NFFC News None Transfer Related

[nffc93]

It sounds like it is very close so I really don’t think we will get a points deduction 
Probably a fine and a plan to follow

Fingers crossed and hopefully the moving forward the influx of so many players will stop.

I can see what the club was aiming to achieve, a huge gamble which has sort of paid off. We now need to be more sensible and use Brighton's approach.

[JollyLolly]

FFP is total bollocks, if the other clubs mentioned are also to be financially reviewed I am predicting that this blows over as quickly at it came to light!

[Username]

Given that this is from Percy and therefore briefed by the club its fairly clear we had gone over the FFP spending limit.

Because accounts run July to June there's essentially a week after the season when the window opens where we could've sold someone (Brennan) to meet FFP. We're saying that we would've got a lower fee had we have sold at that point.

This is similar to the argument Everton used, except they sold Richarlison on last day of June to meet FFP (they still failed). Their argument was that they were forced to sell low to meet FFP. They ended up with a points penalty, can't really see how our argument carries much weight based on that article.

So the questions are how much did we fail by and why? I suspect its not much otherwise we wouldn't have risked this Brennan gambit. Perhaps when the Everton verdict came through this caused adjustments to what we expected we could get away with and hence we jumped over the limit.

Precedent has been set, I reckon we get a points penalty but less than Everton. I guess we won't know how bad the accounts actually are until they are released though.

It does make you wonder if Brentford were semi-aware of how close we were skating to the line and that’s why they didn’t up their offer so as to try and take advantage of the situation.

[wassy04]

Given that this is from Percy and therefore briefed by the club its fairly clear we had gone over the FFP spending limit.

Because accounts run July to June there's essentially a week after the season when the window opens where we could've sold someone (Brennan) to meet FFP. We're saying that we would've got a lower fee had we have sold at that point.

This is similar to the argument Everton used, except they sold Richarlison on last day of June to meet FFP (they still failed). Their argument was that they were forced to sell low to meet FFP. They ended up with a points penalty, can't really see how our argument carries much weight based on that article.

So the questions are how much did we fail by and why? I suspect its not much otherwise we wouldn't have risked this Brennan gambit. Perhaps when the Everton verdict came through this caused adjustments to what we expected we could get away with and hence we jumped over the limit.

Precedent has been set, I reckon we get a points penalty but less than Everton. I guess we won't know how bad the accounts actually are until they are released though.

It does make you wonder if Brentford were semi-aware of how close we were skating to the line and that’s why they didn’t up their offer so as to try and take advantage of the situation.

Yeah would make sense, I did always wonder why they didn't just bid what we wanted.

[jurgen rober]

Matt Davies has put together a short video on the problems and this includes a statement by the club at the end.

[ozzyten10]

I can’t see how we pass at 61m. Our EFL losses add up to 61m without 2023 accounts. That said I don’t know the ffp calculation from those 2 years as it’s different to the loss on the accounts. I think some of it on 2022 can be discounted from the promotion bonuses.
It pisses me off though that we are in this position - just stinks of the elite wanting a closed shop and how dare Forest spend…
Hopefully someone will come on here and set it out better but think we need as many points as possible!
Plus Leeds, Leicester and Southampton may have something to say if we were over.
Important but when did they change the rules regarding reporting?

[Reds73]

I can’t see how we pass at 61m. Our EFL losses add up to 61m without 2023 accounts. That said I don’t know the ffp calculation from those 2 years as it’s different to the loss on the accounts. I think some of it on 2022 can be discounted from the promotion bonuses.
It pisses me off though that we are in this position - just stinks of the elite wanting a closed shop and how dare Forest spend…
Hopefully someone will come on here and set it out better but think we need as many points as possible!
Plus Leeds, Leicester and Southampton may have something to say if we were over.
Important but when did they change the rules regarding reporting?

The 61m quoted includes 20.9m promotion bonuses that you can remove.
It also includes academy costs, infrastructure, stadium improvements that can all be removed.

The club say they are confident they have adhered to the rules. I’m guessing it’s pretty close to the allowed losses so we aren’t taking any chances, hence the hiring of Nik De Marko

[wassy04]

I can’t see how we pass at 61m. Our EFL losses add up to 61m without 2023 accounts. That said I don’t know the ffp calculation from those 2 years as it’s different to the loss on the accounts. I think some of it on 2022 can be discounted from the promotion bonuses.
It pisses me off though that we are in this position - just stinks of the elite wanting a closed shop and how dare Forest spend…
Hopefully someone will come on here and set it out better but think we need as many points as possible!
Plus Leeds, Leicester and Southampton may have something to say if we were over.
Important but when did they change the rules regarding reporting?

The 61m quoted includes 20.9m promotion bonuses that you can remove.
It also includes academy costs, infrastructure, stadium improvements that can all be removed.

The club say they are confident they have adhered to the rules. I’m guessing it’s pretty close to the allowed losses so we aren’t taking any chances, hence the hiring of Nik De Marko

Based on estimates made by Swiss Ramble last year we had room to lose approximately £40m this year. It feels unlikely we'd have breached that amount with the increase in TV money but we did spend a lot on amortisation and wages. Plus Chris Wood was only a two year deal so that'll have been a big hit. Just so difficult to properly estimate given the massive changes to amortisation, wages and tv income. Any estimates would be complete guesswork.

[Salvatore Matrecano]

Wood was a 1 year deal. £4m loan and £2m wages last seasons accounts
£15m fee and £5m wages this year’s accounts.
32 years old so poor resale value, can leave on a free regardless.
If there is any one single deal that has stung us its that one. Make your own mind up whether you think his contribution is worth that.

[wassy04]

Wood was a 1 year deal. £4m loan and £2m wages last seasons accounts
£15m fee and £5m wages this year’s accounts.
32 years old so poor resale value, can leave on a free regardless.
If there is any one single deal that has stung us its that one. Make your own mind up whether you think his contribution is worth that.

That's a good point though the fee was this year, I'd forgotten that.

He does score a cracking goal vs Newcastle though.

[JWJW]

Alternatively..........this story has been leaked by Percy to allow Forest to offer lowball bids during the January window and demand high fees for player sales..................all part of a cunning plan............

[Jacksbadhobbits]

Wood was a 1 year deal. £4m loan and £2m wages last seasons accounts
£15m fee and £5m wages this year’s accounts.
32 years old so poor resale value, can leave on a free regardless.
If there is any one single deal that has stung us its that one. Make your own mind up whether you think his contribution is worth that.

But most definitely not Chris Woods fault. If we are over the limit it is the person or people who are in control of adding the numbers up.