Gourlay out.

[leon]

I suspect that if we are getting close to FFP then it's a toss up between getting rid of Stam and risk that getting a new manager in would improve things or backing him with (some) money in the transfer window and risk that he's able to make any signings make a material difference.

[Muskrat]

I suspect that if we are getting close to FFP then it's a toss up between getting rid of Stam and risk that getting a new manager in would improve things or backing him with (some) money in the transfer window and risk that he's able to make any signings make a material difference.

Looks to me that he's lost the confidence of the owners insofar as they aren't willing to back his judgement in the January transfer window, and who would blame them for that? Not me for one

[Muskrat]

I suspect that if we are getting close to FFP then it's a toss up between getting rid of Stam and risk that getting a new manager in would improve things or backing him with (some) money in the transfer window and risk that he's able to make any signings make a material difference.

Looks to me that he's lost the confidence of the owners insofar as they aren't willing to back his judgement in the January transfer window, and who would blame them for that? Not me for one

If that was the case they'd sack him.

Not if it meant falling foul of the FFP rules...

[Pandoras Box]

Serious question. How does this FFP work?
I mean Wolves seem to be spending ridiculous amounts and the question of FFP never seems to arise.
We don't seem to be able to spend ten quid and FFP is used as the reason (excuse?)

I thought it was how you balance your books?
So it begs the questions
1) do they balance the books because their owners take more interest and are willing to invest properly in the club or
2) are the ins and outs transfers managed much better than those that we have in charge of this area?

[Sutekh]

Serious question. How does this FFP work?
I mean Wolves seem to be spending ridiculous amounts and the question of FFP never seems to arise.
We don't seem to be able to spend ten quid and FFP is used as the reason (excuse?)

I thought it was how you balance your books?
So it begs the questions
1) do they balance the books because their owners take more interest and are willing to invest properly in the club or
2) are the ins and outs transfers managed much better than those that we have in charge of this area?

Can't recall what the "rules" are but someone did post them on here a while ago.

Essentially owners can no longer just "bankroll" a FL club by spending whatever they want. Expenditure has to be balanced against gate receipts, tv money, wages etc.

The rules do not insist a club is or has to become profitable either as clubs are allowed to lose x amount each season

It's always been a grey area as Forest have fallen foul of the rules yet other clubs don't seem to get "done" with QPR the most famous case (although the FL have having legal arguments with them - and wonders what will happen to the rules if QPR win their arguments).

[Winston Biscuit]

Gourley has lost the board room

[muirinho]

Serious question. How does this FFP work?
I mean Wolves seem to be spending ridiculous amounts and the question of FFP never seems to arise.
We don't seem to be able to spend ten quid and FFP is used as the reason (excuse?)

I thought it was how you balance your books?
So it begs the questions
1) do they balance the books because their owners take more interest and are willing to invest properly in the club or
2) are the ins and outs transfers managed much better than those that we have in charge of this area?

Can't recall what the "rules" are but someone did post them on here a while ago.

Essentially owners can no longer just "bankroll" a FL club by spending whatever they want. Expenditure has to be balanced against gate receipts, tv money, wages etc.

The rules do not insist a club is or has to become profitable either as clubs are allowed to lose x amount each season

It's always been a grey area as Forest have fallen foul of the rules yet other clubs don't seem to get "done" with QPR the most famous case (although the FL have having legal arguments with them - and wonders what will happen to the rules if QPR win their arguments).

Couple of asides about Wolves - can't be arsed taking a look, but when it comes to transfer fees, they are spread over the length of the contract rather than just the year the player is transferred in. So a 20million player who is given a 4 year contract will basically be a 5million hit per year rather than 20million in one year. If most of their expenditure is on players with long contracts, then they may be spreading the damage. Worth pointing out as well that their average attendance is 10K more than ours, so they will also have higher turnover. In general though, it's not transfer fees that cause the issues, it's wages.

As regards QPR, they've lost the case they've spent 3 years trying to appeal, and have been fined £40million. Now I believe they are trying to argue that the size of the fine is disproportionate.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/201 ... ing-three/
FA will be going after Bournmouth and Leicester next, as they were relying on the arguments that QPR failed on.

If it's just money, then maybe an owner would just suck it up, but new penalities include being able to turf a club out of the automatic promotion or play-off spots. At the rate we're going, we'd never get there, but still....

[Sutekh]

Serious question. How does this FFP work?
I mean Wolves seem to be spending ridiculous amounts and the question of FFP never seems to arise.
We don't seem to be able to spend ten quid and FFP is used as the reason (excuse?)

