| More FFP woe? 16:11 - Dec 12 with 7213 views | Esox_Lucius |
Following on from my enquiry about whether we were in danger of failing FFP again due to the run on contracts from our last foray into the EPL; this appeared today in West London Sport.
http://www.westlondonsport.com/qpr/football-qpr-steven-caulker-sylla-ngbakoto-ff
I suppose that getting rid of Sylla will ensure that we don't score enough goals to survive. I didn't want Holloway to get the job in the first place but I most certainly don't want him sacked this season no matter what division we end up in but his refusal to play some of the decent players that we have in a system to maximise their abilities makes me want to punch him in the throat until he sees it. His appointment really smacked of pandering to the fans to stop the onslaught on social media sites and now we have to grit our teeth and decide whether we remain loyal supporters or vote with our feet. |  |
| The grass is always greener. |
| |  |
| More FFP woe? on 16:29 - Dec 12 with 3767 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
Don’t look good.
Caulker is a given, and I wouldn’t miss Yeni to be honest.
Not one for dismissing players like that, but if I had to choose two it would be them. |  | | |
| More FFP woe? on 16:45 - Dec 12 with 3731 views | QPR_John |
How can we possibly be failing FFP now. If the way this club is being run financially at the moment still breaks FFP rules then we cannot exists within FFP or at the very least hold out any hope of anything other than lower league football. Alternatively if existing Premier League contracts are the problem If we ever get back there we cannot offer contracts to attract players. [Post edited 12 Dec 2017 16:48]
|  | | |
| More FFP woe? on 16:49 - Dec 12 with 3713 views | toboboly |
We shouldn't even be paying wages to Caulker. "Problems" or not no other fcker in the workplace would. |  |
| Sexy Asian dwarves wanted. |
| |
| More FFP woe? on 16:49 - Dec 12 with 3709 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| More FFP woe? on 16:45 - Dec 12 by QPR_John |
How can we possibly be failing FFP now. If the way this club is being run financially at the moment still breaks FFP rules then we cannot exists within FFP or at the very least hold out any hope of anything other than lower league football. Alternatively if existing Premier League contracts are the problem If we ever get back there we cannot offer contracts to attract players. [Post edited 12 Dec 2017 16:48]
|
We have 35 first team players on the books. We are far from bare bones.
Please see Burnley for more details on how to be successful on a shoestring. | | | |
| More FFP woe? on 16:51 - Dec 12 with 3706 views | Esox_Lucius |
That what I was led to believe when I first heard about this a couple of weeks ago. Once all the old contracts have been fully amortised then we should be able to operate on a slightly less tight rein. It also reinforces the argument that we really do need to get a new stadium that can operate and generate revenue outside match days. | |
| The grass is always greener. |
| |
| More FFP woe? on 17:01 - Dec 12 with 3661 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
PLAYERS OVER 21 WITH 5 LEAGUE APPEARANCES OR LESS:
Y Ngbakoto 2 (3)
A Borysiuk 0 (0)
S Caulker 2 (0)
J Cousins 4 (0)
S Goss 0 (0)
G Hall 0 (1)
M Ingram 0 (0)
J Perch 4 (0)
M Petrasso 0 (0)
I’m going to let you decide which ones you’d miss or not but my point is made, we are far from bare bones. [Post edited 12 Dec 2017 17:03]
| | | |
| More FFP woe? on 17:08 - Dec 12 with 3631 views | PinnerPaul |
Usual transfer rumour non story - some players might go, some might not.
Very insightful = not! | | | |
| More FFP woe? on 17:26 - Dec 12 with 3563 views | Esox_Lucius |
| More FFP woe? on 17:08 - Dec 12 by PinnerPaul |
Usual transfer rumour non story - some players might go, some might not.
Very insightful = not! |
The story isn't about transfers, it's about another potential FFP fine. | |
| The grass is always greener. |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| More FFP woe? on 17:29 - Dec 12 with 3553 views | Northolt_Rs |
| More FFP woe? on 16:29 - Dec 12 by BazzaInTheLoft |
Don’t look good.
Caulker is a given, and I wouldn’t miss Yeni to be honest.
Not one for dismissing players like that, but if I had to choose two it would be them. |
What other club is going to sign Caulker from us? We’re stuck with this waste of space and will be paying out his insane salary until his contract finishes up next summer. |  |
| Scooters, Tunes, Trainers and QPR. |
| |
| More FFP woe? on 17:31 - Dec 12 with 3545 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| More FFP woe? on 17:29 - Dec 12 by Northolt_Rs |
What other club is going to sign Caulker from us? We’re stuck with this waste of space and will be paying out his insane salary until his contract finishes up next summer. |
One other according to the article you never read. | | | |
| More FFP woe? on 17:39 - Dec 12 with 3517 views | PinnerPaul |
| More FFP woe? on 17:26 - Dec 12 by Esox_Lucius |
The story isn't about transfers, it's about another potential FFP fine. |
which we might avoid by maybe selling some players?
FFP is mentioned in one line followed by lengthy speculation, with pictures, about 4 players - seems like a transfer story to me!
AND as any potential fine is based on average loss over three seasons, none of whose accounts we have published and we are only halfway through this season any statement about a further FFP fine is based on guesswork. | | | |
| More FFP woe? on 17:40 - Dec 12 with 3513 views | Northolt_Rs |
| More FFP woe? on 17:31 - Dec 12 by BazzaInTheLoft |
One other according to the article you never read. |
Yeah righty-o..... | |
| Scooters, Tunes, Trainers and QPR. |
| |
| More FFP woe? on 18:07 - Dec 12 with 3444 views | Mytch_QPR |
I only occasionally glance at the BBC Football Gossip article (as we are rarely mentioned these days - unless it involves impending disaster) but there was an item yesterday linking Nedum with Burnley.
Seems a bit random - you'd think the jewels in our crown are Smithies and Freeman at the moment. |  |
| |
| More FFP woe? on 18:14 - Dec 12 with 3418 views | BrianMcCarthy |
"The expectation is therefore that a couple of loan signings is the most Rangers will be able to run to. That is unless they can ship out a player or two, which would then give them more scope to bring in new faces."
expectation...unless...would.
It's all conjecture and hypothesis.
Even if it were to be true (and surely they would use stronger language if it was) then the above quote says we only have to get rid of players if we want to bring loans in - therefore if we don't want to bring loans in, we don't have to sell. |  |
| |
| More FFP woe? on 18:15 - Dec 12 with 3408 views | PunteR |
| More FFP woe? on 18:07 - Dec 12 by Mytch_QPR |
I only occasionally glance at the BBC Football Gossip article (as we are rarely mentioned these days - unless it involves impending disaster) but there was an item yesterday linking Nedum with Burnley.
Seems a bit random - you'd think the jewels in our crown are Smithies and Freeman at the moment. |
Isnt Onouha out of contract end of season..? Probably its his agent putting it out there. As they do. |  |
| Occasional providers of half decent House music. |
| |
| More FFP woe? on 18:48 - Dec 12 with 3331 views | stevec |
What is this West London Sport? It's like something a schoolkid would write.
This player might get transferred, we might fail FFP, the reporter could at least try and show some factual evidence. And the web page never works properly.
Just ban it from LFW. Utter fckin morons. |  | | |
| More FFP woe? on 18:55 - Dec 12 with 3296 views | DesertBoot |
We usually have 7 or 8 more players in our squad than others it match programmes are anything to go by. |  |
| Wish I could be like David Watts |
| |
| More FFP woe? on 19:16 - Dec 12 with 3241 views | LongsufferingR |
| More FFP woe? on 18:55 - Dec 12 by DesertBoot |
We usually have 7 or 8 more players in our squad than others it match programmes are anything to go by. |
Maybe if we wrote our players names in a smaller font, we might get away with it. |  | | |
| More FFP woe? on 19:20 - Dec 12 with 3228 views | Roller |
| More FFP woe? on 17:39 - Dec 12 by PinnerPaul |
which we might avoid by maybe selling some players?
FFP is mentioned in one line followed by lengthy speculation, with pictures, about 4 players - seems like a transfer story to me!
AND as any potential fine is based on average loss over three seasons, none of whose accounts we have published and we are only halfway through this season any statement about a further FFP fine is based on guesswork. |
We have published one of those sets of accounts. Those for the year ending May 2016 show a £11 million loss and it is worth remembering that we had a parachute payment of £24 million that year. This dropped to £19.3m for last season and has dropped again to £9.6 million for this and next season. While they also include wages for the likes of Sandro, Green and Fer (Caulker was out on loan with all his wages covered initially by Southampton and then by Liverpool and incredibly Ferdinand even managed to get a couple of loan fees for him), those accounts also include £4 million from Charlie Austin’s sale to Southampton and our proceeds from Sterling’s transfer from Liverpool to Manchester City, believed to be in the region of £10 million.
To highlight the significance of the way that players' transfer fees are handled, in this years accounts we still suffer the final £2 million of the £8 million we paid for Caulker back in July 2014 as well as smaller amounts for the purchase of players such as Washington, Luongo and Smithies, along with the associated agents' fees.
