Another 6 point, points deduction incoming

[Stranded]

Had a Conspiracy Theory Thought................

We've blown the biz plan through failing to sell players and stating that realised not as valueable etc etc

We knew this last year - did we somehow manage to convice EFL the squad had some saleable assets so we could get the extra 6 points moved to this season - knowing full well it was going to happen all along. So avoid relagation last year and give ourselves a fighting chance this year...... Jump to Inces 50 point mantra from the get go

In essence we've known all along - smart move by someone ??

The other worry is this investment asset sale that needs to be completed by 30th June - does this mean if this thing does not happen we will again be within breach for this season.... that has me worried

In short, on your last point - that is what has been said. We have been allowed to include this sale but the final P&S audit takes place at the end of the season. So yes, if the sale is not complete we will breach as the club have already confirmed that.

Hopefully it won't happen but with the way the club is managed at the top level currently, nothing would surprise me.

[Franchise FC]

Now the ruling has been published with the written reasons, surely Peterborough will feel they have a legal case to bring against the club having submitted a business case the club had little chance of adhering too.

I think the only recourse they might have is to the EFL as they had to agree the plan.
By default, if the EFL agreed the plan, they considered it appropriate at the time, so any action against the club would fail
This would also be supported by the 'honest and transparent' comment from the EFL

[Sutekh]

Now the ruling has been published with the written reasons, surely Peterborough will feel they have a legal case to bring against the club having submitted a business case the club had little chance of adhering too.

I think the only recourse they might have is to the EFL as they had to agree the plan.
By default, if the EFL agreed the plan, they considered it appropriate at the time, so any action against the club would fail
This would also be supported by the 'honest and transparent' comment from the EFL

So therefore the agreed plan was totally within reason at the time so hard to see what on earth any other club would be able to sue either Reading or the FL for, still if they wanted to waste the money and effort that’d be up to them.

[Snowball]

May be a small point, but is INFLATION not now a serious component?

When was £13 Million, 39 in three years first set?

Last year alone we had 11% inflation, fuel prices through the roof,
energy costs rocketing etc etc etc

If £13M was the limit, should it not be 15, 16, 17 by now?

[Stranded]

Now the ruling has been published with the written reasons, surely Peterborough will feel they have a legal case to bring against the club having submitted a business case the club had little chance of adhering too.

I think the only recourse they might have is to the EFL as they had to agree the plan.
By default, if the EFL agreed the plan, they considered it appropriate at the time, so any action against the club would fail
This would also be supported by the 'honest and transparent' comment from the EFL

So therefore the agreed plan was totally within reason at the time so hard to see what on earth any other club would be able to sue either Reading or the FL for, still if they wanted to waste the money and effort that’d be up to them.

I guess the potential problem statement could be Bowen's admission that we took the penalty to avoid relegation last year. Now I don't think Peterborough would have a case but they could argue that that shows a harsher penalty was the original default and Reading knowingly went in to an agreement they either couldn't or had no intention of meeting in order to avoid that, sending Peterborough down as a result.

[Snowball]

I think the only recourse they might have is to the EFL as they had to agree the plan.
By default, if the EFL agreed the plan, they considered it appropriate at the time, so any action against the club would fail
This would also be supported by the 'honest and transparent' comment from the EFL

So therefore the agreed plan was totally within reason at the time so hard to see what on earth any other club would be able to sue either Reading or the FL for, still if they wanted to waste the money and effort that’d be up to them.

I guess the potential problem statement could be Bowen's admission that we took the penalty to avoid relegation last year. Now I don't think Peterborough would have a case but they could argue that that shows a harsher penalty was the original default and Reading knowingly went in to an agreement they either couldn't or had no intention of meeting in order to avoid that, sending Peterborough down as a result.

By how much did we fail to meet the limits? Do we know?

For all *I* know it might've been fifty quid

[Franchise FC]

I think the only recourse they might have is to the EFL as they had to agree the plan.
By default, if the EFL agreed the plan, they considered it appropriate at the time, so any action against the club would fail
This would also be supported by the 'honest and transparent' comment from the EFL

So therefore the agreed plan was totally within reason at the time so hard to see what on earth any other club would be able to sue either Reading or the FL for, still if they wanted to waste the money and effort that’d be up to them.

I guess the potential problem statement could be Bowen's admission that we took the penalty to avoid relegation last year. Now I don't think Peterborough would have a case but they could argue that that shows a harsher penalty was the original default and Reading knowingly went in to an agreement they either couldn't or had no intention of meeting in order to avoid that, sending Peterborough down as a result.

Good luck proving that the Club did that ‘knowingly’

[Stranded]

So therefore the agreed plan was totally within reason at the time so hard to see what on earth any other club would be able to sue either Reading or the FL for, still if they wanted to waste the money and effort that’d be up to them.

I guess the potential problem statement could be Bowen's admission that we took the penalty to avoid relegation last year. Now I don't think Peterborough would have a case but they could argue that that shows a harsher penalty was the original default and Reading knowingly went in to an agreement they either couldn't or had no intention of meeting in order to avoid that, sending Peterborough down as a result.

Good luck proving that the Club did that ‘knowingly’

Totally agreed but Peterborough may chose to wish to pursue a line based on the following quote from Bowen:

Last season, the club entered into discussions with the EFL on our punishment for breaching Profit & Sustainability rules. The club came to an agreement on a six-point deduction in 2021-22, with six points suspended until 2022-23 if an agreed plan to fill the financial gap was not followed. Those terms were admittedly ambitious, requiring significant player sales income – but had the club not agreed that plan, our points punishment last season would have been more severe and – to be clear - would ultimately have led to relegation from the Championship

Now this of course doesn't say that the club did this knowing full well they wouldn't meet the terms but it could be argued that they knew there was a very strong chance they wouldn't but that it was better to carry that risk than lose 9 or 12 points.