-
Posts
5149 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
17
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Uncouth Garb - The BRFCS Store
Everything posted by Herbie6590
-
I was interviewed by Gregor Robertson for the Times last year for the 10 year anniversary (lack of modesty klaxon) & I likened Venky’s to someone who buys a stately home, sacks all the gardeners & maintenance staff, then burns it to the ground...then thinks...”Perhaps we should think about rebuilding it ?” Only now, they’ve reverted to Venky’s 1.0 & seem set upon a course of further destruction of the legacy.
-
In the words of Vic & Bob I just couldn’t let it lie....😉 Upon checking...the share capital increases are with the parent company VLL. The company that is subject to FFP is the football trading entity BRFC (per Kieran Maguire’s podcast) not the parent. Let’s look at the BRFC figures then to see what V’s have injected... June 16 - share capital £146.9m, loans from parent £87.2m June 19 - share capital unchanged, parent loans £126.8m The owner has therefore introduced funds of....£39.6m...spooky (!)...over a 3 year period. This suggests that Rovers are sailing close to the FFP wind as of June 19. The June 20 numbers will reflect some of the Covid impacts but the June 21 ones will potentially be a bloodbath....hence the whole Brockhall project IMHO...
-
The purpose of the Academy is two-fold, provide first team players, then sell them to help fund the clubs working capital. If we lose Cat 1 status, both of those become harder. Developing other clubs players of course helps them....so it would be perverse in the extreme to pursue that intellectual argument....*insert pithy comment here* 🤨
-
https://www.mikethornton.xyz/ffp-and-p-and-s/ if a club loses more than £39m via the FFP calculation it is subject to penalty. If the club is to continue trading, it must pay its bills so it either borrows more or the owners put more share capital in to provide working capital. Owners can put in more than the £39m if they choose....but the funds would not mitigate the FFP fail & the idea is that a fine would be imposed to negate the impact of the cash injection. So in practice...they are restricted as to what they can invest. The FFP calculation isn’t just a case of adding up 3 years P&L numbers. It is an adjusted calculation. So owners are allowed to invest extra on allowable expenditure e.g. stadium redevelopment, training ground etc. So Venky’s could well have been investing more than £39m gross...because some of that is allowable.
-
They aren’t different for FFP. A club can lose up to £39m in a 3 year cycle...though that has been extended due to COVID. When a club loses money, the owner can invest up to £39m to cover those losses via loans or share capital. We must be perilously close to the FFP threshold before COVID. This whole proposal is to my mind to bring us back in line. It has nothing to do with improving facilities.