Millers aiming to raise 2m in share issue

[CASPER-64-FRANK]

Agree Wrinkly. But I thought loans dont count as income in terms of turnover. Converting loans to capital means that it does. If I remember its why Abramovich converted his loans to shares a few years back to bring Chelsea in line with fair play regs.

Loans do count towards income / turnover. So do some transfer money depending when the deal is done. FA and EFL don’t like clubs to go down the route of too many loans, it’s a debt that has to be repaid or wrote off.
Sponsorship money is giveaway cash that TS doesn’t want back.
Kieran Maguire is worth a read on Twitter. He has us down as the best run club in League 1.
I take it he means financially.

[WanChaiMiller]

Loans do count towards income / turnover. So do some transfer money depending when the deal is done. FA and EFL don’t like clubs to go down the route of too many loans, it’s a debt that has to be repaid or wrote off.
Sponsorship money is giveaway cash that TS doesn’t want back.
Kieran Maguire is worth a read on Twitter. He has us down as the best run club in League 1.
I take it he means financially.

Not sure loans are considered income as, technically, they are repayable.

[CASPER-64-FRANK]

Not sure loans are considered income as, technically, they are repayable.

It's part of the Turnover. The turnover dictates the amount we can spend as per FFP rules.
Loans are a debt that have to be repaid or wrote off. Chairmen can put loans or ' freeby money ' in ( Sponsership )
Transfer income is also added to the pot as is Sponsorship money from TS.
Bigger richer clubs with filthy rich chairman obviously have the advantage.
It's all in the accounts.
The loans and sponsorship money from TS is what's keeping us afloat.
Season ticket sales don't account for as much as people think they do.

[gm_gm]

It's part of the Turnover. The turnover dictates the amount we can spend as per FFP rules.
Loans are a debt that have to be repaid or wrote off. Chairmen can put loans or ' freeby money ' in ( Sponsership )
Transfer income is also added to the pot as is Sponsorship money from TS.
Bigger richer clubs with filthy rich chairman obviously have the advantage.
It's all in the accounts.
The loans and sponsorship money from TS is what's keeping us afloat.
Season ticket sales don't account for as much as people think they do.

Just looking at the accounts Frank, only £2.5m out of nearly £14m was from both match day income and season tickets. Central distributions £7.5m presumably this is money from the league and TV

[wrinkly]

Loans do count towards income / turnover. So do some transfer money depending when the deal is done. FA and EFL don’t like clubs to go down the route of too many loans, it’s a debt that has to be repaid or wrote off.
Sponsorship money is giveaway cash that TS doesn’t want back.
Kieran Maguire is worth a read on Twitter. He has us down as the best run club in League 1.
I take it he means financially.

I would be absolutely amazed if loans are considered as turnover for ffp. It is simply not revenue. It is most definitely not income under accounting principles. This is from the fair play rules for the Championship - appendix A which lists what is regarded as revenue :
3.4 No loan funding, from whatever source and on whatever terms, should be included.
I very much doubt it can be included for league one either.
It just doesn't make sense. Incurring debt to fund expenditure is totally against the principles of ffp

[WanChaiMiller]

I would be absolutely amazed if loans are considered as turnover for ffp. It is simply not revenue. It is most definitely not income under accounting principles. This is from the fair play rules for the Championship - appendix A which lists what is regarded as revenue :
3.4 No loan funding, from whatever source and on whatever terms, should be included.
I very much doubt it can be included for league one either.
It just doesn't make sense. Incurring debt to fund expenditure is totally against the principles of ffp

Absolutely Wrinkly.

[CASPER-64-FRANK]

I would be absolutely amazed if loans are considered as turnover for ffp. It is simply not revenue. It is most definitely not income under accounting principles. This is from the fair play rules for the Championship - appendix A which lists what is regarded as revenue :
3.4 No loan funding, from whatever source and on whatever terms, should be included.
I very much doubt it can be included for league one either.
It just doesn't make sense. Incurring debt to fund expenditure is totally against the principles of ffp

Fair enough wrinkly, my mistake.
I thought loans and other cash was added in.
Still doesn’t alter the fact that without those loans and sponsorship cash from TS we wouldn’t exist.
Championship rules say £39M over three seasons.
TS better dig deep next season and the lads need to battle if we’re to survive more than one season...😎

[wrinkly]

Fair enough wrinkly, my mistake.
I thought loans and other cash was added in.
Still doesn’t alter the fact that without those loans and sponsorship cash from TS we wouldn’t exist.
Championship rules say £39M over three seasons.
TS better dig deep next season and the lads need to battle if we’re to survive more than one season...😎

Stranger things happen in footie Casper. Receipts from sale of Stadium don't count as turnover under accountancy regs but they are allowed for ffp purposes (although if you sell it to the same bloke who already owns it, for 3 times it's actual value, claim it was really sold in the year before the actual sale, set all the supposed profits against losses for that previous year - despite not having received any money at the supposed date of sale and not receiving the full amount for at least 8 years - then you might be in trouble (eventually - possibly))

[CASPER-64-FRANK]

Stranger things happen in footie Casper. Receipts from sale of Stadium don't count as turnover under accountancy regs but they are allowed for ffp purposes (although if you sell it to the same bloke who already owns it, for 3 times it's actual value, claim it was really sold in the year before the actual sale, set all the supposed profits against losses for that previous year - despite not having received any money at the supposed date of sale and not receiving the full amount for at least 8 years - then you might be in trouble (eventually - possibly))

Big LOL...and there's a possibility he could get away with ' bending ' the rule book...😂

[CASPER-64-FRANK]

TS himself told me that if WBA get promoted then another 300K ...

Yes Will Vaulks was the larger of the two transfer fees with more potential add ons.
Maybe we ought to be cheering Cardiff to make the play offs and get promotion.