NFFC Financial Talk

[optimistic_red]

I think the penalty is decided in April. If we challenge the penalty then it could go on to May. But we will know the worse case.
If that's not the case then the PL is fixing the league.

[optimistic_red]

Normally the only excitement for the last few weeks of the season are, who is going down. Are the PL really going to remove that, because all teams involved (bottom 5) don't know who is going to be relegated until they decide on points deductions.
If that's the case we might as well all give up and either support ManCity or choose another sport!

[The reds]

I think the penalty is decided in April. If we challenge the penalty then it could go on to May. But we will know the worse case.
If that's not the case then the PL is fixing the league.

Decided by April - It can be done a lot earlier - Forest in the statement put - they expect a ‘fair and speedy resolution’. So hopefully in next couple weeks we find out and I think Forest are hoping that to.

[Jean_claude_killy]

Just been thinking about a points deduction and how this could possibly be finalised after the season's end. Could it work in our favour? I mean, if an appeal tribunal has some sympathy with our position but feel obliged to find us guilty because of a technical breach, will it be likely they'll be more lenient on the points if they know it's their decison soley that will relegate us?

I like the approach of just accepting it and not kicking up a fuss like Everton. I think if we can show a clear difference between our approaches, it'll help our case.

Yes but we have only accepted the charge we haven't accepted any possible punishment.

I don't think we will just roll over and accept a points deduction if it comes to that, on the contrary.

I will be amazed if there is a points deduction.

If what we read is accurate, it appears we have used accounting practices which are perfectly acceptable to the likes of HMRC but not the PL; do the PL refuse to accept those practices because they have written rules to the contrary, or because the situation has never risen before?

We know that the accounts submitted to the PL are fundamentally different to those submitted to HMRC, but that is essentially down to having the allowances stripped out - but is there any stipulation ruling against GAAP?

My guess is this is all new to the PL, so they pass the buck on to the Independent Commission.

The questions are, is the IC truly Independent, which I am absolutely sure that they are, and do the IC fly in the face of conventional accountancy practices when faced with a decision - a decision which may end up being appealed to the court of arbitration; I would think not.

[Jacksbadhobbits]

Nobody knows for certain what is going to happen. We seem to be in a similar situation to Everton who were assessed to be £20 m outside agreed limits not £200 m. We might be in a position where we are hoping Everton have a successful appeal against their deduction.

[Jean_claude_killy]

Nobody knows for certain what is going to happen. We seem to be in a similar situation to Everton who were assessed to be £20 m outside agreed limits not £200 m. We might be in a position where we are hoping Everton have a successful appeal against their deduction.

But our case is nothing like that of Everton's

[Jacksbadhobbits]

Nobody knows for certain what is going to happen. We seem to be in a similar situation to Everton who were assessed to be £20 m outside agreed limits not £200 m. We might be in a position where we are hoping Everton have a successful appeal against their deduction.

But our case is nothing like that of Everton's

How do you know that.

[Paplane]

Just been thinking about a points deduction and how this could possibly be finalised after the season's end. Could it work in our favour? I mean, if an appeal tribunal has some sympathy with our position but feel obliged to find us guilty because of a technical breach, will it be likely they'll be more lenient on the points if they know it's their decison soley that will relegate us?

I like the approach of just accepting it and not kicking up a fuss like Everton. I think if we can show a clear difference between our approaches, it'll help our case.

Yes but we have only accepted the charge we haven't accepted any possible punishment.

I don't think we will just roll over and accept a points deduction if it comes to that, on the contrary.

I will be amazed if there is a points deduction.

If what we read is accurate, it appears we have used accounting practices which are perfectly acceptable to the likes of HMRC but not the PL; do the PL refuse to accept those practices because they have written rules to the contrary, or because the situation has never risen before?

We know that the accounts submitted to the PL are fundamentally different to those submitted to HMRC, but that is essentially down to having the allowances stripped out - but is there any stipulation ruling against GAAP?

My guess is this is all new to the PL, so they pass the buck on to the Independent Commission.

The questions are, is the IC truly Independent, which I am absolutely sure that they are, and do the IC fly in the face of conventional accountancy practices when faced with a decision - a decision which may end up being appealed to the court of arbitration; I would think not.

I wouldn't be confident with that. The sheep used their own amortisation method which was accepted as being in line with real world accounting principles but the efl saw through it (eventually) and decided it was dodgy and used in a way to gain advantage over the other clubs.

And I doubt we had any agreement in principle with Spurs to sell them Brennan, which I gather is the minimum that would be required to use this deferred accounting principle. We played Brennan for 3 games this season too. Those 3 games resulted in 3 points being gained. If the panel agree the principle, they might take those 3 points back at least.

[Salvatore Matrecano]

Agree Pap. Think some of us are starting to sound a bit like Derby fans convincing themselves they had done nothing wrong and everything was a conspiracy against them.

[Paplane]

Agree Pap. Think some of us are starting to sound a bit like Derby fans convincing themselves they had done nothing wrong and everything was a conspiracy against them.

Having spent hours on the sheep's forum reading all their bollocks, im desperately trying not to turn into them. I'll remain sceptical and assume we've just made a balls up of things.

[wassy04]

Agree Pap. Think some of us are starting to sound a bit like Derby fans convincing themselves they had done nothing wrong and everything was a conspiracy against them.

Having spent hours on the sheep's forum reading all their bollocks, im desperately trying not to turn into them. I'll remain sceptical and assume we've just made a balls up of things.

Yes this 100%, their case was really interesting, if you're into that sort of stuff and perfectly financially legal. However, there was no precedent set and eventually the league decided they'd be gaining an advantage over the other clubs. (After initially accepting it)

From what I gather our situation is similar in that we'd be trying to use something that no other club has used to date thereby setting a precedent. Football accounting is different from other businesses. The players being classed as assets is in itself unique and therefore it is perfectly tly legitimate to have different rules to other businesses that apply solely to football. 

Plus, Brennan allegedly would've rejected Brentford anyway so not sure how we can claim would chose not to sell him. 

I doubt this mitigation is accepted but I hope our accepting our fate and not kicking up a fuss gives us more leniency than is applied to other teams (Derby and Everton) that did not go down that route.

Arguing your case and attempting to provide mitigation is very different from kicking up and refusing all allegations and lying as Everton did.

[stirred]

From memory Derby claimed a player would have a residual value at the end of their contract, not zero, so the amortization was greatly reduced. But then pulled those valuations from their arse, including if memory serves me right using the transfermrkt website.

I don’t think we’re trying to value Johnson off FIFA 2023 or anything as daft!