General Wolves News

[Wolf Hunting]

If you're only a little bit.(!!!) over the line like a few million, do they fine you proportionally?
A few million over = 3 points fine, 25 Million over,=5 points etc etc.
How does it work?

 

[MARKakaJIM]

It is, but the PL seem to be sympathetic to clubs acknowledging they have an issue and fixing it early in the next year. At least that's what Forest are claiming re being able to include the Johnson sale in the 22/23 period even though it sits a couple of months outside it. Our perceived issue was supposed to be the 3 year period ending 24, not 23, this is the first time anyone's claimed we have an issue for the earlier period.

A farce really from the PL, why bother setting out a rule that says you'll be measured over a 3 year period but then let people make it 3 and a bit if they're struggling?

 

[jd1981]

If we were dangerously close it would be a lot more widespread in the media than just a column in the football insider.

 

[PuntsWolf]

A farce really from the PL, why bother setting out a rule that says you'll be measured over a 3 year period but then let people make it 3 and a bit if they're struggling?

Not that it works like this. But could theoretically spend a fortune to achieve said goal and then just sell one of them after to avoid any punishment.

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

If you're only a little bit.(!!!) over the line like a few million, do they fine you proportionally?
A few million over = 3 points fine, 25 Million over,=5 points etc etc.
How does it work?

Ask Everton

 

[Banjo]

Not that it works like this. But could theoretically spend a fortune to achieve said goal and then just sell one of them after to avoid any punishment.

That is kind of the position Forest are in (the sale being Brennan J).

 

[Squeak]

If you're only a little bit.(!!!) over the line like a few million, do they fine you proportionally?
A few million over = 3 points fine, 25 Million over,=5 points etc etc.
How does it work?

No, none of that.
You would think that the Premier League would have some set rules about FFP and the punishments for breaking it but the fact is, they don't. They set up rules and said don't break them but never put down what the consequences would be. This is part of the Everton argument and it could so easily have been avoided if when they announced the rules, they announced the penalties or consequences.

Just goes to show how badly this has all been run. Essentially, they are making it up as they go along. If 10pts for breaking FFP by 19M is now the benchmark, so be it.... but it should have been made clear before Everton decided to go over it.

Going to be interesting to see what happens with City, Chelsea and Forest.

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

City with their billions will tie it up in courts until the sun goes out

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

So TWF's is still 100% confident that FFP isn't an issue for Wolves?

 

[Kenny]

Remove me from being confident mainly because I have zero clue. Some people on here seemed clued up on it but I think I understand the inner workings of VAR and their interpretation of the laws of the game more than I understand how they will work out FFP

 

[YoungWolf]

We made something like 95m in profit before we even sold Nunes, surely it can’t be?

 

[The Bear]

So TWF's is still 100% confident that FFP isn't an issue for Wolves?

I think we're on the right side of the line now for the period ending 23/24.

But that doesn't mean we can just go on a trolley dash next summer. Still got to be mindful of it unless we're selling players regularly.

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

So it wasn't a load of bollocks in the summer then?

 

[The Bear]

We made something like 95m in profit before we even sold Nunes, surely it can’t be?

Nope, we made £64m profit last summer on player trading, including Nunes.

Edit - Mainly because Cunha was made permanent last summer. Depends when you put that fee as going off the books.

 

[Kenny]

I think we're on the right side of the line now for the period ending 23/24.

But that doesn't mean we can just go on a trolley dash next summer. Still got to be mindful of it unless we're selling players regularly.

With our new way of working in the transfer market (or the way Fosun dreamed back when they took over before Nuno made us successful and Jeff lost his shit) the sale of Neto and 1 more (Hwang or Max) will fund our summer and leave us in profit

 

[Tony Towner]

So TWF's is still 100% confident that FFP isn't an issue for Wolves?

Why would anyone choose to believe the report of a continually discredited blog over a denial from LL which has clearly come directly from the club?

 

[YoungWolf]

Nope, we made £64m profit last summer on player trading, including Nunes.

Edit - Mainly because Cunha was made permanent last summer. Depends when you put that fee as going off the books.

Okay, but that’s 43m less in the losses from last season then. The summer before we had also made a small profit in transfer fees I thought too. I know it’s not that simple but if we manage to breach the rules that’s some serious mismanagement anyway (which I guess we already know about)

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

Why would anyone choose to believe the report of a continually discredited blog over a denial from LL which has clearly come directly from the club?

Who is?

The club is saying FFP was an issue, that was continually called as bollocks and an excuse in the summer.

 

[Johnny75]

Who is?

The club is saying FFP was an issue, that was continually called as bollocks and an excuse in the summer.

It was called bollocks after we sold Neves and the others (before Nunes) which is when the line was still being fed to LL by the club.

For LL to still claim this is the case is just idiocy now, mainly because most people can count.

 

[Tony Towner]

Who is?

The club is saying FFP was an issue, that was continually called as bollocks and an excuse in the summer.

The period that report was about and the accounts going live this weekend aren't the same timeframe that the club said there was an issue with.

There was an FFP issue in the Summer nobody said that was bollocks, what they did say is after the Neves sale that more or less disappeared and the rest of the Summer strategy was by choice.