Transfer Window 26/27 Summer Embargo Window

[SteMerritt]

 

[Billyox]

Question for anyone really....now we've gone past the summer transfer window,how far realistically do we think we are to coming out of the embargo?

Id say with £3.5m in transfer fees and around £2m in wages shaved off id say we are very close if not under the 65%

I believe you resubmit your scmp calculation in December

 

[Symp59]

Whats so annoying is ,that for Charlton who its the 2nd year back in the championship have spent alot but on the last day of the transfer have a player that Southampton bid £7 million for turned down ,while our recruitment team spent heavily on hasbeans and Asian players that are now worth Fu.....all ,2 waisted years i hope the recruitment team are shipped out at some point

 

[Marked Ox]

Id say with £3.5m in transfer fees and around £2m in wages shaved off id say we are very close if not under the 65%

I believe you resubmit your scmp calculation in December

Although it should be updated on a regular basis outside of that iirc.

 

[londonyellow]

Whats so annoying is ,that for Charlton who its the 2nd year back in the championship have spent alot but on the last day of the transfer have a player that Southampton bid £7 million for turned down ,while our recruitment team spent heavily on hasbeans and Asian players that are now worth Fu.....all ,2 waisted years i hope the recruitment team are shipped out at some point

Mbick was under 10 when he joined Charlton. And as you say they've also spent a lot more than we did in the Championship, so I'm not sure that's completely fair.

 

[Ian]

The development of players over the past two years has been disappointing. Lankshear aside...

 

[Ian]

Because funds are deposited in the ckubs account on a regular basis, and there will be only five months to cover, it's believed the threshold will be met.

Then... Will there be a recurring problem next June?

 

[BicesterU]

Although it should be updated on a regular basis outside of that iirc.

Christ, I'd hope so given the situation we're in.

It'd be a disaster if we had to wait until December to find out if we're out of embargo. It's a brave agent who takes Ed's calls without even knowing if we can sign anyone.

We should be banging the EFL's door down as soon as we're there, throwing the bank statements at them, and demanding they make a big song and dance about it being lifted.

 

[londonyellow]

The development of players over the past two years has been disappointing. Lankshear aside...

I think Mills developed a lot last season. Early days of course, but promising signs coming from the Academy too

 

[Billyox]

Although it should be updated on a regular basis outside of that iirc.

Wages are but not your future turnover forcast

 

[Up The Manor]

Id say with £3.5m in transfer fees and around £2m in wages shaved off id say we are very close if not under the 65%

I believe you resubmit your scmp calculation in December

Your figures for reducing the wage bill is miles off the mark .
We have reduced payroll by over 17 players since the summer .Saving us over £5.5 million .
The wage bill is the lowest it's been for sometime .

 

[Billyox]

Your figures for reducing the wage bill is miles off the mark .
We have reduced payroll by over 17 players since the summer .Saving us over £5.5 million .
The wage bill is the lowest it's been for sometime .

Scmp for this season started July 1st we had already released those 17

 

[greatunclekip]

You didn’t mention “boosting the balance sheet” at all. You said “pocketing what we can” while suggesting the club was being packaged up for sale.
Now that’s been challenged, it’s suddenly become “the club is boosting its balance sheet”.
That is a completely different argument.
And even if we accept the new version, reducing wages, generating transfer income and improving the club’s financial position after relegation is still not evidence of an impending sale. It is exactly what you would expect a club under SCMP pressure to do.
You can keep changing the wording, but the missing bit remains the same: where is the actual evidence that Erick is preparing to sell?

It’s my opinion.

 

[greatunclekip]

Question for anyone really....now we've gone past the summer transfer window,how far realistically do we think we are to coming out of the embargo?

I have a bridge to sell you.

 

[Billyox]

It’s my opinion.

Ok in your opinion why would he sell now when there is a major uplift in value just around the corner

 

[Up The Manor]

Scmp for this season started July 1st we had already released those 17

My point being we have reduced costs massively and with consecutive promotions around the corner we are well on course to becoming sustainable again.

 

[Basham Wonderland]

My point being we have reduced costs massively and with consecutive promotions around the corner we are well on course to becoming sustainable again.

Quite negative of you not to mention our upcoming Champions League qualification...

 

[Up The Manor]

Quite negative of you not to mention our upcoming Champions League qualification...

I was thinking maybe europa league .

I think the champions league is a tad ambitious .

 

[Newbury yellow mk 2]

Id say with £3.5m in transfer fees and around £2m in wages shaved off id say we are very close if not under the 65%

I believe you resubmit your scmp calculation in December

Thank you

 

[carefreeoufc]

In reality, very few (if any) really know how close we are. We think we know how much people were paid (like we thought we knew BdK was desperate to play for us again) and we think we know how much players have been sold for.

It’s almost all supposition dressed up as fact. Certainly until the latest accounts become available and we can see what the measures we’ve taken have achieved. I suppose Jan when we’re “out of embargo” as well.

 

[holdsteady]

The development of players over the past two years has been disappointing. Lankshear aside...

Well he moved for £10 million quid so we did well out of that, 0% share of £10 million must still be a few quid.

 

[Steve Gilbert]

The development of players over the past two years has been disappointing. Lankshear aside...

Currie, Cumming, Spencer, Mills, McDonnell, Emakhu, Konak all good signings in that time and with Mills we sold at a profit.

 

[mooro]

Question for anyone really....now we've gone past the summer transfer window,how far realistically do we think we are to coming out of the embargo?

It may not be as intrinsically linked as we first thought, but I would guess it will follow shortly after the JR rejection and the release of the first tranche of stadium funding

 

[mooro]

Presumably we have to submit our squad for the first half of the season in the next few days - is it 20 players excluding keepers and u21s?

