FFP breakdown

[The Rational Fan]

But the statutory accounts are not the same as the FFP accounts.

I wanted to laugh when I read our new assistant DOF job description, as it seems half of his work is with the youth and so half his wages would be FFP exempt (this may be the case but it could also be avoiding FFP). It says "His primary focus will be on embedding the Club's playing philosophy through all Fulham's teams, from youth level to the first team". Although, a less honest club may have given Javier Pereira the job title of assistant youth DOF because then none of his wage would have to be included in FFP.

As a rule of thumb, I think we can spend upto £5m per year on youth development thats FFP exempt. I don't think we spend that much yet, but if we lose parachute payments and have no one left to sell, then I expect that Fulham will try to corner every teenager in the country outspending everyone on youth for a 5 year plan for premier league push.

[The Rational Fan]

My guess now we have caught up a bit of the gap  to WBA and some good teams are getting relegated, he will use some of the wiggle room to go for promotion this season rather than next.

This last bit is what fascinates me on the topic.

We discuss everything under the sun on this forum and how it may affect the future of the club. yet arguably the biggest factor of finance is misunderstood by many (including myself).

At a glance you should be able to look at any club and understand where they sit on the FFP scale - do they need to sell players, do they have money to spend etc, yet you never hear anything regarding their status until they are getting a 12 point deduction or has gone into administration. Its madness!

The problem with FFP, like spending in life, is you tend to keep spending or investing until it's all gone. It's hard to say don't spend now, we have a better chance of saving some money (which would have made sense last season) and having a promotion push the next season. The tempetation is get one more player and we will get promoted this season with EPL TV money waiting, but when you don't get promoted and you're trimming the squad without adding anything much.

This season is a great example, we want to get another few loan players but we win every game before the playoffs and WBA wins every game except against us, then they go up. So many options, maybe it's better to build a promotion push for next season, but then what teams are going down. If West Ham goes down and goes all out for promotion, I cannot see them failing. So maybe its better to try this season. Who knows, but we must prioritize now or later.

I think we will be in real financial trouble if not promoted by 30th May 2021, which is the summer that I think Parker will transform from a novice manager to a top manager. We won't be in FFP trouble, but we will be trying to get promoted with best players like Reed, Onamah and Kamara, which would test Parker as a coach.

[The Rational Fan]

I'd point out one thing we do know about our FFP situation and that is TK had the money to sign Hector for the entire season surely with wintertransfer budget (e.g Kongolo and Archer), so we know he hasnt spent the money saved on Hector for the first half of the season. TK can choose use it now or next season.

[Sting of the North]

I'd point out one thing we do know about our FFP situation and that is TK had the money to sign Hector for the entire season surely with wintertransfer budget (e.g Kongolo and Archer), so we know he hasnt spent the money saved on Hector for the first half of the season. TK can choose use it now or next season.

I agree that we do know for sure that TK claimed to have to money for the Hector transfer (and as such it is reasonable to take his word for it), he did never claim as far as I know that he had a winter transfer budget. So, again this is guess work. We therefore don't know that he hasn't spent any money saved on Hector.

[charlieFFC]

At a glance you should be able to look at any club and understand where they sit on the FFP scale

Agree, whole thing should be more transparent

Perhaps not in real time, because that may prejudice clubs in negotiations, eg if everyone knows they're loaded

But IMO the rules (including accounting standards etc) should all be published and so should every club's accounts shortly after each season ends

Yep, would be extremely difficult to do in real time due to the issue you mentioned.

It wouldn't surprise me if there are math geniuses backing and laying long term bets on football clubs based off FFP.

It seems to me to be a cloudy area that if you can decipher a clubs state then you can heavily predict their intention in the coming seasons.

The accounts should be published on 31st July each year, it is crazy to let teams like Wolves join the premier league and then half way through the season see if they cheated to get there. Fulham and most other teams publish their figures around March of the next year, so already know next year's result.

Fulham's FFP position is we have money now, but we are burning it fast. Next season to get automatic promotion, we will have to finish ahead of teams with more expensive squads. The season after to get in the playoffs, we will have to finish ahead of teams with higher wages bill. The Fulham Accounts really show that this squad needs to get out of this division before in 2021/22 we are in the similar financial position to Middlesbrough and QPR.

Scary stuff - this is what I mean by if we were to lose in play off final for arguments sake

We would probably be up there as a favorite to go up next season so you could probably get a "decent" price for Fulham to not be in the premier league for 5 years.

