Are them tossers Shortland, Firth and that bald bastard Martin Howells still spreading their filth on twitter?

38 minutes ago, wakey said:

Fuck's sake.

No I don't.

Convinced you're just on a wind up now so I'll leave you to it.

Oh no, not a lovers tiff immediately after kissing and making up following years of spurning me...

What exactly was your original post about that started all this?

There was nothing you wrote that I had not already said apart from this little dig...

11 hours ago, wakey said:

This stuff is tedious as fuck in the first place, but at least be accurate instead of speculating what may or may not be left in the pot.

So if you don't think it's £18m, then what do you reckon it is, or maybe you think I might actually know what I was talking about?

Luckily, revenue will increase sharply and operating costs will be stable, if not decrease. Be reet.

Edited June 24Jun 24 by jmjhb

18 minutes ago, jmjhb said:

Luckily, revenue will increase sharply and operating costs will be stable, if not decrease. Be reet.

Let's hope it is.

I don't think the new Squad Cost Rules (SCR) have been finalised yet but from what I understand it is saying is that squads can be built up to a sum of 85% of revenue.

What my worry is though is can all the other expenditure the club has be met from the remaining 15% of revenue?

If it can't, we trade at a loss and whatever loss we trade at will have to me met from the £33m of permitted new equity over the next 3 years.

So whatever our trading losses amount to would have to be deducted from the £33m first and then the squad each year built (or strengthened) from whatever money is left over each year.

That's why the more equity that can be pumped into the club before the new rules start 1st July 2026 (next week!) the more flexibility we will have to cope with the new rules.

The next problem is who has the best part of £50-£60m to put into the club over the next 3 years?

As you say though, whatever happens it always ends up reet in the end.

The likelihood is we'll still make a loss next season but it'll be dramatically lower. I think Plymouth were the only team to make a profit in 24/25.

Our revenue when we finished outside the playoffs is already comparable with lower mid-table Championship teams - so with the extra TV money and other opportunities we'll be top half of that table.

Edited June 24Jun 24 by jmjhb

3 minutes ago, jmjhb said:

The likelihood is we'll still make a loss next season but it'll be dramatically lower. I think Plymouth were the only team to make a profit in 24/25.

Our revenue when we finished outside the playoffs is already comparable with lower mid-table Championship teams - so with the extra TV money and other opportunities we'll be top half of that table.

Hope you are bob on.

Still need to put a team together first though.

5 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

Hope you are bob on.

Still need to put a team together first though.

Fairly clean slate in that regard.

14 minutes ago, jmjhb said:

Fairly clean slate in that regard.

IF we are going to buy anyone, the same logic applies in that if we can do so before Squad Cost Rules (SCR) comes in next week, then they would not be included under those rules and not be counted against any new equity being put in during next season.

Can't see any significant transfers (Kenny, ACD,) taking place next week though.

And any sale (Randall) would be better off taking place from next week onwards because that would count as increased revenue towards SCR.

3 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

IF we are going to buy anyone, the same logic applies in that if we can do so before Squad Cost Rules (SCR) comes in next week, then they would not be included under those rules and not be counted against any new equity being put in during next season.

Can't see any significant transfers (Kenny, ACD,) taking place next week though.

And any sale (Randall) would be better off taking place from next week onwards because that would count as increased revenue towards SCR.

Genuinely can't see anyone coming in for Randall unless it's a League 2 team, might be a cracking player in there but it's well noted that coming to Bolton has not worked in his favour. He's had a poor spell at 3 clubs now..

5 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

IF we are going to buy anyone, the same logic applies in that if we can do so before Squad Cost Rules (SCR) comes in next week, then they would not be included under those rules and not be counted against any new equity being put in during next season.

Can't see any significant transfers (Kenny, ACD,) taking place next week though.

And any sale (Randall) would be better off taking place from next week onwards because that would count as increased revenue towards SCR.

I meant from a squad-building point of view; the two transfers (a free and compensation) barely move the needle anyway.

I was really meaning when proper money changed hands (£1m plus sort of thing) I only chucked out Kenny and ACD names as examples as purchases and Randall as a sale but it could apply to anyone to anyone we buy/sell.

