Amortisation Policy

[Ghost of Clough]

3 minutes ago, Stockport Ram said:

Please could you tell me where I can get an online copy of the report in full?  A link would be great, thank you..

Here

[Stockport Ram]

On 04/09/2020 at 07:40, Ghost of Clough said:

Here

Thank you.

[Half Fan Half Biscuit]

On 27/08/2020 at 09:27, RadioactiveWaste said:

I certainly think other clubs are going to move to this method and point to the tribunal ruling as precedence its accepted. To be honest, it is probably concerns about efl compliance that kept any other clubs from doing it. 

And you just know some club will adopt it, not be very clever about how they do it, try to fiddle something and end up being charged. X

 

Perhaps someone at the Club needed to put a bit more effort into providing supporting information in the spreadsheet listing the player values used for the basis of the amortisation charged in the accounts. 

[Woodley Ram]

What I take from this is that the bottom line in the accounts (for the FFP £39m sake) shouldn't be any different? if that is so, can the EFL still deduct points for our accounting practice even if it didn't affect the bottom line?  

[Spanish]

12 minutes ago, Woodley Ram said:

What I take from this is that the bottom line in the accounts (for the FFP £39m sake) shouldn't be any different? if that is so, can the EFL still deduct points for our accounting practice even if it didn't affect the bottom line?  

don't think so, where is the justice in that?

[Ellafella]

On 27/08/2020 at 04:41, RamNut said:

Given the unusual nature of football clubs - having  a lot of depreciating intangible assets - amortisation is a significant element of the accounts. I’m surprised that all clubs have not been required to submit a full schedule of those assets, showing how the amortisation value was calculated. 
in our case that led to a lack of clarity and ultimately a breakdown of trust.

when eventually scrutinised by the IDC panel, the panel were persuaded that we used a valid systematic process which was appropriately signed off by accountants and auditors. From the outside it all seems a bit weird.

I read somewhere a proposal that ffp should exclude amortisation which seems to have some merit to me.
Base ffp on real world revenue trading, excluding depreciation of intangible assets.

our crime was not our level of spending, but our level of spending badly (by signing players that we couldn’t sell), so that we could not recover the ’subjective’ residual Values, and therefore ended up in a spot of bother. 
Any financial governance system that effectively forces clubs to sell players in order to stay compliant - even if they don’t need to otherwise - seems like a ? system to me. 
but what do I know, I’m just a fan supporting  a club that was effectively forced to sell its best player every season in order to comply with ffp, whilst the real problem  - player wages - was not addressed across the whole of the EFL.

ultimately ffp is producing is producing some bizarre outcomes.  

Hear! Hear! 

[BramcoteRam84]

52 minutes ago, Woodley Ram said:

What I take from this is that the bottom line in the accounts (for the FFP £39m sake) shouldn't be any different? if that is so, can the EFL still deduct points for our accounting practice even if it didn't affect the bottom line?  

Only way they could possibly sanction us in this instance is if it was found we deliberately misled them. I believe this panel has said we acted honestly and truthfully.

Therefore no they can’t. If we are within the £39m limit we won’t get a points deduction.