[The Rational Fan]

At a glance you should be able to look at any club and understand where they sit on the FFP scale

Agree, whole thing should be more transparent

Perhaps not in real time, because that may prejudice clubs in negotiations, eg if everyone knows they're loaded

But IMO the rules (including accounting standards etc) should all be published and so should every club's accounts shortly after each season ends

Yep, would be extremely difficult to do in real time due to the issue you mentioned.

It wouldn't surprise me if there are math geniuses backing and laying long term bets on football clubs based off FFP.

It seems to me to be a cloudy area that if you can decipher a clubs state then you can heavily predict their intention in the coming seasons.

The accounts should be published on 31st July each year, it is crazy to let teams like Wolves join the premier league and then half way through the season see if they cheated to get there. Fulham and most other teams publish their figures around March of the next year, so already know next year's result.

Fulham's FFP position is we have money now, but we are burning it fast. Next season to get automatic promotion, we will have to finish ahead of teams with more expensive squads. The season after to get in the playoffs, we will have to finish ahead of teams with higher wages bill. The Fulham Accounts really show that this squad needs to get out of this division before in 2021/22 we are in the similar financial position to Middlesbrough and QPR.

Scary stuff - this is what I mean by if we were to lose in play off final for arguments sake

We would probably be up there as a favorite to go up next season so you could probably get a "decent" price for Fulham to not be in the premier league for 5 years.

There is a very high chance we will be out of the premier league for 5 years, but FFP cannot hold a club that is investing behind forever. Firstly, we could dramatically increase our investment in youth and that will payoff in 5 years. Secondly, we don't have the money to buy great players but unlike Fulham  1982-83 even with FFP we have the money to keep a good squad together. Thirdly, parachute payments hold a club back from cleaning out the deadwood and starting again, because you want to get promoted before they run out. If Fulham get to a point they know they need a five year plan to get back in the premier league, selling everyone over 27 years old and rebuilding it might not be the worst. Although, I'd prefer promotion this season or next.

[Roberty]

I'd point out one thing we do know about our FFP situation and that is TK had the money to sign Hector for the entire season surely with wintertransfer budget (e.g Kongolo and Archer), so we know he hasnt spent the money saved on Hector for the first half of the season. TK can choose use it now or next season.

I agree that we do know for sure that TK claimed to have to money for the Hector transfer (and as such it is reasonable to take his word for it), he did never claim as far as I know that he had a winter transfer budget. So, again this is guess work. We therefore don't know that he hasn't spent any money saved on Hector.

What money saved on Hector ???

He's been our player since September we just couldn't register him so that he could play

[The Rational Fan]

I'd point out one thing we do know about our FFP situation and that is TK had the money to sign Hector for the entire season surely with wintertransfer budget (e.g Kongolo and Archer), so we know he hasnt spent the money saved on Hector for the first half of the season. TK can choose use it now or next season.

I agree that we do know for sure that TK claimed to have to money for the Hector transfer (and as such it is reasonable to take his word for it), he did never claim as far as I know that he had a winter transfer budget. So, again this is guess work. We therefore don't know that he hasn't spent any money saved on Hector.

What money saved on Hector ???

He's been our player since September we just couldn't register him so that he could play

Amortization is spread over the period that the player is registered for the club for the life of his first contract. So, we only pay 1/5th of the transfer fee this season, instead of 2/5th if he was registered at the start of the season. The money is saved this season, but we still need to pay it later.

[charlieFFC]

At a glance you should be able to look at any club and understand where they sit on the FFP scale

Agree, whole thing should be more transparent

Perhaps not in real time, because that may prejudice clubs in negotiations, eg if everyone knows they're loaded

But IMO the rules (including accounting standards etc) should all be published and so should every club's accounts shortly after each season ends

Yep, would be extremely difficult to do in real time due to the issue you mentioned.

It wouldn't surprise me if there are math geniuses backing and laying long term bets on football clubs based off FFP.

It seems to me to be a cloudy area that if you can decipher a clubs state then you can heavily predict their intention in the coming seasons.

The accounts should be published on 31st July each year, it is crazy to let teams like Wolves join the premier league and then half way through the season see if they cheated to get there. Fulham and most other teams publish their figures around March of the next year, so already know next year's result.

Fulham's FFP position is we have money now, but we are burning it fast. Next season to get automatic promotion, we will have to finish ahead of teams with more expensive squads. The season after to get in the playoffs, we will have to finish ahead of teams with higher wages bill. The Fulham Accounts really show that this squad needs to get out of this division before in 2021/22 we are in the similar financial position to Middlesbrough and QPR.

