Man City ring a bell mate ? Chelsea nah nothing to see here..
They could do mate.
Or if they're in a good mood and had a nice lunch they could take the view that the underlying issues at the club remain the same as the first breach, and can't be cured quickly (most costs are locked in, you can't just shed them overnight) and that the underlying issues have already been punished by the first deduction.
It'll probably be somewhere in the middle of the two.
The punishment for mismanagement of a club should fall on those who were in a position of ownership during the period of mismanagement
What other clubs do or do not do has nothing to do with this situation. Honestly it's like when school kids get caught misbehaving then say but but what about XYZ they also did it.
I don't think we've been compliant, but I don't expect it to be as big a breach as last time. Why is the estimation of deductibles being based on 2021/22, rather than 2018/19 for example? The City finance bloke doesn't know the figures, and for someone who banged on about Everton fans being misled last time it's a bit rich to throw such estimations out as quickly as he can.You're right that we don't. But the loss per accounts makes it very difficult to become compliant.
I don't think we've been compliant, but I don't expect it to be as big a breach as last time. Why is the estimation of deductibles being based on 2021/22, rather than 2018/19 for example? The City finance bloke doesn't know the figures, and for someone who banged on about Everton fans being misled last time it's a bit rich to throw such estimations out as quickly as he can.
I know that most of you want to hear from me but I actually think you are circa £10 million over not £25. The PSR submission would have included deductions for the loss of USM sponsorship and if you refer back to the first charge the suggestion is that if there was a loss that was quantifiable based on contract then that would be allowed.Last year's statutory loss was 45m and in the appeal report that went down as a 10m loss for PSR. So 35m of deductibles. However I think those accounts had c.8m of Covid deducted and this year's don't. So we had 35m deductibles then but possibly only 25m now. But yes this is an ESTIMATE but a reasonable one. I'm hoping there are more deductibles than that but we don't know.
Statutory loss 89m
Deductibles c. 25m
PSR loss c. 65m
PSR wiggle room (from appeal verdict) 40m
Breach c. 25m
There's no defense. 100% certain we'll get a second points deduction. For the sake of your mental health, just deal with it.won’t the panel
go “oh they’ve not listened”
punish them
and we have no defence?
Why were we loaning Danjuma and signing Dele Alli when we knew we were in such financial dire straits?
Absolute luxury signings that have done nothing for the club
Some of the excuses he used to come out with as wellTalking of Kenwright, @4737carlin is more and more looking like he was Kenwright.
Not one single post since June last year.
This is a good point come to think of it.If you want a positive - 2023 accounts include years 20-23 (20 & 21 were COVID years), the 2019 loss has dropped off.
So £111m loss off, £89m loss on
Next year (Year ending June 2024) we lose both COVID years and the accounts will be just the losses from 22, 23 and 24.
I think this highlights getting through this year as a PL team is so important with all overhanging punishments spent then we will see an upturn next season, especially with some big players coming off the books at the end of this season i.e. Gomes, Alli, Gueye, Coleman, Young plus Harrison and Danjuma going back, I reckon them 7 players cost us £530k per week, nearly £28m per year.
TBH I hope all of them go, Gueye might have 1 more season, he earns £80k p/w though.
There's no defense. 100% certain we'll get a second points deduction. For the sake of your mental health, just deal with it.