CVByrne Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 33 minutes ago, MarkLillis said: You don't get this kind of detail from the mainstream media so thanks for your work I know you say we could come in over or under depending on the accuracy of your figures but assuming they are all 100% correct then we do not breach this year but we need make 70M on player trading next year - right? In that case if we do make 70M what kind of budget would we have? For 23/24 I've been able to estimate the change in player amortisation based on players we signed and new contracts for players (which reduces the remaining amortisation). Could then alter wages based on assumptions etc.. A big part in the 22/23 losses was paying off Gerrard and his staff and buying Emery. That is one off and not recurring into 23/24. Then all our youth sales making us 40m. I could easily be off by 10 or 15 mil in wrong direction thus we are in breach of PSR unless we bring in income this month. For 24/25 our season of +23.5m in PSR account drops off and we've 2 big negative seasons plus the 24/25 season for PSR. Yes we have a big boost to revenue from CL but we still need to make profits on player sales. How we trim the wage bill and amortisation is key here. Digne, Coutinho, Carlos and Dendonker if they can be moved on permanently for maybe a loss on player sales of 5m that will be huge for us. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Albrighton Posted June 7 VT Supporter Share Posted June 7 12 hours ago, Frodo said: This may sound stupid but what's not stopping us sell Dougie to Juventus for £50 million before the end of this financial FFP year (31st june) then come July 1st we buy him back for £51 million, Juventus make a Million & that £51 million goes into next seasons accounts & we get Dougie back ? I wonder how many deals we could sneakily make on the 31st June to help us ease the books. ”Oh that £30m we received on the 31st June? Yeah that was the money we received for Coutinho, we had a nice going away party, some nice words were said, there was cake…” To help us cover our tracks, we would just need to change that little rhyme “Thirty days have September, April <loud cough> and November…” 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 2 hours ago, Czarnikjak said: Thanks for posting these numbers, appreciated. There is one thing I would like to highlight however that most people miss in our calculations (including yourself by the looks of it). The fact that we extended our accounting period, automatically increases our wages and amortisation (and some other costs) by 1/12, even if all other things were equal. So you have there ~300m in wages+amortization, that extra month adds another £25m costs to your calculations. I could argue some other minor points (like how did we keep amortization flat in your calcs, according to mine it went up by about £10m), but overall i still stand by my point that we are non-complaint as things stand atm (unless we sold Bodymoor or pulled some other accounting trick). Yes, but a month in the 22 accounts drops off too to make it fully 3 years of 12 months. We sold Engles and Samatta in June 21 both at a loss so we can exclude those from our FFP in the 22 season now increasing our profit that year. So it might be a net positive overall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 48 minutes ago, Czarnikjak said: I don't know, I asked this question before on this forum. Would need a professional accountant to answer I think. It is a good question, I'm sure we can choose which period to account it for. Technically it's income in June so I see now reason we can't include it. I think selling Bodymoor is just a no brainer. Easy accounting trick that's allowed in rules at present. We should simply do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Czarnikjak Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 9 minutes ago, CVByrne said: Yes, but a month in the 22 accounts drops off too to make it fully 3 years of 12 months. We sold Engles and Samatta in June 21 both at a loss so we can exclude those from our FFP in the 22 season now increasing our profit that year. So it might be a net positive overall. I don't think anything drops off. Is it in Premier League handbook? AFAIK handbook only talks about T, T-1 and T-2 accounting periods, they don't need to add to 36 months exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 (edited) 14 minutes ago, Czarnikjak said: I don't think anything drops off. Is it in Premier League handbook? AFAIK handbook only talks about T, T-1 and T-2 accounting periods, they don't need to add to 36 months exactly. Kieran Maguire said it on price of football podcast. If it didn't we could just shorten our season to 11 months He explained it's always on a 36 month period Edited June 7 by CVByrne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Czarnikjak Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 2 minutes ago, CVByrne said: Kieran McGuire said it on price of football podcast Ok, quick scan through the handbook shows he is right. It is last 36 months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 (edited) 1 minute ago, Czarnikjak said: Ok, quick scan through the handbook shows he is right. It is last 36 months. I trust him on all these matters. He is an expert. We'll need to restate the 21/22 accounts at same time we submit our 23/24 accounts Edited June 7 by CVByrne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Czarnikjak Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 Just now, CVByrne said: I trust him on all these matters. He is an expert. He is, although I value Borson and Swiss Ramble higher than him. Anyway, this 36 month thing makes it even more interesting and complicated to assess properly. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
