Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Football] QPR Ruling



hans kraay fan club

The voice of reason.
Helpful Moderator
Mar 16, 2005
61,094
Chandlers Ford
Well, that article from a couple of years ago suggests it'll be more like an £8m fine, but the latest report today suggests the panel doesn't feel that a £58m fine is disproportionate, so one completely contradicts the earlier one.

I don't see how the fine can possibly be £50m+ now though, when the precedence has already been set to fine the cheats around £8m.

What's not to understand? The fines are proportional to the SIZE of the overspend.
 


Easy 10

Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Jul 5, 2003
61,674
Location Location
It may well be more down to the £60m they tried to transfer to shares as 'income'. The FL wasn't having any of that.

So the Directors effectively wrote off £60m worth of debts, and the FL want to fine them another £60m on top of that. Presumably they're looking to force QPR into administration - not sure anyone wins with that scenario.

Not that I'm defending QPR's actions in breaching FFP, but a punishment that would potentially force a club into insolvency does seem excessive.
 


Easy 10

Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Jul 5, 2003
61,674
Location Location
What's not to understand? The fines are proportional to the SIZE of the overspend.

QPR posted losses of £65m in the year they were promoted (before they "wrote off" a chunk) = £58m fine, or 89% of the losses
Plucky posted losses of £38m the year they were promoted = £7.6m fine, or 20% of the losses

Still looks hugely disproportionate to me.
 




Murray 17

Well-known member
Jul 6, 2003
2,159
Great, the cheats have run out of options.

Bournemouth and Leicester coughed up, but more importantly did not put a creative accounting adjustment through the accounts to cheat the rules signed up to by all clubs. QPR did.

Didn't Leicester allegedly pay a 'marketing company' millions to promote their club abroad? It was then suggested that this 'company' didn't have a phone number or email address?
 




Westdene Seagull

aka Cap'n Carl Firecrotch
NSC Patreon
Oct 27, 2003
20,938
The arse end of Hangleton
So the Directors effectively wrote off £60m worth of debts, and the FL want to fine them another £60m on top of that. Presumably they're looking to force QPR into administration - not sure anyone wins with that scenario.

Not that I'm defending QPR's actions in breaching FFP, but a punishment that would potentially force a club into insolvency does seem excessive.

But if that wasn't against the rules you could get a owner spending a billion and then writing it off and thus breaking the point of the rules. Hope they get everything they deserve. They knowingly overspent, knew the rules and yet somehow think they shouldn't be punished.
 


hans kraay fan club

The voice of reason.
Helpful Moderator
Mar 16, 2005
61,094
Chandlers Ford
Didn't Leicester allegedly pay a 'marketing company' millions to promote their club abroad? It was then suggested that this 'company' didn't have a phone number or email address?

That wouldn't have helped much.

I think you mean that the marketing company PAID THEM, several million pounds, for the privilege of promoting their rights overseas.

And I think that esteemed company DID have an address, too. (Dave Richards' daughter's garden shed, if I recall).
 


Murray 17

Well-known member
Jul 6, 2003
2,159
That wouldn't have helped much.

I think you mean that the marketing company PAID THEM, several million pounds, for the privilege of promoting their rights overseas.

And I think that esteemed company DID have an address, too. (Dave Richards' daughter's garden shed, if I recall).
Yes, that's what I meant! [emoji6]
 




One Teddy Maybank

Well-known member
NSC Patreon
Aug 4, 2006
21,485
Worthing
According to Sky, Bournemouth and Leicester are watching closely, so perhaps they haven't paid it off.........

-40 points would be fair if you ask me, then we just need to finish above Palace.
 


Easy 10

Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Jul 5, 2003
61,674
Location Location
But if that wasn't against the rules you could get a owner spending a billion and then writing it off and thus breaking the point of the rules. Hope they get everything they deserve. They knowingly overspent, knew the rules and yet somehow think they shouldn't be punished.

Absolutely they should be punished. But my point is that the fine seems disproportionately large when compared to Bournemouths "little miracle" in their promotion year. Both clubs cheated to go up, but one of them is getting lined up for a fine x8 larger than the other for breaching FFP. Just wondered why is all.
 