Tbh though I don't expect any such movement until clubs are back from their holibobs, probably after the World Cup is finished.

I've not paid much attention to these new Squad Cost Rules but taking a brief look, basing any sort of relative cap on revenue generated seems to be similar to me to the issues I've always had with the existing PSR rules in that it just protects the status quo for the big boys that either already have huge revenue streams or their owners can artificially generate them through sponsorships and money moving amongst their different entities.

Any cap like that, whilst I understand the desire to protect clubs from rogue ownership, only ever seems to limit competition in my eyes.

24 minutes ago, meanderson93 said:

I've not paid much attention to these new Squad Cost Rules but taking a brief look, basing any sort of relative cap on revenue generated seems to be similar to me to the issues I've always had with the existing PSR rules in that it just protects the status quo for the big boys that either already have huge revenue streams or their owners can artificially generate them through sponsorships and money moving amongst their different entities.

Any cap like that, whilst I understand the desire to protect clubs from rogue ownership, only ever seems to limit competition in my eyes.

Surely we'd be ok to spend relatively if someone came in with cash due our size?

As opposed to some fucker buying Burton Albion and spending £100m on players

57 minutes ago, gonzo said:

Surely we'd be ok to spend relatively if someone came in with cash due our size?

As opposed to some fucker buying Burton Albion and spending £100m on players

No one can do that as far as I can interpret the new rules.

In order to run a club, buy players, pay players wages, etc, there has to be money in the club to do so - yes?

There are two main ways the money get's there, either by trading at a profit (Including selling players), or the owners put money into it (equity).

But our club doesn't generate any profits (we trade at a loss) and the rules state that the owners can only put £33m of equity into the club over a 3 year period.

(With £15m being the most you can put into the club in any one year).

So even if Elon Musk bought us, he could only put £15m maximum into the club in any one year - and if we had a trading year like the last reported one (June 2025) where we had a trading deficit of £14m, it would mean we had just £1m available to us as a transfer kitty for that season.

Its NOT about how rich an owner is, it's more to do with clubs generating enough profits to not need the owners to keep pouring millions into their clubs and put an end to issues such as happened at Sheffield Wednesday with Chansiri.

Saying that though there are probably clever financial ways around the rule such as when City's owners sponsored their own stadium, or Chelsea selling their women's team, have done previously (but now are outlawed).

Here is a link to EFL's statement about SCR but note their last paragraph as I've still to see their final version.

Championship and League One Clubs approve changes to financial control rules - The English Football League

3 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

it would mean we had just £1m available to us as a transfer kitty for that season.

Don't forget that's in addition to 85% of revenue

Just now, jmjhb said:

Don't forget that's in addition to 85% of revenue

True.

However in our last accounts published the players wages alone (not including any money we spent on new player transfers) was 98% of revenue!

Also that would only leave the owners a total £18m of capital for the remaining two seasons to cover expected trading losses

I suspect that the SCR rules are being revised as unless the EFL have sent them to the clubs already, and the press have yet to see them, that they've left it awfully late for the clubs to plan how to apply them within their financial plans, with only a week to the rules actually starting.

Edited June 25Jun 25 by Sluffy

Keep wanting to not get sucked in but here goes..... its incredibly dull for most.

The running costs include the amortisation on player contracts Sluffy they are not seperate 'pots'.

You can sell someone for 1.5 million buy another for 6 and show breakeven in year - and its nothing to do with when cash payments are made.

Say you sell Thomason for 1.5m whose on the balance sheet at zero and buy a replacement for £6m on a 4 year contract your player trading cost on your accounts is zero. (£1.5m less £6m divided by 4).

June 25 accounts will be carrying heavy amortisation charges on Collins, Vic, Schon, McAtee and Randall.

June 26 will show a profit over book value on Tommo, Collins and Schon (if we got about over half what we paid assuming 4yr contract). Vic's gone only McAtee and Randall remain. More recent cash signings (Erahon Gale Simons) are at lower cost on long contracts.

Edited June 25Jun 25 by RoadRunnerFan

3 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

True.

