+- COYR NOTTINGHAM FOREST FORUM (https://coyrforestforum.co.uk)
+-- Forum: NOTTINGHAM FOREST - A REBEL CLUB IN A REBEL CITY (https://coyrforestforum.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Forum: Nottingham Forest Fan Talk - Forest All Over The World (https://coyrforestforum.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: NFFC Financial Talk (/showthread.php?tid=546)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - Sausage Roll - 13-07-2023
Forest got paid just short of $580,000 by FIFA for releasing players to play in last year's World Cup.
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - nffc93 - 14-07-2023
(06-07-2023, 11:17 AM)JollyLolly Wrote: nffc93, based on your assumed selling figures and again on the rumoured purchase prices we paid for these guys we would be taking a large hit if we could indeed get these type of sums if selling. Also are any of these players wanted by other clubs?
We'll tick Surrridge off that list off to the MLS 5m plus according to DT
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - Marinakis Red - 18-07-2023
Ranked 91st out of 92 league clubs for sustainability
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - Salvatore Matrecano - 18-07-2023
(18-07-2023, 06:14 AM)Marinakis Red Wrote: Ranked 91st out of 92 league clubs for sustainability
So it depends if this sort of thing bothers you or not. The vast majority of fans don’t give a stuff about it as long as their club is in the Premier League and makes some sexy signings each year.
However it is driven by Tracey Crouch MP’s excellent fan led review of football governance published in 2021 here.
Its a long read and very good intentions but has to be said has been pretty well ignored by most clubs.
The 2023 ranking MR is referring to is here
Basically for Forest scores were
4/40 financial sustainability
6.1/30 governance
5.8/20 fan engagement
1.3/10 equity standards
It has to be said how these scores are arrived at is somewhat unclear.
As I said up to the individual how worried they are by it.
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - JollyLolly - 18-07-2023
Financial sustainability stands out for me and if we did not need reminding fan engagement is particular poor.
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - Paplane - 18-07-2023
All this stuff is b****ks.
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - Marinakis Red - 18-07-2023
(18-07-2023, 09:15 AM)Paplane Wrote: All this stuff is b****ks.
It is whilst the current owners are bank rolling us, it certainly isn't if they decide that they have had enough one day.
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - Reds73 - 18-07-2023
(18-07-2023, 09:23 AM)Marinakis Red Wrote:(18-07-2023, 09:15 AM)Paplane Wrote: All this stuff is b****ks.
It is whilst the current owners are bank rolling us, it certainly isn't if they decide that they have had enough one day.
You could say that for the majority of teams.
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - Marinakis Red - 18-07-2023
(18-07-2023, 10:08 AM)Reds73 Wrote:(18-07-2023, 09:23 AM)Marinakis Red Wrote:(18-07-2023, 09:15 AM)Paplane Wrote: All this stuff is b****ks.
It is whilst the current owners are bank rolling us, it certainly isn't if they decide that they have had enough one day.
You could say that for the majority of teams.
Absolutely, that is a reason for concern in the whole of football, nobody wants to see another Bury.
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - wassy04 - 01-08-2023
FFP Losses to affect this season
So the below is based off Swiss Ramble's calcs on the FFP losses which is based off the actual accounts and excludes any allowable losses, like promotion bonuses for examples (begs the question why you wouldn't massively load up on those in the EFL)
21/22 - 19m (13m allowable)
22/23 - 32m (39m allowable) - estimated based on what we could afford to do last year, ie worst case scenario
23/24 - So we should have around 39m to lose after allowable losses which tend to be around 7-10.
To be honest, until we see the accounts for this year it's hard to estimate how much of an impact this is having. If the 32m was correct, this would include amortisation. Meaning we couldn't increase wages/amortisation by more than say 10m. We already did that with Wood alone nearly. Maybe we only have a budget of 10-20m without Brennan sale.
If we sold Brennan for 50m, we could book that straight away. That would theoretically mean we could spend 250m on players signing 5 year deals to offset that. Excluding the inevitable wage/signing costs that would come from it. It's pushing the FFP can down the road but it does really show the value of selling an academy player in the current rules.
FYI, selling the likes of Dennis will have little impact. Lets assume he was signed for 10m as we met none of the add ons. I'm going to guess a 5 year contract, so the first 2m of that will be amortised already meaning he has a book value of 8m. So if we sold him for 8m, we'd actually only benefit to the tune of 2m (and 2m in each of the next four years accounts). Basically all you save is the amortisation owed (if that makes sense).
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - TwangandBoots - 01-08-2023
I rarely post, but Jonno is off. 100%
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - nffc93 - 01-08-2023
(01-08-2023, 08:47 PM)TwangandBoots Wrote: I rarely post, but Jonno is off. 100%
Think we've known this for a while to be fair.