+- 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 - The reds - 15-01-2024
(15-01-2024, 08:47 PM)Paplane Wrote: To be honest Im already fed up with keyboard lawyer warriors and accountants, apparent ITK's etc etc speculating as to what our fate will be. Basically, no one knows the facts of our case, what discussions have been had with the premier league nor the seriousness of our apparent indiscretion.
EM's no mug amd he's got a top KC on board. We need to back the club and stay as one.
I agree with you - It’s Boring - Sadly got at least 2/3 months of this to come
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - Paplane - 15-01-2024
I took a bit of an interest in the EFL's case against the Sheep. Most of the details I've forgotten now but as we know they were doing loads of well dodgy stuff and it was our guy Nick de Marco KC who was their barrister defending them. He's probably one of the most experienced guys we could have got in to act on the club's behalf. I think he actually won the original case for the sheep and the EFL had to really press hard and ended up appealing the decison, which they eventually won.
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - JollyLolly - 15-01-2024
I think Ozzy is about right with points deduction (most suspended) plus a sizable fine. It sends out a signal to other in the PL and we fell into the trap, hook line and sinker. However I think we will be OK this season in the PL and finish mid-table regardless.
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - ozzyten10 - 15-01-2024
Trouble is Leeds, bin dippers and Southampton have a case against us now.
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - Salvatore Matrecano - 15-01-2024
(15-01-2024, 08:59 PM)ozzyten10 Wrote: Trouble is Leeds, bin dippers and Southampton have a case against us now.
Percy reported at the time that we were one of the 4 clubs persuing a claim against Everton. No idea if we went ahead with that although as we know Percy is normally fed that info. Thought at the time it was people in glass houses.
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - wassy04 - 15-01-2024
(15-01-2024, 09:06 PM)Salvatore Matrecano Wrote:(15-01-2024, 08:59 PM)ozzyten10 Wrote: Trouble is Leeds, bin dippers and Southampton have a case against us now.
Percy reported at the time that we were one of the 4 clubs persuing a claim against Everton. No idea if we went ahead with that although as we know Percy is normally fed that info. Thought at the time it was people in glass houses.
It's pretty bizarre we'd claim against Everton whilst being so close to the line ourselves. We must've been convinced at that point we were comfortable. I wonder what went wrong.
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - ozzyten10 - 15-01-2024
I will take a sabbatical from this as stated previously it is all now conjecture and depends on the whim of the ‘independent’ commission and how they apply the rules and interprets our defence. Coincidence that Maters is up against MPs tomorrow I think not.
Villa, wolves and a few others are so bloody lucky - they went over previously but used covid and a more relaxed approach by the EPL to circumvent it.
We need 44 points for me. 24 points starting Saturday.
Let’s concentrate on that…
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - wassy04 - 15-01-2024
(15-01-2024, 09:39 PM)ozzyten10 Wrote: I will take a sabbatical from this as stated previously it is all now conjecture and depends on the whim of the ‘independent’ commission and how they apply the rules and interprets our defence. Coincidence that Maters is up against MPs tomorrow I think not.
Villa, wolves and a few others are so bloody lucky - they went over previously but used covid and a more relaxed approach by the EPL to circumvent it.
We need 44 points for me. 24 points starting Saturday.
Let’s concentrate on that…
You could argue we brought it on ourselves by pursuing Everton so aggressively and forcing the league to take a stricter approach.
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - stirred - 15-01-2024
(15-01-2024, 08:35 PM)wassy04 Wrote:(15-01-2024, 08:29 PM)Sausage Roll Wrote:(15-01-2024, 08:20 PM)wassy04 Wrote: For me the biggest question is simply, why didn't we just take the money in June and avoid this charge?
Did we think we could beat the system with this mitigation plan? Did we not realise until too late? Did the PL decide after the Everton sage to be less lenient (would be my guess)
It seems pretty brazen to just take on the FFP rules and hope we can essentially get them changed after the fact.
If the rules are about profitability and sustainability then why should we have just accepted an offer about 30% lower than what we originally got for Johnson? Selling an asset for below market value isn't profitable. I imagine that'll be our pushback.
No I get it makes sense, the rules suck and obviously the same transfer window should be the deadline, however on the 30th June, that was not the actual rules in place.
My point was that we knew what the rules were. Why did we risk this scenario and not just reluctantly sell in June? Similar to what Everton did with Richarlison.
Caveat that I'm not an accountant...but I gather there's a rule in accounting along the lines that if you sell an asset after the end of an accounting period at a significantly different value to where it was marked in the accounts, you can restate its value as of that accounting period.
We sold Johnson, who was marked at 0, shortly after the end of an accounting period for 47.5mio. I assume this is part of the argument they are using. It's not just hand waving saying 'well it was only just after, go on, let us have it' it is that there are international accounting principles that support it, and I assume the KC is all over it.
If we had a written offer from Brentford by the end of the accounting period for £30mio, it strengthens the case. So the argument may even be let us value him at £30mio for that accounting period, then take the remaining 17.5mio of profit into this season. That would be good! But that's accounting standards, now the Premier League's own rules are probably different, but there's an argument there at least. Maybe if we have someone in the accountancy game they can weigh in.
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - Reds73 - 15-01-2024
(15-01-2024, 08:42 PM)ozzyten10 Wrote: Because we wanted to write off the premier league promotion bonuses- this hasn’t been allowed
Kieran Maguire has confirmed promotion bonuses can be excluded from costs
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - ozzyten10 - 15-01-2024
Why did Forest cite them in their first statement then?
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - Salvatore Matrecano - 15-01-2024
And boom…….DT article lands…..
Miltos, Randall and implied lack of scrutiny of Supporter club all criticised. Whole strategy widely questioned.
Make your own minds up whether its justified but Forest do seem to keep giving him an unlimited supply of ammunition.