FFP Clarification

[coulsonblue]

The rule that said that players who signed before 1 June 2010, their wages do not count towards FFP, applies only to the 11/12 season just gone.

From now on they count, and the amortisation costs count for all seasons.

So Adebayor, Santa Cruz etc... their wages actually count for FFP this season, when they didnt last.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

The rule that said that players who signed before 1 June 2010, their wages do not count towards FFP, applies only to the 11/12 season just gone.

From now on they count, and the amortisation costs count for all seasons.

So Adebayor, Santa Cruz etc... their wages actually count for FFP this season, when they didnt last.

That's correct but don't forget FFP doesn't kick in until next summer and the first monitoring period will be the aggregate results from the 2011/12 and 2012/13 accounts. Then we use those two again, plus 2013/14, for the next monitoring period. That means we get the benefit of the exclusion twice.

 

[St Helens Blue (Exiled)]

The rule that said that players who signed before 1 June 2010, their wages do not count towards FFP, applies only to the 11/12 season just gone.

From now on they count, and the amortisation costs count for all seasons.

So Adebayor, Santa Cruz etc... their wages actually count for FFP this season, when they didnt last.

That's correct but don't forget FFP doesn't kick in until next summer and the first monitoring period will be the aggregate results from the 2011/12 and 2012/13 accounts. Then we use those two again, plus 2013/14, for the next monitoring period. That means we get the benefit of the exclusion twice.

PB-when are our next set of figures released?

 

[Deleted member 14625]

There's something somewhere in these set if rules that says "working towards". So, if a club appears to be "working towards" complying with the rules then they wont be penalised.

Sending Adebayor and Santa Cruz out on loan and openly seeming to offer them to other clubs on sale, would make us to seem to be "working towards" making money on a transfer sale and saving millions in wages. I honestly wouldn't worry about FFPR too much.

 

[coulsonblue]

The rule that said that players who signed before 1 June 2010, their wages do not count towards FFP, applies only to the 11/12 season just gone.

From now on they count, and the amortisation costs count for all seasons.

So Adebayor, Santa Cruz etc... their wages actually count for FFP this season, when they didnt last.

That's correct but don't forget FFP doesn't kick in until next summer and the first monitoring period will be the aggregate results from the 2011/12 and 2012/13 accounts. Then we use those two again, plus 2013/14, for the next monitoring period. That means we get the benefit of the exclusion twice.

er well no. because the accounts for this season and last count. so no we dont benefit twice.

 

[citysix]

FFP will never work

 

[kenzie115]

The rule that said that players who signed before 1 June 2010, their wages do not count towards FFP, applies only to the 11/12 season just gone.

From now on they count, and the amortisation costs count for all seasons.

So Adebayor, Santa Cruz etc... their wages actually count for FFP this season, when they didnt last.

That's correct but don't forget FFP doesn't kick in until next summer and the first monitoring period will be the aggregate results from the 2011/12 and 2012/13 accounts. Then we use those two again, plus 2013/14, for the next monitoring period. That means we get the benefit of the exclusion twice.

er well no. because the accounts for this season and last count. so no we dont benefit twice.

Whoosh.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

The rule that said that players who signed before 1 June 2010, their wages do not count towards FFP, applies only to the 11/12 season just gone.

From now on they count, and the amortisation costs count for all seasons.

So Adebayor, Santa Cruz etc... their wages actually count for FFP this season, when they didnt last.

That's correct but don't forget FFP doesn't kick in until next summer and the first monitoring period will be the aggregate results from the 2011/12 and 2012/13 accounts. Then we use those two again, plus 2013/14, for the next monitoring period. That means we get the benefit of the exclusion twice.

er well no. because the accounts for this season and last count. so no we dont benefit twice.

Let me explain in a bit more detail.

In summer 2013 (i.e. this time next year) we will have to submit our FFP "return". Let's say that last year's (2011/12) loss is £90m and this year's is £10m. That gives an aggregrate loss of £100m. Then we add back expenditure on youth development, community activities and infrastructure and let's say that's £15m per year, leaving an aggregrate loss of £70m (€85m). That's outside the €45m allowed so then we can add back the wages exclusion if that allows us to meet FFP. That's probably going to be around €50-60m meaning we can use it to meet FFP for te 2013/14 monitoring period.

The following summer we submit the return again but this time using 3 years accounts, being 2011/12, 2012/13 & 2013/14. As I understand it, we can still use that wages exclusion against 2011/12 if we need to. So if we show a £10m profit in 2013/14 our aggregrate loss will be £90m over the 3 years. Knock off the 3 x £15m and we're still outside the FFP limit by about €10m. Therefore we could use the wages exclusion again against the 2011/12 accounts.

Because we use the same accounts for two separate FFP monitoring periods, that's what I meant by getting the benefit twice.

 

[BoyBlue_1985]

Cant we just ignore it like PSG

 

[jake28]

It's a load of bollocks...