Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine

Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: aj2k77 on May 27, 2018, 05:48:41 PM

Title: Financial fair play
Post by: aj2k77 on May 27, 2018, 05:48:41 PM
Ok so how buggered are we?

From what I read you are allowed £39m of losses over 3 years as long as the owner injects capital. More losses allowed should you have had time in the Premier League. Of which by the end of next we wont have, so we have £39m of losses allowed.

Some of the losses can be excluded. Losses to do with sale of the club and downwriting assets, not including players. Last season we posted losses of £80m, of which £79m were exceptional items. How much of that we can exclude from FFP I have no idea.

This year we posted a loss of £14m.

So that's £94m of losses over two seasons. Somehow we are going to have to get down to £39m including next seasons results and that's with £18m less of parachute payments. By my non certified accountant reckoning we need to find £70m ish to avoid breaking the rules by the end of next season, unless a large sum of the exceptional items from last year can be written off against the amount...

Have I gone wrong somewhere?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 27, 2018, 05:52:31 PM
If £79 million is exceptional losses, is that not excluded from the calculation?

Recon sponsoring our training ground, shirts, tea spoons and the shadows we cast will help, as will getting a few more votes to change the rules.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt C on May 27, 2018, 05:55:45 PM
So we just need to find a buyer for Micah Richards at 69m and we’re all but home and dry.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: aj2k77 on May 27, 2018, 05:58:51 PM
If £79 million is exceptional losses, is that not excluded from the calculation?

Recon sponsoring our training ground, shirts, tea spoons and the shadows we cast will help, as will getting a few more votes to change the rules.

£79m were exceptional losses but I don't know how much of that can be excluded from FFP. Things such as player depreciation cannot. It looked a weird set of accounts at the time, I'm hoping that it was a bit of pre-planning by the owner at the time to give us potential wiggle room but I don't know.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 27, 2018, 06:01:05 PM
It does seem odd to to have £80 million losses but only £1 million counts as an ordinary loss. Somebody will know I suppose.

Wyness has never sounded too concerned about it all to be honest. I strongly suspect Recon sponsorship is a means of jibbing the system a bit.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: VinnieChase84 on May 27, 2018, 06:26:19 PM
Excuse my ignorance on this but wasn’t the £80m loss year (£79 exceptional) the year we went down (for which Dr Tony was now responsible for due to club purchase)
£14m loss was last season
This season won’t be posted till next year!? If we made £14m losses last season then this one must be more flat/even due to the player sales!?
Which means we will be absolutely fine!?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Stu on May 27, 2018, 06:28:59 PM
Hasn't the Dr borrowed a load of money to finance the club? I can see him selling up.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: amfy on May 27, 2018, 06:38:54 PM
As I remembwr the 'exceptional losses' were something weird like thebclub being worth less because its a Championship club rather than a Premiership club now.
This being the case- thats a notional loss rather than actual debt, so I'm not sure it counts.

* all.of this could.be wrong!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Stu on May 27, 2018, 06:44:18 PM
Hm. I think we should be a bit more concerned, or at least questioning, than we are. I'm still not convinced the owner has any of his own money to spend.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: VinnieChase84 on May 27, 2018, 06:46:02 PM
Hm. I think we should be a bit more concerned, or at least questioning, than we are. I'm still not convinced the owner has any of his own money to spend.

What’s this based on may I ask?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Stu on May 27, 2018, 06:52:29 PM
Hm. I think we should be a bit more concerned, or at least questioning, than we are. I'm still not convinced the owner has any of his own money to spend.

What’s this based on may I ask?

There's stuff out there about Tone's MSG business being in debt, and he borrowed the money to buy Villa against his company.

It's internet stuff, so likely to be nonsense, however his background is so opaque that I do have my doubts about him and always have.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Stu on May 27, 2018, 06:54:50 PM
If anyone who knows about the financial side of things could provide more positive info, please do. I'd like to feel a bit better about the future!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: pauliewalnuts on May 27, 2018, 06:59:22 PM
Hm. I think we should be a bit more concerned, or at least questioning, than we are. I'm still not convinced the owner has any of his own money to spend.

What’s this based on may I ask?

There's stuff out there about Tone's MSG business being in debt, and he borrowed the money to buy Villa against his company.

It's internet stuff, so likely to be nonsense, however his background is so opaque that I do have my doubts about him and always have.

Well, I reckon we'll find out pretty soon, because we are going to need to buy a lot of players.

Look at the players who are here on loan, take them out, take out the leeches and end of contract players and look at what's left.

Not a lot.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on May 27, 2018, 07:05:57 PM
There were at the end of the normal season twelve clubs in the championship that had failed the FFP test.  Not sure if we were one of them but small heath certainly were.  The league authorities are so shocked at the number of clubs involved they literally don’t know what to do about it.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: VinnieChase84 on May 27, 2018, 07:08:04 PM
There were at the end of the normal season twelve clubs in the championship that had failed the FFP test.  Not sure if we were one of them but small heath certainly were.  The league authorities are so shocked at the number of clubs involved they literally don’t know what to do about it.
As far as I know, we were absolutely fine
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Kevin Dawson on May 27, 2018, 07:58:51 PM
There were at the end of the normal season twelve clubs in the championship that had failed the FFP test.  Not sure if we were one of them but small heath certainly were.  The league authorities are so shocked at the number of clubs involved they literally don’t know what to do about it.

Do you know which 12?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: pauliewalnuts on May 27, 2018, 08:03:08 PM
There were at the end of the normal season twelve clubs in the championship that had failed the FFP test.  Not sure if we were one of them but small heath certainly were.  The league authorities are so shocked at the number of clubs involved they literally don’t know what to do about it.
As far as I know, we were absolutely fine

I seem to recall that at one of the SCG meetings, Wyness said that FFP is not a problem this season, but would be next season if we did not get promoted.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: amfy on May 27, 2018, 08:10:24 PM
At SCG he said it was a problem if we didn't go up this time, but only on a 'the loans will have to go back' level.

We won't have the money we have had, but we're not in actual trouble from what I know. We have been cutting already, we have contracts expiring, we have loans, we have some decent youths.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt Collins on May 27, 2018, 08:12:20 PM
This is the best summary I found. Can't vouch for its veracity but I found it both convincing and obviously alarming. In short, says we need to generate c £40m next season. We can save a bit on the high earners leaving. But that looks like jack leaving to me. Can't imagine Kodjia's stock is high enough

https://heartoftheholte1874.wordpress.com/2018/02/20/villa-play-ffp-roulette-as-the-consequences-of-failing-this-season-becomes-clear/#more-37

Any accountant types able to comment on this piece?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on May 27, 2018, 08:12:53 PM
He's hardly going to tell a bunch of fans that we're fucked is he. Hopefully we aren't, but from meetings I was at in the past, what they say and what happens aren't always the same thing.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: VinnieChase84 on May 27, 2018, 08:30:22 PM
I think between the new kit deal and the training ground sponsorship that would see around £10m added to income. Now we’re staying down I fully expect to see Recon as our main shirt sponsor shortly
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 27, 2018, 08:33:06 PM
They are I believe. Have to evidence market rate. Surely easier for us given Sky Sports 1 at 17:30 every other Saturday is the AVTV channel.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt Collins on May 27, 2018, 08:36:05 PM
I think the EFL consider any sponsorship deal's fair value. So we cant just chuck a ton of money at it as a complete workaround

Why is the kit deal going to increase revenues?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 27, 2018, 08:40:18 PM
You keep a bigger chunk as Fanatics own the production. Nike pay something like 10 dollars for ever shirt and then a portion to the sports team they're producing for. As Fanatics own the means of producing and distributing, the base cost is smaller per unit  so they take a bigget share and the club receive a larger share.

What do you mean by fair value? It would surely have to be a subjective test? As we're the biggest goons on the block, bringing in the largest TV and paying audience, our Brand Goodwill would be valued significantly higher than tin pot outfits like the Noses or QPR.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on May 27, 2018, 08:40:25 PM
If you do basic maths of salaries versus expected revenue next season I can see it being a difficult summer and like in most organisations you find it hard to get rid of the dross and lose talent.  On a very fag packet basis you have;

Five loanees gone so best part of £150k per week recouped but the team is weaker.
One of Jack and Kodjia to go - say £20m. 
Parachute payment £15m
Tv money £6m
Other income including season tickets £12m
Total bought in; £61m

Outlays:

McCaramack £40k per week.
Richards - £35k per week.
11 times first teamers average 20k per week
Staff and reserves and hangers on £15k per week.
Management costs - 60k per week
General overheads £5k per week.

