Where Did All the Money Go?

Means **** all to FFP, so maybe it’s you that has no understanding on how things work.

 

Why?, surely we’ve either fallen foul of FFP and will incur some kind of penalty, or we haven’t ?

 

Wasting your time, he is always correct in his head.

 

FFP IS CONTROLLING FINANCES WITHIN THE LEGAL RULES... so you make a loss you have not complied, but the safety net is you can make forever losses unless the total lost is more than £39 million in 3 seasons .. 3 new directors putting in £10m would be £30m to club accounts.... what the club does with them is common sense at the mo would help finances .. so therefore aiding help with keeping FFP WITHIN ITS BOUNDARIES

 

OH PS 8 ... sponsorship also helps FFP

 

No it does not, you’ve really not got a clue have you.

 

ok Mr 8 give us your reasoning as to what happens to money in the accounts that has or [ doesnt have! lol] an effect on FFP

First clue is FFP determines that a club runs with a legally determined Income over expenditure and over a 3 year period the aggregated figure must not exceed £39m ...........

 

If we exceed the limit we exceed it, it’s as straight forward as that, makes no difference whether directors put money in or not.

 

The owner/ chairman / shareholders are only allowed to put x into the accounts. Regardless if that is one person or 16 owners. SL puts that figure in already.
It’s not really that difficult is it?

 

pray tell why would SL be trying to attract additional investors?

 

To spread the cost, at present he has to cover the full amount, if he brings in others they will share it. But the limit will stay the same. Just spread between more people it’s less each.

 

As Ashton said, he’s funding us year on year.

 

you [ or anyone , incase your reply is dont do the lottery! ] win £x m on lottery decide to give / setaside 10% for BCFC would they accept your money?

 

Makes no difference to income v expenditure of running of the club for FFP.
This is the last time I’m answering you on this. 2 people have tried explaining to you that you’re wrong.

 

so OK you dont understand that income v expenditure = profit or loss and FFP is in plav / the over sight to make sure that teams /clubs stay within the rules ...which is dont spend to much over income over a rolling period of 3 years

it is all based on ........

The UEFA Financial Fair Play Regulations (FFP) were established to prevent professional football clubs spending more than they earn in the pursuit of success, and in doing so not getting into financial problems which might threaten their long-term survival. They were agreed to in principle in September 2009 by the Financial Control Panel of football's governing body in Europe (Union of European Football Associations – UEFA).

The regulations provide for sanctions to be taken against clubs who exceed spending, over several seasons, within a set budgetary framework. Implementation of the regulations took place at the outset of the 2011–12 football season.[3] The severest penalty is disqualification from the European competitions.[4] Other penalties included fines, the withholding of prize money, and player transfer bans.

 

The key word is “earn”. SL or anyone for that matter, is not allowed to bank roll our success, our outgoings can be greater than what we “earn” by a set figure over I think it’s a rolling 3 year period, and £39m. The reason we’re in trouble is our model is to sell players largely, we also earn money from corporate events using the stadium and to a lesser extent footfall on match day, catering etc, all our main forms of income , especially players sales, were stopped altogether during covid. Had it not been for covid provided we could have sold players we’d probably have been ok, hence why we are appealing to not have sanctions etc. no amount of “donations” from wealthy individuals will change the fact we overspent by more than FFP allows.

 

Spot on

 

there was another site that stated "generate[d] as opposed to earn ... A company generates income from ... various things depending on company ....
taking on additional shareholders is a means to expand ... most companies do it ... script issues/and etc etc etc.... unless you are savvy with business processes can be difficult to grasp without a lot of learning ..........

this is very true, a disaster income became tv money and handouts and sponsorship .....

no one is saying "donations" from anyone will help our situation regarding past FFP, covid or not ... .. CERTAINLY NOT ME ... we have to look to the future , and attract more money [ income ]
When you say x y or z cant "donate" by legal methodology, money into the system you are wrong. If you believe it is not so, then we are in the pooo as SL HAS BEEN DOING IT FOR YEARS. We have pretty much just 1 shareholder, who is also supporting at least 4 other concerns. You need to understand equity and shares, if you dont then you are firing blanks!!!!

 

And you are talking bull——