FFP sorted

[QPRDave]

But how does FFP solve that mate?

It doesn't stop the owners from spending the money in the first place, it just means that the clubs face a fine a couple of seasons afterwards. Portsmouth would actually be in even more sh*te if FFP had existed back then, cos they would have had to pay a fine on top of all the other turmoil they were going through.

I accept there is a problem in football with irresponsible owners, and clubs overspending. But FFP as it is right now is not the answer. A better plan would be to ensure that every club by Football League regulations has to have a competent CFO that will be held personally responsible if clubs were spend beyond reasonable and affordable limits.

Exactly ....the FL decide the best way to deal with rogue owners is to heavily fine the club, and stop them trading
and competing ....load of ol b*llocks

[gator]

I can't believe what I've read. Strange comparison and he will never be a prolific goal scorer like Sir les

If you read the conversation I was having with 1973 he was maintaining we need to buy a keeper because Smithies would be a big loss which will cost us points and potentially take us down, he referred to the LF sale and how his replacements weren't good enough, that's where the analogy came from!

[Undecided]

A better plan would be to ensure that every club by Football League regulations has to have a competent CFO that will be held personally responsible if clubs were spend beyond reasonable and affordable limits.

Can't see many people would take that role unless paid an absolute mint! The average CFO's worth would probably be dwarfed by any unreasonable spend, so what would holding them personally responsible achieve? Why would anyone take a job on those terms, and lose all when they could defo get an equally well rewarded job elsewhere without the risk of personal ruin? How many would stand up to a charismatic bully of an owner, or even keep his job if they did?

'Fraid that plan is dead in the water.

Nope, its the owners that must somehow carry the can

[Tarbie]

Can't see many people would take that role unless paid an absolute mint! The average CFO's worth would probably be dwarfed by any unreasonable spend, so what would holding them personally responsible achieve? Why would anyone take a job on those terms, and lose all when they could defo get an equally well rewarded job elsewhere without the risk of personal ruin? How many would stand up to a charismatic bully of an owner, or even keep his job if they did?

'Fraid that plan is dead in the water.

Nope, its the owners that must somehow carry the can

Plenty of industries are required by regulatory bodies to have a financial experts that carry personal accountability for overseeing certain aspects of the accounting. In any company in the UK where you are required to move money around, an Anti Money Laundering specialist (or MLRO) is required by law. They carry personal responsibility for compliance when it comes to money laundering, and will lose their license if they are seen to be negligible. Likewise companies who work the stock exchange, they are all required to have a compliance officer.

I don't see why it would be so hard to have a similar role in football, and make it a requirement of football league registration. If all clubs signed to agree to certain parameters of what they could spend (i.e. no more than 10% more expenditure than revenue in any particular season, or similar), I don't see why you couldn't make someone within the club accountable for enforcing this. Whether it be a CFO, or specifically appointed individual.

Makes a hell of a lot more sense to me than waiting for clubs to mess up and then hitting them with a huge fine.

[Undecided]

Plenty of industries are required by regulatory bodies to have a financial experts that carry personal accountability for overseeing certain aspects of the accounting. In any company in the UK where you are required to move money around, an Anti Money Laundering specialist (or MLRO) is required by law. They carry personal responsibility for compliance when it comes to money laundering, and will lose their license if they are seen to be negligible. Likewise companies who work the stock exchange, they are all required to have a compliance officer.

I don't see why it would be so hard to have a similar role in football, and make it a requirement of football league registration. If all clubs signed to agree to certain parameters of what they could spend (i.e. no more than 10% more expenditure than revenue in any particular season, or similar), I don't see why you couldn't make someone within the club accountable for enforcing this. Whether it be a CFO, or specifically appointed individual.

Makes a hell of a lot more sense to me than waiting for clubs to mess up and then hitting them with a huge fine.

Oh I see.

You want football clubs to be Regulated in the same manner as a Financial Institution. Rules books on Conduct of Business, Training and Competence, Capital Adequacy, Financial accounting, Quarterly reporting, Anti Money Laundering, Authorised Officers the list goes on... They are all inter-dependent.