Total outlay equals £42,940,000

Take one of the sales out above and it leaves us in precarious state when you add in the losses of the previous seasons.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt Collins on May 27, 2018, 08:43:35 PM
You keep a bigger chunk as Fanatics own the production. Nike pay something like 10 dollars for ever shirt and then a portion to the sports team they're producing for. As Fanatics own the means of producing and distributing, the base cost is smaller per unit  so they take a bigget share and the club receive a larger share.

What do you mean by fair value? It would surely have to be a subjective test? As we're the biggest goons on the block, bringing in the largest TV and paying audience, our Brand Goodwill would be valued significantly higher than tin pot outfits like the Noses or QPR.


I agree there would have to be a degree of subjectivity to the fair value assessment. I only read about it today so not sure how it works.

Thank for info on the shift deal. Sounds food. Though why doesn't everyone do something like that then?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt Collins on May 27, 2018, 08:44:26 PM
Fucking autocorrect

If we have to sell freakish I'll be butter
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 27, 2018, 08:46:41 PM
Not sure to be honest. It's how it's done in the US with NFL and it seems we're opening up their entry to the UK market for them.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: A Northern Soul on May 27, 2018, 09:00:27 PM
I tend to agree with the sums posted and those in the article. What would be key is a) how many sizeable transfers are still being dripped onto the P&L next season - McCormack, Kodjia & Hogan spring to mind; b) if they are then there’s little point in selling Ross or Scott for a much reduced sum as whilst it would generate cash it may have a negative impact on the P&L - if say we sold Hogan for £3m but still had £6m of costs to be posted wouldn’t that shows as a £3m loss?!; c) we are hardly in a position to write off costs paying off another manager and his staff - unless we do it on the drip; which brings us to d) how many other managers are we still paying off on the drip which could be eating into the P&L bottom line?

All in looks calamitous and suggests 2-3 big sales that could  show a P&L surplus, BUT if half the Championship can’t balance the FFP books then maybe we just bite the bullet & see what happens if we were to get up...
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Phil from the upper holte on May 27, 2018, 09:03:05 PM
Don't man city just pay a fine? Can't we offer the FA £1 million at £6 a week?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: VinnieChase84 on May 27, 2018, 09:07:02 PM
There was a lot of noise that FFP was being looked at and potentially changed? If 12 clubs have failed it for this year then a change is surely likely? Shows the majority cannot/won’t adhere to it as things stand.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt Collins on May 27, 2018, 09:14:34 PM
On the Hogan question, I don't think so

Scenario where we don't sell him, we amortise say 2.5m pa of costs (10m over 4 years)

Scenario where we sell him for 5m we are better off. Though not sure if we can score the total income in one go (+2.5 net) or if it's also spread

I may be wrong though. But doesn't stand to reason that you're worse off financially for generating income. I don't think we treat players as assets on balance sheet that are subject to depreciation. Otherwise you'd get a double hit every time a players value declined
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on May 27, 2018, 09:34:16 PM
This is the best summary I found. Can't vouch for its veracity but I found it both convincing and obviously alarming. In short, says we need to generate c £40m next season. We can save a bit on the high earners leaving. But that looks like jack leaving to me. Can't imagine Kodjia's stock is high enough

https://heartoftheholte1874.wordpress.com/2018/02/20/villa-play-ffp-roulette-as-the-consequences-of-failing-this-season-becomes-clear/#more-37

Any accountant types able to comment on this piece?

I haven't double-checked his figures but I can't argue with the logic.

He's looked at it in more detail than I have the time for but he's got to the same position - we need to find £40-£50m to balance the books.  That's simply impossible without selling players.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: A Northern Soul on May 27, 2018, 09:39:19 PM
If we go bottom end as say it’s £35m, what is the going rate for sponsorship of a training ground, maxing out the value of shirt sponsorship, and even sponsoring the ground. Maybe £15m max all in? Then getting into the realms of fire sale, what land, etc. have we got left that we could offload? Clutching at every straw before reaching the inevitable conclusion...
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: VinnieChase84 on May 27, 2018, 09:55:57 PM
We’ve got £8m from the Amavi sale to take into account as we deferred payment till this summer
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: VinnieChase84 on May 27, 2018, 10:01:19 PM
Could really do with Traore getting a big move and Veretout as we have sell on clauses
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Newby on May 27, 2018, 10:28:45 PM
There was talk of Veretout going to Juventus recently.  If we have a sell on fee, let's hope that this move happens. Chelsea are also said to be looking at Traore too, he will cost at least £20 mill.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on May 27, 2018, 10:55:07 PM
This is the best summary I found. Can't vouch for its veracity but I found it both convincing and obviously alarming. In short, says we need to generate c £40m next season. We can save a bit on the high earners leaving. But that looks like jack leaving to me. Can't imagine Kodjia's stock is high enough

https://heartoftheholte1874.wordpress.com/2018/02/20/villa-play-ffp-roulette-as-the-consequences-of-failing-this-season-becomes-clear/#more-37

Any accountant types able to comment on this piece?
Yes , exactly my understanding.
We are truly fucked.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on May 27, 2018, 10:57:39 PM
On the Hogan question, I don't think so

Scenario where we don't sell him, we amortise say 2.5m pa of costs (10m over 4 years)

Scenario where we sell him for 5m we are better off. Though not sure if we can score the total income in one go (+2.5 net) or if it's also spread

I may be wrong though. But doesn't stand to reason that you're worse off financially for generating income. I don't think we treat players as assets on balance sheet that are subject to depreciation. Otherwise you'd get a double hit every time a players value declined
Players are Assets on the Balance sheet.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 27, 2018, 11:02:07 PM
Amavi sale, £2 million a year saved on Gabby and 3 increased commercial deals. The question is, how much are the latter worth? £12 million combined? More?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on May 27, 2018, 11:08:23 PM
As Jordan points out, it’s very difficult to see how we could comply without selling Jack and Chester and there still being no money to rebuild the team
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Des Little on May 27, 2018, 11:16:54 PM
I’ve fixed it. All we need to do is sell Jack to Recon FC (2018) for £200 million then take him back on loan indefinitely.

Piece of piss, this. Night all.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: villan from luton on May 27, 2018, 11:22:19 PM
We are all speculating at the moment, lets see how it goes
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 27, 2018, 11:26:21 PM
Aye. We should let cricket have it's chance to make our piss boil for 3 months and see what happens where we are in August.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: robleflaneur on May 28, 2018, 12:13:51 AM
If I had the technical nouse,I would post a link,but basically it concerns Wyness' interview with Bham Mail March 14/15 2017, the interview about the need for contigency plans for another season,2018-19 ,in the Championship and sitting down with Xia and discussing those plans.
I find that,perhaps naively,reassuring  in contrast to the lack of a business plan and a need to protect your business under Lerner. Wyness stressed a need to grow income.Are the kit deal and  naming rights signs of that strategy ?Was Amavi 's deferred transfer fee,not only a precaution because of his injury concerns but also limiting the damage in 2018-9.Would we have signed Bedeau for 900k in Jan 2017 if it had been all about the absolute desperate need to gain promotion this season,as they knew he was not a signing for the immediate future.Surely,after such a meeting with Xia,the outcome couldn't have been,let's bet the ranch on promotion after being nowhere near the play offs at that time.


Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: VinnieChase84 on May 28, 2018, 12:43:31 AM
Fulham managed to hang to to Cairney last summer so I’m hopeful we can do the same with Jack
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on May 28, 2018, 03:20:01 AM
Fulham managed to hang to to Cairney last summer so I’m hopeful we can do the same with Jack
Because both situations are identical  :-*
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt Collins on May 28, 2018, 05:43:17 AM
Our strategy clearly involved maximising income this year. We were hoping that people would buy some of these loaned out players. But I can't see anyone paying much for Gil, Gollini, Elphick, Tshibola, McCormack, De Laet, Gardner etc

The consequences as set out in that article are so severe that it would represent apalling stewardship of the club - a really huge gamble. So I'm hoping that there's something meaning it's not as bad as that. The messages from the club didn't suggest this level of seriosunes, but then I guess they don't ten to. I did struggle to see the flaw in the logic.

