6 + 2 Point Deductions

[Tony’s Carp]

Possibly yes

I presume after this season the averaged covid years drop off and we’re down to a three year period starting with 21/22, which was a 44m loss minus deductions etc. So it’s really impossible to say whether we might breach this year since no one knows y2 let alone current projections for y3. Anyone chucking about predictions is likely doing it for attention.

 

[Titus Bramble]

I think we need a joint venture from both @Voodoo Billy and @Blue Willy

Enter: Voodoo Willy

 

[RD2910]

I wonder if they prefer the points deduction to a transfer ban as such a ban would not allow his "small clubs" to sell their prized assets to his Sexy Six. I also think we need an anti Prem mascot to focus on, c'mon, who's prepared to dress up for home games dressed as a penis with a pink Prem Corrupt FC shirt on with Dickie Little written on the back?

I don't think they ban selling players, that wouldn't make any sense.

 

[gwladysnight]

The club will know the figures for all these things. But the figures aren't public knowledge so we are only able to estimate.

Like for example, lots of deals are undisclosed transfers nowadays - we don't know an exact number.

The club should absolutely know, but outside observers can only estimate. And as you will know, the P&L figure in the stats is adjusted for allowances under PSR, so again not easy to estimate.

A lot of the information though is in the public domain. Things like TV money, gate receipts and commercial revenues are either based on a formula or can be inferred from previous seasons. Then you can look at the last accounts to find out what player amortisation is running at and check things like post-balance sheet events.

Then there are things we know. Such as the fact that one year has dropped off the PSR rolling period and 22/23 has been added and we have still failed and been charged. That means 22/23 has to be similar or worse to the year that dropped off.

That is why the guy on Talksport can be confident in his predictions and about how much we need to raise from player trading.

 

[willo30]

If you can’t see how the rest of the Premier League views Everton with contempt and wants them punished then it’s us as much as LFC or the Geordies who’s in a cult.

Not just the PL.
My almost 4yr old granddaughter asked me "What is an Everton and what does it do?". Didn't have a answer for her.

 

[Voodoo Billy]

I don't think they ban selling players, that wouldn't make any sense.

Clubs like our couldn't sell if we had no way of replacing them though?

 

[Voodoo Billy]

Well volunteered, Voodoo Billy!

I think you might be more appropriately named in the current weather conditions?

 

[willo30]

It doesn't.

Over the last 10 seasons (going all the way back to the 72 point @davek season), here's a breakdown of which non-sky6 teams finished between 1st and 6th:

22/23: Newcastle, Brighton
21/22: None
20/21: Leicester, West Ham
19/20: Leicester
18/19: None
17/18: None
16/17: None
15/16: Leicester, Southampton
14/15: None
13/14: Everton

Over 10 seasons, the 60 top six positions have been filled by a non-sky6 teams 8 times.

The only club who have 'regularly' finished in the top 6 are now in the Championship.

Any sky6 club which misses out is invariably back in the top 6 the following season.

It's the way sport is now.
Take tennis for example over the last 20 years there has been 80 grand slams and 3 players have won almost 70 of them.

 

[Mashtray]

It's the way sport is now.
Take tennis for example over the last 20 years there has been 80 grand slams and 3 players have won almost 70 of them.

tennis is a bad example though, its down to sheer talent of one individual, no investment or trading in "limbs"

 

[pfim]

Clubs like our couldn't sell if we had no way of replacing them though?

That's the punishment, yes.

 

[Titus Bramble]

It's the way sport is now.
Take tennis for example over the last 20 years there has been 80 grand slams and 3 players have won almost 70 of them.

Not sure tennis is the best example... The most talented individuals of the time will be the regular winners.

But, don't let anyone tell you the Premier League is the most competitive in the world next time there's a freak 1 off result. It isn't.

 

[mahermi1]

Interest was allowed because we told them that the Metro and Rights media loans were for the Stadium. That is classed as infrastructure spending so is quite rightly a permissible deduction for PSR purposes. It turns out that the terms of the loan state that the loan was for the day to day running of the club and not for the Stadium. It was just a stupid thing to do.

The thing is that we had dug such a deep PSR hole that we needed to take action. Instead, Moshiri just came up with bizarre deductions. He came up with fanciful excuses and even more fanciful figures. He tried to claim huge sums for COVID losses and pretended that without COVID we would have been able to sell Keane for a ludicrous amount. Totally ignoring the fact that Keane's career had nose-dived and that we hadn't even put him up for sale. As soon as they checked the paperwork it became apparent we hadn't tried to sell him.

Then we get to player X. There has been a lot of misinformation about this. What we tried to do was claim that if we had decided to sue player X for breach of contract then we would have received £10m in compensation so £10m should be allowed as a PSR deduction. There are 3 things here.

1. It was our decision not to sue player X.
2. That we would have won the case and the case would have been settled within that financial year.
3 That player X had a spare £10m lying around plus court costs to pay us that £10m in that financial year.

Player X and Player Y were just farcical. So farcical that the legal team completely dropped them by the pre-trial argument stage. There may be some merits in terms of mitigation but trying to quantify them and expect to be able to deduct them is frankly hilarious.

What happened is that we were miles above the permitted losses and instead of taking action to make sure we complied Moshiri just worked backwards and tried to invent bogus deductions. The basic principle is that if you put forward deductions then you have to prove them on a balance of probabilities basis.

I have some sympathy with your argument regarding the £105m losses. The way the IC will have looked at it though is that the actual losses should only be £5m per season. So £15m over a rolling 3 year period. The generous bit is allowing owners to put in £30m per season or £90m over a 3 year period.

Love to know how the PL could prove that was for day to day running of the club and not the stadium. Do you know ?
Our decision not to sue the player, hmmm. I'm sure the PL and other sporting bodies, have brought up players mental health, especially during the Covid period, what do you think might of happened if we would have just sued the player ? He must have been under great stress as it was, recently married, Covid, the under age charges. What would you have thought of " our club" ,if we would have done that ?

 

[willo30]

Not sure tennis is the best example... The most talented individuals of the time will be the regular winners.

But, don't let anyone tell you the Premier League is the most competitive in the world next time there's a freak 1 off result. It isn't.

Exactly. That was sort of the point I was getting at.

 

[efcfanwirral]

I hate the word but with our debt level where it is at the only way out of this may be administration, to reset the apple cart. It seems we are spiraling more and more out of control into the black hole. I’m beginning to accept that it is the likely result here.

Hopefully hanging on to next season (if we stay up despite the two deductions this season) so the -9 deduction comes then

 

[Daytripper]

This is worse than the 90s, early 2000s and to add to the mix, we have people wanting to buy the club who look like the kind of people Dexter would plan to have on his kill table.