I wonder whether we'll be in a position to leave a gap or two in the list in order to add free agents should we clear the embargo between now and January......??

 

[holdsteady]

Presumably we have to submit our squad for the first half of the season in the next few days - is it 20 players excluding keepers and u21s?

I wonder whether we'll be in a position to leave a gap or two in the list in order to add free agents should we clear the embargo between now and January......??

23 players excluding keepers and kids I think.

 

[Billyox]

It may not be as intrinsically linked as we first thought, but I would guess it will follow shortly after the JR rejection and the release of the first tranche of stadium funding

Stadium and embargo are not linked Stadium is completely separate

 

[Sheik Djibouti]

Stadium and embargo are not linked Stadium is completely separate

However, without a positive outcome on the go ahead for the stadium, it will make lifting of the embargo less likely you would think.

Not only that, but my real fear is that ET simply says enough is enough, turns off the taps completely and walks away if the decision gets kicked down the road again. I think embargo will be the least of our worries, should that happen later this month.

 

[Billyox]

However, without a positive outcome on the go ahead for the stadium, it will make lifting of the embargo less likely you would think.

Not only that, but my real fear is that ET simply says enough is enough, turns off the taps completely and walks away if the decision gets kicked down the road again. I think embargo will be the least of our worries, should that happen later this month.

Again, the stadium funding and the football club’s day to day SCMP position are two separate things.
Obviously the club and stadium are linked in the bigger picture because Oxford United needs somewhere to play and the new stadium is crucial to the club’s long term future. But that does not mean the stadium is causing the embargo.
The embargo is an EFL financial rules issue.

Oxford came down from the Championship carrying Championship level contracts, then the League One SCMP rules were tightened. That left the club having to bring its player, manager and agent costs back within the new calculation.
That is why we have seen players moved on, wages reduced, transfer income generated and talk of further owner equity going into the club.
Whether the stadium judicial review is kicked out does not suddenly change the SCMP calculation. Stadium planning costs and construction costs are not what is putting us over the SCMP limit.

The simple version is:
Stadium problem = long term future of the club.
Embargo problem = current EFL squad cost rules.
They may affect the same owners and the same football club, but they are not the same financial problem.

 

[Sheik Djibouti]

Again, the stadium funding and the football club’s day to day SCMP position are two separate things.
Obviously the club and stadium are linked in the bigger picture because Oxford United needs somewhere to play and the new stadium is crucial to the club’s long term future. But that does not mean the stadium is causing the embargo.
The embargo is an EFL financial rules issue.

Oxford came down from the Championship carrying Championship level contracts, then the League One SCMP rules were tightened. That left the club having to bring its player, manager and agent costs back within the new calculation.
That is why we have seen players moved on, wages reduced, transfer income generated and talk of further owner equity going into the club.
Whether the stadium judicial review is kicked out does not suddenly change the SCMP calculation. Stadium planning costs and construction costs are not what is putting us over the SCMP limit.

The simple version is:
Stadium problem = long term future of the club.
Embargo problem = current EFL squad cost rules.
They may affect the same owners and the same football club, but they are not the same financial problem.

I get that. There's no direct link. But as you say, the bigger picture is important here and the likelihood of the current owners willingness to continue that funding and eventually resolve the current SCMP issue, as is their stated aim, before the January transfer window surely diminishes, if the other long stated aim of moving to a new stadium in the next 2 years starts to look less likely.

How many more setbacks to an already ridiculously drawn out process will ET be prepared to endure before he's had enough?

Are we saying that it didn't matter what the owners did, we were always going to end up under an embargo, regardless of what the owners did over the summer?

 

[Billyox]

Are we saying that it didn't matter what the owners did, we were always going to end up under an embargo, regardless of what the owners did over the summer?

Pretty much we got caught up in a perfect storm with efl changing the rules
The owners had choices.
They could have put in enough qualifying equity immediately.(stupid as it wouldn't solve the problem just push it down the road)

They could reduce the wage bill.(done)

They could generate player trading income.(done)

They could increase turnover.

Or, realistically, use a mixture of all four.(which we appear to of done)

How many more setbacks to an already ridiculously drawn out process will ET be prepared to endure before he's had enough?

Who knows but what we do know is he stuck around when there was delays with dc united stadium

I get that. There's no direct link. But as you say, the bigger picture is important here and the likelihood of the current owners willingness to continue that funding and eventually resolve the current SCMP issue, as is their stated aim, before the January transfer window surely diminishes, if the other long stated aim of moving to a new stadium in the next 2 years starts to look less likely.

If the stadium became impossible, that could absolutely affect the owners’ long term appetite for Oxford United. Nobody can sensibly pretend otherwise.
But that still does not mean a delay in the stadium automatically means they stop funding the club next week.
That part is speculation.

So I’d separate the two

The SCMP problem is a current financial rules problem that can be fixed by changing the club’s numbers.
The stadium is the much bigger strategic question that could influence how long the owners want to remain involved.
Related in the bigger picture, yes.
The same problem, no.

 

[londonyellow]

Just going back to owner funding, I believe I'm correct in saying that the 65% for year one relegated teams applies to equity injection too.

The EFL Handbook explains that it's
"the Club’s Allowable Injection Income for the Reporting Period multiplied by
the Relevant Percentage".

The EFL defines 'relevant percentage' as:

(a) For League One Clubs - 50%.
(b) For Former Championship Clubs – 65% for its first Season in League One only.

I see lots of talk of 50% for equity injections, but surely that's after year one for us?