Financial Fair Play

[Jype 6,398]

  On 13/11/2014 at 17:41, didierforever said:

-49.4mil - 2012-13

1.4mil - 2011-12

18.4mil - 2013-14

whats our fascination with this .4???

anyways for the upcoming "monitoring period" 2012-15, we have a loss of 30mil pounds so far considering 2012-13 and 2013-14. considering the exemptions, which are 5mil per year (i think) on youth development, we still have a loss of 20mil pounds which is around 25.5 euros. the maximum loss can be 30 mil euros for this monitoring period.

but considering that the sales of luiz, lukaku will be included in the 2014-15 thing (and so far we have spent nothing in this season compared to about 60mil pounds last season), we will easily clear this monitoring period too.

great work by the board. absolutely awesome. COME ON CHELSEA!!!

Actually the exclusions for youth development costs, infrastructure etc. are way more than £5m a year, in fact I think it's closer to £15m p/a. Basically that makes sure we have absolutely nothing to worry about regarding FFP because like you said, the rules allow a certain amount of operating loss made during the monitoring period and I believe that as things stand with the excludable costs Chelsea's total FFP result for the years 2012-2014 will be a profit instead of a loss so for now I think we could even afford missing out on the CL for one season and still not be in any kind of trouble.

  On 13/11/2014 at 17:53, RoyalBlues said:

Wait, it is said that 'for the year ended in 30 June 2014', so it means only Mata, Kdb sales included? so that Luiz, Lukaku sales not included yet? really awesome if true.

Yep, that is correct. The sales of Luiz and Lukaku will be included next year and given the fact that the club's spending this year was much less than it was for the 13/14 season, which also ended trophyless if I might add, I wouldn't be surprised if the annual profit was in the region of £30-40m next year.

Just had a look at the FFP topic on Bluemoon to see what the City fans think about the news and it was really cute. According to them we would have made an £80m loss without the sales of Mata and Luiz, therefore failing FFP, and the only reason we passed was because of creative accounting and PSG laundering money with the David Luiz deal even though the Luiz deal was not even in the books for the 13/14 season. Fuck logic.

[the wes 7,212]

Bruce Buck delighted with profits of £18.4m

  Quote

"The club is naturally pleased to record a significant profit for 2013-14,'' said Buck. "By reaching the Champions League semi-final and maintaining a challenge in the Premier League until the final week of the season we demonstrated that, while improving our financial figures, we remained competitive in football's toughest club competitions.

"We financed player purchases from sales as the squad for this current season was shaped and our philosophy since Mr Abramovich acquired the club in 2003 has been to build upon success on the pitch.

"That is evident in the partnerships we signed and in our fanbase growth which contributed to the new record turnover figure and the profit made.

"We have done all of this at the same time as creating one of the world's leading football community programmes through the Chelsea Foundation.

"Going forward we have ambitious plans to build a pioneering global commercial programme, partnering with innovative and market-leading organisations from around the world.

"In the era of FFP, we must progress commercially to continue the circle of success to invest in the team and get results.''

Improved commercial activity, the new Premier League broadcasting deal and a significant surplus on player sales during the 12-month period contributed to the profit.

In a statement Chelsea, who pointed out ticket prices had been frozen at 2011-12 levels, said increased turnover demonstrated: "business growth continues in seasons without trophy success as well as in years when silverware is won''.

The statement continued: "In the past year we have signed new partnerships with Rotary, Hackett, Coral, William Lawson's, Indosat and Guangzhou R&F Football Club.

"The latest financial results combined with those from the previous two years mean that for the second monitoring period for FFP we will fall comfortably within the limits set by UEFA, who measure expenditure against the income from football-related activities. Chelsea also complied with FFP criteria over the first monitoring period.''

http://www.espnfc.co.uk/chelsea/story/2145148/chelsea-chairman-bruce-buck-delighted-with-profits-of-184m?

[didierforever 7,349]

  On 13/11/2014 at 18:00, Jype said:

Actually the exclusions for youth development costs, infrastructure etc. are way more than £5m a year, in fact I think it's closer to £15m p/a. Basically that makes sure we have absolutely nothing to worry about regarding FFP because like you said, the rules allow a certain amount of operating loss made during the monitoring period and I believe that as things stand with the excludable costs Chelsea's total FFP result for the years 2012-2014 will be a profit instead of a loss so for now I think we could even afford missing out on the CL for one season and still not be in any kind of trouble.

makes sense. otherwise we might have been in some bother for the 2011-12 and 2012-13 monitoring period.

