Can I just take time out to say thanks to Le Mod and others for using this article as a stick to beat George Elek with this morning. Go get him!
just been reading that, shame for someone who's usually fairly clued up
you'd also think he'd be happy we are raising the profile and bringing in players like Stansfield to a league he champions so well
He's best mates with a Villa fan and used to regularly go to VP, so he likes to have a pop whenever he can.
Now he's doubling down because he's been proven to be wrong. Turns out you can't be an expert on 72 different clubs after all?
With this in mind it will be interesting to see how George Hall, Romelle Donovan and Tommy Fogarty's loans turn out this season.
SnoopEverbluesince92El MayorComancheHi Dan,
Thanks for writing this. I know UEFA and the Prem have capped amortisation at 5 years, but do you know if this applies to the EFL? I had a look through the rules and couldn't specifically find anything.
Could we be spreading the £15m across the full 7 years, thus realising a cost of only £2.14m each year on his value amortisation?
As far as I’m aware it is capped under EFL rules too
That's going to be the next loophole to exploit. Can see it coming a mile off that it flies in the face of accounting standards of useful economic life and from the Leicester hearing the rules are written so poorly theres no way they can enforce a shorter amortisation period.
Stansfield for example would have a book value of £6m but an ffp of £0. Any sale in the final two years of his contract would all be profit?
That's without considering what happens if he gets a contract extension at some point. Does the period of amortisation increase again back up to 5 years?
I don't understand your point?
From the authorities' point of view what matters is that the transfer fee has scored within a reasonable period. I'd think, if they could, they would ban any amortisation from the calcs at all if they could.
My point is having the calculation for losses in a way that contradicts accounting standards is surely impossible to enforce should a club get to a hearing.
If a club signs a player for £100m on a 10 year contract then the accounting standard is £10m per year for the full period. Having an arbitrary calculation that sits outside the accounts that says it should be £20m for 5 years and then they will have a £0 carrying value for ffp but 50m book value is absolutely insane.
In that scenario if somebody comes in and buys the player at the end of year 6 for £30m when theyve already been reduced to nil value. They would have an accounting loss of £30m-£40m= -£10m but they would get an ffp profit for that season of £30m-£0= £30m.
I get that they didn't like the way Chelsea started offering long term contracts to ensure compliance but footballing bodies cannot be arrogant enough to think we can create our set of financial treatments.
Clearly they are that arrogant though which is why their success rate of wanting the punishment they want to impose at hearings is so low and they were basically laughed at by the panel for Leicester because the rules are a shit show.
Dan, do you know if we're likely to be using the League One "owner injects money" part of the rules this year? It looks like all we've done is spend money which the club has generated. In which case any fans crying about fair play and rule changes being needed are so far off the mark it's crazy. No footballing authority can enforce that clubs can't spend money which they generate surely.
El MayorRoyale Blue FEA"east way" typo for easy way.
Thanks, I’ll pick those up. I thought I’d caught them all this morning when I gave it a once over 🤦♂️
If you’re happy for us to point out errors, the following sentence might need to be edited
The complexities of financial fair play regulations mean that it’s difficult for many people to understand exactly what is going on, leaving pundits and fans alike to result to opinions based on guesswork and straw man hypotheses..
It should be resort methinks 😉
BluenoseMoEl MayorRoyale Blue FEA"east way" typo for easy way.
Thanks, I’ll pick those up. I thought I’d caught them all this morning when I gave it a once over 🤦♂️
If you’re happy for us to point out errors, the following sentence might need to be edited
The complexities of financial fair play regulations mean that it’s difficult for many people to understand exactly what is going on, leaving pundits and fans alike to result to opinions based on guesswork and straw man hypotheses..
It should be resort methinks 😉
Yeah it should. I’ll fix that.
And yeah, absolutely pick up my errors.
I’ve had it confirmed that at the moment there isn’t a 5 year cap - my apologies
good news, i'm sure the EFL will be changing that before long!
I'd be very dubious about amortising a player's contract for longer than 5 years though.
It's a sensible (non) limit.