Anyone know what kind of sell on clause we've got with veretout or Adama?

The HS2 purchase of all / part of BMH could be crucial if it goes through in time

Do think we need the board to spell out some certainty
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: VinnieChase84 on May 28, 2018, 06:38:33 AM
Fulham managed to hang to to Cairney last summer so I’m hopeful we can do the same with Jack
Because both situations are identical  :-*

They had a high wage bill, no parachute money and were turning down £20m bids for West Ham and Newcastle. Not too dis similar
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Risso on May 28, 2018, 09:52:52 AM
Intersting as ever analysis from The Swiss Rambler:

(http://i66.tinypic.com/2wc0ldd.png)

Yet again, thanks Bruce.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Clampy on May 28, 2018, 10:13:36 AM
We are all speculating at the moment, lets see how it goes

Couldn't agree more. I think we all need to sit back and wait and see how things pan out.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 28, 2018, 10:20:10 AM
Wyness said they're plans for either eventuality.

I hope that Wyness was right at the AGM that there is no need to sell Chester and Grealish. Them with a fit Kodjia and having Green, O'Hare and RHM offering the elusive pace we've lacked all year wouldn't be the worst.

A manager who can have us moving the ball with a bit of tempo wouldn't be the too shabby.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: liam on May 28, 2018, 10:23:11 AM
If we did get penalised for FFP (which seems to be at least 12 months away) isn't it a transfer embargo? Which still allows loans and frees to happen? Which is about all we have done in the last 12 months anyway. Like a lot have said already we are all speculating, and speculating while we are hurting is never good.

Cardiff and Fulham have been down here for about 4 years and both went back up, Wolves were in league 1 3 years ago, yes I know they have bought well, but did anyone thing they would go up like they did? A lot can happen, I hope we keep Jack, but when we sold Platt I was gutted, yet the players that came in gave us a spring board to push on for a great couple of years. Onwards and upwards hopefully
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithe on May 28, 2018, 10:25:23 AM
Has anyone got or read a suggested scenario where we can cut £50m of cost without selling the Crown Jewels?

We need to save just shy of a million quid a week, we aren’t going to get anywhere close to that by selling the deadwood and not renewing the big earners contracts. Are we?

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 28, 2018, 10:26:24 AM
Cardiff were on their last parachute payments and in a pretty dicey financial situation.

Fulham didn't spend vast amounts.

The Dingles duped the system by having a £25 million Champions League player in their midfield on £10k per week.

The Gerodies closed their eyes and put their head down and ran through it.

Brighton spent well.

Huddersfield didn't have a penny to rub together.

Many ways to skin a cat.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: aj2k77 on May 28, 2018, 10:44:17 AM
All involve having a manager that can either spot a gem or mould a team from nothing. Not Bruce.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on May 28, 2018, 10:47:26 AM
Anyway fcuk football for a couple of months.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: eamonn on May 28, 2018, 10:48:07 AM
Do we have a confirmed list of players now out of contract and expected to be released?

McCormack and Richards not getting bumps in their salary following a promotion is, as has been said, one of the few "good" things about not going up as they'll finally be gone next summer ( unless McCormack was signed on a four year deal?).
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Madferret62 on May 28, 2018, 10:55:23 AM
PNE are warming up a new song “Twenty grand twenty grand Jackie  Grealish...”

Funny how the FFP thing has come home to roost. It should have been implemented from the start and the “parachute” money is quite simply a joke that unfairly rewards failure.

Did no one see this coming no one?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: aj2k77 on May 28, 2018, 10:58:32 AM
PNE are warming up a new song “Twenty grand twenty grand Jackie  Grealish...”

Funny how the FFP thing has come home to roost. It should have been implemented from the start and the “parachute” money is quite simply a joke that unfairly rewards failure.

Did no one see this coming no one?

The parachute payments are so a relegated team doesnt have to sell it's entire squad and replace them with kids.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on May 28, 2018, 11:02:51 AM
PNE are warming up a new song “Twenty grand twenty grand Jackie  Grealish...”

Funny how the FFP thing has come home to roost. It should have been implemented from the start and the “parachute” money is quite simply a joke that unfairly rewards failure.

Did no one see this coming no one?

The parachute payments are so a relegated team doesnt have to sell it's entire squad and replace them with kids.

That's what they're intended for, but as we've shown they actually get used to buy loads of players in the gamble that you'll get straight back up.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sickbeggar on May 28, 2018, 11:32:59 AM
My plan would be as follows. If we have to sell a key player to balance the books then so be it.

My choice would be Kodjia. Not because i don't rate him, he's our best forward, but we managed pretty much the whole season without him. I reckon we'd get 12-15m for him. Give that to the accountants. If we can get grabban on loan again then great, if not someone else.

send back all the loans. like Snodgrass and Onamah. Whoever is manager will have to get a tune out of our youth players plus tshbola.

Try and sell Bjarnason, taylor, lansbury whelan elphick and any other deadwood we can move. Hopefully that will scrape about 8-10m together to spend on our defence

We go again.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: garyshawsknee on May 28, 2018, 11:39:26 AM
I don't see many paying that for Kodjia, I fear it'll be Chester who goes for that amount.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 28, 2018, 11:40:43 AM
I would differ in that Chester, Jedinak, Grealish and Kodjia represent a good spine and it would be my aim to keep that and adorn it with a mix; pace and movement has to be key.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: aj2k77 on May 28, 2018, 11:41:19 AM
If we lose Chester then it's almost an entire new back 5 next season and I can't see us getting it that right to mount a challenge.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithe on May 28, 2018, 11:42:29 AM
Kodja would be the obvious sacrifice to me as well but surely we’d get back far more than we paid for him?

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sickbeggar on May 28, 2018, 11:44:03 AM
Kodjia is a proven championship striker. He's in his prime at 28, and he's an international. I think in today's market he's worth  12-15m of anyone's money. If he'd played and scored goals this season he'd be in the 20m price range.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithe on May 28, 2018, 11:47:23 AM
If I were one of the relegated teams I’d pay £20m for him, easy for me to say though.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: aj2k77 on May 28, 2018, 11:51:38 AM
Tshbola, Gil, Gollini, McCormack, Hogan, Lansbury, Gardner, De Laet, Richards, Elphick. There's got to be a few quid in that lot, even if we are subsiding wages elsewhere as they have contributed almost nothing to the team this season. We have to move them on. If we keep Kodjia, Jedinak, Chester, Grealish then it's a great start for next season.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Chris Jameson on May 28, 2018, 11:54:25 AM
Under no circumstances should *insert name of player we signed from Reading for a silly amount of money who we sent on loan once saw how good he is* ever return to Villa. I can't cope with hearing that bloody Queen song each time his name is mentioned.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sickbeggar on May 28, 2018, 11:55:05 AM
Tshbola, Gil, Gollini, McCormack, Hogan, Lansbury, Gardner, De Laet, Richards, Elphick. There's got to be a few quid in that lot, even if we are subsiding wages elsewhere as they have contributed almost nothing to the team this season. We have to move them on. If we keep Kodjia, Jedinak, Chester, Grealish then it's a great start for next season.


well i'm looking at getting 12-15m for the bank plus another 10m for signings and that's not even the FFP worse case scenario. I think we'd struggle to get half of that amount from the players you've listed
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithe on May 28, 2018, 11:55:38 AM
I’d have a guess that’s about a third of the weekly amount we need to save if we get rid of that lot. It’s a start.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on May 28, 2018, 11:59:03 AM
Fulham managed to hang to to Cairney last summer so I’m hopeful we can do the same with Jack
Because both situations are identical  :-*

They had a high wage bill, no parachute money and were turning down £20m bids for West Ham and Newcastle. Not too dis similar
Why don’t you read the article above and then explain how it’s the same.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on May 28, 2018, 12:01:58 PM
This is the best summary I found. Can't vouch for its veracity but I found it both convincing and obviously alarming. In short, says we need to generate c £40m next season.

https://heartoftheholte1874.wordpress.com/2018/02/20/villa-play-ffp-roulette-as-the-consequences-of-failing-this-season-becomes-clear/#more-37

Any accountant types able to comment on this piece?
Before the wishful thinking crap, why don’t people read this.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: john e on May 28, 2018, 12:03:46 PM
I’m co confused

have we got no money to spend because we’ve got no money
or we have money but we can’t spend it because of FFP
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on May 28, 2018, 12:11:28 PM
I’m co confused

have we got no money to spend because we’ve got no money
or we have money but we can’t spend it because of FFP
The latter.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: footyskillz on May 28, 2018, 12:13:45 PM
Do we have a confirmed list of players now out of contract and expected to be released?

