FFP - 60% includes transfer fees?.... (1 Viewer)

FFP does as its all about allowable losses however CCFC is not under FFP rules because League One and Two clubs are under the restrictions of SCMP (Salary Cost Management Protocol) not FFP. SCMP is only concerned as wages as a percentage of turnover.
http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/resources/wsc0001.pdf
http://www.football-league.co.uk/page/FLExplainedDetail/0,,10794~2748246,00.html

Yes it includes transfer fees.

Swindon were out under a transfer embargo wen the compensation figures for Collins and another player set by the tribunal put then over the FFP allowance.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19857015

ashbyjan said:

FFP does as its all about allowable losses however CCFC is not under FFP rules because League One and Two clubs are under the restrictions of SCMP (Salary Cost Management Protocol) not FFP. SCMP is only concerned as wages as a percentage of turnover.
http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/resources/wsc0001.pdf
http://www.football-league.co.uk/page/FLExplainedDetail/0,,10794~2748246,00.html

Click to expand...

Although on the face of it clubs can get away with paying large transfer fees without sanction, indirectly players commanding a substantial fee are likely to ask for/be paid higher salaries, though I do wonder if a signing on fee would be counted as salary or could it be used to bypass the regulations.

Copied from jan's link

League 1 and League 2

League 1 and League 2, clubs have chosen to implement the Salary Cost Management Protocol (SCMP) first used in League 2 in 2004/05, although it will operate at different thresholds in each division.

The SCMP broadly limits spending on total player wages to a proportion of each club's turnover, with clubs providing budgetary information to The League at the beginning of the season that is updated as the campaign progresses.

Any club that is deemed to have breached the permitted spending threshold will be subject to a transfer embargo. Wherever possible, The League will seek to tackle the issue 'at source' by refusing player registrations that take clubs beyond the threshold.

At the beginning of the current season, League 2 clubs reduced the permitted spending threshold to 55% from 60% and this figure will continue to be operated next season.

League 1 clubs are currently operating a 'pilot' of the SCMP with clubs complying with a 75% threshold but with no sanctions being applicable this season. This threshold will reduce to 65% in 2012/13 and 60% in 2013/14 with sanctions (transfer embargoes) being applicable in both seasons.

This is a reply I had sometime ago from FL as to what is in the calculation

SCMP splits turnover into ‘normal income’ and ‘football fortune’ income. For League 1 clubs both these forms of income go into determining how much money a club can spend in relation to wages. In League 1’s case, this is set at 65% of turnover. This is calculated on an on-going basis going forward.

All player wages are included in the calculation. This covers basic wage, bonuses, appearances and any other add-ons. The calculation also includes PAYE, medical costs, cars and travel and also agent payments. Basically the full cost of a player is included. Players included are all contract players (full contract, non-contract, multiplicity etc.) and loan players. Players loaned out are deducted for the period of the loan. Players not included are youth players on a professional contract (i.e. players that have been in the club’s YD scheme and have been given a pro contract. They must be 20 years of age or under at the start of the season to be discounted from the SCMP calculation.

Also in group situations there are certain rules also

The League takes the results from the set of accounts that have been agreed between the club and The League. It can vary from club to club as to whether it is the football club only accounts or a group set of accounts as clubs are structured differently and certain revenue streams are sometimes held in different companies. If a material aspect of the club is held in a different company, then we would be likely to assess the club based on a consolidated group set of accounts. This is specified in regulation 16.4, “If the Club considers it appropriate, or the Executive so requests, the Annual Accounts required to be submitted….shall relate to the Group of which the Club is a member

OSB what was our last turnover figure?

I still find this confusing, we are told we could suffer under these rules but our gates average around 10/11000 and most other clubs in our division are well below that in fact our average gate is higher than a number of clubs capacity. How can clubs like Leyton Orient, Crewe or Walsall for example compete.

SkyBlueScottie said:

OSB what was our last turnover figure?

Click to expand...

2011 accounts gave turnover for ccfc at 10,267,708 SBS

CCFCH had turnover of 4,478,157 but that includes management charges to CCFC Ltd that wouldnt count so actual turnover is 1,791,315

clearly a lot less in 2012 and 2013 though

Hence why we will finally have to make use of our academy. If we pay for it!

We may get a nice surprise.

rupert_bear said:

I still find this confusing, we are told we could suffer under these rules but our gates average around 10/11000 and most other clubs in our division are well below that in fact our average gate is higher than a number of clubs capacity. How can clubs like Leyton Orient, Crewe or Walsall for example compete.

Click to expand...

Because they pay league one wages for league one players, where as we pay championship wages for league one players......

stupot07 said:

Because they pay league one wages for league one players, where as we pay championship wages for league one players......

Click to expand...

So based on that where will that leave Wolverhampton Wanderers ?

Cant see how those turnover figures stack up. Season ticket sales and other gate receipts alone must be around £5million on an average gate of 10k. I worked at a League 2 club with average gates of around 2k and their turnover was £2million and no they did not have access to catering and drinks revenues.

I can't see it being fool proof either. What is income ? sponsership ? TV money ? gate reciepts ? transfer fees, merchandise ? catering ? each of our stands are sponsered aren't they. Get the feeling there's smoke and mirrors with this. and as said before how clubs like Crewe and Leyton Orient on gates of 5/6000 maximum can compete is a puzzle to me. We might have a few players on so-called championship wages, whatever they are, the facts show our income has to be higher than most in our division.
'

oldskyblue58 said:

Players not included are youth players on a professional contract (i.e. players that have been in the club’s YD scheme and have been given a pro contract. They must be 20 years of age or under at the start of the season to be discounted from the SCMP calculation.

Click to expand...

This gave me a thought, does that mean Christie (who was 19 at the start of this season so 20 for next) will be counted like a new player under SCMP? I can't think of any others at that age, but might mean the club are a little more willing to offload as he's actually an increased cost next year.

rupert_bear said:

So based on that where will that leave Wolverhampton Wanderers ?

Click to expand...

Up shit creak....

shmmeee said:

This gave me a thought, does that mean Christie (who was 19 at the start of this season so 20 for next) will be counted like a new player under SCMP? I can't think of any others at that age, but might mean the club are a little more willing to offload as he's actually an increased cost next year.

Click to expand...

I don't think so, my reading of it is that a player like Christie will not count in the calculation because he's home grown and 20 years old, leaving us more to play with in the budget. This means there is a massive incentive to use use youth players in the squad as it leaves more money to pay senior pro's higher wages. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong?

How many players left in the squad who were signed on Championship contracts?

Baker, Bell, Murphy.. I think that is about all, assuming Sheff & MacDonald go as we expect.

I think Baker & Bell both have 2 more years.. Murphy has one more.