I thought it was how you balance your books?
So it begs the questions
1) do they balance the books because their owners take more interest and are willing to invest properly in the club or
2) are the ins and outs transfers managed much better than those that we have in charge of this area?

Can't recall what the "rules" are but someone did post them on here a while ago.

Essentially owners can no longer just "bankroll" a FL club by spending whatever they want. Expenditure has to be balanced against gate receipts, tv money, wages etc.

The rules do not insist a club is or has to become profitable either as clubs are allowed to lose x amount each season

It's always been a grey area as Forest have fallen foul of the rules yet other clubs don't seem to get "done" with QPR the most famous case (although the FL have having legal arguments with them - and wonders what will happen to the rules if QPR win their arguments).

Couple of asides about Wolves - can't be arsed taking a look, but when it comes to transfer fees, they are spread over the length of the contract rather than just the year the player is transferred in. So a 20million player who is given a 4 year contract will basically be a 5million hit per year rather than 20million in one year. If most of their expenditure is on players with long contracts, then they may be spreading the damage. Worth pointing out as well that their average attendance is 10K more than ours, so they will also have higher turnover. In general though, it's not transfer fees that cause the issues, it's wages.

As regards QPR, they've lost the case they've spent 3 years trying to appeal, and have been fined £40million. Now I believe they are trying to argue that the size of the fine is disproportionate.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/201 ... ing-three/
FA will be going after Bournmouth and Leicester next, as they were relying on the arguments that QPR failed on.

If it's just money, then maybe an owner would just suck it up, but new penalities include being able to turf a club out of the automatic promotion or play-off spots. At the rate we're going, we'd never get there, but still....

Thanks for the update. Be interesting to see if Leicester and Bournemouth get successfully done as well - though somehow I don't think that'll happen until they get relegated from the PL

And that possibly explains why Aluko got a 4 year deal....

[Snowflake Royal]

Don't forget we've just come out from parachute payments so our revenue is significantly down. Don't think Wolfs have had those for a while.

Our wages have been among the highest in the division since we came down. Wolves' haven't been nearly as much although their recent spending may be pushing them up there.

Give it 3 or 4 years of failing to go up and they'll be struggling with it.

Also don't forget the QPR effect. Break them but you're ok if you go up and leave the FL's jurisdiction.

[muirinho]

Don't forget we've just come out from parachute payments so our revenue is significantly down. Don't think Wolfs have had those for a while.

Our wages have been among the highest in the division since we came down. Wolves' haven't been nearly as much although their recent spending may be pushing them up there.

Give it 3 or 4 years of failing to go up and they'll be struggling with it.

Also don't forget the QPR effect. Break them but you're ok if you go up and leave the FL's jurisdiction.

That's why they've brought in new penalties. If a club goes up, they can afford the fine. But if they are not allowed go up because they get deducted points, or get booted out of the promotion places, they are in a lot worse place.

Be interesting to see how it goes, but with the new regulations they have done two things.
One - made it easier to pass FFP (spread across 3 years rather than 1, and you are allowed lose bucketloads for every year you spent in the PL during those 3 years)
but Two, made the penalites for infringing FFP a lot worse. A fine only hits the owners really, the fans won't care and will still be moaning about "lack of investment". A transfer embargo might be a bit of a pain, but it's possible to plough on regardless. But preventing promotion - every owner would be running scared of that! Every fanbase also should be - but it might take an example case for a club's fanbase to take FFP seriously.

Note also that the PL have agreed to cooperate with extracting fines for previous bad-behaviour. Although the FL went after QPR first - an easier target since they got relegated back to the FL - they will be going after the teams that stayed up, after being promoted with financial doping - Leicester and Bournemouth. Unfortunately, they can only fine them, as those were the regulations in play at the time - when you think of what they have gained since then (especially bloody Leicester), you can see why they have decided that fines alone are not enough.

[Snowflake Royal]

To prevent promotion you've got to establish within about 5-6 weeks of the season finishing that they broke the rules. This seems unlikely to be achievable when clubs don't have to file their accounts for about 6 - 18 months after the season ends.

But maybe I'm wrong to be cynical.

[muirinho]

To prevent promotion you've got to establish within about 5-6 weeks of the season finishing that they broke the rules. This seems unlikely to be achievable when clubs don't have to file their accounts for about 6 - 18 months after the season ends.

But maybe I'm wrong to be cynical.

You're not wrong. I'm dying to know how it's meant to work also!

[The Cap]

Part of the latest quote from Gourlay on the getreading site reads:

"It's been quite a difficult time for the club in the past few years and while we got very close last year [to the Premier League] that increased a lot of expectations which up till now we have probably not fulfilled. But I have total belief in the manager and in the players."

