Financial Fair Play investigation

[Tommy Chong]

Link please

Customers will pay us to take those back! We'll make our money twice on each sale!

 

[blulouie]

Our problem is we have failed to increase our revenue to match our increased spending , especially our wage bill.
I agree with you that an unwanted side effect of rules is to make it difficult for clubs to find the sustained success that drives an increase in revenue, but that is the challenge all clubs face.
Bottom line is that if ourselves or Man City are found to have breached the rules we ourselves helped create we will be punished, and we can’t really complain.

I've agreed there will be an outcome to this, but to me these rules are outdated now.
They have lost focus for what they were put in place for .
We have lost the clubs major sponsor & its add ons in this time frame plus the Covid years & the club have shown a willingness to balancing the books with the sale of 3 players for around £130 million.
The Prem have openly encouraged this over the last 2 yrs and the club have voluntarily worked with them.

 

[Clarky cat]

Customers will pay us to take those back! We'll make our money twice on each sale!

Which would make the 2 I kept in their unopened packets worth more than their 2 human counterparts. The surplus could be abused at length and thrown around like a dog toy before home games

 

[WestStandLower]

The accounts clearly weren't "passed", we submit our accounts, UEFA, The Premier League, The FA, anybody with any powers is free to query our accounts at anytime they please.

Lot of people sticking their head in the sand with this, for them to come for us so publicly is quite a concern.

First things first the charges you have been handed down are a million miles away from those Man City are facing. There is no suggestion that you have blocked the PLs investigation or refused to supply information on demand.

Second as far as I am aware it’s not the job of the PL to sign off the accounts yes they will monitor information that is submitted at year end in conjunction with the accounts but I very much doubt that the PL got too deeply involved in setting any sort of budget that is an in house matter but they, the PL , will be flagging up issues as the season / financial year proceeds.

Everton’s trading year ended 30/6/22 meant that whilst Richarlinsons sale probably will be reflected in the 21/22 trading year it probably would not feature in the FFP information for the 21/22 season which and that possibly will be a mitigating factor

 

[davek]

What punishment did they say might be expected?

 

[allen]

The accounts clearly weren't "passed", we submit our accounts, UEFA, The Premier League, The FA, anybody with any powers is free to query our accounts at anytime they please.

Lot of people sticking their head in the sand with this, for them to come for us so publicly is quite a concern.

Those who think this ends with just a fine are in for a shock, too.

For it to be prohibitive, a fine would have to be titanic in scale. And if it were, it’d only make matters even worse - leading to a doom loop for any club falling victim to it.

 

[everton fan number one]

First things first the charges you have been handed down are a million miles away from those Man City are facing. There is no suggestion that you have blocked the PLs investigation or refused to supply information on demand.

Second as far as I am aware it’s not the job of the PL to sign off the accounts yes they will monitor information that is submitted at year end in conjunction with the accounts but I very much doubt that the PL got too deeply involved in setting any sort of budget that is an in house matter but they, the PL , will be flagging up issues as the season / financial year proceeds.

Everton’s trading year ended 30/6/22 meant that whilst Richarlinsons sale probably will be reflected in the 21/22 trading year it probably would not feature in the FFP information for the 21/22 season which and that possibly will be a mitigating factor

Maybe they've made the referral due to the outward appearance of the accounts and they've already given us time to rectify and mitigate. Maybe even forewarned us a referral was coming.

 

[JLW]

The beautiful simple spectacle we once loved has become a board room men in suits circus.

I hate modern day football.
#givesourgameback

 

[gazzaa2]

Those who think this ends with just a fine are in for a shock, too.

For it to be prohibitive, a fine would have to be titanic in scale. And if it were, it’d only make matters even worse - leading to a doom loop for any club falling victim to it.

A fine doesn't make sense. As if it's low (thousands or low millions) then it's one players weekly or annual salary and hardly a punishment. If it's an enormous figure then as you say it's a doom loop, plus how would you even come up with a figure? Say Everton are fined 20 million pounds, it's still preferable financially and sports wise to taking the hit of relegation, therefore would still be worth the overspend and the cooking of the books with the Covid losses.

 

[Damo_1878]

What punishment did they say might be expected?

Listen to the podcast Dave

 

[davek]

Listen to the podcast Dave

I am.

It sounds like the esk is saying that if Everton had sold Richarlison and Gordon in the summer rather than keep Gordon until the January then we wouldn;t be facing this referral now as we'd be complaint with the requested £100M brought into the club.

We eventually did though so it's a bit churlish for them to bring this referral about.

 

[Eggsyblueskin]

I've agreed there will be an outcome to this, but to me these rules are outdated now.
They have lost focus for what they were put in place for .
We have lost the clubs major sponsor & its add ons in this time frame plus the Covid years & the club have shown a willingness to balancing the books with the sale of 3 players for around £130 million.
The Prem have openly encouraged this over the last 2 yrs and the club have voluntarily worked with them.

We do not know the full details at present but clearly there is a discrepancy which requires further scrutiny.
Perhaps as some are suggesting it is tied into examination of the latest years accounts ?
It is possible that even our best efforts have failed to deliver the position we had assured the PL we would be in.
In which case we will have breached the rules regardless how hard we worked to ameliorate it after the event.

 

[jimmythenut]

I imagine if a points deduction was even suggested or issued, Everton would take things to the Courts and likely sue the Premier League.

You can't give one club a slap on the wrist and the other a points deduction.

 

[everton fan number one]

We do not know the full details at present but clearly there is a discrepancy which requires further scrutiny.
Perhaps as some are suggesting it is tied into examination of the latest years accounts ?
It is possible that even our best efforts have failed to deliver the position we had assured the PL we would be in.
In which case we will have breached the rules regardless how hard we worked to ameliorate it after the event.

And tbf we only sold him because he boycotted training.

 

[JLW]

I am.

It sounds like the esk is saying that if Everton had sold Richarlison and Gordon in the summer rather than keep Gordon until the January then we wouldn;t be facing this referral now as we'd be complaint with the requested £100M brought into the club.

We eventually did though so it's a bit churlish for them to bring this referral about.

If true then why would the club not sell Gordon in the summer when he was wanted? Unless they where under the illusion they were ok FFP wise
So why sell him in January and sign no one when we are well short of numbers and quality?

Why did the PL sanction deals for Onana Maupay and McNeil if we were close to breaching the rules?

None of it makes sense.

Well actually it does make sense in that this club is in absolute tatters and in the hands of amateurs.