quotes my posts in the meantime,I'll try to reply when I can.

[Spanish]

32 minutes ago, ramblur said:

After my latest flurry of posts,my head's starting to hurt and I can't concentrate as well as I'd like,so I'll have to skip the first point until I can think more clearly. However,it just instinctively seemed a bad idea. Don't understand the second half of your last sentence, but again that could be because I'm not thinking straight. Time for a long break methinks. If anyone quotes my posts in the meantime,I'll try to reply when I can.

second one was agreeing with you so ignore it

[Sexydadbod]

If we are in trouble, we have no-one to blame but ourselves. Norwich want 30 million for Maddison, we should have been more pushy when teams wanted Ince and Hughes.

[Mafiabob]

1 hour ago, McLovin said:

If we are in trouble, we have no-one to blame but ourselves. Norwich want 30 million for Maddison, we should have been more pushy when teams wanted Ince and Hughes.

Maybe we were in a position where we couldn’t be too pushy.....