Times article, Burnley/Leeds threaten to sue Everton

[ste d' indica]

That's me that is!!


edit - I mean I do the noddy thing, I'm not Susie Dent like.

 

[catcherintherye]

Heck, we might even have a billionaire accountant who knows a thing or two about accounts and accounting giving it a thorough look through.

Yes. On top of all the independent accountants who have signed off on these accounts, we have a highly qualified accountant in charge.

I would trust that, over sports journalists, who know frankly very little about accounting or legality. The latest in the BBC gets completely the wrong year, when looking at accounts. A very very basic mistake, thinking what has happened in 2022 would reflect in accounts that consider performance up to the early part of 2021.

The problem is though, that latter group, of largely ignorant people, who can't even get the year correct, dictate the narrative, and the herd, rather than being educated on why it is wrong, assume there is some sort of conspiracy.

The reason why the Mykolenko, Patterson etc signing arent showing, is because those accounts for that period are yet to be published. There's no conspiracy. Not that you will get that from 90% of the onlooker though.

 

[degsy]

It’ll probably only be one club after one of them stays up

True.
Burnley are not too squeaky clean over in their own glass house, funny how we're 4pts up with 1 to play, they pipe up now.
The PL ( for their own nefarious reasons no doubt) have more or less rubber stamped our accounts and they'll not let their whole house of cards come under public legal scrutiny.
They sacked Dyche in a Hail Mary move, I'm not sure what trumps that but this is it.

It's a pity Burnley and Leeds (dirty, dirty, Leeds) can't both go down...you sort of expect this stuff from Leeds, I thought Burnley were a bit better than that - the everday fan probably is, but the suits / money men are in the driving seat.

 

[everton fan number one]

I'm not sure why Arsenal would be bothered. But again, the legal action would be against the PL for not enacting the rules properly. As has been stated, I'm not sure you can sue a business for poor financial performance. That would be absurd.
They could perhaps sue Everton if it was felt they had knowingly tried to mislead the PL. But given the accounts have been signed off independently, and also accepted by the PL, and there have been ongoing discussions with the PL, it would be almost impossible to substantiate such a claim.
Any impartial court would recognise Everton as a business have gone over and above in ensuring the PL were given all of the information.

It will never go to court m8. There is an agreement in the contract to go to an arbitrator who has limited powers who at worst who will simply ask whether the Prem considered a point deduction.

 

[Martin Alvito]

All I am hearing here is how much the PL television contract is worth, and how desperately these clubs are willing to spend on litigation to chase their share.

The degree to which the money has corrupted the game turns my stomach.

 

[Martin Alvito]

There was a massive reduction in spend. I don't think that point could even be contested.

It cannot. It is an empirical fact backed by actual evidence.

 

[WestStandLower]

But the 20/21 interim numbers have been with the PL since March 21 mate, our financial year ended in July 21, the PL have these figures for a long time and by all accounts have been aware, working with the club and in dialogue around them, setting budgets and limits on what we can spend and sanctioning deals. To my mind there is a process in place and we have been constant communication around our compliance. Our new financial year 21/22 ends in short weeks - they would have those projected figures in March 22, so 20/21 figures were the grievance is, is almost a year old at this stage.

Untill the audited 20/21 figures ( accounts) were submitted the interim figures would more based on cash flow . The PL will be looking to ensure in March 21 that Everton would have been able to finance the 21/22 season hence why I suspect they took such a keen interest your budget.

In March 21 you still had a quarter of the trading year left irrespective the PL can not apply any full scrutiny of the 21/22 year until after the audited accounts are submitted and as I said earlier we don’t know when that was do although we do know they had to be submitted by 31/3/222 almost certainly alongside the 21/22 interim numbers.

What we do know is that in the 21/22 accounts Everton have stated that the losses quantifiable due to COVID and crystalsed in 19/20& 20/21 numbers as being £82.1 million. The accounts also state that over the two years a £40 ish million impairment charge and another £11 million ish onerous sum was paid out due to COVID so that is £82 +£40+£11 = £133 million over two years averaged = £66 million. That sum wouldn’t be large enough, even if it all were agreed. Indeed it’s common practice to show sums in respect of impairment so it would be questionable to think that all was due to COVID but let’s work on the basis it was.