McCormack and Richards not getting bumps in their salary following a promotion is, as has been said, one of the few "good" things about not going up as they'll finally be gone next summer ( unless McCormack was signed on a four year deal?).

Apart from the loans players the seniors contracts expiring in June

JT
Hutton
Agbonlahor
Samba
Bunn
(Hutton, JT and Gabby leaving would reduce wages)

These 3 below would be on chunky wages and 2019 expiry
Jedinak
Whelan
Richards
(Green, steer, Lyden younger players less wage)

Next are those expiring  in 2020 so max price would be this summer for sales and club. players and agents will be looking at situation of contract as will the club.


29 year old Chester
Mccormack  who is 31 will be 33 at expiry.
30 year old Elmo
29 year old Kodija
30 year old Bjarnason
30 year old adomah

Houirhane
Grealish
Tshibola minimal wage.

Here I think Mccormack and Bjarnason may well be 2 moved on. And possibly Kodjia.


2021
Hogan
Taylor
Lansbury
Bree

I think players leaving along with JT and Hutton will be Kodjia or Hogan. Bjarnason hopefully Mccormack and Richards too.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ASHTONVILLA on May 28, 2018, 12:18:02 PM
Tshbola, Gil, Gollini, McCormack, Hogan, Lansbury, Gardner, De Laet, Richards, Elphick. There's got to be a few quid in that lot, even if we are subsiding wages elsewhere as they have contributed almost nothing to the team this season. We have to move them on. If we keep Kodjia, Jedinak, Chester, Grealish then it's a great start for next season.

De Laet is a better right back than Elmo or Bree and should feature next season.

Hogan and McCormack could do well with a new manager, I wouldn't write them off just yet (though would take the cash if offered). If Grealish is sold then McCormack is the most obvious player for a front man to play off, other than maybe Gil.

Golini may be used, as if we can't sell him he is better than Steer.

Elphick might be OK with a new manager, he was certainly excellent for Bournemouth at this level.

Lansbury looked good at Forrest and is worth a try under a new manager too.

Tsibola, Richards, Gardner I can't see any use for. Also I am not convinced Jedinak and Whelan have the legs for another season.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: footyskillz on May 28, 2018, 12:23:15 PM
The move for Elmo now looking unnecessary. When faith in Bree and Hutton to do the job. As well as da laet. However Bruce wanted some of his own and along with snoddy did well enough but would like to see him go. Elmo more of a wing back and not suited to system.

Think some players on those contracts will stick around another season.

Jedinak and Whelan can let contracts run and would probably be kept but would like them one to go but lack of funds prob have to keep them.


Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 28, 2018, 12:33:06 PM
Tshibola, Elphick, McCormack, De Laet and Gollini all returning bloats the squad again.

I would keep Elphick as 3rd choice centre half unless a permanent move is on the card for him.

De Laet is lightening quick and I wouldn't mind him and Brew being our right back options.

Tshibola looked like he could have been a player, but his attitude is not there.

McCormack is for the glue factory and Gollini wants an Italian goal keeping coach.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: john e on May 28, 2018, 12:34:34 PM
I’m co confused

have we got no money to spend because we’ve got no money
or we have money but we can’t spend it because of FFP
The latter.

that’s alright then
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sickbeggar on May 28, 2018, 12:55:48 PM
Looking at the players most people would be ok with selling this is what i think we'd get in sales. You're welcome to argue otherwise. Note: what we paid for them is off the net and probably quesstimates in some cases


gollini 4.25m - hasn't made an impact on loan, 2 years on his contact. providing an italian team can afford his wages £1.5-2m
Richards - crocked, on massive wages. Unsellable. Only question is whether it would make sense to pay him off yet.
Tshbola -  £5m stll young, done absolutely nothing. only played 8 games for us though. 2 years left £1.5m-2m but can anyone pay his wages
Whelan 1m - not worth anything of note at his age. may be persuaded to leave if someone offers him a 2 year contact.
Lansbury 2.75m - 3 years left on good wages. you'd need a decent club to come in for him. 2.5m
Gardner - last year of his contact. unlikely to get anything for him above a nominal fee
Bjarnason 2-3m - not really made an impact. probably get back what we paid for him 2-3m
Taylor  - swap -   Again wages could be a problem for suiters as well as the length of his contract  - possibly 3-4m
Elphick 3m  -  last year of his contact. 1m to get him off the books
Hogan 8m -  i good season in the championship versus 2 crap ones for us. 3 years left. Unlikely to be on peanuts 4m
McCormack  12m - is he worth anything after bruce publicly rubbished him? I can't see anyone taking a chance on him but 4m
Gill 3.25m -  Again last year of his contact 1m
De Laet  2.5m - nominal fee if that


So i make that in an ideal world 23m  clawed back. I don't think for a second we'll get that but even half of that would be something. Add in a conservative figure of 25k per week per player on wages next season and i make that an extra 15m saved on wages so concievably 38m saved. Obviously replacements would eat into that wage saving.

--
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: robleflaneur on May 28, 2018, 12:57:09 PM
I’m co confused

have we got no money to spend because we’ve got no money
or we have money but we can’t spend it because of FFP
The latter.
So let's watch them at Recon Park wearing our Recon shirts.

that’s alright then
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: auntiesledd on May 28, 2018, 01:01:22 PM
Given that Fulham apparently spent a net £3M (last season?) to go up, it further convinces me that having the right manager & club structure is more important than continuing to spunk money. It may take a few seasons to bring about such a revolution at VP, but shirley it's worth instigating - now we've hit financial Palookaville? Bruce continually bangs/banged on about experience being vital, but players only become experienced by being given a chance to play first team football when they're younger. His reluctance to utilise some of our young talent has aided & abetted the huge Summer clear-out which we're about to witness, so I sincerely hope The Suits have realised a radically different approach is now necessary to push this club forward. Bring it on, I say.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: tomd2103 on May 28, 2018, 01:07:02 PM
Looking at the players most people would be ok with selling this is what i think we'd get in sales. You're welcome to argue otherwise. Note: what we paid for them is off the net and probably quesstimates in some cases


gollini 4.25m - hasn't made an impact on loan, 2 years on his contact. providing an italian team can afford his wages £1.5-2m
Richards - crocked, on massive wages. Unsellable. Only question is whether it would make sense to pay him off yet.
Tshbola -  £5m stll young, done absolutely nothing. only played 8 games for us though. 2 years left £1.5m-2m but can anyone pay his wages
Whelan 1m - not worth anything of note at his age. may be persuaded to leave if someone offers him a 2 year contact.
Lansbury 2.75m - 3 years left on good wages. you'd need a decent club to come in for him. 2.5m
Gardner - last year of his contact. unlikely to get anything for him above a nominal fee
Bjarnason 2-3m - not really made an impact. probably get back what we paid for him 2-3m
Taylor  - swap -   Again wages could be a problem for suiters as well as the length of his contract  - possibly 3-4m
Elphick 3m  -  last year of his contact. 1m to get him off the books
Hogan 8m -  i good season in the championship versus 2 crap ones for us. 3 years left. Unlikely to be on peanuts 4m
McCormack  12m - is he worth anything after bruce publicly rubbished him? I can't see anyone taking a chance on him but 4m
Gill 3.25m -  Again last year of his contact 1m
De Laet  2.5m - nominal fee if that


So i make that in an ideal world 23m  clawed back. I don't think for a second we'll get that but even half of that would be something. Add in a conservative figure of 25k per week per player on wages next season and i make that an extra 15m saved on wages so concievably 38m saved. Obviously replacements would eat into that wage saving.

--

In all likelihood, we would be looking at loaning out the majority of the above.  Either that or we are going to have to reintegrate them into the squad and use them.  I would personally look to offer Terry and Hutton one year deals, but the finances to do that might not be there.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sickbeggar on May 28, 2018, 01:19:19 PM
yep, the likes of Hogan and McCormack would show up horrendous losses on FFP if they were sold. Others like whelan may be just worth keeping as cover as to replace them is going to cost more. Lansbury and Bjarnason would probably be the best bets to sell. Maybe give Tshibola another try. The others just loan if we can
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Toronto Villa on May 28, 2018, 01:38:17 PM
Wyness said they're plans for either eventuality.

I hope that Wyness was right at the AGM that there is no need to sell Chester and Grealish. Them with a fit Kodjia and having Green, O'Hare and RHM offering the elusive pace we've lacked all year wouldn't be the worst.

A manager who can have us moving the ball with a bit of tempo wouldn't be the too shabby.

That's where I am. We have a good crop of kids coming through that most Championship clubs would die to have. Then, we're just not going to sell everyone. Yes players will leave, and yes, we're not going to shell out money like we've become accustomed to, and especially at this level. And that's a good thing in many ways. What we need is a manager who is going to make the very best of our resources, which at the end of the day should still put us in a very strong position headed into the new season. The relegated clubs will lose players and while they will have much larger budgets we've all seen how that can be wasted and provides no guarantee of success. So let's see what the next few weeks brings. I'm not at all with what has happened, and lay the blame squarely at the door of the manager. That's the very first change that needs to happen.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Mister E on May 28, 2018, 01:56:05 PM
My view on the players coming and going is:
Gollini - get rid.
Richards - if he's unfit, we've got to get rid, either via the insurance or on a paid-up basis.
Tshibola -  let a new manager have a go with him; still has some potential.
Whelan - back to Stoke? Try and offload.
Lansbury - get rid; doesn't matter for how much.
Gardner - let him play his contract out; or sell for nominal amount
Bjarnason - I'd keep him and play him, if he wants to do so.
Taylor  - gotta get rid, to someone!
Elphick - let him play out the last year of his contact.
Hogan - ??? Depends on who the manager is, but take an offer to get rid if it comes.
McCormack - unlikely to be able to offload; can a new manager rehabilitate him?
Gill - just offload somewhere (if his wages are not a total blocker)
De Laet - keep him and play him!

God, there are some deadbeats on long contracts in this lot!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sirlordbaltimore on May 28, 2018, 02:16:56 PM
Given that Fulham apparently spent a net £3M (last season?) to go up, it further convinces me that having the right manager & club structure is more important than continuing to spunk money.

Our net spend last season was something like 20m in profit

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: shipscat on May 28, 2018, 02:20:18 PM
I can see us,whilst not actively marketing,looking to shift a few of the profitable in FFP terms players.

We signed Lansbury and Hourihane on the relatively cheap,albeit with decent wages.Suspect we'd get circa 3million for Lansbury and 5/6 for Hourihane.

Additionally,in the way of Baker last season,where we made a substancial profit in FFP terms,I wouldn't be surprised if Andre Green ends up at a certain London club,billed as one for the future for 5/6 Million.

FFP will hinder getting rid of some of the squad as we'll be essentially receiving nothing or a loss for the likes of McCormack,Hogan,Tschibola .However,in that context I don't see us being unable to shift Gollini,Gardner,Elphick and Gil and co on,possibly even with a small operating profit.

As allegedly 38 Million is the break figure for March 2019,that'll leave us adrift by circa 20-22 Million.....When do we get that chunk off the HS2 Liability Fund and how much is the realistic re-naming rights to BMH?



Additionally we have the Amavi money to come in at around 7/8 million. If they move on,and both are heavily linked, sell on clauses for Traore and Vertout ..4/5 million?

Add all the wages we are getting rid of.... and the fact Wolves have basically showed the way to circumnavigate FFP will we be ok?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Lastfootstamper on May 28, 2018, 02:35:23 PM
Given that Fulham apparently spent a net £3M (last season?) to go up, it further convinces me that having the right manager & club structure is more important than continuing to spunk money. It may take a few seasons to bring about such a revolution at VP, but shirley it's worth instigating - now we've hit financial Palookaville? Bruce continually bangs/banged on about experience being vital, but players only become experienced by being given a chance to play first team football when they're younger. His reluctance to utilise some of our young talent has aided & abetted the huge Summer clear-out which we're about to witness, so I hope sincerely hope The Suits have realised a radically different approach is now necessary to push this club forward. Bring it on, I say.

Revolution NOW. We're not evolving, we're not progressing, we're fucking dull and boring, and we've got exactly what our approach has deserved; nothing.

And as for "stability", our ever-dwindling income doesn't scream stable to me.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SirSteveUK on May 28, 2018, 02:49:01 PM
Just to clarify, for the three seasons just ended, our acc losses needed to be under 61 mill ( PL=35, CH= 13). We submitted ( as did all clubs) an estimated accounts for season just ended - by Mar 1st.

Now we wait.......

March 2019, figure drops from 61 to 39.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: dalians umbrella on May 28, 2018, 03:02:22 PM
When Tony Xia took over and there was mention of Villa Park being re-named, I was completely against it but if things are bad financially, I really think this is the way to go  - it could then go back to being Villa Park when the financial situation has improved.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: auntiesledd on May 28, 2018, 03:37:46 PM
Given that Fulham apparently spent a net £3M (last season?) to go up, it further convinces me that having the right manager & club structure is more important than continuing to spunk money. It may take a few seasons to bring about such a revolution at VP, but shirley it's worth instigating - now we've hit financial Palookaville? Bruce continually bangs/banged on about experience being vital, but players only become experienced by being given a chance to play first team football when they're younger. His reluctance to utilise some of our young talent has aided & abetted the huge Summer clear-out which we're about to witness, so I hope sincerely hope The Suits have realised a radically different approach is now necessary to push this club forward. Bring it on, I say.

Revolution NOW. We're not evolving, we're not progressing, we're fucking dull and boring, and we've got exactly what our approach has deserved; nothing.

And as for "stability", our ever-dwindling income doesn't scream stable to me.

I completely concur with not waiting a moment longer for the revolution. I'm just not sure it'll turn us into instant world-beaters: especially with the amount of over-paid & under-performing wasters that we still have stinkin' the place out.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SirSteveUK on May 28, 2018, 03:41:32 PM
Re: Transfer embargoes

This is dated Oct 2014 - no idea if anything has changed

How the embargo works

Any embargo would be applied before the start of January Transfer window. Under the ban, a club could still players however they will only be able to sign a player if it is on a ‘one a one-out, one in’ basis where both the following conditions apply:

The club has fewer than 24 registered players, and
The incoming player has wages of below 75% of the departing player.

Once an embargo is applied a club can apply in March to the Football League to have the ban removed. However the removal of the ban cannot take place until 31 May 2015 and will only occur where the club has submitted Interim Information that confirms the club is on target to pass the FFP test in the following December (i.e. relating to the 2014/15 Season).

It is therefore possible that some of the clubs that start their transfer embargo in 1 January 2015 will not have their ban removed during next summer’s transfer window.

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on May 28, 2018, 03:49:33 PM
As far as I know if you have a transfer embargo you cannot pay a fee of any kind, including compensation or loan fees.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: pauliewalnuts on May 28, 2018, 04:01:04 PM
When Tony Xia took over and there was mention of Villa Park being re-named, I was completely against it but if things are bad financially, I really think this is the way to go  - it could then go back to being Villa Park when the financial situation has improved.

That wouldn't raise very much money

Stadium naming rights only really have value on new stadiums. People would still call Villa Park Villa Park, and that is why it would attract minimal money.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: dalians umbrella on May 28, 2018, 04:05:21 PM
When Tony Xia took over and there was mention of Villa Park being re-named, I was completely against it but if things are bad financially, I really think this is the way to go  - it could then go back to being Villa Park when the financial situation has improved.

That wouldn't raise very much money

Stadium naming rights only really have value on new stadiums. People would still call Villa Park Villa Park, and that is why it would attract minimal money.

no, I meant for Recon to sponsor it and for Xia to plough in as much money as legally possible - Recon Park.

Man City managed to plough in 400 million using this tactic:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2011/jul/12/arsenal-manchester-city-premier-league

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on May 28, 2018, 04:06:00 PM
When Tony Xia took over and there was mention of Villa Park being re-named, I was completely against it but if things are bad financially, I really think this is the way to go  - it could then go back to being Villa Park when the financial situation has improved.