[OhForAGreavsie 5,916]

  On 13/11/2014 at 18:00, Jype said:

Actually the exclusions for youth development costs, infrastructure etc. are way more than £5m a year, in fact I think it's closer to £15m p/a. Basically that makes sure we have absolutely nothing to worry about regarding FFP because like you said, the rules allow a certain amount of operating loss made during the monitoring period and I believe that as things stand with the excludable costs Chelsea's total FFP result for the years 2012-2014 will be a profit instead of a loss so for now I think we could even afford missing out on the CL for one season and still not be in any kind of trouble.

Yep, that is correct. The sales of Luiz and Lukaku will be included next year and given the fact that the club's spending this year was much less than it was for the 13/14 season, which also ended trophyless if I might add, I wouldn't be surprised if the annual profit was in the region of £30-40m next year.

Just had a look at the FFP topic on Bluemoon to see what the City fans think about the news and it was really cute. According to them we would have made an £80m loss without the sales of Mata and Luiz, therefore failing FFP, and the only reason we passed was because of creative accounting and PSG laundering money with the David Luiz deal even though the Luiz deal was not even in the books for the 13/14 season. Fuck logic.

Did you put them straight or did you leave them to marinade in their own bile?

[The Skipper 20,593]

So this is without the Luiz, Lukaku, Ba etc. deals... Very, very impressive. We're going to be caking in profits next season.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

Actually, Ian Herbert, who is usually reliable, the Luiz deal is included while the purchases of Cesc and Costa are not: http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/chelsea-finances-highflying-blues-set-to-announce-record-20m-profits-9857395.html?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

That's rather worrying to be honest. If that is really the case, then I imagine we'll struggle to break even next season.

[the wes 7,212]

[the wes 7,212]

  On 13/11/2014 at 18:34, CHOULO19 said:

Actually, Ian Herbert, who is usually reliable, the Luiz deal is included while the purchases of Cesc and Costa are not: http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/chelsea-finances-highflying-blues-set-to-announce-record-20m-profits-9857395.html?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

That's rather worrying to be honest. If that is really the case, then I imagine we'll struggle to break even next season.

signing a sponsor deal with turkish airlines would help fix that problem

[didierforever 7,349]

  On 13/11/2014 at 18:34, CHOULO19 said:

Actually, Ian Herbert, who is usually reliable, the Luiz deal is included while the purchases of Cesc and Costa are not: http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/chelsea-finances-highflying-blues-set-to-announce-record-20m-profits-9857395.html?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

That's rather worrying to be honest. If that is really the case, then I imagine we'll struggle to break even next season.

damn!!! it specifies 30th june 2014. the transfer of luiz officially happened on 13th june 2014. also, the transfer of cesc officially happened on 13th june 2014. so we will have to include it in. (http://www.chelseafc.com/news/latest-news/2014/06/fabregas-signs-for-chelsea.html)

so all calculations can be offset by 23mil (luiz 50mil - cesc 27mil).

if we had not included these, we would have incurred a loss of 5mil (odd) for a total transfer activity of 37mil (60 for the 2013-14 season - 23mil for these 2 deals).

this season, so far we would have spent 23mil which is still less than the previous season's transfer rate. i think we will be fine. only thing it does is make me sure of NO PIQUE. :blue scalf: :blue scalf:

[Chelsea? 892]

  On 13/11/2014 at 19:12, didierforever said:

damn!!! it specifies 30th june 2014. the transfer of luiz officially happened on 13th june 2014. also, the transfer of cesc officially happened on 13th june 2014. so we will have to include it in.

so all calculations can be offset by 23mil (luiz 50mil - cesc 27mil).

if we had not included these, we would have incurred a loss of 5mil (odd) for a total transfer activity of 37mil (60 for the 2013-14 season - 23mil for these 2 deals).

this season, so far we would have spent 23mil which is still less than the previous season's transfer rate. i think we will be fine. only thing it does is make me sure of NO PIQUE. :blue scalf: :blue scalf:

arent player sales amortized over the length of the players contract?

[didierforever 7,349]

  On 13/11/2014 at 19:19, Chelsea? said:

arent player sales amortized over the length of the players contract?

no sales are not amortized.

[Jype 6,398]

  On 13/11/2014 at 19:23, didierforever said:

no sales are not amortized.