I wonder if there was a sort of clue in the narrative as to problems going forward when you read what the club said in the notes that accompanied the accounts:


“The Club is continuing to assess the uncrystallised financial impact caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and the Board of Directors strongly believe that a further substantial sum financially not reflected in the £82.1m cumulative crystallised figure referred to opposite, has been incurred by the club.”

 

[Yorkie89]

True.
Burnley are not too squeaky clean over in their own glass house, funny how we're 4pts up with 1 to play, they pipe up now.

Yeah exactly and they’ve both got very difficult games in context of how the season has gone. I would prefer Leeds to go down but if either went I wouldn’t be that bothered haha.

Leeds have their own issues and their fans aren’t exactly loving their club nothing like our fans do and what they’ve done for the team in the last couple of months to get through this has been nothing short of phenomenal yet other clubs don’t do it

 

[Neiler]

The reason that projected accounts have to go to the PL in the March of the financial year is to allow the PL the opportunity to apply sanctions in the season in question, if there was going to be a sanction for 20/21 it would have been done in 20/21.

The sanctions in the PL hand book are as follows:

• E.15.1. to require the Club to submit, agree and adhere to a budget
• E.15.2. to require the Club to provide such further information as the Board shall
  determine and for such period as it shall determine; and
• E.15.3. to refuse any application by that Club to register any Player or any new contract of an existing Player of that Club if the Board reasonably deems that this is necessary in order to ensure that the Club complies with its obligations listed in Rule E.14.7.

In truth sanctions are unlimited, but i thik we are in rule E.15.1 already. To my mind "the club working closely and in constant dialogue with the PL" is code for us being subject to rule E.15.1 above, being subject to an agreed budget and an agreement in terms of player trading – i.e. the club having to seek approval or agree to parameters to enable them to buy a player. Those conditions have clearly been a limit on what could we spend without player trading, or indeed take on in wages.

To my mind this is the position of the club and the PL. I think the PL and Everton have a strong position to say the rule has been applied if it ever comes to it, which i dont think it will, as everyone in the power that be seem happy with our submitted accounts. You cant say that the limit on our budget or the need to sell some of our best and most creative players hasn't had an impact or sanction - look at the season we just had.

I think we are in a very strong and comfortable position.

 

[Phil Rodgers]

Thoughts on the media releasing this FFP story the day after we ensured survival despite the fact Snitch FC & Grass United sent this letter last week?

It's almost as if they have an agenda

 

[Neiler]

Untill the audited 20/21 figures ( accounts) were submitted the interim figures would more based on cash flow . The PL will be looking to ensure in March 21 that Everton would have been able to finance the 21/22 season hence why I suspect they took such a keen interest your budget.

In March 21 you still had a quarter of the trading year left irrespective the PL can not apply any full scrutiny of the 21/22 year until after the audited accounts are submitted and as I said earlier we don’t know when that was do although we do know they had to be submitted by 31/3/222 almost certainly alongside the 21/22 interim numbers.

What we do know is that in the 21/22 accounts Everton have stated that the losses quantifiable due to COVID and crystalsed in 19/20& 20/21 numbers as being £82.1 million. The accounts also state that over the two years a £40 ish million impairment charge and another £11 million ish onerous sum was paid out due to COVID so that is £82 +£40+£11 = £133 million over two years averaged = £66 million. That sum wouldn’t be large enough, even if it all were agreed. Indeed it’s common practice to show sums in respect of impairment so it would be questionable to think that all was due to COVID but let’s work on the basis it was.

I wonder if there was a sort of clue in the narrative as to problems going forward when you read what the club said in the notes that accompanied the accounts:


“The Club is continuing to assess the uncrystallised financial impact caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and the Board of Directors strongly believe that a further substantial sum financially not reflected in the £82.1m cumulative crystallised figure referred to opposite, has been incurred by the club.”

The reason that projected accounts have to go to the PL in the March of the financial year is to allow the PL the opportunity to apply sanctions in the season in question, if there was going to be a sanction for 20/21 it would have been done in 20/21.

The sanctions in the PL hand book are as follows:

• E.15.1. to require the Club to submit, agree and adhere to a budget
• E.15.2. to require the Club to provide such further information as the Board shall
  determine and for such period as it shall determine; and
• E.15.3. to refuse any application by that Club to register any Player or any new contract of an existing Player of that Club if the Board reasonably deems that this is necessary in order to ensure that the Club complies with its obligations listed in Rule E.14.7.

