NFFC Financial Talk

[Reds73]

I think it is considering we're estimated to post losses of 17 million again this season meaning we would mean we will breach the limit by around 27m with the 3 years combined.

The year after will give us around 40m to play with, but will the rules changing that could give us more wiggle room.

It we breach after the 30th June this year then we don't want a mad spend this summer as we will sub consciously get judged on that should we be put in front of a hearing again around being reckless. 

So I think we should be smart this year and let everything sort itself with loans with options.

Where does the 17m deficit figure come from?

We told the commission we were currently expecting a 12-17 million loss for this financial year, the previous 2 of 40 and 53 plus this year if after the 30th of June it will be a combined loss off 110m over the 3 year period.

Were allowed 83m for this period meaning we will estimately breach by 27m currently. Unless things change.

So my opinion would be even though we will have more wiggle room. For the next 3 year period would be to be cautious so we don't piss any potential commission off. Although it's clear our losses are reducing they could still use it against us if we went out and spent big this summer.

If we're not in line to breach we could be far more active this summer and less cautious.

We aren’t going to breach by 25m as it stands. the losses of 12-17m are an operating loss, last season we had 15m deductibles so that takes us to break even so we need 10-15m in profit to be in line with PSR. I am sure we will.

I was talking about the total over the limit over the 3 year period. Unless we make a profit in this set of accounts we have already breached psr as the last 2 years total 93m when we're only allowed to lose 83m over the 3 year period we are bring judged for. 

So the deductables are going to have to turn us into profit.

I guess a lot will depend on whether the Mangala 15m fee is factored into the 12-17m loss.
If it hasn’t than there is 6m of profit there for us taking into account his remaining cost in the accounts.

If we sell Joe pre 30/6 then a reported 4m fee would make us pretty close to getting to the numbers

[ozzyten10]

The jonno money - it depends if the Johnson money was factored in or not in our representations. It is not clear if in our original hearing where this money would be going - were we trying to get that in last years or had we factored that in with this years? That is pure profit.

[Tricky]

OK, I know absolutely f$@k all about PSR, FFP or whatever it is called. All I do know is its a con and is designed to protect the so called big 6.
What would happen if the club decide to stay at the City Ground and start the work on the New stand? That would mean we will be 5,500 fans per home match less to bring in revenue at a cost of roughly £3-4M in lost ticket sales per home matches. 

Now, assuming for one minute my calculations are remotely close to the actual figures the club will make on those ticket sales.

What I want to know is, will the PL reduce the clubs PSR figure for the period we will not have a main stand, during reconstruction, or will we still be expected to find the lost revenue to include in our annual accounts? My worry is we will still have to show the revenue to cover all costs, wages, running costs etc with a massively reduced revenue. 

Answers on a postcard please.

[ozzyten10]

It probably could be allowed as allowable losses within the exempt cost of infrastructure development. If you can prove it’s an unavoidable cost due solely to the infrastructure development.

[Tricky]

It probably could be allowed  as allowable losses within the exempt cost of infrastructure development. If you can prove it’s an unavoidable cost due solely to the infrastructure development.

Thanks Ozzy.

I would assume a demolished stand would be proof of an infrastructure development. Then again, this is the PL we are working with.

[nffc93]

What about those shipping containers than went from 2m to 7m in cost.. are we able to factor that in?

[The reds]

What about those shipping containers than went from 2m to 7m in cost.. are we able to factor that in?

I’m sure that will count as infrastructure costs so that will be removed from PSR calculations.

[Salvatore Matrecano]

What about those shipping containers than went from 2m to 7m in cost.. are we able to factor that in?

Like what you’re thinking…..yes in fact lets say they cost us £12m, nothing to see here, move along now.

[Reds73]

The jonno money - it depends if the Johnson money was factored in or not in our representations. It is not clear if in our original hearing where this money would be going - were we trying to get that in last years or had we factored that in with this years? That is pure profit.

That is already factored into last years accounts as that is when it was received.
Kieran Maguire went though the figures a while back and confirmed this

[Tricky]

The jonno money - it depends if the Johnson money was factored in or not in our representations. It is not clear if in our original hearing where this money would be going - were we trying to get that in last years or had we factored that in with this years? That is pure profit.

That is already factored into last years accounts as that is when it was received.
Kieran Maguire went though the figures a while back and confirmed this

This is what I don't understand.

We were charged for going over the permitted amount as the PL did not recognise the BJ sale as being on time, so we were punished for it. If the sale went through too late to be considered in last years accounts on 30th June, then surely the sale of BJ would be in this years accounts?

[wassy04]

The jonno money - it depends if the Johnson money was factored in or not in our representations. It is not clear if in our original hearing where this money would be going - were we trying to get that in last years or had we factored that in with this years? That is pure profit.

That is already factored into last years accounts as that is when it was received.
Kieran Maguire went though the figures a while back and confirmed this

This is what I don't understand.

We were charged for going over the permitted amount as the PL did not recognise the BJ sale as being on time, so we were punished for it. If the sale went through too late to be considered in last years accounts on 30th June, then surely the sale of BJ would be in this years accounts?

Yeah they will be. It wouldn't matter anyway as its a rolling three year period so if it was included in this year or last year it'll still have the same impact on the three year cycle were in at the moment.

We are currently on a loss even with that money included.

[BomberBowyer]

The jonno money - it depends if the Johnson money was factored in or not in our representations. It is not clear if in our original hearing where this money would be going - were we trying to get that in last years or had we factored that in with this years? That is pure profit.

That is already factored into last years accounts as that is when it was received.
Kieran Maguire went though the figures a while back and confirmed this

This is what I don't understand.

We were charged for going over the permitted amount as the PL did not recognise the BJ sale as being on time, so we were punished for it. If the sale went through too late to be considered in last years accounts on 30th June, then surely the sale of BJ would be in this years accounts?

Yeah they will be. It wouldn't matter anyway as its a rolling three year period so if it was included in this year or last year it'll still have the same impact on the three year cycle were in at the moment.

We are currently on a loss even with that money included.

Thats how I see it. Had the BJ sale been allowed in last years accounts then we wouldn’t have breached PSR for that 3 yr rolling period but then we’d have bigger losses to factor into this years. It’s the 3 yr rolling cycle that’s hitting us (and other clubs tbf) sadly