Quote from: cdbullyweefan on April 15, 2019, 11:30:12 PMThe Derby thing does seem a blatant attempt to get around the rules, to be fair. If they can do that then it makes a mockery of the whole rules. It's really not a loophole of any sort. Sale and leaseback is standard business practice in the 'real world' and has actual economic consequences. Derby County no longer own their stadium. The fact that it's to another company owned by their chairman is neither here nor there.
The Derby thing does seem a blatant attempt to get around the rules, to be fair. If they can do that then it makes a mockery of the whole rules.
Restraint of trade. If they have it to spend, spend it. Bloody rules!
I thought we lost £36.1 million just in one season? How are we going to stay within the limits over three seasons? Surely we're not expecting to make a massive profit from this season?
The stadium was on the books at 41m and they got an “ independent “ valuation of 80m and booked a 39mil profit by SALB.The justification is that the new owner can use the stadium for events on the 330 days it is not in use by the club.Now it he had paid 250 mil without a valuation then that would a completely different kettle of fish.
Quote from: Risso on April 16, 2019, 09:19:13 AMQuote from: cdbullyweefan on April 15, 2019, 11:30:12 PMThe Derby thing does seem a blatant attempt to get around the rules, to be fair. If they can do that then it makes a mockery of the whole rules. It's really not a loophole of any sort. Sale and leaseback is standard business practice in the 'real world' and has actual economic consequences. Derby County no longer own their stadium. The fact that it's to another company owned by their chairman is neither here nor there.Hypothetically, if he, or rather his company, was to sell the stadium back to Derby at a much reduced rate, would that be any sort of breach of FFP?Also, not sure what the "real world" has to do with this. Most billionaire business owners can invest what they want without worrying that it might upset their competitors, so football is already ignoring business norms in applying such rules in the first place, isn't it?
Quote from: ChicagoLion on April 25, 2019, 06:08:03 AMThe stadium was on the books at 41m and they got an “ independent “ valuation of 80m and booked a 39mil profit by SALB.The justification is that the new owner can use the stadium for events on the 330 days it is not in use by the club.Now it he had paid 250 mil without a valuation then that would a completely different kettle of fish.I wouldn't want us to go down the stadium sale route just to meet short term FFP needs, just in case the ownership goes sour. If there was a buy back clause at a fixed price then that would be more comforting.