Driver8

On the road...
NSC Patreon
Jul 31, 2005
15,952
North Wales
Absolutely they should be punished. But my point is that the fine seems disproportionately large when compared to Bournemouths "little miracle" in their promotion year. Both clubs cheated to go up, but one of them is getting lined up for a fine x8 larger than the other for breaching FFP. Just wondered why is all.

They cheated (lost) more than PLB.
 




Easy 10

Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Jul 5, 2003
61,674
Location Location
They cheated (lost) more than PLB.

Not 8 times more though. An (admittedly) quick Google search said QPR lost £65m, whilst the muff lost £38m.

Be good to have [MENTION=31]El Presidente[/MENTION] 's input, once he's put his special sock in the wash.
 


Papa Lazarou

Living in a De Zerbi wonderland
Jul 7, 2003
18,840
Worthing
Yes. [MENTION=31]El Presidente[/MENTION] is clearly the best qualified pwrson to talk about this. I assume he's busy on the telly or radio currently.
 


LlcoolJ

Mama said knock you out.
Oct 14, 2009
12,982
Sheffield
Absolutely they should be punished. But my point is that the fine seems disproportionately large when compared to Bournemouths "little miracle" in their promotion year. Both clubs cheated to go up, but one of them is getting lined up for a fine x8 larger than the other for breaching FFP. Just wondered why is all.

Isn't it just because QPR are in the FL and PLB and Leicester aren't at present?
 




Easy 10

Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Jul 5, 2003
61,674
Location Location
Isn't it just because QPR are in the FL and PLB and Leicester aren't at present?

I wondered that, but PLB paid their fine to the FL whilst in the PL.



What do we want ? No more acronyms
When do we want them ? ASAP.
 


seagullwedgee

Well-known member
Aug 9, 2005
2,981
I’m no expert on this, but I think QPRs issue is in relation to losses in the 13/14 season, when losses were capped at £8m for that season, and AFCBs issue is in relation to losses in the 14/15 season, which is when the “£39m allowable losses over a 3 year period” came in. I guess there are many ways you can calculate the nature of AFCBs indiscretion, given that averaging rule.
 


Thunder Bolt

Ordinary Supporter
So how come QPR are getting clobbered for £58m, whilst Bournemouth were fined £7.6m for doing the same thing ? ???

Is it because QPR are back in the FL ? Or weren't they plucky enough ? Seems a bit unfair.

The article says they broke FFP and threw in the £60M, so broke the rules in two different ways.

Under the Football League's 2012 rules, Championship clubs were permitted losses of £8m in 2013-14, with clubs promoted to the Premier League subject to a fine if they exceeded that figure.

After a sliding scale of fines on losses between £8m and £18m, losses above £18m would be punished by a fine imposed on a strict pound-for-pound basis.

QPR's actual loss for the 2013-14 campaign, in which they won the Championship play-off final, was £9.8m.

However, then-owner Tony Fernandes, now co-chairman, and other shareholders also wrote off £60m in loans as an "exceptional item".
 


sandfacer

New member
Oct 24, 2017
3
looking at the figures i have seen brighton losses in last 3 years
10.5m
24.44m
unknown
so if over 3 years you are allowed to lose 39m think brighton could be in the same boat unless they managed to stay under a 3m loss for there promotion year ? thoughts
 




Weststander

Well-known member
NSC Patreon
Aug 25, 2011
63,407
Withdean area
So the Directors effectively wrote off £60m worth of debts, and the FL want to fine them another £60m on top of that. Presumably they're looking to force QPR into administration - not sure anyone wins with that scenario.

Not that I'm defending QPR's actions in breaching FFP, but a punishment that would potentially force a club into insolvency does seem excessive.

No.

Fernandes deliberately wrote off part of the loan to the company, via the Profit and Loss Account, rather than by the orthodox football club route of capitalising the debt into share capital.

There could have been one reason, to try to bypass FFP by saying the loan write off credit was allowable football operations income.

In accounting terms that nonsense. Under FFP it's disallowed in the calculations.

Every step of the way, authorities have found it to be nonsense.
 
Last edited:





Paying the bills

Latest Discussions

Paying the bills

Paying the bills

Paying the bills

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here