Financial Fair Play

[Mawsley]

...we have noted Biffa's financial claims

No one is ever going to doubt your abilities in that area.

 

[Redditch Fox]

I've never doubted that the intentions of the Trust are well meaning.

It's just that there are limitations on what a few geezers with a couple of grand can do with a second tier professional football club.

The potential solutions are obvious: either run down LCFC to the point where it can be run from the local chip shop or the Trust leaders take their obvious expertise and use it to shape the destiny of a local pub Sunday league team.

 

[Biffa Bacon]

I'm noting a lot of informality in this topic, my name is Mr. Bacon not biff or biffa. Just for the sake of clarity, should this club (or any club) run into financial difficulties I will not be investing, donating or loaning them any money, I'd rather burn money than hand it over to rescue players salaries.

Less than one months salary for one of our higher paid players as a seed fund will be useless, as with all of these rescues it requires some high net worth individuals coming on board, the trust was quickly sidelined last time and is likely to be again if a rescue is needed.

 

[Mawsley]

Has the Trust noted down the situation with regards the seats in SK4?

 

[Blue Maniac]

Has the Trust noted down the situation with regards the seats in SK4?

I thought that had been sorted.

 

[spionfox]

Has the Trust noted down the situation with regards the seats in SK4?

Aye. That would be worth the subs I paid.

 

[Mawsley]

Aye. That would be worth the subs I paid.

It's been frittered on cheap, leaky biros and recycled paper.

...hey, hang on...if you are in the Trust then YOU can tell us how many members they've got.

Come on Spion, spill the beans, don't be a wanker.

 

[spionfox]

Come on Spion, spill the beans, don't be a wanker.

Genuinely no idea but I am not prepared to forgo my onanism just so you can feel good about yourself

 

[Mawsley]

Genuinely no idea but I am not prepared to forgo my onanism just so you can feel good about yourself

We can do this like Watergate - just stay silent if this is true:

At the AGM you say "let's all play a rubber of Bridge". Would I be correct in speculating that the all of you would then wait for a fourth person to enter the room with a completed membership form?

 

[Mawsley]

Ha!

I bloody knew it.

Silence speaks volumes.

 

[spionfox]

We can do this like Watergate - just stay silent if this is true:

Entrapment is wrong!

 

[Mawsley]

Entrapment is wrong!

It's the only way I get sex.

 

[Macky]

"let's all play a rubber of Bridge"

Don't come in here using bourgeois phrases that I don't understand, it makes me feel even more inadequate

 

[Han]

Do trusts have to publish accounts to members?

 

[consty]

With regard to FFP, can anyone confirm or discuss the following: I've heard that if a clubs reduces its losses by selling players this does NOT count in reducing a clubs debts in the eyes of FFP. What I've heard is that FFP looks at finances of the club with a main focus on wages.
Clearly if a player is transfered then wages are saved (if cheaper replacements are brought in) but the fee itself is not taken into account for FFP... or so I've heard... Not disputing that transfer fees feed into the clubs OFFICIAL published accounts, this clearly must be the case, but wonder if FFP looks only at whether regular income (ticket sales, sponsorship & merchandise etc) covers wages and running costs and that transfer fees are pretty much disregarded...

 

[Blue Maniac]

With regard to FFP, can anyone confirm or discuss the following: I've heard that if a clubs reduces its losses by selling players this does NOT count in reducing a clubs debts in the eyes of FFP. What I've heard is that FFP looks at finances of the club with a main focus on wages.
Clearly if a player is transfered then wages are saved (if cheaper replacements are brought in) but the fee itself is not taken into account for FFP... or so I've heard... Not disputing that transfer fees feed into the clubs OFFICIAL published accounts, this clearly must be the case, but wonder if FFP looks only at whether regular income (ticket sales, sponsorship & merchandise etc) covers wages and running costs and that transfer fees are pretty much disregarded...

Sounds like bollocks. Why would that be the case?

 

[consty]

So that the thrust of the policy can be aimed at reducing wages...
would be in the interests of rich owners to have wage inflation curbed and reversed...

 

[Biffa Bacon]

Sounds like bollocks. Why would that be the case?

As far as I am aware it is total bollocks, the total income of a club is used as the benchmark for FFP so any activities bringing money into the club increase the amount you can spend on players. I'm waiting to see which club sells it's stadium and leases it back to create a cash injection first.

 

[SJN-Fox]

The "thrust" of the policy is to make clubs live within their means, that means wages, transfers, agent's fees, new big tv screens, relaying the pitch, repainting the bogs, anything. If a player is sold it is a) income for the club and b) a saving of that player's wages and bonuses and such like. It all counts.

 

[consty]

ok thanks for that clarification SJN. What you have outlined is what I hoped was the case...