No, but then I have to question why he'd need a loan then. Very bizarre. The only other reason I can think of is, if this is allowed, he took the loan out before he took on the club to avoid the FFP and hoped it wouldn't count towards FFP. That might explain why he tried to pay it back when funds became available.
Don't think FFP applies to holding companies/owners, just the club incomings and outgoings can't be more than 13m average annual loss in a rolling 3 years - though there are exceptions for infrastructure investments, academies and the like.
The only way we can trouble FFP is if there's a danger of spending 39m over any other income (ie transfers out) in any rolling 3 year period. Share issues have been used in the past to circumvent but I think that's tighter now.
I don't think there'd be a meeting if we were just spending the KLP money, as that would be net zero.
People seem to equate breeching FFP with some sort of catastrophic financial meltdown. It isn't. It will just incur a punishment depending on the severity of breech.
Derby dint get relegated because of FFP, they got relegated because Mel Morris spunked a load of cash and couldn't sustain the mess he made without promotion so dumped them in admin.
Reading breeched FFP and survived with their deduction
Wouldn't want to breech it ourselves though.
Last edited: