FFP

[Hookeysmith]

Nothing will happen to City or Chelsea.

And the saddest part is we all know it as well does the FA spineless wankers

[VillaTim]

On this day in 2011 Citeh announced losses of £197 million. Quite the turnaround in fortunes don't you think.

Chelsea posted losses of £200m in their last accounts

You can lose money as a club, and more than the FFP amounts, but not on players/playing costs.  For example, I think all the money we're ploughing to the ground and the new academy buildings will cost us loads, but they aren't included in the FFP calculations.

Yeah but how can Chelsea spend £800m on new players when they are losing £200m per annum as a business

[Toronto Villa]

The thing is they’ve now set a marker with Everton. And what Everton have been charged with doing pales into insignificance compared to what is alleged against Chelsea let alone Man City. That’s where I think the PL will fail. Because if you give Everton a 10 point penalty then the consequences for the other two should be so much greater. They won’t have the stomach to pull that trigger and the penalty in all likelihood will be considerably less. Because, for the PL, let’s face it, having Chelsea and Man City as part of it is far more profitable than not.

[ChicagoLion]

On this day in 2011 Citeh announced losses of £197 million. Quite the turnaround in fortunes don't you think.

Chelsea posted losses of £200m in their last accounts

You can lose money as a club, and more than the FFP amounts, but not on players/playing costs.  For example, I think all the money we're ploughing to the ground and the new academy buildings will cost us loads, but they aren't included in the FFP calculations.

Yeah but how can Chelsea spend £800m on new players when they are losing £200m per annum as a business

Because they have enough cash to do so.

[pauliewalnuts]

On this day in 2011 Citeh announced losses of £197 million. Quite the turnaround in fortunes don't you think.

Chelsea posted losses of £200m in their last accounts

You can lose money as a club, and more than the FFP amounts, but not on players/playing costs.  For example, I think all the money we're ploughing to the ground and the new academy buildings will cost us loads, but they aren't included in the FFP calculations.

Yeah but how can Chelsea spend £800m on new players when they are losing £200m per annum as a business

Because they have enough cash to do so.

And because they amortise the costs appropriately.

[Chris Harte]

On this day in 2011 Citeh announced losses of £197 million. Quite the turnaround in fortunes don't you think.

Chelsea posted losses of £200m in their last accounts

You can lose money as a club, and more than the FFP amounts, but not on players/playing costs.  For example, I think all the money we're ploughing to the ground and the new academy buildings will cost us loads, but they aren't included in the FFP calculations.

Yeah but how can Chelsea spend £800m on new players when they are losing £200m per annum as a business

Because they have enough cash to do so.

And because they amortise the costs appropriately.

Don't they give their new signings eight year contracts so they can spread the payments over the same period?

[ChicagoLion]

On this day in 2011 Citeh announced losses of £197 million. Quite the turnaround in fortunes don't you think.

Chelsea posted losses of £200m in their last accounts

You can lose money as a club, and more than the FFP amounts, but not on players/playing costs.  For example, I think all the money we're ploughing to the ground and the new academy buildings will cost us loads, but they aren't included in the FFP calculations.

Yeah but how can Chelsea spend £800m on new players when they are losing £200m per annum as a business

Because they have enough cash to do so.

And because they amortise the costs appropriately.

Don't they give their new signings eight year contracts so they can spread the payments over the same period?

Yes it’s called amortisation

[VillaTim]

On this day in 2011 Citeh announced losses of £197 million. Quite the turnaround in fortunes don't you think.

Chelsea posted losses of £200m in their last accounts

You can lose money as a club, and more than the FFP amounts, but not on players/playing costs.  For example, I think all the money we're ploughing to the ground and the new academy buildings will cost us loads, but they aren't included in the FFP calculations.

Yeah but how can Chelsea spend £800m on new players when they are losing £200m per annum as a business

Because they have enough cash to do so.

And because they amortise the costs appropriately.

Don't they give their new signings eight year contracts so they can spread the payments over the same period?

Just sounds like accountants fudging the books , in a similar vein to the way large corporations employ aggressive tax avoidance tactics

[Chris Harte]

On this day in 2011 Citeh announced losses of £197 million. Quite the turnaround in fortunes don't you think.

Chelsea posted losses of £200m in their last accounts

You can lose money as a club, and more than the FFP amounts, but not on players/playing costs.  For example, I think all the money we're ploughing to the ground and the new academy buildings will cost us loads, but they aren't included in the FFP calculations.

Yeah but how can Chelsea spend £800m on new players when they are losing £200m per annum as a business

Because they have enough cash to do so.

And because they amortise the costs appropriately.

Don't they give their new signings eight year contracts so they can spread the payments over the same period?

Yes it’s called amortisation

I thought that was what Paulie was getting at.

[Brazilian Villain]

Don't they give their new signings eight year contracts so they can spread the payments over the same period?

Just sounds like accountants fudging the books , in a similar vein to the way large corporations employ aggressive tax avoidance tactics

I've yet to meet anyone who asked me to arrange it for them to pay more tax.

[VillaTim]

Don't they give their new signings eight year contracts so they can spread the payments over the same period?

Just sounds like accountants fudging the books , in a similar vein to the way large corporations employ aggressive tax avoidance tactics

I've yet to meet anyone who asked me to arrange it for them to pay more tax.

eh ? Aggresive tax avoidance = less tax . If it doesn't fire your accountant

[pauliewalnuts]

Don't they give their new signings eight year contracts so they can spread the payments over the same period?

Just sounds like accountants fudging the books , in a similar vein to the way large corporations employ aggressive tax avoidance tactics

I've yet to meet anyone who asked me to arrange it for them to pay more tax.

eh ? Aggresive tax avoidance = less tax . If it doesn't fire your accountant

That's what he's saying to you, Tim.

There is nothing wrong with amortisation, all businesses do it, it is standard business practice.

Just for clarity, we're answering the following question. Which you asked.

Yeah but how can Chelsea spend £800m on new players when they are losing £200m per annum as a business

[VillaTim]

Don't they give their new signings eight year contracts so they can spread the payments over the same period?

Just sounds like accountants fudging the books , in a similar vein to the way large corporations employ aggressive tax avoidance tactics

I've yet to meet anyone who asked me to arrange it for them to pay more tax.

eh ? Aggresive tax avoidance = less tax . If it doesn't fire your accountant

That's what he's saying to you, Tim.

There is nothing wrong with amortisation, all businesses do it, it is standard business practice.

Just for clarity, we're answering the following question. Which you asked.

Yeah but how can Chelsea spend £800m on new players when they are losing £200m per annum as a business

ok thanks. I understand amortisation.
they (chelsea) are rolling the dice here . very risky strategy.

[Simon Page]

Don't they give their new signings eight year contracts so they can spread the payments over the same period?

Just sounds like accountants fudging the books , in a similar vein to the way large corporations employ aggressive tax avoidance tactics

I've yet to meet anyone who asked me to arrange it for them to pay more tax.

I've yet to meet anyone who's asked for less public services when they're in need of them. Not that I think Chelsea are fudging the books with their eight-year deals.

[tony scott]

With the threats of legal action being talked by some clubs that were relegated, in the period of Everton’s offences, this could turn into a very expensive farce.  The whole saga threatens to undermine any credibility the the EPL has.