That wouldn't raise very much money

Stadium naming rights only really have value on new stadiums. People would still call Villa Park Villa Park, and that is why it would attract minimal money.
It’s all a bit clutching at straws now.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: dalians umbrella on May 28, 2018, 04:11:01 PM
When Tony Xia took over and there was mention of Villa Park being re-named, I was completely against it but if things are bad financially, I really think this is the way to go  - it could then go back to being Villa Park when the financial situation has improved.

That wouldn't raise very much money

Stadium naming rights only really have value on new stadiums. People would still call Villa Park Villa Park, and that is why it would attract minimal money.
It’s all a bit clutching at straws now.

why? If Man City can use the tactic to inject 400m, why can't we use the same tactic to inject a substantial amount via Recon?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on May 28, 2018, 04:17:22 PM
When Tony Xia took over and there was mention of Villa Park being re-named, I was completely against it but if things are bad financially, I really think this is the way to go  - it could then go back to being Villa Park when the financial situation has improved.

That wouldn't raise very much money

Stadium naming rights only really have value on new stadiums. People would still call Villa Park Villa Park, and that is why it would attract minimal money.
It’s all a bit clutching at straws now.

why? If Man City can use the tactic to inject 400m, why can't we use the same tactic to inject a substantial amount via Recon?
It was a new stadium.
It is a long term commitment.
The rules and penalties of FFP had not been established.
There are independent firms that will provide an independent valuation of the naming rights and whatever that comes out at is the amount that will be allowed and as Paulie points out it will not be significant.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt Collins on May 28, 2018, 04:34:05 PM
Just to clarify, for the three seasons just ended, our acc losses needed to be under 61 mill ( PL=35, CH= 13). We submitted ( as did all clubs) an estimated accounts for season just ended - by Mar 1st.

Now we wait.......

March 2019, figure drops from 61 to 39.
pretty sure we're fine for the last year it's the next onr that's the problem

As has been spelled out here about five times
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SirSteveUK on May 28, 2018, 05:54:54 PM
As far as I know if you have a transfer embargo you cannot pay a fee of any kind, including compensation or loan fees.

That’s right, I think PWS - but if no loan fee, you are allowed to pay more of the players wages - which may then conflict with the “pay the new player less than the old one”
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 28, 2018, 06:29:29 PM
When Tony Xia took over and there was mention of Villa Park being re-named, I was completely against it but if things are bad financially, I really think this is the way to go  - it could then go back to being Villa Park when the financial situation has improved.

That wouldn't raise very much money

Stadium naming rights only really have value on new stadiums. People would still call Villa Park Villa Park, and that is why it would attract minimal money.
It’s all a bit clutching at straws now.

why? If Man City can use the tactic to inject 400m, why can't we use the same tactic to inject a substantial amount via Recon?
It was a new stadium.
It is a long term commitment.
The rules and penalties of FFP had not been established.
There are independent firms that will provide an independent valuation of the naming rights and whatever that comes out at is the amount that will be allowed and as Paulie points out it will not be significant.

Man City had been fined £49 million for being in breach of FFP, which is one of the reasons they arranged £40 million a year sponsorship deal with Etihad.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Risso on May 28, 2018, 06:44:32 PM
I'm amazed that the FFP rules haven't fallen foul of EU competition and free movement of capital laws.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on May 28, 2018, 07:01:22 PM
I'm amazed that the FFP rules haven't fallen foul of EU competition and free movement of capital laws.
At some point they will be, I guess it needs someone to be brave enough to take it on.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 28, 2018, 07:02:54 PM
I'm amazed that the FFP rules haven't fallen foul of EU competition and free movement of capital laws.

You're not alone. Given the aim is to avoid monopolies and uncompetitive practice, I fail to see how interfering with an owners ability to invest in a business that would allow another club to climb the ladder fits in with that.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on May 28, 2018, 07:13:48 PM
With how some clubs have taken the piss, i'm looking at you Leicester, I can see why it was brought in. And long term it probably helps some clubs not end up fecked and in administration.
Problem is if you have say, Bill Gates buy a club. He should be able to spend as much as he wants, as long as it isn't actually landing a club with debt. And that's then another problem if it's allowed, FFP and those responsible won't know how long term it is. No one will. Bill Gates could come in at say Barnsley, spend £200m of his own money on transfers, cover the massive increase in wages, non of it is loans just him happily spending and writing off his own money, but then a year or 2 later he gets bored and leaves, or passes away, saddling them with a massive wage bill they haven't a hope of being able to afford once Gates has gone. Then what for Barnsley.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 28, 2018, 07:17:35 PM
After 2 years of excitement they can go back to sacrificing virgins to make sure the sun keeps rising I suppose.

Gaydamack at Portsmouth is probably the wrong un' these rules were designed to stop.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on May 28, 2018, 07:22:28 PM
The likes of Rushden and Diamonds, Darlington etc as well.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Toronto Villa on May 28, 2018, 07:25:10 PM
I'm amazed that the FFP rules haven't fallen foul of EU competition and free movement of capital laws.

Didn't Wyness suggest in that interview that the club were challenging the FFP rules with Football League? Or did I imagine that?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on May 28, 2018, 08:51:36 PM
It's naïve beyond belief to think that FFP was genuinely brought in to stop clubs going to the wall. As others have said, if that's the case, why can't gazillionaires just pump loads of their own money in?

FFP is designed to make sure the same name keep cropping up at the top of the major leagues so that those leagues can build some brands and make shit loads of money selling viewing rights around the world.

The game wouldn't be anywhere near as popular if the top 6 changed every year.

And now those clubs are established it's not a massive leap of faith to think that the next thing will be an expansion of the Champions League (in terms of games, not clubs) and a switch of those games to Saturdays and domestic league games to midweek. That way you can time Champions League games at a time the Far East don't have to set the alarm clock for 5am and they'll make even more money.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: David_Nab on May 28, 2018, 08:55:55 PM
It's naïve beyond belief to think that FFP was genuinely brought in to stop clubs going to the wall. As others have said, if that's the case, why can't gazillionaires just pump loads of their own money in?

FFP is designed to make sure the same name keep cropping up at the top of the major leagues so that those leagues can build some brands and make shit loads of money selling viewing rights around the world.

The game wouldn't be anywhere near as popular if the top 6 changed every year.

And now those clubs are established it's not a massive leap of faith to think that the next thing will be an expansion of the Champions League (in terms of games, not clubs) and a switch of those games to Saturdays and domestic league games to midweek. That way you can time Champions League games at a time the Far East don't have to set the alarm clock for 5am and they'll make even more money.

Nail on head ..FFP was to stop another Man City spoiling the party of the established big teams
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sickbeggar on May 28, 2018, 08:57:14 PM
The ironic thing was this was all agreed nearly 10 years ago and some of the clubs who were all for it when they had their noses in the trough have suddenly found its them being penalised. Be careful what you wish for i guess.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on May 28, 2018, 09:01:31 PM
I think it's a bit of both, it must have been embarrassing for the leagues to have so many clubs going into administration. From 2008-20013 a quick Google and 20 clubs from the Conference North/South level upwards went into administration, 12 were league clubs, since 2013 i'm not sure any have. So something is working somewhere.

And they definitely always want Man Utd, Real, etc at the top of their leagues.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Dante Lavelli on May 28, 2018, 09:19:34 PM
Do debts transfer from one owner to the next in FFP world?  Could Recon (or another of Xia's businesses) buy Villa, effectively re-setting the clock back to zero whilst all other variables stay the same?  That system would be ripe for abuse but it seems unfair that a new regime would be responsible for the previous owners mis-management.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt Collins on May 28, 2018, 09:46:21 PM
Next season will be our third under Recon so it doesn't matter
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: wolfman999 on May 28, 2018, 10:10:32 PM
FFP is also creating a new problem for the Premiership in that it is cementing small, unfashionable clubs in the league at the expense of others (like us) who pull in more viewers. I can't ses the Chinese paying a fortune to see  Bournemouth play Huddersfield or Watford play Brighton so the product will in time be less able to attract the big TV money of the past both at home and abroad. Last year, our games were often pulling better viewer numbers than many Premiership games.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on May 28, 2018, 10:17:21 PM
We are really under pressure now.  The new season kicks off in 9 weeks.  There’s a World Cup in the middle of it all meaning business will probably be slow.  In addition the window closes earlier this year.  It is partly for this reason they will stick with Bruce unless he does his usual resigning trick.  I’m genuinely concerned. 
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Dante Lavelli on May 28, 2018, 10:20:51 PM
Next season will be our third under Recon so it doesn't matter

Yeah, but Xia buys us again, wearing a disguise, using another of his businesses as the purchaser.  There's so little transparency with Chinese businesses that I'm sure they could fabricate the paperwork.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Risso on May 28, 2018, 10:21:26 PM
I think it's a bit of both, it must have been embarrassing for the leagues to have so many clubs going into administration. From 2008-20013 a quick Google and 20 clubs from the Conference North/South level upwards went into administration, 12 were league clubs, since 2013 i'm not sure any have. So something is working somewhere.