Scary stuff - this is what I mean by if we were to lose in play off final for arguments sake

We would probably be up there as a favorite to go up next season so you could probably get a "decent" price for Fulham to not be in the premier league for 5 years.

There is a very high chance we will be out of the premier league for 5 years, but FFP cannot hold a club that is investing behind forever. Firstly, we could dramatically increase our investment in youth and that will payoff in 5 years. Secondly, we don't have the money to buy great players but unlike Fulham  1982-83 even with FFP we have the money to keep a good squad together. Thirdly, parachute payments hold a club back from cleaning out the deadwood and starting again, because you want to get promoted before they run out. If Fulham get to a point they know they need a five year plan to get back in the premier league, selling everyone over 27 years old and rebuilding it might not be the worst. Although, I'd prefer promotion this season or next.

Good points, I like how there are lots of different approaches and forks in he road.

Really interesting

[Logicalman]

........

Perhaps he can't get sued by the owner, but he can get sent to prison for fraudulent accounting.

My understanding (which admittedly isn't perfect) is that essentially, if you spend £25m on a player (eg Anguissa) you can't just make that disappear in the accounts.

What you can legitimately do, however, is say you've swapped £25m in cash for an asset worth £25m, and treat the value of that asset as amortising over the term of his contract, ie, rather than losing £25m up front, you lose £5m per year over five years as the player's book value reduces.

And if necessary, you can use 'impairment' to bring forward some of those losses, eg, bringing them into a season where you've a much higher revenue to offset them.

But I'm not sure how TK or AM could just keep a player's "book value at dishonestly high levels."

So how does that get accounted for where a players value rises? Is that the Book value you alluded to?  (If I'm reading this correctly)

[Statto]

........

Perhaps he can't get sued by the owner, but he can get sent to prison for fraudulent accounting.

My understanding (which admittedly isn't perfect) is that essentially, if you spend £25m on a player (eg Anguissa) you can't just make that disappear in the accounts.

What you can legitimately do, however, is say you've swapped £25m in cash for an asset worth £25m, and treat the value of that asset as amortising over the term of his contract, ie, rather than losing £25m up front, you lose £5m per year over five years as the player's book value reduces.

And if necessary, you can use 'impairment' to bring forward some of those losses, eg, bringing them into a season where you've a much higher revenue to offset them.

But I'm not sure how TK or AM could just keep a player's "book value at dishonestly high levels."

So how does that get accounted for where a players value rises? Is that the Book value you alluded to?  (If I'm reading this correctly)

The book value, as I understand it, is purely the most recent transfer fee paid for the player, amortizing at a steady rate, down to zero, over the term of their contract. Subject, as a I said, to impairment. I don't think you can just revise their value upward because you speculate that they've a higher market value, eg after a spell of good form.

However, if you sell the player for more than their book value, the difference is accounted for as a profit.

But I am not an accountant.

[Logicalman]

........

Perhaps he can't get sued by the owner, but he can get sent to prison for fraudulent accounting.

My understanding (which admittedly isn't perfect) is that essentially, if you spend £25m on a player (eg Anguissa) you can't just make that disappear in the accounts.

What you can legitimately do, however, is say you've swapped £25m in cash for an asset worth £25m, and treat the value of that asset as amortising over the term of his contract, ie, rather than losing £25m up front, you lose £5m per year over five years as the player's book value reduces.

And if necessary, you can use 'impairment' to bring forward some of those losses, eg, bringing them into a season where you've a much higher revenue to offset them.

But I'm not sure how TK or AM could just keep a player's "book value at dishonestly high levels."

So how does that get accounted for where a players value rises? Is that the Book value you alluded to?  (If I'm reading this correctly)

The book value, as I understand it, is purely the most recent transfer fee paid for the player, amortizing at a steady rate, down to zero, over the term of their contract. Subject, as a I said, to impairment. I don't think you can just revise their value upward because you speculate that they've a higher market value, eg after a spell of good form.

However, if you sell the player for more than their book value, the difference is accounted for as a profit.

But I am not an accountant.

Me neither, that's why I was interested.

[davew]

Fulham Accounts upto the 30th June 2018 has been released at https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/03374347/filing-history

What we really need to get a clear picture is the Fulham Accounts upto the 30th June 2019 that will probably be released around the 6th June 2020.

Ok, thanks for the link.

So is it theoretically possible come circa June 6th when results are published that we can have an exact number in mind that can be used for transfers / player wages.

