RadioactiveWaste Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 So basically the OP fears Mel will utterly shaft us if the EFL pursue punishment that it seems they are not currently able to implement on the basis that boro's chairman seems unhappy with other clubs appearing to exploit loopholes. They'll probably be a bunch of huffy words and maybe the EFL redraft profit and sustainability next season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyinLiverpool Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 Perhaps Gibson is harrumphing because he didn't think of it first. Isn't he just going to draw attention to his own dealings? Middlesbrough surely haven't survived on their gate receipts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TigerTedd Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 3 hours ago, rammieib said: Boro should be charged with bringing the game into disrepute for the quality of football they play. Heard an interesting debate on talksport about how the likes of Burnley, Bournemouth, Cardiff, Brighton show zero ambition in the premier league, they get the money, but they don’t do anything with it, just the bare minimum to keep them in. So they offer nothing to spectacle of the premier league, the owners are just happy to skim off as much as they can for minimal outlay. Boro would definitely join that list if they got promoted. Does any fan of football really want to watch boro on sky sports each week in the prem, aiming for 17th place each season. Boro can balls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cannable Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 6 hours ago, DRBee said: Recycled garbage and perhaps wishful thinking on your part. Perhaps little more can be expected from a 'new' poster. From memory he used to be DerbyMad’s resident ITK, to be fair Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comrade 86 Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 7 hours ago, ram59 said: As a result of the sale of the ground, the club actually has cash in the bank. Can you substantiate this claim? As far as I can see, the ground has not been paid for and is a paper transaction only. 6 hours ago, Curtains said: Basically FFP is ruining Football I can think of a few thinks I would blame before FFP:- FIFA Sky Egotistical owners Agents Greedy players Fans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curtains Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 19 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: Can you substantiate this claim? As far as I can see, the ground has not been paid for and is a paper transaction only. I can think of a few thinks I would blame before FFP:- FIFA Sky Egotistical owners Agents Greedy players Fans FFP causes nothing but heartache for EFL clubs . Premier League clubs aren’t affected really Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadioactiveWaste Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 18 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: Can you substantiate this claim? As far as I can see, the ground has not been paid for and is a paper transaction only. Seeing as the club and all associated offshoots and businesses basically depend on Mel's money, the bank accounts are presumably moving money around in essential Mels big pot of gold. The sale of the stadium from one bit of Mels empire to another bit hasn't changed the extent to which DCFC are dependant on MM. However, the problem wasn't Mels wad of used fivers, it was how FFP looked at the losses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 Just now, Curtains said: Why are you a fan of FFP it causes nothing but heartache for EFL clubs Premier League isn’t effected really I'm a fan of the principles of FFP but not a fan of how it is being applied and the limits in place. I'd like to see any limits to equity investment removed. I'd like to see some sort of cap on wages. I'd like to see rules applied consistently. I'd like to see punishments proportionate to the breach. I'd like to see financial penalties compensating teams that have played by the rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 2 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said: Seeing as the club and all associated offshoots and businesses basically depend on Mel's money, the bank accounts are presumably moving money around in essential Mels big pot of gold. The sale of the stadium from one bit of Mels empire to another bit hasn't changed the extent to which DCFC are dependant on MM. However, the problem wasn't Mels wad of used fivers, it was how FFP looked at the losses. The post was worded though as if the £80m from the ground sale is now in the bank for us to spend, as at the end of last year's accounts it wasn't hence why I asked if the claim could be substantiated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curtains Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 2 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: I'm a fan of the principles of FFP but not a fan of how it is being applied and the limits in place. I'd like to see any limits to equity investment removed. I'd like to see some sort of cap on wages. I'd like to see rules applied consistently. I'd like to see punishments proportionate to the breach. I'd like to see financial penalties compensating teams that have played by the rules. Why can’t we just have a free market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 Just now, Curtains said: Why can’t we just have a free market. We can I'm just not a fan of it because ultimately clubs will go bust or pass the costs on to fans, who I believe already pay enough for matches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Clough Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 3 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: I'm a fan of the principles of FFP but not a fan of how it is being applied and the limits in place. I'd like to see any limits to equity investment removed. I'd like to see some sort of cap on wages. I'd like to see rules applied consistently. I'd like to see punishments proportionate to the breach. I think that's a fairer, and easier to manage way of applying it 3 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: I'd like to see financial penalties compensating teams that have played by the rules. This was the original intention when FFP started. From a legal perspective I don't believe it could be enforced. QPR being the prime example Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norman Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 To save internet space, can Mel Morris CBE just sell us back the ground and get us a 12 point deduction after losing the Birmingham game? All done and dusted. Nobody affected, nobody cares. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norman Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 Hold on. Forest might finish above us. Hold on. No they wouldn't. Plan is flawless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ram59 Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 53 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: Can you substantiate this claim? As far as I can see, the ground has not been paid for and is a paper transaction only. I can think of a few thinks I would blame before FFP:- FIFA Sky Egotistical owners Agents Greedy players Fans If you look at the accounts, you'll see a massive increase of debtors to pay within 1 year, to approximately £80m. Which means that this sum is due before the end of this June. Obviously, the paperwork on the sale was back dated to last year, but the money transfer couldn't be back dated and would have to be made this year, hence taking it into the debtors within 1 year. Is that clear enough or haven't I explained it well enough? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 14 minutes ago, ram59 said: If you look at the accounts, you'll see a massive increase of debtors to pay within 1 year, to approximately £80m. Which means that this sum is due before the end of this June. Obviously, the paperwork on the sale was back dated to last year, but the money transfer couldn't be back dated and would have to be made this year, hence taking it into the debtors within 1 year. Is that clear enough or haven't I explained it well enough? Debtors are always classified as due within one year in accounts, does not mean they are definitely paid within that period. Guess we will see next year unless you have knowledge that the debt has been paid already? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carnero Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 19 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: Debtors are always classified as due within one year in accounts, does not mean they are definitely paid within that period. Guess we will see next year unless you have knowledge that the debt has been paid already? I expect that the annual rent (£1m?) will be knocked off the £80m debtor, year-by-year, for the foreseeable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheron85 Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 13 minutes ago, Carnero said: I expect that the annual rent (£1?) will be knocked off the £80m debtor, year-by-year, for the foreseeable. FTFY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ram59 Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 36 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: Debtors are always classified as due within one year in accounts, does not mean they are definitely paid within that period. Guess we will see next year unless you have knowledge that the debt has been paid already? There are debtors listed on the accounts of over 1 year, £23k down from £283k the previous year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.