Leeds and Burnley complain to Premier League about Everton

[Ken Hairy 3,773]

https://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/sport/football/leeds-united/relegation-battling-leeds-united-and-burnley-write-to-premier-league-over-evertons-ps3718m-losses-3703451

Will obviously come to nothing, but fair complaint or sour grapes? 

Edited May 20, 2022 by Ken Hairy

[hogesar 9,681]

The Premier League want Everton in the league, so they'll stay in the league 😉

Equally, had our club done similar many on here would be ripping our own board to shreds, so guess its only right they do the same to super ambitious, won't accept relegation Leeds United...😀

[Greavsy 2,415]

funny how they didnt complain earlier though! 

[cambridgeshire canary 6,740]

Deduct Everton -20 points, only fair

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

Relegate Everton, Burnley and Leeds.

[Graham Paddons Beard 2,434]

This couldn’t be more football if it tried . 
 

Wait till you nearly go down and suddenly find a breach of the rules . All the other members of the league couldn’t care less. 
 

We are so dead and buried we can’t be bothered . 
 

Point is , there has either been a breach or there hasn’t . If there has it shouldn’t be down to two invested clubs to draw it to the attention of the authorities. Everton’s spending has been well known for several years. 
 

 

[Mello Yello 2,296]

Yorkshire and Lancashire blubfest.....

Take it on the chin.....we did.....and we're the better for it...."WAAAAAHHHH!"....'sniffle'.....

[Chelm Canary 404]

9 minutes ago, Graham Paddons Beard said:

 

We are so dead and buried we can’t be bothered . 

Yep. I don't see Watford up in arms either. 

[sgncfc 1,228]

There hasn't been a breach if it's accepted that Covid losses were as high as Everton suggest. It's going to be tough in all the circumstances to find an FFP breach over the last 3 years when more than a season was played behind closed doors.

[Graham Paddons Beard 2,434]

7 minutes ago, sgncfc said:

There hasn't been a breach if it's accepted that Covid losses were as high as Everton suggest. It's going to be tough in all the circumstances to find an FFP breach over the last 3 years when more than a season was played behind closed doors.

Agreed. This argument will negate FFP for a year or two. 

[PurpleCanary 5,562]

2 hours ago, Greavsy said:

funny how they didnt complain earlier though! 

Premier League clubs have been complaining about Everton's finances, and particularly how much of a loss they attribute to covid, for some months now. There was talk of getting a forensic accountant to go through them.

[Icecream Snow 761]

Believe Everton were claiming £170m of Covid losses, compared to Villa at £60m and Leeds at £23m

[sgncfc 1,228]

12 hours ago, Icecream Snow said:

Believe Everton were claiming £170m of Covid losses, compared to Villa at £60m and Leeds at £23m

They are, but this includes losses on players market value, which because they had spent so much, is much higher than others and which they claim is due to Covid. Legally, they are in the clear I think - distasteful as it all seems. Another example of the lack of corporate governance at the highest levels of football, unfortunately. A regulator is long overdue.

[Jersey Canary 143]

Everton can offset costs of the new ground and that’s why their losses are higher than the other clubs. 

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

Next season will be over by the time a forensic audit is done.

[DraytonBoy 155]

Even as a Leeds fan this smacks of a desperate attempt to avoid relegation at any cost, Everton's financial mess has been known about for sometime so you have to ask why these two clubs didn't say anything before. 

[dylanisabaddog 4,931]

12 minutes ago, DraytonBoy said:

Even as a Leeds fan this smacks of a desperate attempt to avoid relegation at any cost, Everton's financial mess has been known about for sometime so you have to ask why these two clubs didn't say anything before. 

I doubt anyone would have considered action unless it  directly affected them which it clearly now has. Sky News suggests that Leeds and Burnley have the support of other unnamed clubs - 

 

If there has been a breach they want rules to be enforced, and the maximum punishment is a points deduction.

 

They want this dealt with before next season's fixtures are released on June 16. They want a quick resolution - unlike the Premier League's investigation into Manchester City's alleged breaches of financial fair play rules which have been going on for more than three years.

 

There is believed to have been encouragement from other Premier League clubs to take this course of action.

