Financial Fair Play investigation

[Neiler]

Do you seriously think I want Everton to be in this position?

Like saying I want Everton to lose. I never want us to lose.

However, people need to seriously wake up and stop living in delusions

We are in this position due to severe errors in judgment from highly paid executives

There needs to be consequences for that. Big ones.

I think you find it hard to separate an agenda against the board and view issues objectively not through that prison mate. You do seem a bit excited that this is happening as it’s ammunition to fire. That only leads to a sense that you aren’t being objective in reviewing the issue in isolation in terms of due process and dynamic amongst the stakeholders.

 

[Damo_1878]

I think you find it hard to separate an agenda against the board and view issues not through that prison mate. You do seem a bit excited that this is happening as it’s ammunition to fire. That only leads to a sense that you aren’t being objective in reviewing the issue in isolation in terms of due process and dynamic amongst the stakeholders.

I'm not having that Neiler. "Excited"

I'm very very angry about it is what I am

The fact people still seem to be deflecting blame elsewhere is frankly ridiculous too

It illustrates the culture that Bill Kenwright has introduced and played off

 

[catcherintherye]

I just think its silly people keep saying "They signed off" no backsys.

Im pretty sure club accounts are fairly complex things, so when they are handed in, somebody looks and says sound, but then maybe they get reviewed over time?

Im baffled how people can argue we didnt break any rules, we made an utter mockery of them, for 4 whole years, im just shocked it took them so long.

I mean they did sign them off. That means they accepted the content of them.

And yes, there is the possibility things get reviewed over time, and they may have made a mistake in doing so. But if a regulator, who's job it is to uphold the rules makes a mistake, I'm not entirely sure why someone trying to follow the rules is held accountable. That is a PL mistake, and whoever signed them off should be culpable.

On the final point, we can all have our opinions. But the facts remains, we submitted audited accounts, signed off by Accounting and legal specialists, who were then examined by the PL's accounting & legal specialists who stated that they were fully compliant with P&S. I will take those experts judgements over my own.

I'm not sure you can have a legal system, whereby a judge/jury can find someone innocent of a crime, and then 2 weeks later decide they want to change their mind, with no evidence changing, and just run the trial again to get a guilty verdict. That is behaviour of a tinpot dictatorship, even if the plaintiff in question was guilty.

 

[Dymak]

Every club has to submit a projection of their accounts in the !arch before the end of the financial year mate - so the PL had out projection in March 22. They have the projection for 23 right now.

How confident are we that our projection from last year had us continuing to break the rules 12 months down the line, and the PL just said “yeah sound, no problem”?

I believe that Everton conversed with the PL over what Covid deductions were allowed, which is what the PL were referring to when they said there was no case to answer. But I don’t believe that the PL have been holding Everton’s hand so much that they have been overseeing every transaction since then, nor should they.

Everton know the rules, it’s Everton’s responsibility to abide by them not the PL’s, and we certainly wouldn’t have a situation where the PL are effectively administrating Everton’s accounts to a point that they continue to be in breach of the rules a year later.

 

[catcherintherye]

It would allow things to come to light

Things that would enable Moshiri to act

What things would the EGM bring to light that are not already publicly known? Moshiri doesn't need an EGM to know this information. I'm not against an EGM, but it will not achieve the things you think it will.

 

[Librarian]

 

[Damo_1878]

What things would the EGM bring to light that are not already publicly known? Moshiri doesn't need an EGM to know this information. I'm not against an EGM, but it will not achieve the things you think it will.

A meeting of the shareholders is a legal meeting. Records are taken of it

I think you'll find it will

 

[good times bad times]

Point of order:

Just because someone wants the people who run the club held accountable for this fiasco doesn't mean they also want the club punished with fines/transfer bans/points deductions.

Carry on.

 

[catcherintherye]

The PL have clearly bollocksed this up. It's clear now that the club statment yesterday (interpreted as bravado by some) was exasperation at a baffling decision given what had been agreed (and passed on to other clubs it appears).

On point 1: maybe their hasn't been a transgression in the context you state that certain costs that weren't include in P&L now are included. The laywyers will sort that one out. I'm just looking at the spending EFC made in relation to other clubs and thinking that looks a lot out of line with what others spent.

Yes there are numerous options and until we see the acocunts hard to say.

The two most likely are either that EFC have included uncrystalised losses in 2021/22 that have not been accepted by the PL. Or that previous accepted uncrystalised losses have now been rejected. If it's the former we are in a weaker position, but there seems to be some position it is the latter.

 

[Damo_1878]

Point of order:

Just because someone wants the people who run the club held accountable for this fiasco doesn't mean they also want the club punished with fines/transfer bans/points deductions.

Carry on.

Thank you.

Useful to remind people.

 

[catcherintherye]

A meeting of the shareholders is a legal meeting. Records are taken of it

I think you'll find it will

I know what an EGM is mate.
But it being legal meeting will make no difference to Moshiri's thinking. It is not the lack of a legal meeting that is preventing him removing the board. People will ask for the board to go, and 95%+ of the shareholders who want the board to say will vote it down.
The PL could remove the board. There is a valid question as to why haven't they?

 

[catcherintherye]

Point of order:

Just because someone wants the people who run the club held accountable for this fiasco doesn't mean they also want the club punished with fines/transfer bans/points deductions.

Carry on.

Which is fine, but why argue against a penalty that punishes the board, not the club?

 

[Damo_1878]

I know what an EGM is mate.
But it being legal meeting will make no difference to Moshiri's thinking. It is not the lack of a legal meeting that is preventing him removing the board. People will ask for the board to go, and 95%+ of the shareholders who want the board to say will vote it down.
The PL could remove the board. There is a valid question as to why haven't they?

The Premier League won't do that without a legal basis to do that. By statute etc.

You're telling them to intervene.

They didn't in Chelsea. The UK Government did under the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport did under the Russian sanctions legislation. A very clear legal basis.

To force a board change the Premier League would need to prove wrong doing.

Such as a finding against the club at an independent commission.

They can only act after the fact.

 

[Dymak]

View attachment 207401

But we weren’t in breach of the rules at the points in time that these people are referring to, and therefore we weren’t the subject of any punishment or restriction at that time.

The ‘no case to answer for’ wasn’t a go ahead to breach the restrictions in the future when no special Covid rules apply. It was a comment applicable to the state of play at the time the comments were made.

 

[good times bad times]

Which is fine, but why argue against a penalty that punishes the board, not the club?

If the penalty was that the owner and board are banned from carrying out financial business on behalf of the club then I'm sure we'd (nearly) all be delighted with that.