EFL Verdict

[May Contain Nuts]

16 minutes ago, Taribo said:

Trouble is if we used the amortisation methodology as a way to increase spending/defer losses then we will likely be in breach of P&S when compared to the 'standard' methodology.

Losses/spending for amortisation would have been capped against a different criteria than for 'standard' methodology, we may have been within P&S using our method, but over if we now have to revert to 'standard' P&S methodology.

Not really our fault though if the EFL signed it off (three times - if we believe what we've heard). 

 

Best case scenario any club deciding to go along this route has ran both figures concurrently and knows exactly how much extra leeway the unique policy created, which has informed their spending, keeping them within limits, just.

Worst case scenario, this is Derby County we're talking about so I wouldn't pin my hopes on that being the case 

 

Edited June 28, 2021 by Coconut

[Eddie]

1 hour ago, Curtains said:

I honestly think any thing however small that Rams fans can do to help the club is needed. 

I'm going to stand on my doorstep and clap.

(sorry if that's a little too political)

[May Contain Nuts]

Just now, Eddie said:

I'm going to stand on my doorstep and clap.

(sorry if that's a little too political)

We've had the Belper Moo, they just need to change it to the Belper Baa

[Spanish]

31 minutes ago, Dean (hick) Saunders said:

Did we start using the “new” amortisation before the stadium sale occurred?

45) Until 2015 the approach taken by the Club to amortisation of player registrations was – like the vast majority of other clubs – to amortise the amount paid for a player registration (including associated costs such as Football League levies and commissions) on a straight line basis over the period of that player’s contract.

[Reggie Greenwood]

38 minutes ago, Coconut said:

Best case scenario any club deciding to go along this route has ran both figures concurrently and knows exactly how much extra leeway the unique policy created, which has informed their spending, keeping them within limits, just.

Worst case scenario, this is Derby County we're talking about so I wouldn't pin my hopes on that being the case 

 

According to the guys on here in the know about accounts plus Swiss Ramble and even Maguire think we will be within P&S limits even reverting back to the straight line method. So nothing to fret about ?

[Big Bad Bob]

12 minutes ago, Reggie Greenwood said:

According to the guys on here in the know about accounts plus Swiss Ramble and even Maguire think we will be within P&S limits even reverting back to the straight line method. So nothing to fret about ?

I'm not 100% up to speed with the current situation. I'm kind of loosing interest in football in general. But hypothetically, if our amortisation is changed to straight line and we are still within P&S limits, does the £100k fine still stand?

[RadioactiveWaste]

Just now, Big Bad Bob said:

I'm not 100% up to speed with the current situation. I'm kind of loosing interest in football in general. But hypothetically, if our amortisation is changed to straight line and we are still within P&S limits, does the £100k fine still stand?

Yes.

And I don't think we'd get it revoked even if we appealed.

[Sparkle]

2 minutes ago, Big Bad Bob said:

I'm not 100% up to speed with the current situation. I'm kind of loosing interest in football in general. But hypothetically, if our amortisation is changed to straight line and we are still within P&S limits, does the £100k fine still stand?

Depends if the EFL appeal - it could go up or down 

[Reggie Greenwood]

3 minutes ago, Big Bad Bob said:

I'm not 100% up to speed with the current situation. I'm kind of loosing interest in football in general. But hypothetically, if our amortisation is changed to straight line and we are still within P&S limits, does the £100k fine still stand?

The 100k fine is for the amortisation breach not P&S so subject to appeals by either side that would still stand. 

[Sparkle]

So the current position is that we are awaiting the full details/results of the last verdict as the EFL should be doing as well before anything else occurs. 

is that correct 

[Big Bad Bob]

9 minutes ago, Reggie Greenwood said:

The 100k fine is for the amortisation breach not P&S so subject to appeals by either side that would still stand. 

Ah, ok. Thanks. 

[Dean (hick) Saunders]

How many times are EFL (and us) allowed to appeal? Can EFL keep going until the end of time (or we get a 4000 point penalty for the 2038/39 season).

[alexxxxx]

1 hour ago, Dean (hick) Saunders said:

Did we start using the “new” amortisation before the stadium sale occurred?

Yes we've been using it for years

[alexxxxx]

1 hour ago, Taribo said:

Trouble is if we used the amortisation methodology as a way to increase spending/defer losses then we will likely be in breach of P&S when compared to the 'standard' methodology.