I know I am being incredibly naive but it just frustrates me that there is an apparent FFP threshold number and all our financials are published yet we never know what maximum budget is available bu rather just people conjecturing on rumors, using FFP as an excuse.

I might be wrong (accountants sometimes are) but don´t they have to be submitted within 10 months of the financial year end?

[The Rational Fan]

........

Perhaps he can't get sued by the owner, but he can get sent to prison for fraudulent accounting.

My understanding (which admittedly isn't perfect) is that essentially, if you spend £25m on a player (eg Anguissa) you can't just make that disappear in the accounts.

What you can legitimately do, however, is say you've swapped £25m in cash for an asset worth £25m, and treat the value of that asset as amortising over the term of his contract, ie, rather than losing £25m up front, you lose £5m per year over five years as the player's book value reduces.

And if necessary, you can use 'impairment' to bring forward some of those losses, eg, bringing them into a season where you've a much higher revenue to offset them.

But I'm not sure how TK or AM could just keep a player's "book value at dishonestly high levels."

So how does that get accounted for where a players value rises? Is that the Book value you alluded to?  (If I'm reading this correctly)

The book value, as I understand it, is purely the most recent transfer fee paid for the player, amortizing at a steady rate, down to zero, over the term of their contract. Subject, as a I said, to impairment. I don't think you can just revise their value upward because you speculate that they've a higher market value, eg after a spell of good form.

However, if you sell the player for more than their book value, the difference is accounted for as a profit.

But I am not an accountant.

Correct, you cannot revise a players value upward (or more correctly 91 clubs don't and Derby's account amorizses differently) but until the accounts are officially released (8-10 months later) it would be very easy to fool around with the amount of impairment on a player, plus the accounts don't tell you what player was impaired.

For example, in 2017/18 we impaired player value by £5.5m which is probably meant to be Rui Fonte, but if we needed an extra money in 2018/19 the some could claim it was David Button then book a profit on his sale. Such a trick even if caught could be sold as an honest mistake, and the EFL has much more dishonest tricks going on with agents fees, stadium buybacks and others.

Another trick to accountancy is a club could sign an older player Glenn Murray on a five year contract say at £20,000 per week, because if we were honest he's worth £40k this year, £20k next and £10k per year after that. Note signing a young player like Steven Sessegnon or Marcus Rodak maybe the reserve affect. It would be expensive to extend Marcus Rodak to a five year contract, but in three years we could get £30m+.

[Statto]

@therationalfan

Again, you're referring to the statutory accounts and assuming the FFP accounts are the same

They're not, and I think it quite possibly (in fact, likely) that the FFP accounts detail exactly how things like amortisation are calculated (eg "what player was impaired") or at least, that the EFL can request that detail if the accounts appear suspicious

Also, I can't be bothered to check, but aren't our statutory (and I assume FFP) accounts audited, ie, confirmed by independent third party accountancy firm to be "true and fair"? In that case, you aren't going to see any "tricks" or dishonesty in there.

Edit - just checked, yes they're audited by KPMG, so you can assume every number in there has been diligently and honestly calculated

[The Rational Fan]

@therationalfan

Again, you're referring to the statutory accounts and assuming the FFP accounts are the same

They're not, and I think it quite possibly (in fact, likely) that the FFP accounts detail exactly how things like amortisation are calculated (eg "what player was impaired") or at least, that the EFL can request that detail if the accounts appear suspicious.

Also, I can't be bothered to check, but aren't our statutory (and I assume FFP) accounts audited, ie, confirmed by independent third party accountancy firm to be "true and fair"? In that case, you aren't going to see any "tricks" or dishonesty in there.

Edit - just checked, yes they're audited by KPMG, so you can assume every number in there has been diligently and honestly calculated.

An audit states an opinion that Fulham's numbers are diligent and honest, not necessarily that they are correct. If you were DOF, what is diligently and honestly calculation for Mawson right now? We bought him for around £15m, he is 3 half seasons though an 8 half-season contract, so cannot be more than £9.4m and injuries mean his value could be impaired a little, but any value between £6.4m and £9.4m would pass an audit.  Obviously, of other clubs bid for him £10m you couldn't impair his value, but if other clubs don't put in bids doesn't mean you have to impair him.

As another example, I seriously doubt Fulham would fail an audit if they didn't impair Seri's value below his book value (5/8 of what we bought him at), but they could also impair him a fair bit and get away with it. Can anyone state MLM value is (my opinion is not really), there is a massive range of acceptable values for him in an audit. As stated before, if our DOF wanted to buy players in June this season, he could keep Seri's value at full book value (half of what we bought him) until next season pre-season even if it's questionable whether Seri is worth that much.