And they definitely always want Man Utd, Real, etc at the top of their leagues.

Trying to bring some sort of financial common sense into play was a good thing, but a one size fits all approach that tries to work for the Premier League with teams like Man U and Man City, and League 2 with teams like Scunthorpe and Hartlepool was always going to end with disparities.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: David_Nab on May 28, 2018, 10:25:03 PM
FFP is also creating a new problem for the Premiership in that it is cementing small, unfashionable clubs in the league at the expense of others (like us) who pull in more viewers. I can't ses the Chinese paying a fortune to see  Bournemouth play Huddersfield or Watford play Brighton so the product will in time be less able to attract the big TV money of the past both at home and abroad. Last year, our games were often pulling better viewer numbers than many Premiership games.

Which is why the big clubs are now angling to tear up the TV deal that distrubutes money evenly and take more for themselves...basically the same as Real and Barca do in Spain.

FFP based on revenue just helps already established clubs who just use their name to sign more marketing deals..hence why Man United have official Paint and Mattress suppliers and Liverpool have their players shaving their chests on tv ads..

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Lastfootstamper on May 28, 2018, 10:34:08 PM
They could've just borrowed ideas off the colonials, like global merchandising revenue redistribution and a salary cap.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SoccerHQ on May 29, 2018, 12:25:37 AM
Fulham managed to hang to to Cairney last summer so I’m hopeful we can do the same with Jack

Fulham selling McCormack to us for 12m helped them balanced the books nicely and avoided FFP penalties.

Does show you can sell a big player which helps rebuild the first 11 at least.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/dec/15/leeds-blackburn-nottingham-forest-financial-fair-play-transfer-embargo

Forest, Leeds and Blackburn all punished in 2014 and restricted to free transfers and loans with special criteria.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: OzVilla on May 29, 2018, 04:21:18 AM
Is the Wolves style model out of the question?  I'm no expert on these things but you'd think an agent would rather his players be put in the shop window/earn him his return far more with us than with anybody else.  Larger fan base also provides greater return for commercial opportunities and merchandise. 
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: IFWaters on May 29, 2018, 06:32:04 AM
If you look at the real problems in the finances it's the stupid long term contracts we entered into in the sherwood and rdm period that have given us unusable dross on megabucks for years.

Conversely SB's deals are loans and short-term (in the main) and don't leave us in financial meltdown. I think he's under-rated on this front.

Even if you look at some of his longer term deals like Lansbury or Bjarni they are usable or sellable. Hogan probably the worst panic buy but I can see him going, albeit at a significant loss.

We will just have to use some younger players, and I'm happy with that. Make do and mend.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt Collins on May 29, 2018, 06:43:08 AM
Fulham managed to hang to to Cairney last summer so I’m hopeful we can do the same with Jack

Fulham selling McCormack to us for 12m helped them balanced the books nicely and avoided FFP penalties.

Does show you can sell a big player which helps rebuild the first 11 at least.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/dec/15/leeds-blackburn-nottingham-forest-financial-fair-play-transfer-embargo

Forest, Leeds and Blackburn all punished in 2014 and restricted to free transfers and loans with special criteria.

McCormack is a good example. He'd been at Fulham for 2 years I believe, and they sold him to us for a similar price to what they paid.

Under most explanations of FFP I've seen thats only moderately helpful. Fulham would have an amortised cost of (12/4=) £3m pa, assuming a four year contract. So £6m outstanding after two years.

We pay £12m upfront. So the benefit to Fulham is only £6m for FFP purposes. It helps again next year when Fulham don't have to incur the extra £3m hit.

I'm not sure I'm convinced this is right yet. But I've seen this explanation in a few places.

If it is right, you really need to be selling home grown players, or those who've been with you a while, or who've massively increased their value, if you're trying to head off a crisis year.

But given that we only really have grealish in any of those categories, and at the start of the season he probably wasnt worth mega bucks or in that much demand, I'm thinking there must have been alternatives considered or the above is wrong somehow
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt Collins on May 29, 2018, 08:09:06 AM
If you look at the real problems in the finances it's the stupid long term contracts we entered into in the sherwood and rdm period that have given us unusable dross on megabucks for years.

Conversely SB's deals are loans and short-term (in the main) and don't leave us in financial meltdown. I think he's under-rated on this front.

Even if you look at some of his longer term deals like Lansbury or Bjarni they are usable or sellable. Hogan probably the worst panic buy but I can see him going, albeit at a significant loss.

We will just have to use some younger players, and I'm happy with that. Make do and mend.

We should definitely sell Hogan and Lansbury if we can

But I think both are on 40k a week. Who do we think is going to pay that for guys who couldn't cut the mustard here? There's only really the relegated clubs who might feasibly consider it but thst would seem a stupid decision
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: David_Nab on May 29, 2018, 09:48:48 AM
Swiss Ramble

 
@SwissRamble
 13m13 minutes ago
More
For 2018/19, #AVFC parachute payment falls from £34m to £17m. If we assume no other changes and zero profit on player sales, we can see how much money Villa need to find to meet FFP limit of £39m. The shortfall is £45m, which must be made up by cuts in wage bill or player sales.

Doesn't sound too good ...
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Risso on May 29, 2018, 09:57:59 AM
Fulham managed to hang to to Cairney last summer so I’m hopeful we can do the same with Jack

Fulham selling McCormack to us for 12m helped them balanced the books nicely and avoided FFP penalties.

Does show you can sell a big player which helps rebuild the first 11 at least.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/dec/15/leeds-blackburn-nottingham-forest-financial-fair-play-transfer-embargo

Forest, Leeds and Blackburn all punished in 2014 and restricted to free transfers and loans with special criteria.

McCormack is a good example. He'd been at Fulham for 2 years I believe, and they sold him to us for a similar price to what they paid.

Under most explanations of FFP I've seen thats only moderately helpful. Fulham would have an amortised cost of (12/4=) £3m pa, assuming a four year contract. So £6m outstanding after two years.

We pay £12m upfront. So the benefit to Fulham is only £6m for FFP purposes. It helps again next year when Fulham don't have to incur the extra £3m hit.

I'm not sure I'm convinced this is right yet. But I've seen this explanation in a few places.

If it is right, you really need to be selling home grown players, or those who've been with you a while, or who've massively increased their value, if you're trying to head off a crisis year.

But given that we only really have grealish in any of those categories, and at the start of the season he probably wasnt worth mega bucks or in that much demand, I'm thinking there must have been alternatives considered or the above is wrong somehow

You’re right that there’s a profit realised on the disposal of an asset, but also the saving on £2m worth of wages per annum is a big FFP bonus for subsequent years.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: phantom limb on May 29, 2018, 09:58:36 AM
Is it possible to work out how much we are going to save on the wage bill from all of the out of contract players? I would assume that all of the loan players will go back to their respective clubs and we wouldn’t renew contracts for Agnonlahor, Terry, Hutton etc.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 29, 2018, 10:04:37 AM
I guess around £10 million.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SoccerHQ on May 29, 2018, 10:18:28 AM
I think it's a bit of both, it must have been embarrassing for the leagues to have so many clubs going into administration. From 2008-20013 a quick Google and 20 clubs from the Conference North/South level upwards went into administration, 12 were league clubs, since 2013 i'm not sure any have. So something is working somewhere.

And they definitely always want Man Utd, Real, etc at the top of their leagues.

Trying to bring some sort of financial common sense into play was a good thing, but a one size fits all approach that tries to work for the Premier League with teams like Man U and Man City, and League 2 with teams like Scunthorpe and Hartlepool was always going to end with disparities.

I always felt domestically Pompey were the textbook case for FFP.

