NFFC News None Transfer Related

[The reds]

I feel more confident after seeing them figures from Kieran Maguire
So basically 2020/21 we lose 14.8m, 2021/22 we lose 13.9m which adds to 28.7m
61 - 28.7 equals 32.7m we are allowed to lose 
I’m sure we have done that

[The reds]

Kieran Maguire interviewed on TalkSport and got asked about whether any clubs will get a points deduction and he said no
He also said he has spoke to various people and lawyers and they say they situation is calm and they are confident

[McDurban]

From what I read, the club were acting diligently regards the selling price they could achieve for Johnson.
It'll be a slap on the wrist.

[Deeler16]

All this goes to show that for reporting purposes, the period should coincide with end of the transfer window. Ridiculous it isn’t given most transfers take place latter in the window.

[McDurban]

I was puzzled yesterday listening to the Garibaldi Red podcast yesterday none of the regulars were around. I later came across Forest Focus which is where they all were, Matt, Emily & Gary.
Anyone know what happened with Garibaldi Red and why they appear to have moved en masse?

[nffc93]

I was puzzled yesterday listening to the Garibaldi Red podcast yesterday none of the regulars were around. I later came across Forest Focus which is where they all were, Matt, Emily & Gary.
Anyone know what happened with Garibaldi Red and why they appear to have moved en masse?

I believe Matt left the NEP who own the youtube channel and has gone it alone

[wassy04]

Well those figures at least suggest Forest did know exactly what they were doing and kept within rules so far.

Well it depends if his figures include Brennan sale or not (he implies they do in the comments)

If they do then suggests if that is rejected we'd fail by miles!

[Salvatore Matrecano]

I kind of meant we deliberately kept within the rules in the Championship so I would be surprised if we decided not to or intentionally bent the rules last season.
Like so often though if rules are somewhat grey they are open to different interpretations hence we have employed a lawyer.

[Widdow]

Have we really stuck sensibly to FFP or whatever you call. We’ve had Arter for years and paying him £50k a week, which must be one of the worst transfers of all time.

We paid £5m for 29 year old Hwang and £4m for Bowler just to send them on loan to Oly, where their career stagnated and now we have to loan them to the championship. Terrible transfers

We sell BJ and then spend £11m on a centre back from Norwich who can’t even get in the squad. Surely that money would be better off saved to spend in January.

Shelvey on £75k a week seems silly when talking about staying close to financial line.

[Malcolm X]

Worrying news, the ridiculous level of spending, mostly on average at best players is catching up with us.

[Shawoddyred]

Yes, we've wasted quite a lot of money on a load of signings, but what club hasn't?!?

From what I can tell, we don't have much to worry about. My only worry is that we are Nottingham Forest and that the authorities don't fancy us for some reason. I'm pretty certain we'll be fine and that this article put out is very much making a mountain out of a molehill from some random hearsay!? Apparently this football 'financial expert' just answered a question from the Telegraph, who asked who he thought was most at risk. He said us because we have a smaller loss allowance from being in the Championship and have signed a fair amount of players. No other reason.

[DeesideRed]

To me, the phrase included in the club statement about long-term financial sustainability “as the PL rules intended” indicates there is a risk that there may be a technical breach of the rules.

The reference to promotion bonuses gives a further clue as to the (main) area of doubt.

The issue will be on the interpretation of whether those payments fall inside or outside FFP.
This is the bit we don’t/can’t know and for which we will have to wait for news.

I suspect they fear for a jobsworth with renewed zeal inside the PL.

Forest’s wording is clearly already setting up a general defence with this in mind if the PL’s interpretation doesn’t go in our favour; that the delayed Brennan sale was in the greater interest of financial stability rather than a technical and arbitrary breach a few weeks earlier on the balance sheet date.

It’s the old ‘letter of the law’ vs ‘intention of the law’ argument IF the bonuses are interpreted within FFP.

I'm of this view. 

Think we can stop short of saying the club would only hire a lawyer if they had something to worry about, I can tell you we get hired 'just to make sure' on plenty of occasions!

That said, there comes a time when legal interpretation is required, which is what this seems to suggest.