To my knowledge, no club has even been in trouble for impairing or not impairing players sufficiently, most problems with Audits and FFP have been extremely dishonesty (e.g. Derby valuing their ground above any of 10,000 real estate agents would value it at). Adjust the value small amounts with every player and that adds up to quite a lot of wiggle room.

[Roberty]

@therationalfan

Again, you're referring to the statutory accounts and assuming the FFP accounts are the same

They're not, and I think it quite possibly (in fact, likely) that the FFP accounts detail exactly how things like amortisation are calculated (eg "what player was impaired") or at least, that the EFL can request that detail if the accounts appear suspicious

Also, I can't be bothered to check, but aren't our statutory (and I assume FFP) accounts audited, ie, confirmed by independent third party accountancy firm to be "true and fair"? In that case, you aren't going to see any "tricks" or dishonesty in there.

Edit - just checked, yes they're audited by KPMG, so you can assume every number in there has been diligently and honestly calculated

I admire your bravery with regard to the confidence you have in the integrity of auditors and the accountancy profession.

I think Arthur Anderson shredding the Enron papers would be the first public manifestation of their misdeeds but I'm sure it was not an isolated incident, they just happened to be the first to get caught.

In the days when AMSTRAD was a public company AMS had some scathing things to say about the competence of the accountants and consultants his share holders forced him to employ.

This lack of confidence might have something to do with why footballs ruling bodies do not take clubs accounts at face value but make their own investigation, which given the number who've been caught trying to fiddle the FFP is perhaps a fair an reasonable thing for them to do

[The Rational Fan]

@therationalfan

Again, you're referring to the statutory accounts and assuming the FFP accounts are the same

They're not, and I think it quite possibly (in fact, likely) that the FFP accounts detail exactly how things like amortisation are calculated (eg "what player was impaired") or at least, that the EFL can request that detail if the accounts appear suspicious

Also, I can't be bothered to check, but aren't our statutory (and I assume FFP) accounts audited, ie, confirmed by independent third party accountancy firm to be "true and fair"? In that case, you aren't going to see any "tricks" or dishonesty in there.

Edit - just checked, yes they're audited by KPMG, so you can assume every number in there has been diligently and honestly calculated

I admire your bravery with regard to the confidence you have in the integrity of auditors and the accountancy profession.

I think Arthur Anderson shredding the Enron papers would be the first public manifestation of their misdeeds but I'm sure it was not an isolated incident, they just happened to be the first to get caught.

In the days when AMSTRAD was a public company AMS had some scathing things to say about the competence of the accountants and consultants his share holders forced him to employ.

This lack of confidence might have something to do with why footballs ruling bodies do not take clubs accounts at face value but make their own investigation, which given the number who've been caught trying to fiddle the FFP is perhaps a fair an reasonable thing for them to do

These are two extreme viewpoints, Arthur Anderson is an extremely unethical and believed every assessment put in front of them, KPMG is one of the most credible auditor firms and trust their opinion that the accounts represent an accurate representation of the situation, but Tony Khan estimates player values for the accounts and KPMG gives an opinion if those numbers are honest.

If Tony Khan impaired Mitrovoics value, I am sure Arthur Anderson would have no problem and KPMG would have a problem. But Tony Khan could either i) impair Fabri's value from £3m down to zero or ii) place Fabri as our number two goalkeeper keeping his value at £3m and sell Betts for £3m; I can see the auditor calling both situations honest.

Fulham Accounts are clearly much more honest than most of the other teams, but if Parker really needed a right winger it could be done by keeping MLM value high until 2020 pre-season rather impairing him now.

Another example is It is quite obvious that if Mitrovoic had a career ending injury before the end of the season, Fulham would break FFP. If we were promoted with Mitrovoic having a possible career ending injury, do you think they might be a little optimistic about his return, not too keen to find out before July 2020 or would they announce we failed FFP possibly straight away getting an immediate points deduction. Lets just say if Mitrovoic said let me see my own doctors until a July 2020 and we can assess the injury pre-season Fulham might be very glad not to know until then.

The reason I am certain little fiddles are possible is because all the cases teams get in trouble for are laughable bad. Another classic example of a minor fiddle, it seems Javiers job description for Assistant DOF is half youth development planning, while I do think he does at least 20 hours per week on youth development I wouldn't be surprised if he worked 60 hours per week. If he does 20 hours per week on youth, the KPMG Auditors would check Javier spends 20 hours per week on youth and then allow him to book half his salary there, but they would not check if we only works 40 hours per week.

