Liverpool fail FFP

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Tobes said:
No-one said you were going to get banned (at least not being serious ffs) as there's a raft of sanctions that are available before a ban. However, what was said, is that you don't currently comply, which you don't & the only reason you're going to get away with it this year is the fact that UEFA seemingly haven't got time to look at every case & as a result it would appear that they're making it up as they go along.

You've added another £100k a week for Goofy btw, plus you bought replacements so your £500k won't be a net saving.....

The 'stadium debt' is a pile of horse ****. A £50m write off in 2011 for a project that never broke the soil, please, do me a favour. BTW the write of was in the year prior to UEFA's first monitoring year and therefore shouldn't be eligible. The fact that the Shermans have re-financed it in the last financial year shouldn't be relevant to the FFP rules, as the actual expense was taken 2 years hence. That surely won't stand up to any form of scrutiny.
Click to expand...

I hear those Guardian gears crashing again!

Don't be upset Tobes, we know you and your flag of convenience mates got a little excited there for a fleeting, happy moment, but it's not going to happen. Anyway, we're not there yet - we could finish anywhere from third to sixth yet with ten games to go. Keep your bitter dry till then feller! <cheers>
 
Tobes said:
No-one said you were going to get banned (at least not being serious ffs) as there's a raft of sanctions that are available before a ban. However, what was said, is that you don't currently comply, which you don't & the only reason you're going to get away with it this year is the fact that UEFA seemingly haven't got time to look at every case & as a result it would appear that they're making it up as they go along.

You've added another £100k a week for Goofy btw, plus you bought replacements so your £500k won't be a net saving.....

The 'stadium debt' is a pile of horse ****. A £50m write off in 2011 for a project that never broke the soil, please, do me a favour. BTW the write of was in the year prior to UEFA's first monitoring year and therefore shouldn't be eligible. The fact that the Shermans have re-financed it in the last financial year shouldn't be relevant to the FFP rules, as the actual expense was taken 2 years hence. That surely won't stand up to any form of scrutiny.
Click to expand...

Of course most clubs will get away with financial impropriety due to various caveats.

What is amusing is after all the years of Reds (united arsenal lpool) bleating about FFP being the end for Chelsea, that Liverpool are also under the microscope once again.

Best get selling some more plastic This is Anfield signs to comply
 
donga darko said:
I hear those Guardian gears crashing again!

Don't be upset Tobes, we know you and your flag of convenience mates got a little excited there for a fleeting, happy moment, but it's not going to happen. Anyway, we're not there yet - we could finish anywhere from third to sixth yet with ten games to go. Keep your bitter dry till then feller! <cheers>
Click to expand...

Behave lad, we all know that it'd never happen to you lot. As they make special exceptions just to let you in ffs, so they're never going to use you as their FFP sacrificial lamb :) How are they doing dismantling that £50m part built stadium btw? <whistle>
 
"Under the rules, Liverpool are likley to qualify for UEFA competiton so would have to supply their 2011/12 and 2012/13 accounts this coming July. These would clearly show that the club made a Break Even deficit and hence, during October 2014, UEFA would request the 2013/14 club accounts. Liverpool would clearly be assessed over the three seasons (2011/12, 2012/13 and 2013/4) and any punishment disclosed in July 2015 (assuming they had overspent over the three year period)."


donga this is from your link. As you've already gone over the limit in the last 2 years and still have the 13/14 year figures to add which by your own clubs accounts show a -53m transfer defect then in the year 13/14 you would need to make a profit of over 65m to comply. Do you see that happening when this year the 'profit' was less than 1/5th of that?

We have to make a profit of 4m in the same season to comply which will be difficult although we do have new sponsorship deals in ours but yours haven't started yet so won't be in the 13/14 season figures.
 
Tobes said:
Behave lad, we all know that it'd never happen to you lot. As they make special exceptions just to let you in ffs, so they're never going to use you as their FFP sacrificial lamb :) How are they doing dismantling that £50m part built stadium btw? <whistle>
Click to expand...

I think it depends on how much they fail by. If their year on year figures stayed the same they would fail by over 70m. I don't think UEFA could ignore that. With them having less home games because of exiting the cups early this year and their new deals don't kick in until after the current monitoring period then it's going to be closer to a 70m loss than not.
 
