... and in Other Football News

Make a suggestion ST14. Mine are
Based on level over FFP , duration of default etc create a scale . Set a rule of when it is applied . Don’t let a team stay up or go up if they have breached it to a certain level as that has helped them ‘succeed’ as an example. It could be as severe as relegation if required . Yes it’s the fans that hurt but if your club has ‘cheated’ to benefit then the greater good is to benefit all the others who haven’t . I think what grieves others who been relegated from the Prem is that Everton seemed to have stayed up longer than they should have and maybe Forest will do too. I’m not sure Luton have been ‘honest’ with low fan income and some high wages but if they have applaud them and Bournemouth. I have not stated facts as I don’t have the time to look , these are just my thoughts .

 

Given the amounts of money involved it would make sense for clubs to be required to produce monthly accounts to Premier League and the final audited accounts to be produced within one month (31 July) and decisions made one month later. That turn around isnt impossible. I've been senior on an audit when accounts have been audited within 4 days of the year end.

 

The points deductions, the timing of them and the carefully calculated reduction on appeals are all structured to ensure that Everton are not relegated. It's completely cynical.

It should have been a 50 point deduction to ensure that it is an actual punishment, because it quite patently isn't a punishment at all, but a sop to ensure that the powerful clubs do not suffer and are allowed to carry on cheating at will.

 

The whole problem with rule-breaking and cheating is that it’s unfair on anyone who abides by the rules. Authorities can only mitigate against it after the fact. Points deductions with a month left of the season that could be appealed after the final game creates more insecurity than a points deduction for an upcoming season. At least clubs know where they stand ahead of time rather than after the fact with the latter.

Maybe a caveat to the situation you mentioned is that the Premier League, in addition to the points deduction for the upcoming season, orders the cheating club that survived relegation to pay a significant portion of their Premier League revenue as reparations to relegated clubs that otherwise would’ve survived.

 

The size of the turnover means very little. It's the number of transactions that is the issue in any football club. Most of the turnover and expenses are known well in advance.

 

You seem to have got confused by mixing up two of my sentences. Nobody has said that a business with a turnover of £700m should produce accounts within 4 days. I said the accounts should be audited (obviously after the accounts can be prepared) within a month. That is very doable given accounts can be done quickly if required.

 

The headline criteria of losses that are within the 'rules' and permitted is simple, however the complexities of how clubs manage their finances and audited accounts are complex to say the least. In any event groups with multi-club ownership have a significant scope to 'bend' the rules to suit and be seen to remaining within the loss permitted criteria over the 3 year term. Sponsorship being another potential loophole.

In Everton's case, are they allowed to lose the entirety of their new stadium build investment 'outside' their football related activities?

I'm no expert, but at face value seems the application of the penalties when appropriate are open to to a degree of commission intervention that is flexible to some extent which is fundamentally wrong.

 

My suggestion is scrap it because you're never going to administer it properly and there'll be appeals upon appeals. Or if you want to do something about it you just have no deductions and quite simply say that the operating P&L produced by a club over a period of time is what will be measured so it's black and white. It's far too grey and open to debate/appeal at the moment.

On Luton I have no idea how you think they haven't been 'honest' when their financial outlay this season has been miniscule. Look at the transfer fees and wages they're paying this season for a starting point on why they're comfortably in the green.

 

This is flabbergasting given the rest of this post as it reeks of someone with absolutely no clue about how financial accounts are compiled and audited and the time required for complex organisations.

Yes I've also audited companies in the space of a week but those were incredibly straight forward, small, low volume organisations. The exact opposite of multi-billion dollar sporting organisations.

 

Monthly accounts give an up to date position. Two of those years accounts will alreaady have been prepared so they are irrelevant in the monthly accounts issue.

 

I completely agree with you by the way, I'm just pointing out why it's done the way it is. All you could do is require footballing year ends be March with accounts produced no later than August with all review and sign off by the PL of the previous three year period by October and all appeals/final decisions done by the end of December. That way all clubs know explicitly where they stand heading into the January transfer window with no room for debate/appeal post that point.

I'm not too sure on how the UK tax system works and whether changing the year end requirements for football clubs would be feasible though.

As an aside, having footballing club year ends be in March not June would make a lot of sense given the timing of the summer transfer window and clubs like Forest having to decide whether to sell Johnson early to comply with PSR or not would be irrelevant.

 

Why on earth would you need a live position for clubs? What will be materially different in a clubs accounts in October then November? It's outside a transfer window.

What is needed is a year end for football clubs that allows for the preparation and review of the accounts by the end of the calendar year.

 

Football clubs are not the opposite of "low volume organisations". Match day revenue is known by the day of the match. Other revenues are large amount but small volume transactions. Same with expenditure.

"someone with absolutely no clue about how financial accounts are compiled and audited and the time required for complex organisations."

You talk absolute nonsense all the time. I've been an auditor with a top 4 firm of international accountants (now called EY) and I've been senior in charge of the audit of the holding company of BP. Granted that wasnt the operating companies but it was the year that BP took over Standard Oil of Ohio. A successful and timely audit is achieved by good PLANNING in advance.

Have you heard of interim audits? Auditors dont wait until the end of the years to start the audit. The vast majority of the work is done before the end of the year.

 

Might have been more practical in the past but perhaps with all of this mess it may increasingly become less practical..

Although I take your point regarding the end of player contracts.

 

No in my four years as an auditor I never experienced interim audits, please tell me all about them. If we're going to swing our dicks and go on about which accounting firm we worked for I was at KPMG for four years. You're talking rubbish if you think the audit of a Premier League football club could be competently completed in four days regardless of how substantially you audited them prior to their year end. With the PSR requirements and the deductions and complexities involved it would still take a substantial amount of time.

 

All i know is
Give forest another 5 point deduction