Financial Fair Play investigation

[Tom Hughes]

Hes a jobbing lecturer in the media space though mate isn't he - he's not working for the university in that sphere - hes free lancing or creating his own content for financial gain.

As i mentioned i'm not mocking the man - i merely pointed out the often gap between academia and application of theory into practice.

i don think its terribly complicated to know how bad our financial situation is - my issue with him is on speculation of points deductions etc that he has highlighted through his various reporting on our story - he can be the best academic in the world - but he cant predict the future particularly as its unprecedented and he doesn't have access to the clubs own data on the subject - just the clubs published accounts that doesn't tell the whole story. I also dont like that hes leaking interactions with the administration - 1) because even in the media space their is an ethical code in regard to sources, 2) because its for financial remuneration and 3) because the dynamic between the club and fans at the moment is a tinder box of pent up emotions that could ignite toxicity like we saw in January that undermines the club in a vital period of survival.

No, he's a commentator on the media because of his credentials and expertise. He lives or dies on that media based on those insights and is very well established. Of course some points will be speculative in the absence of detail, but he's looking at similar figures for all clubs over many years. So when you're talking about our outlier statistics/adjustments and the situation regarding auditors, their "going concern" comments and the PL referral, he's hardly having to stretch his analytical muscles nor imagination.

Toxicity is not his concern and again is only a symptom, not a cause. Bit like you can't blame the vultures for the rotting carcass.

 

[Neiler]

No, he's a commentator on the media because of his credentials and expertise. He lives or dies on that media based on those insights and is very well established. Of course some points will be speculative in the absence of detail, but he's looking at similar figures for all clubs over many years. So when you're talking about our outlier statistics/adjustments and the situation regarding auditors, their "going concern" comments and the PL referral, he's hardly having to stretch his analytical muscles nor imagination.

Toxicity is not his concern and again is only a symptom, not a cause. Bit like you can't blame the vultures for the rotting carcass.

Not sure he lives or dies based on insights, he will vary them from outlet to outlet depending on the tone and agenda of said publication, for example hes more sensational on talksport and keeps the inside information to push his own content. There is more then one stakeholder at play here and financial motivation is also play that conveys a message that brings into question objectivity and agenda. People are probably awed by being an "academic" - i definitely wouldn't be with much experience in that area myself both in practice and academia.

Which is fine, so he leaves himself open to constructive rebuttal and critique which i and others are providing on objectivity, competence and motivation, im sure his shoulders are broad enough.

 

[Damo_1878]

Not sure he lives or dies based on insights, he will vary them from outlet to outlet depending on the tone and agenda of said publication, for example hes more sensational on talk port and keeps the inside information to push his own content. There is more then one stakeholder at play here and financial motivation is also play that conveys a message that brings into question objectivity and agenda. People are probably awed by being an "academic" - i definitely wouldn't be with much experience in that area myself both in practice and academia.

Which is fine, so he leaves himself open to constructive rebuttal which i and other are providing.

I have not seen any indications of bias from him. I saw his tweets about Chelsea this weekend. Pretty scathing of them too

Davek is just claiming bias and so on, because Dave is not being rational about it all.

 

[Neiler]

I have not seen any indications of bias from him. I saw his tweets about Chelsea this weekend. Pretty scathing of them too

Davek is just claiming bias and so on, because Dave is not being rational about it all.

Nobody said he was bias, in fact the opposite in terms of ambulance chasing for financial remuneration and thus compromised objectivity, financial motivation and intent to further a media profile around the league

 

[Damo_1878]

Nobody said he was bias, in fact the opposite in terms of ambulance chasing for financial remuneration and thus comprised objectivity, financial motivation and intent to further a media profile around the league

Dave has been pretty clear in his ridiculous criticism.

Kieran Maguire seems to target any club that is being ran ridiculously.

I fail to see why Everton Football Club warrants special treatment.

Edited. Kevin to Kieran

 

[Neiler]

Dave has been pretty clear in his ridiculous criticism.

Kevin Maguire seems to target any club that is being ran ridiculously.

I fail to see why Everton Football Club warrants special treatment.

Kieran mate.

 

[Damo_1878]

Kieran mate.

I just know him as "Maguire". Plus I need coffee this morning.

 

[davek]

Hes a jobbing lecturer in the media space though mate isn't he - he's not working for the university in that sphere - hes free lancing or creating his own content for financial gain.

As i mentioned i'm not mocking the man - i merely pointed out the often gap between academia and application of theory into practice.

I dont think its terribly complicated to know how bad our financial situation is - my issue with him, is on speculation of points deductions etc that he has highlighted through his various reporting on our story - he can be the best academic in the world - but he cant predict the future particularly as its unprecedented and he doesn't have access to the clubs own data on the subject - just the clubs published accounts that doesn't tell the whole story. I also dont like that hes leaking interactions with the administration - 1) because even in the media space there is an ethical code in regard to sources, 2) because its for financial remuneration and 3) because the dynamic between the club and fans at the moment is a tinder box of pent up emotions that could ignite toxicity like we saw in January that undermines the club in a vital period of survival.

Precisely mate.

@Tom Hughes asks for a challenege to Maguire on the content of his assessment of Everton's financial governance, and, of course, that challenge would be ridiculous. We can all see what a basket case the club have become...and some of us have been saying it for donkeys years without any assistance from an outside 'football industry expert'.

No, the real meat of any critique of Maguire has been his less than professional behaviour concerning his speculation over what the club are being specifically referred to a commission for (he doesn't know...only the club and the PL know), his projection forward of a likely and fitting punishment for the club (having already adjudged us 'guilty') and his leaking of private messaging into the public domain. @Tom Hughes though would appear to be intent on putting up a straw man rather than dealing with those errors in judgement of Maguire. Which is his prerogative, I suppose.