[dylanisabaddog 4,931]

Sorry, posted that before I'd finished. The Everton claim is that amortisation (losses in the simplest of terms) on players contracts have been exacerbated by Covid. That is nonsense. 

[The Real Buh 3,444]

I think the fact they are as vanilla and bland as they come for years and years has camouflaged the fact that Everton and their fans are filthy. 
 

scousers though, I guess. Shouldn’t really be too surprised.

[cornish sam 954]

I think that lots of clubs should have been crying foul about Everton's finances for a while now, but the majority are probably scared that people will start looking too closely at theirs...

Premier League is financially corrupt and has been for years, problem is no one really wants to risk their own house of cards falling down so don't dare knock the table

[Beetley Yellow 57]

Nothing will come if it IMO, Everton (and more importantly their access to funds) are too important for the PL to them to exercise any sanction, justified or not. A convenient ’blind eye’ will be cast (as applied to ownership by murderous regimes, FFP irregularities by oil-nation funded clubs, ‘harmless’ gambling sponsorship etc etc). ‘Ker-ching’, “keep your noses in the trough lads, nobody will notice”.

[Badger 2,406]

Swiss Ramble did a thread on it. Although the £373 loss seems miles over the £105 million allowable he says that Everton can reasonable show that they were only 39 million above what is allowable. Everton argue that their covid losses were far more than what is reported in their accounts though due to a depression in the transfer market which stopped them raising money from player sales and having to keep (and therefore pay) players that they did not want.

They do have some defence but it is stretching it a bit.

Details for those interested are below or a link to the full thread is at the bottom

1. £373m losses over the last three years are by far the worst in the Premier League, around £150m more than the next highest losses

2. The Premier League Profitability and Sustainability (P&S) rules allow a £5m loss a year, which can then be boosted by £30m equity injection, giving allowable losses of £35m a year. This works out to £105m over the 3-year monitoring period.

3. However, the Premier League have relaxed the regulations in order to help with the impact of COVID, so the 2022 monitoring period will assess the seasons 2019/20 and 2020/21 as a single (average) period. This  it means that their loss over the adjusted three-year monitoring periods is “only” £255m, as opposed to the £373m reported

4. Clubs are allowed to make deductions for “good” expenditure, including infrastructure, academy, community & women’s football. Worth around £41m to Everton

5. They have incurred £29m costs on their new stadium in this period, which can also be deducted. (combined take the loss down to £185 million)

6. The Premier League also allows clubs to adjust for COVID losses in the P&S calculation. Based on the £82m impact detailed in the accounts, averaged to £41m for 2019/20 and 2020/21, the net loss is further reduced to £144m. However, this would still be £39m above the £105m target. Everton argue that they lost a further £88 million due to covid, claiming a significant deterioration in the transfer market, leading to an inability to generate higher player sales profits plus more costs incurred (wages and amortisation).

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1527982058001375232.html?utm_source=subscriptions_mailer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=real_time

 

[dylanisabaddog 4,931]

35 minutes ago, Badger said:

Swiss Ramble did a thread on it. Although the £373 loss seems miles over the £105 million allowable he says that Everton can reasonable show that they were only 39 million above what is allowable. Everton argue that their covid losses were far more than what is reported in their accounts though due to a depression in the transfer market which stopped them raising money from player sales and having to keep (and therefore pay) players that they did not want.

They do have some defence but it is stretching it a bit.

Details for those interested are below or a link to the full thread is at the bottom

1. £373m losses over the last three years are by far the worst in the Premier League, around £150m more than the next highest losses

2. The Premier League Profitability and Sustainability (P&S) rules allow a £5m loss a year, which can then be boosted by £30m equity injection, giving allowable losses of £35m a year. This works out to £105m over the 3-year monitoring period.