CPofL KTBFFH said:
"Under the rules, Liverpool are likley to qualify for UEFA competiton so would have to supply their 2011/12 and 2012/13 accounts this coming July. These would clearly show that the club made a Break Even deficit and hence, during October 2014, UEFA would request the 2013/14 club accounts. Liverpool would clearly be assessed over the three seasons (2011/12, 2012/13 and 2013/4) and any punishment disclosed in July 2015 (assuming they had overspent over the three year period)."


donga this is from your link. As you've already gone over the limit in the last 2 years and still have the 13/14 year figures to add which by your own clubs accounts show a -53m transfer defect then in the year 13/14 you would need to make a profit of over 65m to comply. Do you see that happening when this year the 'profit' was less than 1/5th of that?

We have to make a profit of 4m in the same season to comply which will be difficult although we do have new sponsorship deals in ours but yours haven't started yet so won't be in the 13/14 season figures.
Click to expand...

They will never comply in a million years for the period 2011-14 but will probably weasel their way out of a ban somehow. As will we!!!
 
CPofL KTBFFH said:
I think it depends on how much they fail by. If their year on year figures stayed the same they would fail by over 70m. I don't think UEFA could ignore that. With them having less home games because of exiting the cups early this year and their new deals don't kick in until after the current monitoring period then it's going to be closer to a 70m loss than not.
Click to expand...

They'd get a warning, together with a couple of dozen others imo.

However, as we discussed the other day, the issue for UEFA might come from their own rules. As teams directly affected by the decision to allow a non compliant FFP side to participate in their completion have the right of appeal. So that could prove to be interesting in the next couple of years.
 
Tobes said:
They'd get a warning, together with a couple of dozen others imo.

However, as we discussed the other day, the issue for UEFA might come from their own rules. As teams directly effected by the decision to allow a non compliant FFP side to participate in their completion have the right of appeal. So that could prove to be interesting in the next couple of years.
Click to expand...

I don't think they'd be denied entry but for 70m it would have to be more than that I think. It will be interesting for sure and as things stand right now Liverpool will likely be the first 'big' and certainly the first English club to fail FFP.
 
Tobes said:
They'd get a warning, together with a couple of dozen others imo.

However, as we discussed the other day, the issue for UEFA might come from their own rules. As teams directly affected by the decision to allow a non compliant FFP side to participate in their completion have the right of appeal. So that could prove to be interesting in the next couple of years.
Click to expand...

Really hope it doesn't come to a situation though where entry into competitions etc. is determined in the Courts rather than on the football field. The whole Sheffield United/West Ham situation was bad enough.

To that end, the rules and punishments must be completely transparent.
 
Tobes said:
They'd get a warning, together with a couple of dozen others imo.

However, as we discussed the other day, the issue for UEFA might come from their own rules. As teams directly affected by the decision to allow a non compliant FFP side to participate in their completion have the right of appeal. So that could prove to be interesting in the next couple of years.
Click to expand...

Daniel levy wouldn't think twice about it would he? <laugh>
 
chelsea - over 100 years of history said:
Really hope it doesn't come to a situation though where entry into competitions etc. is determined in the Courts rather than on the football field. The whole Sheffield United/West Ham situation was bad enough.

To that end, the rules and punishments must be completely transparent.
Click to expand...

And the figures. I can understand an individuals wage being kept secret but all transfer fess, agents fees etc should all be made public.
 
chelsea - over 100 years of history said:
Really hope it doesn't come to a situation though where entry into competitions etc. is determined in the Courts rather than on the football field. The whole Sheffield United/West Ham situation was bad enough.

To that end, the rules and punishments must be completely transparent.
Click to expand...

Yeah I totally agree, and they've hardly made a good fist of that so far, as there's been numerous different interpretations in the last week alone!

They should set out a detailed and transparent set of punishments. So, for example, if you miss by £10m and it's a first offence the punishment is a warning, fail by £50m+ and it's a 1 year ban, that's suspended for 12 months and only actioned if the next years accounts don't comply. 3 years consecutive failure, automatic 1 year ban etc etc etc That way everyone would know where they stand.
 
Now that PSG and Monaco have some cash you can be sure Platini will find a way to see they comply. Of course, it means everyone else can do as they do. Bet he feels a right prick as when he went for this they were paupers.
 
CPofL KTBFFH said:
Now that PSG and Monaco have some cash you can be sure Platini will find a way to see they comply. Of course, it means everyone else can do as they do. Bet he feels a right prick as when he went for this they were paupers.
Click to expand...

Well in Monaco's case it appears he already has done, as the first we've heard about "if you're not already in, we won't be looking at you this year" has been this week......no doubt there'll be a caveat added to the sanctions for failure that any club within 10 miles of the Eiffel Tower will be exempt...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back