Priceless, mate

[Maneki Neko]

Serious question. How does this FFP work?
I mean Wolves seem to be spending ridiculous amounts and the question of FFP never seems to arise.
We don't seem to be able to spend ten quid and FFP is used as the reason (excuse?)

I thought it was how you balance your books?
So it begs the questions
1) do they balance the books because their owners take more interest and are willing to invest properly in the club or
2) are the ins and outs transfers managed much better than those that we have in charge of this area?

FFP is done over several seasons isn't it?
think both clubs have similar (high) net spends this season, but we probably outspent wolves previously...and wolves probably have consistently higher gates than us, so have more wriggle room

[double d]

Serious question. How does this FFP work?
I mean Wolves seem to be spending ridiculous amounts and the question of FFP never seems to arise.
We don't seem to be able to spend ten quid and FFP is used as the reason (excuse?)

I thought it was how you balance your books?
So it begs the questions
1) do they balance the books because their owners take more interest and are willing to invest properly in the club or
2) are the ins and outs transfers managed much better than those that we have in charge of this area?

FFP is done over several seasons isn't it?
think both clubs have similar (high) net spends this season, but we probably outspent wolves previously...and wolves probably have consistently higher gates than us, so have more wriggle room

Wolves alleged had a 30odd million bid turned down for Silva from AC Milan.

How the pfuck are they bidding like that but not gone over FFP

[Hound]

prob would have been some sort of loan to the end of the season and purchase next year, bit like the Mbappe deal

[muirinho]

Serious question. How does this FFP work?
I mean Wolves seem to be spending ridiculous amounts and the question of FFP never seems to arise.
We don't seem to be able to spend ten quid and FFP is used as the reason (excuse?)

I thought it was how you balance your books?
So it begs the questions
1) do they balance the books because their owners take more interest and are willing to invest properly in the club or
2) are the ins and outs transfers managed much better than those that we have in charge of this area?

FFP is done over several seasons isn't it?
think both clubs have similar (high) net spends this season, but we probably outspent wolves previously...and wolves probably have consistently higher gates than us, so have more wriggle room

Wolves alleged had a 30odd million bid turned down for Silva from AC Milan.

How the pfuck are they bidding like that but not gone over FFP

Might be loan to buy. Also £30 mill with a 4 year contract is £7.5mill per year in FFP terms

Our wage bill is higher than theirs

Their gate averages about 10K more than ours.

They made a transfer loss last season, but made a transfer profit the season before. And FFP is spread over 3 years.

[genome]

At this point, if Wolves break our record, I won't be that fussed. It just won't be the same as our achievement - they would have bought the record, we did it through seasons of squad building and very little spend.

[muirinho]

Wolves alleged had a 30odd million bid turned down for Silva from AC Milan.

How the pfuck are they bidding like that but not gone over FFP

Might be loan to buy. Also £30 mill with a 4 year contract is £7.5mill per year in FFP terms

Our wage bill is higher than theirs

Their gate averages about 10K more than ours.

They made a transfer loss last season, but made a transfer profit the season before. And FFP is spread over 3 years.

As a comparison - very quick googling shows that in 2015/2016 (don't have 2016/2017 accounts yet) - Wolves made a profit of 5.8million while we made a loss of 15million.

so that's a 21million swing straight away.

[double d]

FFP is done over several seasons isn't it?
think both clubs have similar (high) net spends this season, but we probably outspent wolves previously...and wolves probably have consistently higher gates than us, so have more wriggle room

Wolves alleged had a 30odd million bid turned down for Silva from AC Milan.

How the pfuck are they bidding like that but not gone over FFP

Might be loan to buy. Also £30 mill with a 4 year contract is £7.5mill per year in FFP terms

Our wage bill is higher than theirs

Their gate averages about 10K more than ours.

They made a transfer loss last season, but made a transfer profit the season before. And FFP is spread over 3 years.

Is it conformed our wage bill is higher?

They hage a net spend so far this season if 17.23 million so assuming contracts are 4 years each it is only 4.3 million plus 7.5 with Silva so that is (aasuming they buy and sell nobody else) almost 12 million a year on JUST fees.

I have no idea what the average wage is. Lets say 30k a week? 120k a month per player x 20 in their squad is 2.4 million a month on wages. Times by 12 is 28 million 800k. Just player wages a year.

If you sell a player does it get knocked off straight away or go into yearly installments for the rest of their contract?

Our highest transfer was Aluko at the same cost it would have been per year for Andre Silva.