Actually, I often wonder if the Financial Adequacy rules should be applied to football clubs, but I think everyone would find them far too prescriptive.

[OldR]

You must've have been what..........fifteen/sixteen back then?

Ha ha!

[OldR]

It ruins competition and holds backs progress.

We had more progress under Jim Gregory spending peanuts than we did under the rich boys.

Oh, and Gregory never once put us close to going out of business or in significant debt.

[Awin]

We had more progress under Jim Gregory spending peanuts than we did under the rich boys.

Oh, and Gregory never once put us close to going out of business or in significant debt.

I agree but it was a different time and football wasn’t the corperative beast it is today.

[lymehoop]

We had more progress under Jim Gregory spending peanuts than we did under the rich boys.

Oh, and Gregory never once put us close to going out of business or in significant debt.

tut tut, he wanted to amalgamate us with Foolham though

[lymehoop]

. . .and Brentford

[OldR]

I agree but it was a different time and football wasn’t the corperative beast it is today.

But football is still 11 men vs 11 men... The problem is, in my opinion, the 'I want it now' type chairmen and fans. A good scouting network and a good academy will allow us to progress as a club. Sure, we might have to sell our best players every now and then and it might take 10-15 years to fully reap the rewards but corporate age or not it can happen.

Another thing everyone needs to accept is that we're QPR and we're never going to be as big as Manchester United, Arsenal or Chelsea. We shouldn't be in a position where we believe we can compete with AC Milan for targets as happened. We can't allow our club to be run on extortionate debt and financial mismanagement that would make Robert Maxwell blush.

We are who we are.

[OldR]

tut tut, he wanted to amalgamate us with Foolham though

Wasn't that Bulstrude?

[Undecided]

But football is still 11 men vs 11 men... The problem is, in my opinion, the 'I want it now' type chairmen and fans. A good scouting network and a good academy will allow us to progress as a club. Sure, we might have to sell our best players every now and then and it might take 10-15 years to fully reap the rewards but corporate age or not it can happen.

Another thing everyone needs to accept is that we're QPR and we're never going to be as big as Manchester United, Arsenal or Chelsea. We shouldn't be in a position where we believe we can compete with AC Milan for targets as happened. We can't allow our club to be run on extortionate debt and financial mismanagement that would make Robert Maxwell blush.

We are who we are.

I agree with you. Trouble is in 10-15 years there'll be another generation of fans (hopefully) and will they heed our words of warning, or will they want PL glory having waited so long, like we did before NW led us there.

[Ginger Ninja]

But football is still 11 men vs 11 men... The problem is, in my opinion, the 'I want it now' type chairmen and fans. A good scouting network and a good academy will allow us to progress as a club. Sure, we might have to sell our best players every now and then and it might take 10-15 years to fully reap the rewards but corporate age or not it can happen.

Another thing everyone needs to accept is that we're QPR and we're never going to be as big as Manchester United, Arsenal or Chelsea. We shouldn't be in a position where we believe we can compete with AC Milan for targets as happened. We can't allow our club to be run on extortionate debt and financial mismanagement that would make Robert Maxwell blush.

We are who we are.

Best post I've read on here in a long time. Fully agree mate.

[Timmy the Doc]

But football is still 11 men vs 11 men... The problem is, in my opinion, the 'I want it now' type chairmen and fans. A good scouting network and a good academy will allow us to progress as a club. Sure, we might have to sell our best players every now and then and it might take 10-15 years to fully reap the rewards but corporate age or not it can happen.

Another thing everyone needs to accept is that we're QPR and we're never going to be as big as Manchester United, Arsenal or Chelsea. We shouldn't be in a position where we believe we can compete with AC Milan for targets as happened. We can't allow our club to be run on extortionate debt and financial mismanagement that would make Robert Maxwell blush.

We are who we are.

We are who we are means we should be jumping between the Premier League and Championship. No need to be too modest.