6 + 2 Point Deductions
- Thread starter GrandOldTeam
- Start date
Moderatelywarmwater
Player Valuation: £10m
But would a Wolves fan think that?
I’m trying to put aside tribalism and put myself in their shoes (which is tricky!)
Moderatelywarmwater
Player Valuation: £10m
pfim
Player Valuation: £35m
Points 26 and 27 have nothing to do with interest costs. Apparently the man can’t read.
WestStandLower
Player Valuation: £1.5m
This is a long post and yes it’s about Chelsea so apologies but as so many are questioning how Chelsea have avoided charges I thought it might add some meat to the debating bone
Far too much attention is paid to the statutory accounts when people are trying to work out what the clubs P& S Submissions will be.
Of course they point us in a direction but as was highlighted in the Everton charge there so many deductions , concessions and like the majority only know what is put in the public domain but being a Chelsea fan with a background in finance I will put a couple of bits and pieces which might give a pointer as to why we don’t appear ( yet ) to be facing any charges.
Including the averaged 19/20& 20/21 and 21/22 years our income was £1.278 billion. For reference Evertons was something like £558million. Chelsea’s losses were at £264 million or around 21% of turnover again as a reference Evertons at £237 million around were close to 42% But of course that’s not the measure it’s the £105 million that is key
So just from the accounts Chelsea appeared to have a bigger problem than Everton. In effect £159 million had to be discounted and these are just my guesses how that sum was “ accounted “away
1) Amortisation.
It’s a word that most had never heard of prior to FFP.
In Chelsea’s accounts there is roughly £150 million a season . But when a player goes out on loan for P&S the sum amortised is discounted and follows the player . As we all know we had a chunk of players out on loan so factor in just one Lukaku. Signed on a 5 year deal his £100 million fee means £20 million pa. But he is out on loan so his £20 m is discontinued for P&S.My guess was over the period that sum was in excess of £50 million
2) Impairment
Normally when a club impairs a players value( the club take a view each year as to the value of a player for who they paid a fee and in effect says in our books he is worth say £20 million but we now think he is worth £10 million so that write off or impair £10 million in the accounts which shows up as an immediate loss) Its an accounting adjustment that unless there are “ exceptional circumstances “ have to just take on the chin “ but by impairing sums this accounting year you reduce the sums you need to show in subsequent years
Chelsea rarely impair players values save the odd million or two but in 20/21 and 21/22 Chelsea claimed impairment of £93 million. I have heard two explanations 1) Part COVID fall out and 2) Player values re assessed as part of takeover
As we know Everton claimed part of the sum they inpaired in their COVID losses. It’s a guess but I would imagine that a portion of the £93 million would be discounted
4) Standard Deductions
Community, Youth, Ladies Football and Depreciation of Assets
Other than depreciation which was £20 million the others aren’t immediately quantifiable but I have seen estimates of around £10 million pa or circa £30 million over a monitoring period so potentially another £50 million there
5) Exceptional Items
When FFP was first introduced some suggested that the cost of sacking a manager fell into this category. Not so sure but in Chelsea’s accounts over the monitoring period Chelsea accounted for £42 million in respect of a historic legal matter and my belief is that this matter pre dates FFP so its highly possible that all this sum has been discounted
As we know Chelsea had to operate under sanctions whilst I am far from sure of the numbers but I know that have been calculated in terms of provable income lost . For instance the club could sell tickets for quite a few games and when they did the proceeds had to be donated to charity. Then you had 3 suspended their £40 million pa deal for 3 months they weren’t alone, . I don’t know for sure but I would imagine that the club would be claiming some allowance here.
Far too much attention is paid to the statutory accounts when people are trying to work out what the clubs P& S Submissions will be.
Of course they point us in a direction but as was highlighted in the Everton charge there so many deductions , concessions and like the majority only know what is put in the public domain but being a Chelsea fan with a background in finance I will put a couple of bits and pieces which might give a pointer as to why we don’t appear ( yet ) to be facing any charges.
Including the averaged 19/20& 20/21 and 21/22 years our income was £1.278 billion. For reference Evertons was something like £558million. Chelsea’s losses were at £264 million or around 21% of turnover again as a reference Evertons at £237 million around were close to 42% But of course that’s not the measure it’s the £105 million that is key
So just from the accounts Chelsea appeared to have a bigger problem than Everton. In effect £159 million had to be discounted and these are just my guesses how that sum was “ accounted “away
1) Amortisation.
It’s a word that most had never heard of prior to FFP.
