NFFC Financial Talk

[pennhillred]

I only mentioned it as a lot of talk on Twitter (I know...), and I'm sure there was something on here, too, about how any appeal *couldn't* increase the sanction.

[stirred]

I only mentioned it as a lot of talk on Twitter (I know...), and I'm sure there was something on here, too, about how any appeal *couldn't* increase the sanction.

Oh ok. Yes I didn’t mean it as a criticism of your post, more wondering who is pushing the story - could be us to get fans ok with us not appealing. Could be the PL to deter us from appealing. I rarely take it as a pure news story these days without wondering what the agenda is :)

[The reds]

So Everton’s case is being held over 25/26/27th March this suggest to me that it is a more serious breach than ours?

[pennhillred]

I only mentioned it as a lot of talk on Twitter (I know...), and I'm sure there was something on here, too, about how any appeal *couldn't* increase the sanction.

Oh ok. Yes I didn’t mean it as a criticism of your post, more wondering who is pushing the story - could be us to get fans ok with us not appealing. Could be the PL to deter us from appealing. I rarely take it as a pure news story these days without wondering what the agenda is :)

Good point. I think that journalist has had stories from us before about transfers (this summer maybe?), so it could be from our end. I guess we'll know soon enough if we do appeal or not. (I really hope not so we can just move on and keep it on the pitch and let the staff and players do what they can to keep us up.)

[wassy04]

Does anyone know why we weren’t allowed to amortise the money spent in 2022/23?

I haven’t had chance to read the report yet. But I’d be very interested to understand why if this is true?

What does it mean? What would have been included? Surely not the entire transfer cost? But we must have taken some of the transfer costs else we wouldn’t have had a problem with breaching surely

We have been don't worry, I remember the line you are referring to and it's unrelated.

They referenced our spending purely to show that we spent excessively, nothing to do with amortisation. 148m spending, even if some are spread over multiple years is still going to be 30-40m on top of wages/agent fees etc. Presumably accounts will be released soon so we can see exactly why we failed.

[Username]

I'm not sure if this has been covered previously (apologies if it has), but Charlotte Duncker (The Times) has tweeted that an appeal does risk increasing the points deduction. The article is behind a paywall, so I couldn't see what was said exactly, but she Tweeted:

Charlotte Duncker
@CharDuncker
Forest are weighing up their next steps after yesterday's points deduction verdict. An appeal is an option but there is a risk their sanction could be increased if they go down that route


If that's the case, I truly hope we don't appeal. Our cooperation was one of the factors for the reduced deduction. I'd really worry the appeal could make things worse.

I'm glad you posted this, one of the less reputable posters stated on here the complete opposite without any basis and the issue is that people start to take such comments as gospel.

The reality is that there is no guidance as to whether an appeal opens us up to a greater risk increasing the points deduction.

Its a roll of the dice, something that Forest have done regularly since EM arrived, so it wouldn't surprise me if we go again.

[wassy04]

I'd imagine you never accept the first offer for a player so my take is that it was probably not unreasonable to reject the Atletico offer and issue a counter offer. The fact that the offer was made on the 30th suggests to me that it was a low ball offer and they were just fishing for a bargain.

Maybe so but we weren't in the position to negotiate given the deadline. Plus it didn't come in much less than Spurs offer in the end.

But it arrived on the final day and when it did, the club were probably thinking they'd missed the psr deadline at that point anyway so why not try to negotiate? And also it was the first real offer to arrive and as such the thinking was probably that Brennan was going to attract a £50m+ bid towards the end of the window. It's very easy to criticise with the 20:20 vision of hindsight. I'm not saying the club acted entirely appropriately, im sure many critisisms can be made, i'm saying just that I can possibly see why decisions were made.

At the end of the day, knowing what we all know now, we can ask why the likes of Richards and the Korean guy were signed but if Navas and Danillo for example hadn't arrived last winter then we'd now be a championship club, not a prem club fighting for it's life.

This isn't 20:20 vision, there was loads of media reporting on that day. They were billing it as an extra transfer window and there were a number of moves done specifically to be included in the previous year accounts. I agree we couldn't necessarily have anticipated that once we miss the deadline we get to use the money and at that point the Everton case wasn't there so we wouldn't have been aware of how much it was going to hurt us.

That said the rules were clear and we knew we had failed by not accepting that offer. I also think it's fairly clear that if you were going to try and claim that we were selling Brennan to meet the rules that playing him would be a mistake as then it looks like we might keep him or he might get injured. This just seems like common sense to me.

I do agree though there's a lot of mitigating factors and the decisions made around Brennan make more sense in the context of what was known at the time. Just a shame we have to be the scapegoats and the precedent of these cases didn't exist until after we'd been through it.

[wassy04]

I see the sun are reporting we will be in the same boat next season if we stay up with the way the accounts are looking, and would need to raise at least £30m in player sales to get back onside of PSR before June 30th

Even with the £47.5m for Johnson? And does that include the sale of Mangala?

That's the question isn't it? Our figures stated were presumably made on the basis that we were arguing that Brennan was in last years accounts. If we're being told not then he has to be in this years accounts. And anyway, I'm sure Murillo will be on his way this summer anyway for something around the £35m mark. It's just going to be the way it is now in this new financial football system. A top performing player will go every year. It wont just be us, it'll be every promoted club, and every sub 30k attendance club. This is the new football reality. We just have to be satisfied at being a low end prem club where a mid table finish is a bonus year.

The accounts for last season will be released any day now, we should be able to much better estimate the situation for this year based on last year's costs/income. Wages/amortisation/TV revenue will be broadly the same. We can guess though, I'd of thought the sales of Brennan and Mangala would get us pretty close. Mangala future fee will def be in next year's accounts though, that's why they'll have done it like that for Lyon.

[optimistic_red]

There are going to be a few clubs desperate to sell players before 30th June this year, now that we all know that the Premier League don't allow any wiggle room. Going to be a weird window.

[Marinakis Red]

There are going to be a few clubs desperate to sell players before 30th June this year, now that we all know that the Premier League don't allow any wiggle room. Going to be a weird window.

Especially with the euros happening in June too.

[Shawoddyred]

There are going to be a few clubs desperate to sell players before 30th June this year, now that we all know that the Premier League don't allow any wiggle room. Going to be a weird window.

Especially with the euros happening in June too.

It's going to be ridiculous. Wouldn't surprise me to see lots of 'swaps' going on between clubs in similar situations with like for like players. Recognise all the income immediately, amortise the spend over the contract. I'll swap you a Gibbs-White for a Dewsbury-Hall - both for £60M quid. Though that wouldn't work very well for us....with MGW fee still being paid off?!? But you get my gist.....

[Paplane]

Can someone create a poll? Appeal or stick. I have no idea how you do that on here.