However in our last accounts published the players wages alone (not including any money we spent on new player transfers) was 98% of revenue!

Also that would only leave the owners a total £18m of capital for the remaining two seasons to cover expected trading losses

I suspect that the SCR rules are being revised as unless the EFL have sent them to the clubs already, and the press have yet to see them, that they've left it awfully late for the clubs to plan how to apply them within their financial plans, with only a week to the rules actually starting.

Some of that data is almost 2 years/seasons old now and practically irrelevant.

SCR was brought in partly for it to operate in 'real time' but I'm a little sceptical as to how that works in reality. I think it's based more on Regulation 16.

2 minutes ago, RoadRunnerFan said:

Keep wanting to not get sucked in but here goes..... its incredibly dull for most.

The running costs include the amortisation on player contracts Sluffy they are not seperate 'pots'.

You can sell someone for 1.5 million buy another for 6 and show breakeven in year - and its nothing to do with when cash payments are made.

Say you sell Thomason for 1.5m whose on the balance sheet at zero and buy a replacement for £6m on a 4 year contract your player trading cost on your accounts is zero. (£1.5m less £6m divided by 4).

June 25 accounts will be carrying heavy amortisation charges on Collins, Vic, Schon, McAtee and Randall.

June 26 will show a profit over book value on Tommo, Collins and Schon (if we got about over half what we paid assuming 4yr contract). Vic's gone only McAtee and Randall remain. More recent cash signings (Erahon Gale Simonss) are at lower cost on long contracts.

All true mate, thank you.

But the new SCR rules are in regards to clubs turnover in the coming season, amortisation is referring to Profit and Loss, not revenue.

That's how I understand things anyway.

Surely all clubs would be well advised to pay all outstanding transfer fees before the 1st of July this year if possible??

Just now, masi 51 said:

Surely all clubs would be well advised to pay all outstanding transfer fees before the 1st of July this year if possible??

The vast majority of transfers below the PL are over several instalments anyway, just from a cash flow point of view.

Edited June 25Jun 25 by jmjhb

6 minutes ago, jmjhb said:

Some of that data is almost 2 years/seasons old now and practically irrelevant.

SCR was brought in partly for it to operate in 'real time' but I'm a little sceptical as to how that works in reality. I think it's based more on Regulation 16.

Well I don't know if the data is 2 seasons old but I suggest it is not practically irrelevant to the EFL as their article which I linked to was issued as recently as last month!

I know it only shows 15 May on the news release itself but the following is what it says under the link from my Google search for the article...

Championship and League One Clubs approve changes to ...

The English Football League

https://efl.com › news › may › championship-and-leagu...

15 May 2026 — The SCR system limits Clubs spending on Player and Manager-related costs (including transfer fees) to a set percentage of their income, 

25 minutes ago, RoadRunnerFan said:

Keep wanting to not get sucked in but here goes..... its incredibly dull for most.

The running costs include the amortisation on player contracts Sluffy they are not seperate 'pots'.

You can sell someone for 1.5 million buy another for 6 and show breakeven in year - and its nothing to do with when cash payments are made.

Say you sell Thomason for 1.5m whose on the balance sheet at zero and buy a replacement for £6m on a 4 year contract your player trading cost on your accounts is zero. (£1.5m less £6m divided by 4).

June 25 accounts will be carrying heavy amortisation charges on Collins, Vic, Schon, McAtee and Randall.

June 26 will show a profit over book value on Tommo, Collins and Schon (if we got about over half what we paid assuming 4yr contract). Vic's gone only McAtee and Randall remain. More recent cash signings (Erahon Gale Simons) are at lower cost on long contracts.

You should do this numbers thing for a living mate

4 minutes ago, masi 51 said:

Surely all clubs would be well advised to pay all outstanding transfer fees before the 1st of July this year if possible??

I wouldn't think so.

Paying off existing creditors would simply effect the clubs Profit and Loss account for the current year and would have no effect on next years revenue (income) which is the basis of how SCR will work.

1 hour ago, jmjhb said:

Don't forget that's in addition to 85% of revenue

🙄