Jump to content

Everton


Reesh

Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, Andyben said:

Just endured that prick Maguire talking about Everton and him blaming stadium development costs.

Which of course are exempted for FFP calculations....😂 

Bloke is thick as fucking mince

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand that rules are rules and the rule breaker has to be punished, fully get that and the need to get control of football finances. But docking them 10 points effectually relegates them, its 25% of the required points for survival. I just feel for the fans who have bought season tickets in good faith and are now expected to to turn up and watch their team in all probabilities get relegated, I just think it's wrong and the leagues need to get off their fat arses and find alternative ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Snap said:

I understand that rules are rules and the rule breaker has to be punished, fully get that and the need to get control of football finances. But docking them 10 points effectually relegates them, its 25% of the required points for survival. I just feel for the fans who have bought season tickets in good faith and are now expected to to turn up and watch their team in all probabilities get relegated, I just think it's wrong and the leagues need to get off their fat arses and find alternative ways.

The flip side of that is that they survived relegation last season because they cheated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, cheat said:

The flip side of that is that they survived relegation last season because they cheated.

That's a fair point. I agree the perps should be punished. I wouldn't consider the fans as perpetrators though. They wouldn't have any control over it anyway. There's just something that doesn't sit right deducting points a third or halfway through the season. I don't like the points deduction system at all anyway, and that's nothing to do with our case.

Surely there's alternative ways. I can think of one or two straight away, so I'm sure the brains at the PL could come up with something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Snap said:

I understand that rules are rules and the rule breaker has to be punished, fully get that and the need to get control of football finances. But docking them 10 points effectually relegates them, its 25% of the required points for survival. I just feel for the fans who have bought season tickets in good faith and are now expected to to turn up and watch their team in all probabilities get relegated, I just think it's wrong and the leagues need to get off their fat arses and find alternative ways.

Had they done it March then your point may have some substance but even after the deduction they are 2 points from safety.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Reesh said:

Had they done it March then your point may have some substance but even after the deduction they are 2 points from safety.

I just find it wrong to be docking points at all, never mind mid season. In my opinion of course, the season should be started as a level playing field and continue like that until the end and when  it finishes the result should be cast in stone. This all just smacks of the financial equivalent of VAR. How long before we get to the end of a season when Man City win the title, but they only think they've won it, the accountants have to go over the books first.

I must admit to not paying too close attention to the PL results or the league itself. Was the points already gained taken into consideration during the consideration of the punishment? Of course it was, i'd wager that if they had been on 4 points less the punishment would have only been 6 points. Anyone sitting in judgement during a season can't objectively administer fair punishment, in my opinion, just my take on it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Snap said:

I just find it wrong to be docking points at all

 

It’s never great to see a league table tarnished by teams with points deducted; but how do you punish in this scenario.

Reading the report, they took a decision to strengthen their team rather than stick to the rules.

Not fair on the sides that stuck to the rules and were relegated surely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, cheat said:

Not fair on the sides that stuck to the rules and were relegated surely.

Totally agree. They're guilty as charged.

How about stopping the offence before it actually happens? If the club knew they were breaking the rules, which supposedly they must do, then why can't the PL and the EFL and stop them in their tracks by not allowing transfers. The accountants will be along shortly to tell me how that's impossible.

I just don't like the fact that this stuff is creeping into the game more and more. Talk of the whingeing scousers appealing to the PL wanting a game replayed the other week for a bad VAR decision, some even saying there should be a court case.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Snap said:

Totally agree. They're guilty as charged.

How about stopping the offence before it actually happens? If the club knew they were breaking the rules, which supposedly they must do, then why can't the PL and the EFL and stop them in their tracks by not allowing transfers. The accountants will be along shortly to tell me how that's impossible.

I just don't like the fact that this stuff is creeping into the game more and more. Talk of the whingeing scousers appealing to the PL wanting a game replayed the other week for a bad VAR decision, some even saying there should be a court case.

 

The fact the rules are complete bollocks is the main reason it's impossible to predict.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Simon Jordan was talking about how Everton's accounts had been signed off and lodged at Companies House and that it was a 'difference of opinion between accountants'

And all I could think of was didn't we have the stadium sale signed off on our accounts but incorrectly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Tylluan said:

Simon Jordan was talking about how Everton's accounts had been signed off and lodged at Companies House and that it was a 'difference of opinion between accountants'

And all I could think of was didn't we have the stadium sale signed off on our accounts but incorrectly. 

Accountants/Auditors are appointed by the club and can be leaned upon to sign off accounts.

 

We've changed accountants since that faux pas, the issue being what we did was correct but actually executed incorrectly by those who should know better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Tylluan said:

Simon Jordan was talking about how Everton's accounts had been signed off and lodged at Companies House and that it was a 'difference of opinion between accountants'

And all I could think of was didn't we have the stadium sale signed off on our accounts but incorrectly. 