3. However, the Premier League have relaxed the regulations in order to help with the impact of COVID, so the 2022 monitoring period will assess the seasons 2019/20 and 2020/21 as a single (average) period. This  it means that their loss over the adjusted three-year monitoring periods is “only” £255m, as opposed to the £373m reported

4. Clubs are allowed to make deductions for “good” expenditure, including infrastructure, academy, community & women’s football. Worth around £41m to Everton

5. They have incurred £29m costs on their new stadium in this period, which can also be deducted. (combined take the loss down to £185 million)

6. The Premier League also allows clubs to adjust for COVID losses in the P&S calculation. Based on the £82m impact detailed in the accounts, averaged to £41m for 2019/20 and 2020/21, the net loss is further reduced to £144m. However, this would still be £39m above the £105m target. Everton argue that they lost a further £88 million due to covid, claiming a significant deterioration in the transfer market, leading to an inability to generate higher player sales profits plus more costs incurred (wages and amortisation).

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1527982058001375232.html?utm_source=subscriptions_mailer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=real_time

 

They claim Covid restricted their ability to sell players. Then they went out and bought Deli Ali which proved it is possible to sell just about anyone 😂

Edited May 21, 2022 by dylanisabaddog

[Branston Pickle 3,661]

It’s utterly ridiculous to have these rules if they aren’t policed and followed up - they all vote for them, after all.  The fact that Everton made those January player purchases has to be key - they definitely gave Everton an unfair advantage they shouldn’t have had..

That said, you can imagine Burnley and Leeds not giving a toss if they weren’t in relegation trouble.

Edited May 21, 2022 by Branston Pickle

[Badger 2,406]

1 hour ago, Branston Pickle said:

It’s utterly ridiculous to have these rules if they aren’t policed and followed up - they all vote for them, after all.  The fact that Everton made those January player purchases has to be key - they definitely gave Everton an unfair advantage they shouldn’t have had..

That said, you can imagine Burnley and Leeds not giving a toss if they weren’t in relegation trouble.

The purchases in January won't count for the calculation above as it's for the three years ending in 20-21. 

The accounts weren't published until late March (29th) so if the EPL are taking action we probably wouldn't know yet anyway but...

I suspect that there is a drive to be stricter with the new Profit and Sustainability rules as the bottom line it affects the profitability of other clubs. Most of the owners want to make money - if they are having to spend extra to compete, it reduces their profit.

The new rules by UEFA are reportedly more coherent on the monitoring side of thing - with predetermined punishments  etc already specified. The big clubs want profit - well policed P and S rules will help them achieve more of it.

[dylanisabaddog 4,931]

1 hour ago, Badger said:

The purchases in January won't count for the calculation above as it's for the three years ending in 20-21. 

The accounts weren't published until late March (29th) so if the EPL are taking action we probably wouldn't know yet anyway but...

I suspect that there is a drive to be stricter with the new Profit and Sustainability rules as the bottom line it affects the profitability of other clubs. Most of the owners want to make money - if they are having to spend extra to compete, it reduces their profit.

The new rules by UEFA are reportedly more coherent on the monitoring side of thing - with predetermined punishments  etc already specified. The big clubs want profit - well policed P and S rules will help them achieve more of it.

True to a certain extent but Manchester City and Newcastle are not remotely interested in profit. 

[Badger 2,406]

3 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

True to a certain extent but Manchester City and Newcastle are not remotely interested in profit. 

True, which is why other clubs are so keen to limit/ prevent cash injections from owners. We have discussed on another thread that nearly half the premier league now has US owners that are  very interested in making a profit. The 70% of turnover proposal could turn their ownership into a cash cow.

[dylanisabaddog 4,931]

58 minutes ago, Badger said:

True, which is why other clubs are so keen to limit/ prevent cash injections from owners. We have discussed on another thread that nearly half the premier league now has US owners that are  very interested in making a profit. The 70% of turnover proposal could turn their ownership into a cash cow.

Indeed. The purchase price for Chelsea shows that. And as I've bored you all with before, the ultimate way of making money is a European Super League. 

[Beetley Yellow 57]

3 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Indeed. The purchase price for Chelsea shows that. And as I've bored you all with before, the ultimate way of making money is a European Super League. 

It just has to happen, it’s more a question of when. For instance the simply crazy amounts PSG are offering Mbappé to stay will now be indicative of the ‘going rate’ for world class players- this surely cannot be sustainable without a further step up in revenue generation, the ESL is an inevitable consequence. As long as the so called ‘big clubs’ are told their headlong rush to financial oblivion means they have to leave their domestic leagues entirely that’s fine by me.