In Chelsea’s accounts there is roughly £150 million a season . But when a player goes out on loan for P&S the sum amortised is discounted and follows the player . As we all know we had a chunk of players out on loan so factor in just one Lukaku. Signed on a 5 year deal his £100 million fee means £20 million pa. But he is out on loan so his £20 m is discontinued for P&S.My guess was over the period that sum was in excess of £50 million
2) Impairment
Normally when a club impairs a players value( the club take a view each year as to the value of a player for who they paid a fee and in effect says in our books he is worth say £20 million but we now think he is worth £10 million so that write off or impair £10 million in the accounts which shows up as an immediate loss) Its an accounting adjustment that unless there are “ exceptional circumstances “ have to just take on the chin “ but by impairing sums this accounting year you reduce the sums you need to show in subsequent years
Chelsea rarely impair players values save the odd million or two but in 20/21 and 21/22 Chelsea claimed impairment of £93 million. I have heard two explanations 1) Part COVID fall out and 2) Player values re assessed as part of takeover
As we know Everton claimed part of the sum they inpaired in their COVID losses. It’s a guess but I would imagine that a portion of the £93 million would be discounted
4) Standard Deductions
Community, Youth, Ladies Football and Depreciation of Assets
Other than depreciation which was £20 million the others aren’t immediately quantifiable but I have seen estimates of around £10 million pa or circa £30 million over a monitoring period so potentially another £50 million there
5) Exceptional Items
When FFP was first introduced some suggested that the cost of sacking a manager fell into this category. Not so sure but in Chelsea’s accounts over the monitoring period Chelsea accounted for £42 million in respect of a historic legal matter and my belief is that this matter pre dates FFP so its highly possible that all this sum has been discounted
As we know Chelsea had to operate under sanctions whilst I am far from sure of the numbers but I know that have been calculated in terms of provable income lost . For instance the club could sell tickets for quite a few games and when they did the proceeds had to be donated to charity. Then you had 3 suspended their £40 million pa deal for 3 months they weren’t alone, . I don’t know for sure but I would imagine that the club would be claiming some allowance here.
I have no idea.
Tribalism is fine, but there is no logic to that argument.
The most laughable thing about all this is the fans on social media constantly shouting that we cheated, and they have no clue about any context. They haven't even researched the facts. And the comments end up all over the internet and media.
The argument that we had a significant sporting advantage makes absolutely no sense. It can be debated by people as long as they like, but a sporting advantage would be seen only in one place - on a football field. No one can seriously argue that we have benefitted from a sporting advantage over the last number of years, after progressively getting worse.
Lob
Player Valuation: £50m
True City's legal team are definitely not playing ball so then why don't the PL not play ball themselves and make it easier and less complex for them by say splitting the charges up and dealing with the different types of breaches separately. Some breaches that are simpler and similar to Everton's breaches for instance (And there definitely are some) can be dealt with immediately as they already have systems in place for it. All 115 don't have to be dealt with at the same time, to do so allows it to be complex and lengthy.
Truth is that the PL is fine with sitting back and kicking the can down the road because City are one of their golden boys and big money earners and they want to help them, not hurt them. It is a different set of rules for the scab 6, always has been.
I'm getting the impression that the media are putting out quite a lot of pro PL stories and reporting
John from Bootle
Player Valuation: £8m
Starting to wonder if as a fanbase we should try and adopt a media boycott. Not sure it would make much much of a difference like, and it would obviously take somebody with much more sway than me to be the driving factor. All forms of protest should be up for consideration though, imo.
Tony’s Carp
Player Valuation: £40m
Wolves bought their way out of trouble in January though, having already spent big in the summer. They took out a loan for Cunha with an obligation to buy for 45m this summer among other signings.
Essentially what they did was blow all their summer budget early to get out of relegation and that’s why they had to get players out the door in the summer to balance it.
It wasn’t some great effort to do the right thing, they’d taken risks with stuff like the Cunha obligation that would’ve really hurt them if they had gone down, they got away with it and fair play but they shouldn’t cry about what happened in the summer, it was just part of the risks they took in the two windows before.
And if they were put under any real scrutiny for the past few years dealings they might not be the paragons of virtue either. Ruben Neves, whose sale got them out of trouble, was one of the hottest young players around when he decided to join them in the Championship. Just really fancied Deepdale on a Wednesday night, yeah?
I think bringing back the Saturday afternoon pre-match protests is probably a good idea. Loud but always peaceful.
And it should be every game, not just one game or two.
As much as I disagree with a lot of the media reporting on this. And I blame them for a lot of bias in football these days. But they will report on those protests if they happen again. They did it before last season, so would do it again.
Man United are -480m in transfers over the last three years.
John from Bootle
Player Valuation: £8m
Don't have twitter mate, nor any idea how to find your account on there. Any chance you could copy/paste here?
