Is Raymond still signing in and out to read my comments

He's replying to me now without reading the comments because he has me filtered, as I said above I haven't filtered him and he knows that. It's just difficult for someone so monumentally thick to work out I can see his comments and he won't ever realise the huge hypocrisy in a lot he comes out with.

Good owd Raymond

Surely he would have to sign out to read your comments if he's blocked you.

I'll try Wassa, hold my hand and I'll do my best to help you.

Have we Strett? To be honest I don't even know the first thing about their financial situation other than they are within FFP this time around and don't like to spend much. When they do it doesn't go well anyway

Yeh, he does that a fair amount of the time Strett, which makes his comments all the more stupid

Derby's debt £-33.3m
Forest's debt £-32.4m

They are both small compared to Bolton: £-163.1m
Ipswich have £-82.4m

We're in pretty good shape

Where did you get these figures from Strett, is that 33.3m our stadium debt?

I thought we did that debt to equity fandango thing last year, where's my financial adviser Milf when I need him?

I still find it odd that other clubs have not been listed for a FFP embargo yet, they can't just be three in the FL that have failed it. There was talk of there being nine in our division which were due to fail.

I suppose the logic in the clubs with the astronomical debt like Bolton is if they use that as a factor on how the club is being run (which they should probably do), then Man Utd would also be in the cross hairs amongst others

It is not the level of debt though that is the measure. It is the size of the annual running losses.

strett will tell you

Yeh, I know. What I am saying is that if a club has a huge amount of debt why didn't they consider looking at that in terms of FFP. It's not beyond possibility for someone to pull the plug on the debt at some point

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/may/22/championship-club-accounts-profit-loss-and-the-wage-bill

There you go Wellies.

I believe a lot of clubs have been creatively accounting to avoid FFP.

Forest, being an honest club has nothing to hide

Bolton:

Accounts for the year to 31 May 2013:

Turnover £35m

Wage bill £37.4m

Loss before tax £50.6m

Net debt £163.8m

Interest payable £7.5m

They are supported by Edwin Davies, the kettle element manufacturer whose loans were up to a staggering £151m. Davies charged £7m interest and other fees in 2012-13, but now charges no interest.


There; that's a good way to get around FFP

I think we actually killed their thread Strett by actually discussing matters to do with football in a sensible way.

This gives me an idea

You won't be able to keep it up Strett

If Davies charges no interest on the loan does that change it in accordance with FFP?

I've lost track of how it works now

Have you been talking to Mrs Strett, derbymanc?

Like Ray says, Davies could suddenly need to call in the loan. How is thay a healthy situation?

I don't get FFP at all. I was in favour of it at first but it looks more and more like you can dodge it if your owner is willing to be a bit creative.

The Football Legue clearly havent got the nous to sort it properly. I am in favour of FFP but the playing field has got to be level.

I've said it before Will but an owner/investor should be able to put as much money into the club as he wants, the only stipulation should be that the debt is left on the onus of the owner/investor not the club.
This would stop massive gambles that fail.

Bolton are looking very fragile.

Maybe the owner of Bolton gave the league reassurances about what happens to the debt in the event of his death. There is more to FFP than just figures on a spreadsheet.

Foredt have completely ignored FFP since its inception, there is no point moaning about others now.

No moaning from me