 

[Tom Hughes]

Not sure he lives or dies based on insights, he will vary them from outlet to outlet depending on the tone and agenda of said publication, for example hes more sensational on talksport and keeps the inside information to push his own content. There is more then one stakeholder at play here and financial motivation is also play that conveys a message that brings into question objectivity and agenda. People are probably awed by being an "academic" - i definitely wouldn't be with much experience in that area myself both in practice and academia.

Which is fine, so he leaves himself open to constructive rebuttal and critique which i and others are providing on objectivity, competence and motivation, im sure his shoulders are broad enough.

It's hardly a rebuttal to say he's motivated by money, clicks, laughs, prestige or whatever. Nor is it a rebuttal to cast aspersions regarding academia or whether or not he's "chasing ambulances".

He's highlighted the main issues..... the depth of our recurring poor figures, our unprecedented/unexplainable adjustments, the auditing fiasco that reinforces those concerns and where we are regards the FFP, P&S and the resultant independent commision generally.

 

[Neiler]

It's hardly a rebuttal to say he's motivated by money, clicks, laughs, prestige or whatever. Nor is it a rebuttal to cast aspersions regarding academia or whether or not he's "chasing ambulances".

He's highlighted the main issues..... the depth of our recurring poor figures, our unprecedented/unexplainable adjustments, the auditing fiasco that reinforces those concerns and where we are regards the FFP, P&S and the resultant independent commision generally.

To be honest mate, you've just spent about 10 posts repeating "because hes an academic" to try and add credence to your point of view - speaking of weak debate points.

In your second paragraph - you are just going again - your having a circular argument with yourself - we know we are financial basket case - we called it long before Maguire. He hasn't really provided any deep dive analysis into our figures - he has provided click bait headlines for financial remuneration and own content creation - I've seen far deeper analysis - then beyond hes presuming guilt beyond due process and speculating on the outcome of a commission - he has no right or expertise to speculate on being an accountant. Being a financial basket case or not isn't my point though, I've told you what my critique is of him and the reasons for it.

 

[Tom Hughes]

Precisely mate.

@Tom Hughes asks for a challenege to Maguire on the content of his assessment of Everton's financial governance, and, of course, that challenge would be ridiculous. We can all see what a basket case the club have become...and some of us have been saying it for donkeys years without any assistance from an outside 'football industry expert'.

No, the real meat of any critique of Maguire has been his less than professional behaviour concerning his speculation over what the club are being specifically referred to a commission for (he doesn't know...only the club and the PL know), his projection forward of a likely and fitting punishment for the club (having already adjudged us 'guilty') and his leaking of private messaging into the public domain. @Tom Hughes though would appear to be intent on putting up a straw man rather than dealing with those errors in judgement of Maguire. Which is his prerogative, I suppose.

So you're not criticising any of his actual assessment of the figures nor concerns regarding the audit process?

He is perfectly within his rights to release any additional information he feels relevant if he's not subject to non-disclosure agreements etc. He's in a position to ask some of those involved the pertinent questions..... we should be interested in all of that information. The club have a long history of gagging former employees, controlling/cancelling AGMs and controlling media. You say that you know the club is a basketcase.... you just don't like outsiders saying it who have a far greater understanding of the numbers and industry.

 

[Yarrgh]

Kieran mate.

Kookookachoo. I think Kieran got banned.

 

[brieverton]

Have to say I'm uneasy with Maguire. This is a matter of the utmost seriousness for the club and its future.

To hear a professed expert on football finance not only judging the club guilty, but pronouncing likely punishment, before the commission has convened and heard submissions, seems to me entirely inappropriate. He is not just another guy giving his two cents on the internet.

Those who will eventually make up the commission could be hearing this in the media, or through their families and associates.

The case against the owner and board is one thing, but that's not actually the issue here. It's the clubs future that's on the line.

The pending hearing is the foremost concern, outside of avoiding relegation. The sort of discourse we've read and heard doesn't do anything to address the problems, it is potentially damaging publicity and the presentation of opinion as fact, when the club is in its most vulnerable state ever.

 

[Neiler]

So you're not criticising any of his actual assessment of the figures nor concerns regarding the audit process?

He is perfectly within his rights to release any additional information he feels relevant if he's not subject to non-disclosure agreements etc. He's in a position to ask some of those involved the pertinent questions..... we should be interested in all of that information. The club have a long history of gagging former employees, controlling/cancelling AGMs and controlling media. You say that you know the club is a basketcase.... you just don't like outsiders saying it who have a far greater understanding of the numbers and industry.

I dont think hes done a deep dive or strong analysis into the figures to be honest, i dont find his reporting strong, its mostly productive of sensationalised headlines or inside info scoops, so i dont think hes added a lot of nuance or additional information or value to the issue. That is separate from me thinking we are mess from a governance and management point of view financially, I've been saying it for years. I find the concern over the auditing piece - speculative.

From a rights point of view, of course, he's not breaking the law, equally he is there to be shot at, that's the gig he has chosen. I'm calling into question, his objectivity, motivation, and the degree his "analysis" is filtered for sensitization - "inside scoops" etc for financial remuneration - certainly - more so if it impacts the wellbeing of the institution, i have an issue with that - i can sperate the institution from the administration. Hes acting and reporting like prosecution, judge and sentencer to line his own pockets - way beyond his experience, knowledge and competence in finance - and ahead of due process. I can understand why the club was annoyed on his speculation ahead of due process, it influences the institutions case and thus wellbeing ahead of their right to due process.

 

[SydneyFan]

Does anyone know what the like punishment will be? Will it be a fine or points deduction this or next season?

Thanks.