News:

Use a VPN to stream games Safely and Securely 🔒
A Virtual Private Network can also allow you to
watch games Not being broadcast in the UK For
more Information and how to Sign Up go to
https://go.nordvpn.net/SH4FE

Main Menu


I know that I'm stupid, but

Started by H4usuallysitting, December 24, 2015, 03:25:54 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

H4usuallysitting

If we knew this FFP was coming - then why didn't the Jags sponsor us last season....I don't know, maybe a nice round figure like £20m would of been a start....oh I forgot, we're a sustainable club.....Fulham Football Club, a managerless sustainable Club.......someone somewhere is having a laugh.     :merry christmas:

ToodlesMcToot

Quote from: H4usuallysitting on December 24, 2015, 03:25:54 PM
If we knew this FFP was coming - then why didn't the Jags sponsor us last season....I don't know, maybe a nice round figure like £20m would of been a start....oh I forgot, we're a sustainable club.....Fulham Football Club, a managerless sustainable Club.......someone somewhere is having a laugh.     :merry christmas:

As has been said before here, those kinds of arrangements are only legal under FFP if the sponsorship price tag is reasonably in line with "the going rate" for such things. I doubt that anyone would accept that a sponsorship for FFC is worthy of 20 million/season <<< if that was the arrangement you intended.
"Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man." — The Dude

Asotosyios

Perhaps because it's not really allowed to take some money from your right pocket and put it in your left?


H4usuallysitting

Man City do it......I know they don't have FFP.....but the shirt and stadium naming rights are a price that can be plucked out of the air....

Asotosyios

I don't remember very well, but if I'm not wrong UEFA took that into account when they punished them last year.

H4usuallysitting

As far as I know UEFA in the end turned a bit of a blind eye, as representatives of City were taking UEFA to court


H4usuallysitting

City were initially fined £50m and had a transfer embargo imposed......after threats of court action, the fine was £16m and no transfer embargo.......last season they supposedly/allegedly spent £130m on transfers

The Old Count

Does anyone think MAF would have unearthed 'creative solutions' to FFP?

He certainly did with RTG Capital Right Off through Offshore Shells that allowed him to 'offset' HMRC liabilities through FFC.

Khan comes across as unimaginative when it comes to dealing with FFP.  Probably because he doesn't spend much time thinking about Fulham Football Club.

f321ffc

Quote from: The Old Count on December 24, 2015, 08:49:30 PM
Does anyone think MAF would have unearthed 'creative solutions' to FFP?

He certainly did with RTG Capital Right Off through Offshore Shells that allowed him to 'offset' HMRC liabilities through FFC.

Khan comes across as unimaginative when it comes to dealing with FFP.  Probably because he doesn't spend much time thinking about Fulham Football Club.

Mo would have had his brief all over the FFP rules and would have been looking forward to a day in court.
Growing old is mandatory
Growing up is optional


MJG

UEFA have their own rules

PL have their own rules

FL have their own rules

No one set of rules are the same and all have different consequences. Talking about rules outside of the championship at this time or giving examples like Man City are pointless in relation to this embargo

The Old Count

Quote from: f321ffc on December 24, 2015, 08:53:21 PM
Quote from: The Old Count on December 24, 2015, 08:49:30 PM
Does anyone think MAF would have unearthed 'creative solutions' to FFP?

He certainly did with RTG Capital Right Off through Offshore Shells that allowed him to 'offset' HMRC liabilities through FFC.

Khan comes across as unimaginative when it comes to dealing with FFP.  Probably because he doesn't spend much time thinking about Fulham Football Club.

Mo would have had his brief all over the FFP rules and would have been looking forward to a day in court.
MAF would have worked out that certain expenditure can be accounted for elsewhere and costs related to management can be paid through 'other channels'. Then, if the Football League didn't like it, he would shuffle the case off to court.

Riverside

Sadly I think FFP means that MAF could never have done what he did .

It seems to me that FFP is simply protecting the bigger clubs and stopping a millionaire bank rolling a small club into the big time .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Beamer

Whatever the rights and wrongs of the argument about the legality/fairness of the rules, we either knew we were going to be in breach and hoped to get away with it because we felt that we needed to spend the money (not that it has done us much good) or we mis-judged the monies coming in and going out. Either way it is a massive misjudgment, which in any sensible business scenario would have seen heads rolling - is there no accountability at the club at all. I cannot believe that Mr Khan made all his money by allowing his other businesses to be run like this one is ie a shambles.