Correct, but your figures are still somewhat off. You substracted the whole of Fabregas' £27m fee from the profits made on selling Luiz when it should have been amortised over the length of his contract and even if a part of the Fabregas deal was somehow included in the 13/14 finances because the transfer went through already in June it would not have been a significant amount because the amortised fee for half a month as well as two weeks worth of his wages do not count for much.

Also the Luiz deal, whether it was in these figures or the next year's, did not profit the club all of the £50m but rather somewhere around £36m when his remaining amortised book value became due.

No matter what Ian Herbert is saying in his article I'm still yet to be convinced that the Luiz money was really included here because it'd make no sense. The deal was announced in June before the deadline for the 13/14 financial year, that much is true, but it did not officially go through until the 1st of July when the transfer window opened in France and therefore any money gained from the sale should only affect the club's finances for the 14/15 season, which goes from the 1st of July 2014 to June 30th 2015. Guess we'll have to wait for one of the experts (The Swiss Ramble, Jake Cohen etc.) to put their minds to it and give us a proper answer on the matter.

[didierforever 7,349]

  On 13/11/2014 at 20:53, Jype said:

Correct, but your figures are still somewhat off. You substracted the whole of Fabregas' £27m fee from the profits made on selling Luiz when it should have been amortised over the length of his contract and even if a part of the Fabregas deal was somehow included in the 13/14 finances because the transfer went through already in June it would not have been a significant amount because the amortised fee for half a month as well as two weeks worth of his wages do not count for much.

Also the Luiz deal, whether it was in these figures or the next year's, did not profit the club all of the £50m but rather somewhere around £36m when his remaining amortised book value became due.

No matter what Ian Herbert is saying in his article I'm still yet to be convinced that the Luiz money was really included here because it'd make no sense. The deal was announced in June before the deadline for the 13/14 financial year, that much is true, but it did not officially go through until the 1st of July when the transfer window opened in France and therefore any money gained from the sale should only affect the club's finances for the 14/15 season, which goes from the 1st of July 2014 to June 30th 2015. Guess we'll have to wait for one of the experts (The Swiss Ramble, Jake Cohen etc.) to put their minds to it and give us a proper answer on the matter.

you were right. the luiz deal was probably not included.

http://weaintgotnohistory.sbnation.com/2014/11/13/7214597/chelsea-finances-future-ffp-fair-play

[RoyalBlues 4,050]

This damn thing, really make me confused. Whatever it is, we made a profit last season is what important. Next year we will get a much better prize money (hopefully), better sponsorship money, and hopefully we could have some profit again.

[Muzchap 8,966]

The amount of profit is almost irrelevant- the fact that we have turned around a loss making club into one breaking even is a testament to our advancement

We have a tiny stadium and are losing out on £30 million year in match day revenue

City - are REALLY struggling- when they shouldn't !

I'm impressed by our shrewd financial dealings - long may it continue - and if we do have to move to Twickenham then so be it for a few seasons. If we could get a 65k+ stadium - we would be in a great position. Think Bayern Munich - since the Allianz - their revenues have been extraordinary in the Bundesliga- even with the cheaper ticket prices. Stadium = sustainability

[iseah100 5,612]

Fuck FFP. Shit confuses the fuck out of me.

[didierforever 7,349]

irrespective of whether the luiz deal was included in the said profit or not is irrelevant when talking about FFP only. i am sure, the club would have thought it through completely before doing the deal.

anyways we have successfully "passed" the 1st 2 monitoring periods of FFP (2011-12 and 2012-14).

for the coming monitoring period (2013-15), we currently have

2012-13: -49.4 mil

2013-14: 18.4

means we have a combined loss of 31mil pounds. for the 2 past years.

we spend 8 mil on academy and infrastructure (according to WAGNH), so that takes our loss down to 15mil for FFP. 24 mil pounds is the breakeven value for this period which gives us a leeway of a 9mil + 8mil (exempted) = 17mil loss for the next season.

[Term-X 7,891]

  On 26/09/2014 at 13:06, Viper22 said:

And no it does not stop ambitious owners developing their clubs. Youth set ups, training facilities etc. are outside of the FFP remit, so don't come under consideration. Would just mean clubs could no longer buy ALL ready made stars any more, they'd either have to promote from within or sign young and cheap.

Well, that's rather naive.

Investing in an academy and relying solely on that to turn you into the next Chelsea would be a slow and laborious task, what investor would be interested in that?