So, are you saying that because there is some initial leeway we should ignore it? On a more general point isn't living within your means desirable regardless of regulations?
Quote from: Chris Smith on August 15, 2011, 12:26:50 PMSo, are you saying that because there is some initial leeway we should ignore it? On a more general point isn't living within your means desirable regardless of regulations?If Lerner had managed to increase our income by anything other than the Sky money which lands in our lap regardless, then maybe. But whatever, this current period is nothing to with the FFP rules, nothing whatsoever. In any case, the chances of Alex McLeish qualifying regularly for Europe via league placings was doubtful enough. Alex McLeish qualifying for Europe after selling his best players then NOT being backed is unlikley in the extreme. When Lerner arrived he was supposed to be a brilliant businessman who was going to cure us of the cornershop mentality. It's clear now that he's absolutely nothing of the sort. If he sticks around, we might as well get used to underwhelming mediocrity.
The scary thing is that despite the best part of £150 million invested we are really no further forward now in terms of success on the pitch, profile, sponsorship deals, new facilities etc...
The last two sets of accounts have shown that the increase in income from matchday receipts and commercial income of about £4m a year in total have been almost exactly offset by the interest charge on the loans from Lerner.
Quote from: N'isso on August 15, 2011, 02:20:30 PMThe last two sets of accounts have shown that the increase in income from matchday receipts and commercial income of about £4m a year in total have been almost exactly offset by the interest charge on the loans from Lerner.We would have paid interest in any event. And probably more depending on terms.
The Acorns sponsorship deal will have skewed the commercial income but I don't think anyone would argue that was anything but a good thing.