Lee Hoos has been very open about the operating costs of the club which are in the order of £9 million per year to run. This covers the cost of Loftus Road, training facilities, match day costs etc. The annual revenue from season ticket sales is £5.6 million, so before we’ve even considered paying any player or member of staff a penny in wages we are short by £3.4 million.
Staying within the FFP regulations will be a massive achievement if Hoos can pull it off. |  | | |
| More FFP woe? on 19:42 - Dec 12 with 3166 views | OldPedro |
|  |
| Extra mature cheddar......a simple cheese for a simple man |
| |
| More FFP woe? on 19:45 - Dec 12 with 3156 views | QPR_John |
| More FFP woe? on 19:20 - Dec 12 by Roller |
We have published one of those sets of accounts. Those for the year ending May 2016 show a £11 million loss and it is worth remembering that we had a parachute payment of £24 million that year. This dropped to £19.3m for last season and has dropped again to £9.6 million for this and next season. While they also include wages for the likes of Sandro, Green and Fer (Caulker was out on loan with all his wages covered initially by Southampton and then by Liverpool and incredibly Ferdinand even managed to get a couple of loan fees for him), those accounts also include £4 million from Charlie Austin’s sale to Southampton and our proceeds from Sterling’s transfer from Liverpool to Manchester City, believed to be in the region of £10 million.
To highlight the significance of the way that players' transfer fees are handled, in this years accounts we still suffer the final £2 million of the £8 million we paid for Caulker back in July 2014 as well as smaller amounts for the purchase of players such as Washington, Luongo and Smithies, along with the associated agents' fees.
Lee Hoos has been very open about the operating costs of the club which are in the order of £9 million per year to run. This covers the cost of Loftus Road, training facilities, match day costs etc. The annual revenue from season ticket sales is £5.6 million, so before we’ve even considered paying any player or member of staff a penny in wages we are short by £3.4 million.
Staying within the FFP regulations will be a massive achievement if Hoos can pull it off. |
People bandy around FFP as if it is a good thing. If this club with the way it is being run financially at the moment still cannot meet FFP then what hope is there for any future. We might as well pack up now. FFP was never there to protect clubs like ours and only there to keep the status quo. | | | |
| More FFP woe? on 19:47 - Dec 12 with 3148 views | QPR_John |
| More FFP woe? on 19:42 - Dec 12 by OldPedro |
|
Can't somebody ask him how close we are to the FFP limit and what expenditure has taken us there. We have hardly been spending millions on transfers. If the day to day costs of running this club exceeds the FFP limit then there really is little point in carrying on [Post edited 12 Dec 2017 19:50]
| | | |
| More FFP woe? on 19:55 - Dec 12 with 3122 views | BrianMcCarthy |
| More FFP woe? on 19:42 - Dec 12 by OldPedro |
|
I like David McIntyre's work, but this is him confirming that the original article was speculation and that we are merely close to the FFP limit.
I think that he may be right that we will look at options re selling as we should look at all options available to us, but that's a long way from actually having to sell which was - intentionally or otherwise - the impression the article gave as witnessed by some of the understandable reaction to it.
Anyway, fair play to him for clearing it up. | |
| |
| More FFP woe? on 20:00 - Dec 12 with 3100 views | Roller |
| More FFP woe? on 19:45 - Dec 12 by QPR_John |
People bandy around FFP as if it is a good thing. If this club with the way it is being run financially at the moment still cannot meet FFP then what hope is there for any future. We might as well pack up now. FFP was never there to protect clubs like ours and only there to keep the status quo. |
The problem is that we are still paying for how the club was previously run. This summer is a watershed for us. Caulker's transfer fee will have been amortized, we won't have to pay his wages any more and the contracts for other high earners such as Onuoha will also be up. We hopefully then will have a little more scope to start to push forwards again. | | | |
| More FFP woe? on 20:06 - Dec 12 with 3077 views | QPR_John |
| More FFP woe? on 20:00 - Dec 12 by Roller |
The problem is that we are still paying for how the club was previously run. This summer is a watershed for us. Caulker's transfer fee will have been amortized, we won't have to pay his wages any more and the contracts for other high earners such as Onuoha will also be up. We hopefully then will have a little more scope to start to push forwards again. |
"The problem is that we are still paying for how the club was previously run."
Another first for FFP. Get punished for contracts entered into in the past and then punished a second time for said contracts which the club is legally bound to honour [Post edited 12 Dec 2017 20:08]
| | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