Simon Jordan who took Palace into admin? Not sure he's the best person to be commenting on financial matters at football clubs 🤣

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rock n roll on a Friday night reading the report. Some very interesting accounting concepts on pre planning expenditure on the stadium development. And the fact Everton spent circa 50m on that site before getting planning permission, but wangled that it should not count.

Basically Everton were about 20m over the rolling average but argued that 4 "items" should be excluded. The more random is the player who got arrested and they then sacked, they could have got 10m income if they had sued him. They chose not to but wanted to pretend they could have received it. 

The other damning suggestion is that the 2023 info suggests the trend is not improving.

Anyway our case v the EFL gets an honourable mention, in that a sporting sanction ie points deduction which was determined then sets the precedent for other cases

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Skamp said:

If the points stick, expect the three relegated teams to go after Everton like the 🐷s did with West Ham about Tevez. 

Burnley Leeds and Leicester are.

I think they were the final placed relegated team in ea h of the three relevant seasons?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, mkowl said:

Rock n roll on a Friday night reading the report. Some very interesting accounting concepts on pre planning expenditure on the stadium development. And the fact Everton spent circa 50m on that site before getting planning permission, but wangled that it should not count.

Basically Everton were about 20m over the rolling average but argued that 4 "items" should be excluded. The more random is the player who got arrested and they then sacked, they could have got 10m income if they had sued him. They chose not to but wanted to pretend they could have received it. 

The other damning suggestion is that the 2023 info suggests the trend is not improving.

Anyway our case v the EFL gets an honourable mention, in that a sporting sanction ie points deduction which was determined then sets the precedent for other cases

Gudjonnson for that 15yr old girl 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Andyben said:

Burnley Leeds and Leicester are.

I think they were the final placed relegated team in ea h of the three relevant seasons?

Does get referenced in the report. The breach was only identified after the accounts were received on the 1st March 2023 and the PSR calculation on the 2nd March

The EPL actually concede that there would not have been adequate time for due process before the end of the season. 

Over 40000 documents were shared for the hearing !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point is its a 3 year average and the covid seasons to June 20 and June 21 are averaged and counted as 1 year.

So you need the accounts to 2019, 2020, 2021 and 2022 to determine this 

So it's really only since March 2023 this was known and the fact this is all done and dusted in 7 months is pretty remarkable in reality 

Evertons mitigations get totally rejected by the EPL. They argue that the transfer levy which is 4% of transfer fees paid, which is then used to fund pension payments by the EPL but any surplus goes to Youth Development, that their share of the surplus made should be deemed Youth Expenditure

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They also argued that interest paid on loans to fund working capital could be construed as bring incurred on stadium development and thus excluded.

The reality is that the stadium was in the main being funded by interest free loans from Moshri, so the interest actually being paid was simply a cost and rightly included in PSR

The other factor is that Everton had been warned by the EPL about player purchases and the likely impact on PSR, but basically ignored that and did it anyway

No sympathy from me, they had the ability to mitigate this and chose not to. Like us, the rules and indeed how they apply and how PSR is calculated were all known and yet they still followed a course of action 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Reesh said:

Let's be fucking reyt though the P&S rules are nonsense.

I will disagree, what is nonsense is a sport that pays inflated transfer fees, wages that are a ridiculous % of revenues and below Premiership level are businesses built on sand.

One company going pop owning £ms could have a huge domino impact 

I looked at Man City's recent accounts. 

Stadium revenue 79m

Other commercial revenue ie sponsorship about 340m or something around that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, mkowl said:

I will disagree, what is nonsense is a sport that pays inflated transfer fees, wages that are a ridiculous % of revenues and below Premiership level are businesses built on sand.

One company going pop owning £ms could have a huge domino impact 

I looked at Man City's recent accounts. 

Stadium revenue 79m

Other commercial revenue ie sponsorship about 340m or something around that

Kev P&S allows clubs with parachute payments huge advantages...hence it is bollocks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Reesh said:

Kev P&S allows clubs with parachute payments huge advantages...hence it is bollocks

Not relevant in the EPL though 

And if you didn't apply them there would it not be worse in the EFL

It is causing an imbalance at Championship level for sure, but allowing unrestricted losses would be even worse in my view in relation to the divide 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 point deduction for breaches of financial regulations.  And the six teams who were involved in a failed attempt to form a breakaway league got what punishment exactly?  Everton are a slightly bigger version of us, proper club, good support, perennial underachievers.  Don’t fit in with the future market strategy of globalised football inc.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, HoylandOwl said:

It should be much bigger if they get done. 

The Man City prospective breaches are huge. Their alleged sponsorship money is 5 times the ground revenues and on par with the broadcast revenues. The alleged salary to Mancini paid by a 3rd party so not in the books.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...