[Roberty]

@therationalfan

Again, you're referring to the statutory accounts and assuming the FFP accounts are the same

They're not, and I think it quite possibly (in fact, likely) that the FFP accounts detail exactly how things like amortisation are calculated (eg "what player was impaired") or at least, that the EFL can request that detail if the accounts appear suspicious

Also, I can't be bothered to check, but aren't our statutory (and I assume FFP) accounts audited, ie, confirmed by independent third party accountancy firm to be "true and fair"? In that case, you aren't going to see any "tricks" or dishonesty in there.

Edit - just checked, yes they're audited by KPMG, so you can assume every number in there has been diligently and honestly calculated

I admire your bravery with regard to the confidence you have in the integrity of auditors and the accountancy profession.

I think Arthur Anderson shredding the Enron papers would be the first public manifestation of their misdeeds but I'm sure it was not an isolated incident, they just happened to be the first to get caught.

In the days when AMSTRAD was a public company AMS had some scathing things to say about the competence of the accountants and consultants his share holders forced him to employ.

This lack of confidence might have something to do with why footballs ruling bodies do not take clubs accounts at face value but make their own investigation, which given the number who've been caught trying to fiddle the FFP is perhaps a fair an reasonable thing for them to do

These are two extreme viewpoints, Arthur Anderson is an extremely unethical and believed every assessment put in front of them, KPMG is one of the most credible auditor firms and trust their opinion that the accounts represent an accurate representation of the situation, but Tony Khan estimates player values for the accounts and KPMG gives an opinion if those numbers are honest.

If Tony Khan impaired Mitrovoics value, I am sure Arthur Anderson would have no problem and KPMG would have a problem. But Tony Khan could either i) impair Fabri's value from £3m down to zero or ii) place Fabri as our number two goalkeeper keeping his value at £3m and sell Betts for £3m; I can see the auditor calling both situations honest.

Fulham Accounts are clearly much more honest than most of the other teams, but if Parker really needed a right winger it could be done by keeping MLM value high until 2020 pre-season rather impairing him now.

Another example is It is quite obvious that if Mitrovoic had a career ending injury before the end of the season, Fulham would break FFP. If we were promoted with Mitrovoic having a possible career ending injury, do you think they might be a little optimistic about his return, not too keen to find out before July 2020 or would they announce we failed FFP possibly straight away getting an immediate points deduction. Lets just say if Mitrovoic said let me see my own doctors until a July 2020 and we can assess the injury pre-season Fulham might be very glad not to know until then.

The reason I am certain little fiddles are possible is because all the cases teams get in trouble for are laughable bad. Another classic example of a minor fiddle, it seems Javiers job description for Assistant DOF is half youth development planning, while I do think he does at least 20 hours per week on youth development I wouldn't be surprised if he worked 60 hours per week. If he does 20 hours per week on youth, the KPMG Auditors would check Javier spends 20 hours per week on youth and then allow him to book half his salary there, but they would not check if we only works 40 hours per week.

Your faith in KPMG is miss placed - use a search engine to find some of the recent mire they have been stuck in - you will also struggle to find any accountancy practice who have not had their "Enron" moment, although to-date it's only Arthur Anderson who've disintegrated.

This is why there has been so much recent legislation to regulate them.

We are not run by a public company so the "Annual Accounts" can be whatever TK and his father want, it is much the same with the majority of clubs, they just have to comply with whatever regulation is in place and can interpret it as they please.

This is why FFP has it's own regulation and adjudication, which means that all club have to reinterpret their accounts to demonstrate that they comply. I have no detailed idea of the regulation but I would expect that our owners are properly advised and have up-to-date information regarding their current position.

[toshes mate]

I admire your bravery with regard to the confidence you have in the integrity of auditors and the accountancy profession.

I agree.  Bury's books were 'a mess for perhaps a decade', but not until the prospective buyers bothered to forensically examine them at the start of this season was the real root cause of the Club's demise identified.  Accountants and auditors are as good as they can get away with and anyone who imagines the football authorities and their armies of fair play specialists to be effective are probably living in cloud cuckoo land.  Some of the worse examples of accountancy over a long period of time seem to be found in that one single example of a club in trouble and so why didn't the EFL's units of fairness identify the appalling anomalies that were present and actually save them?