In truth sanctions are unlimited, but i thik we are in rule E.15.1 already. To my mind "the club working closely and in constant dialogue with the PL" is code for us being subject to rule E.15.1 above, being subject to an agreed budget and an agreement in terms of player trading – i.e. the club having to seek approval or agree to parameters to enable them to buy a player. Those conditions have clearly been a limit on what could we spend without player trading, or indeed take on in wages.

To my mind this is the position of the club and the PL. This is very indictitive of our expiernce and action in the summer on 20/21 in the transfer window. I think the PL and Everton have a strong position to say the rule has been applied if it ever comes to it, which i dont think it will, as everyone in the power that be seem happy with our submitted accounts. You cant say that the limit on our budget or the need to sell some of our best and most creative players hasn't had an impact or sanction - look at the season we just had.

I think we are in a very strong and comfortable position.

 

[catcherintherye]

The reason that projected accounts have to go to the PL in the March of the financial year is to allow the PL the opportunity to apply sanctions in the season in question, if there was going to be a sanction for 20/21 it would have been done in 20/21.

The sanctions in the PL hand book are as follows:

• E.15.1. to require the Club to submit, agree and adhere to a budget
• E.15.2. to require the Club to provide such further information as the Board shall
  determine and for such period as it shall determine; and
• E.15.3. to refuse any application by that Club to register any Player or any new contract of an existing Player of that Club if the Board reasonably deems that this is necessary in order to ensure that the Club complies with its obligations listed in Rule E.14.7.

In truth sanctions are unlimited, but i thik we are in rule E.15.1 already. To my mind "the club working closely and in constant dialogue with the PL" is code for us being subject to rule E.15.1 above, being subject to an agreed budget and an agreement in terms of player trading – i.e. the club having to seek approval or agree to parameters to enable them to buy a player. Those conditions have clearly been a limit on what could we spend without player trading, or indeed take on in wages.

To my mind this is the position of the club and the PL. I think the PL and Everton have a strong position to say the rule has been applied if it ever comes to it, which i dont think it will, as everyone in the power that be seem happy with our submitted accounts. You cant say that the limit on our budget or the need to sell some of our best and most creative players hasn't had an impact or sanction - look at the season we just had.

I think we are in a very strong and comfortable position.

I mean that looks almost like sanction 15.1 doesnt it?

The only caveat is, both parties have entered it voluntarily, before any breach has officially occurred. In any court, that would be viewed positively for both the PL and EFC.

It is yet more evidence the club have attempted to, and stayed within the rules.

 

[catcherintherye]

Thoughts on the media releasing this FFP story the day after we ensured survival despite the fact Snitch FC & Grass United sent this letter last week?

It's almost as if they have an agenda

It generates clicks on a slow news day.

 

[Death]

That what though?

Cry me a river. I hope both go down now.

I've came close to pulling my eyes out looking at Burnley thats a claim.

Atleast a sentence on mass torture they should get

 

[everton fan number one]

The reason that projected accounts have to go to the PL in the March of the financial year is to allow the PL the opportunity to apply sanctions in the season in question, if there was going to be a sanction for 20/21 it would have been done in 20/21.

The sanctions in the PL hand book are as follows:

• E.15.1. to require the Club to submit, agree and adhere to a budget
• E.15.2. to require the Club to provide such further information as the Board shall
  determine and for such period as it shall determine; and
• E.15.3. to refuse any application by that Club to register any Player or any new contract of an existing Player of that Club if the Board reasonably deems that this is necessary in order to ensure that the Club complies with its obligations listed in Rule E.14.7.

In truth sanctions are unlimited, but i thik we are in rule E.15.1 already. To my mind "the club working closely and in constant dialogue with the PL" is code for us being subject to rule E.15.1 above, being subject to an agreed budget and an agreement in terms of player trading – i.e. the club having to seek approval or agree to parameters to enable them to buy a player. Those conditions have clearly been a limit on what could we spend without player trading, or indeed take on in wages.

To my mind this is the position of the club and the PL. I think the PL and Everton have a strong position to say the rule has been applied if it ever comes to it, which i dont think it will, as everyone in the power that be seem happy with our submitted accounts. You cant say that the limit on our budget or the need to sell some of our best and most creative players hasn't had an impact or sanction - look at the season we just had.

I think we are in a very strong and comfortable position.

The sanctions are at section W, and apply for any breach of the rules, E15 is an additional extra power the Prem has.