Losses/spending for amortisation would have been capped against a different criteria than for 'standard' methodology, we may have been within P&S using our method, but over if we now have to revert to 'standard' P&S methodology.

Not really our fault though if the EFL signed it off (three times - if we believe what we've heard). 

 

Will love to see what clubs have done this year. Stoke have somehow lost 85M by writing down the value of all their players this year... I assume P and S isn't being enforced this season?

Basically they're doing to opposite and dumping all their value this year to reduce paper losses in the future.

Reading have lost 85M over the past 2 years. 

I wonder what side of the fence these owners are on? 

[Spanish]

7 minutes ago, Dean (hick) Saunders said:

How many times are EFL (and us) allowed to appeal? Can EFL keep going until the end of time (or we get a 4000 point penalty for the 2038/39 season).

both sides can appeal the verdict of the DC once, neither can appeal the LAP.  Verdict 1 was appealed by EFL, verdict 2 is uncertain as to whether either side will appeal

[Ghost of Clough]

1 hour ago, Taribo said:

Trouble is if we used the amortisation methodology as a way to increase spending/defer losses then we will likely be in breach of P&S when compared to the 'standard' methodology.

Losses/spending for amortisation would have been capped against a different criteria than for 'standard' methodology, we may have been within P&S using our method, but over if we now have to revert to 'standard' P&S methodology.

Not really our fault though if the EFL signed it off (three times - if we believe what we've heard). 

Why likely? Thanks to the stadium sale, we were £17.5m within the limit.
Signings which will have a significant impact on the change in amortisation are: Thorne, Johnson, Butterfield, Blcakman, Vydra, Anya, Nugent, Lawrence, Wisdom, Huddlestone
Total amount spent on signings was about £58m.
Derby amortisation: £15m
Transfer profit: £20m (not including add-ons)

At most that's a £23m swing (£5.5m over the limit). However, if we adjust the amortisation, we also need to adjust the transfer profits, notably Ince by approx £2.3m and £1.9m for Weimann. Minor changes for the likes of Jerome, Shotton, Christie and Albentosa add up for the rest.

 

 

1 hour ago, Dean (hick) Saunders said:

Did we start using the “new” amortisation before the stadium sale occurred?

We started using the new amortisation method for the 15/16 season, so in use since 1 July 2015
Stadium was sold in June 2018, I believe (someone can double check the exact month if they're that bothered)

[Taribo]

Just now, Ghost of Clough said:

Why likely? Thanks to the stadium sale, we were £17.5m within the limit.
Signings which will have a significant impact on the change in amortisation are: Thorne, Johnson, Butterfield, Blcakman, Vydra, Anya, Nugent, Lawrence, Wisdom, Huddlestone
Total amount spent on signings was about £58m.
Derby amortisation: £15m
Transfer profit: £20m (not including add-ons)

At most that's a £23m swing (£5.5m over the limit). However, if we adjust the amortisation, we also need to adjust the transfer profits, notably Ince by approx £2.3m and £1.9m for Weimann. Minor changes for the likes of Jerome, Shotton, Christie and Albentosa add up for the rest.

 

Thank you GoC for taking the time to explain mate, whilst all is not rosy in the garden of Derby County it does look like we'll be within P&S using the 'standard' methodology.  

[GboroRam]

Must admit I'm not up on it, so honest question: is there any possibility they are going for the amortisation restatement, with a view of revisiting the ground valuation? If they get their way and reduce the valuation of the stadium, could that throw us under the bus after the amortisation is recalculated?

[Ramarena]

18 hours ago, CBRammette said:

Saw Derby trending on twitter. Heart failure thought we were down. But fairly calm on here and relax. Combination of horse racing and people offering us sympathy based on Wayne's England side choices. Its going to be a long few weeks ?

Yeah a mate sent me a link to the article on the 3 CDMs, the comments section was merciless ?

[Indy]

5 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

Must admit I'm not up on it, so honest question: is there any possibility they are going for the amortisation restatement, with a view of revisiting the ground valuation? If they get their way and reduce the valuation of the stadium, could that throw us under the bus after the amortisation is recalculated?

I don’t think so. The ground valuation and sale is not linked to the amortisation.
 

The only relevance is that the profit from the sale covered the losses from player values being amortised.