numbersix Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 21 minutes ago, CVByrne said: It is a good question, I'm sure we can choose which period to account it for. Technically it's income in June so I see now reason we can't include it. I think selling Bodymoor is just a no brainer. Easy accounting trick that's allowed in rules at present. We should simply do it. this seems like a good shout if true, sorry if already discussed on here but that sounds like a thing that surely is being looked at, I hadn't heard it before. £40 mill ish spent on it in last 25 years, 60 acre site; semi-rural land alone in Warks with planning permission seems to be going for like 300K per acre - so isn't this potentially a huge part of the answer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Czarnikjak said: He is, although I value Borson and Swiss Ramble higher than him. Anyway, this 36 month thing makes it even more interesting and complicated to assess properly. Yes, Swiss Ramble is the gold standard Also agree it is very complicated. Edited June 7 by CVByrne 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 11 minutes ago, numbersix said: this seems like a good shout if true, sorry if already discussed on here but that sounds like a thing that surely is being looked at, I hadn't heard it before. £40 mill ish spent on it in last 25 years, 60 acre site; semi-rural land alone in Warks with planning permission seems to be going for like 300K per acre - so isn't this potentially a huge part of the answer? It's the answer yes. I don't see why we wouldn't explore it. Maybe because we don't want the bad press? Either way if we don't do it we will certain;y be 100% confident we are inside PSR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Czarnikjak Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 3 minutes ago, CVByrne said: It's the answer yes. I don't see why we wouldn't explore it. Maybe because we don't want the bad press? Either way if we don't do it we will certain;y be 100% confident we are inside PSR We might have already sold some properties to ourselves for what we know. The fact that Chelsea sold hotels only came out in December when they submitted the accounts to Premier league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duke313 Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 3 minutes ago, CVByrne said: It's the answer yes. I don't see why we wouldn't explore it. Maybe because we don't want the bad press? Either way if we don't do it we will certain;y be 100% confident we are inside PSR It shouldn't matter, it's within the rules as per recent PL vote. Let the other clubs squabble amongst themselves, we'll be called all sorts, but who cares if it means we don;t have to sell key players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 3 minutes ago, Czarnikjak said: We might have already sold some properties to ourselves for what we know. The fact that Chelsea sold hotels only came out in December when they submitted the accounts to Premier league. Very good point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 19 hours ago, Demitri_C said: For me the only way out of this is selling fringe players like archer for something like 20m to one of our clubs under the umbrella e.g vitoria Unless a big offer comes in for a ramsey or luiz. Tbh if we fall foul we only have ourselves to blame we knew the rules We are not allowed do business with Vitoria until January. Also that would be absolutely investigated Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duke313 Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 I'm sure if us and Newcastle start taking the piss with this loophole, there will be another PL vote and it will be closed off. Can't be having us as CL mainstays now can we. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 14 minutes ago, duke313 said: I'm sure if us and Newcastle start taking the piss with this loophole, there will be another PL vote and it will be closed off. Can't be having us as CL mainstays now can we. There will be another club vote on it soon. Premier League have to update the wording and come back. So loophole will be shut in next few months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grobs Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 So if we need to make 70m player profit in 2024/2025 should we expect no/limited signings this summer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Made In Aston Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 1 hour ago, CVByrne said: Kieran Maguire said it on price of football podcast. If it didn't we could just shorten our season to 11 months He explained it's always on a 36 month period Yes. If the clubs own accounting period was longer or shorter than 12 months it would need to apportion the figures from the relevant accounts to fit the 36 months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts