Initial 10, then reduced to 6 + 2 Point Deductions

[bag a yoko]

Thank you.

But 1 ( or 2 years ) of that was in the Championship.

Don't they have very different figures for the "acceptable losses"?

The Premier League stated their a private members club.

They what possible fine can they give a team in the Championship?

 

[TyphooToffee]

They'll hit us with the second charge though. Watch this space!

I had a feeling it would be reduced to 6.

I think it was most people's feeling.

 

[HalfTimeSayers]

The "upturn" means that the loss has increased

Nah. If our 23 losses were going the wrong way, they wouldn’t have ignored them. They’d have said we’ve clearly abandoned attempts to ensure future compliance, and given us less points back.

You have seen an upturn in profitability if you have reduced your losses.

 

[PrekisCrossBarlow!]

You would need an accountant to hazard a guess and explain how that could be the case when

1. We hardly signed anyone but sold Gordon for £45 million

2. We lost quite a few big hitters off the wage bill.

To be fair we bought Onana, Garner, Maupay and McNeill for £66 million in 22/23.

But still were 20 million in profit transfer-wise.

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

This ridiculous desire to get the hearings rushed through for this season leaves it open to further recriminations. As only us and Forest have admitted to breaching and had to submit the most recent accounts by the end of the year but what if other clubs are found to have been in breach but the league only discover it when they submit their accounts later.

So for example Chelsea have breached and should have a hearing before the end of the season but because they have not submitted the figures in time they don't get punished until the following season.

Every club should have to report their latest accounts by the deadline not just the ones who think they've gone over.

 

[PITA]

It will almost certainly be revealed on a day that ends in a y.

You were right.

 

[Tin-Tin]

This ridiculous desire to get the hearings rushed through for this season leaves it open to further recriminations. As only us and Forest have admitted to breaching and had to submit the most recent accounts by the end of the year but what if other clubs are found to have been in breach but the league only discover it when they submit their accounts later.

So for example Chelsea have breached and should have a hearing before the end of the season but because they have not submitted the figures in time they don't get punished until the following season.

Every club should have to report their latest accounts by the deadline not just the ones who think they've gone over.

I think they all do now. Around xmas wasnt it?

 

[TyphooToffee]

Woeful outcome for the club

Means big risk of further penalty in a few weeks

Surely they won't do it twice in the same season? Oh, wait....

 

[GoldenToffee]

You were right.

 

[Davideeyore]

View attachment 247252

The league didn't want to consider mitigation. Everything was just rejected out of hand.

I get more frustrated the more I read.

I just read that - from the above

That reinforces that we have been hard done by.

No mitigation. Laughable.

 

[JLW]

Can we not just put this to bed now!

 

[jazzy]

What does this mean below? Is 'upturn' good in this context?

'...The Commission took into account the positive trend in the PSR figures as amitigating factor, saying that it “goes some limited way to diminish Everton’sculpability”. The Commission left out of account evidence as to the PSR picture inFY23, which showed an upturn.'

The first and 2nd sentences are diametrically opposed

First sentence ... they are saying the Commission gave us credit for the positive trend in PSR figures.

Second sentence ....the Commission didn't take into account ( punish us ) for an "upturn" ( increase in the losses ) in Y23.

Had they meant that the Y23 figures were even better ( and showed a smaller loss) they would have said that the commission gave us credit for the continuing trend of diminishing losses.

 

[The Blue Watch]

Been reading the comments from the BBC article. The gist is that most fans from other clubs think we got off lightly, but don’t have any understanding of our individual circumstances or what they’re talking about.
The average football fan is clueless to our plight or just hates us. Well sod them all I say!

The problem is that the average fan is a supporter of the scab six (= thick and entitled), or of one of the other clubs who would benefit from our demise.

I wouldn’t like to see Forest (or any other club) get any points deducted for this, if it wasn’t for the fact that their fans are behaving like they have some sort of moral high ground over us.

At the end of the day it’s only the ones at the top that get preferential treatment and stand to gain from these rules existing in the first place. Yet the fans of other clubs aren’t united, there isn’t any empathy towards us, and there won’t ever be because unfortunately for us we will be the only set of fans and the only club to ever be in this position.

So I agree, sod them all. Forest had just come up and had to overspend to have a chance at competing? Boo hoo, off to the championship. Southampton sold half their team to the RS and couldn’t keep up and the system isn’t fair? Unlucky. Leicester are tories and beyond saving? Yep. Crabs in a bucket while the ones at the top feast on us.

 

[SwedishToffee]

 

[Ring master]

I think they all do now. Around xmas wasnt it?

Xmas is what it did seem like for all. But then it came out that any who thought they may have a problem had to submit by 31st December and others by March the 1st. Not sure what they stuck to