A club with limit of 20k capacity, hardly any coporate cash coming in yet were paying players like Sol Campbell, Diarra and David James 80k a week (in 2007) and relied on TV money to do this. Think their wage bill after they won the cup in 2008 was 95% wages to income turnover.

Then said owner decides overnight he wants to sell club and dosen't want to put anything more in, huge firesale, relegation and then they fall down the divisions as Sunderland have also done and we could easily have done if Lerner hadn't sold us in 2016.

Of course Pompey were massively over achieving but they should never have over stretched themselves to end up as low as league 2. Anyone can see that although probably some on here would sign up for league 2 if it meant seeing us win the FA cup again! (wink)

I have a bit more leeway with this as it makes clubs think before splashing stupid amounts...or at least it should. We obviously gambled we'd get up within two years so will now have to face the consquences of failing to achieve that aim.

Problem now is with the ridiculous TV money in the premier league so many championship clubs will overspend to try to reach the milk and honey. If 10 + do that as seems the case only three can get promoted so very much odds against.

Once you're up in the prem the demand is then to spend 100m + as everyone else is doing it so your wage bill becomes stupid again.

I can see in ten years time every premier league club spending 200m in a summer. Three will still get relegated and 13/14 will finish out of european places so not really sure what the long term aim of all this is.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 29, 2018, 10:29:11 AM
Terry - 60k p/w
Gabby - 30k p/w
Hutton - 30k p/w
Snoddy - 40k p/w
Johnston -  25k p/w
Grabban - 30k p/w
Onomah - 20k p/w
Axel - 10k p/w

Puts it closer to £12.5 million, plus £4-5 million from the potential disposal of McCormack, Tshibola, Gollini et al and possibly £4-5 million in wages saved. £8 million for Amavi [which I assume would be worth £5 million after amortization] and then anybody's guess on what the RECON commercial deals are worth.

I cannot envisage they're worth less than £12-15 million additionally on top of the [not a lot] value of the current shirt manufacturing and sponsorship. That would leave us neutral and not give us room to add. But then the punishments financially are scaled and its a question of how seriously do they want to take it and I have serious doubts if we'd be the worse offenders or even alone. SHA appear in far bigger difficulties.

I'm also unsure whether that hypothetical £39 million* includes the £8 million Xia is allowed to inject as equity.

* I say hypothetical as its based on nothing changing, when things already have. 
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SoccerHQ on May 29, 2018, 10:32:32 AM
Is the Wolves style model out of the question?  I'm no expert on these things but you'd think an agent would rather his players be put in the shop window/earn him his return far more with us than with anybody else.  Larger fan base also provides greater return for commercial opportunities and merchandise. 


I think we've passed that boat.

What's forgotten about Wolves is they were actually in year 2 of their project, the first year they just appointed poor managers like Walter Zenga and Paul Lambert which had them in the bottom half for most of that season.

They learnt from it, continued buying in good players and delivered in the second year. We didn't.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 29, 2018, 10:37:46 AM
The thing is, you don't need to spend fortunes and if we can keep the core of our squad together, we don't need to sign too many players either. Defensively we will need some work, but ultimately we have been less than the sum of our parts this season.

Whoever comes in, touch wood, will hopefully by the time the window shuts, have Chester, Jedinak, Grealish and Kodjia running up the spine of the side. With some more pace and attacking intent surrounding that it ought to be a very good side again.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SoccerHQ on May 29, 2018, 10:38:31 AM
According to one of the papers yesterday Jedinak is on 45k a week and Lansbury 35k a week.

If Henri can somehow wrangle 35k a week when I don't think he's played a single minute of premier league football in his career then I imagine Hourihane wouldn't be far off that. If he isn't he needs to sack his agent.

Then you factor in players dropping down from the prem like AEM and Whelan.

As much as I'm trying to put a better spin on things we are in a bit of a hole with yet again the wage bill compared to what we're turning over. We're paying our squad players not far off what the squad players at Spurs are getting.

Either we let Steve Bruce get on with it to sort out his own mess of putting together an ageing expensive squad or we gave that as the main reason for mutually consenting his deal.

Of course that will have to be another manager we pay off so would that go against us on FFP?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: VinnieChase84 on May 29, 2018, 10:39:49 AM
If we could sign Hernandez on a free then I would sell Kodjia
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SoccerHQ on May 29, 2018, 10:44:36 AM
The thing is, you don't need to spend fortunes and if we can keep the core of our squad together, we don't need to sign too many players either. Defensively we will need some work, but ultimately we have been less than the sum of our parts this season.

Whoever comes in, touch wood, will hopefully by the time the window shuts, have Chester, Jedinak, Grealish and Kodjia running up the spine of the side. With some more pace and attacking intent surrounding that it ought to be a very good side again.

We played less than the sum of our parts but we still accumulated 80 + points.

I really can't see us getting close to that next season and you have no chance of going up automatically if you don't get past 80 points.

So play offs at best which everyone loves now of course. One day we'll finally have an 11 that will play a great game in a major final at Wembley but the much lauded been it, seen it 11 couldn't.

I'd personally let go of SB, get in Dean Smith,tell him he has a season to reconstruct the team and get us in shape (as SB did in 16/17), tell him not to worry about dissent from the Holte End if we draw 1-1 at home to Forest and let him get on with things.

He's had two top 10 finishes with Brentford so the guy can manage at this level. Anyone who expects us to go up next season (automatically) will be a bit bonkers as too much work to do. We can be in the mix for top 6 if we sign well.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 29, 2018, 10:50:35 AM
Depends who we keep. A fit Jack and Kodjia, why not? We need more pace, we lacked it all season.

Plenty of shite keeps going up without spending much.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AsTallAsLions on May 29, 2018, 10:50:54 AM
The thing is, you don't need to spend fortunes and if we can keep the core of our squad together, we don't need to sign too many players either. Defensively we will need some work, but ultimately we have been less than the sum of our parts this season.

Whoever comes in, touch wood, will hopefully by the time the window shuts, have Chester, Jedinak, Grealish and Kodjia running up the spine of the side. With some more pace and attacking intent surrounding that it ought to be a very good side again.

We played less than the sum of our parts but we still accumulated 80 + points.

I really can't see us getting close to that next season and you have no chance of going up automatically if you don't get past 80 points.

So play offs at best which everyone loves now of course. One day we'll finally have an 11 that will play a great game in a major final at Wembley but the much lauded been it, seen it 11 couldn't.

I'd personally let go of SB, get in Dean Smith,tell him he has a season to reconstruct the team and get us in shape (as SB did in 16/17), tell him not to worry about dissent from the Holte End if we draw 1-1 at home to Forest and let him get on with things.

He's had two top 10 finishes with Brentford so the guy can manage at this level. Anyone who expects us to go up next season (automatically) will be a bit bonkers as too much work to do. We can be in the mix for top 6 if we sign well.

I completely agree with you mate. There are those who have and will say it's a massive risk, but everything is. Holding on to SB, for me, is a massive risk, and I can't see it paying off.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 29, 2018, 10:52:24 AM
Chelts seems confident he's going. I do feel a new approach is needed. We've tried to sledgehammer our way out, got close, but now a bit of precision is required. 
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: lukey27 on May 29, 2018, 10:56:08 AM
I think the most inevitable thing about losing in the play-off final is all of the doom and gloom around FFP and potentially being stuck in this league for a long time.

We finished with 5 loan players last year. When we start in August I would expect at least close to that again. Davis, Bree and Green will all play bigger parts next year, so I think to say that we will be nowhere near the top two next year is guesswork.

Most sides in English football and all sides at this level build a team for 12 months to try and achieve their objectives. Once all the white noise settles down, we have a settled coaching structure and boardroom structure to be able to get a more than competitive squad together.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: chrisw1 on May 29, 2018, 10:57:45 AM
Chelts seems confident he's going. I do feel a new approach is needed. We've tried to sledgehammer our way out, got close, but now a bit of precision is required. 
Is Chelts info current or based on info from a while back that if we don't meet certain targets he will go?

If the latter, it may be that Tone thinks the injuries were mitigating circumstances and we got close enough to give him another go.

Personally I want a change, but not meeting a specific target is rarely as black and white as it may seem.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SoccerHQ on May 29, 2018, 10:58:42 AM
I think a parting of the ways would be good for Steve Bruce long term aswell.

I know he's a Geordie rolls his sleeves up type of guy as he keeps on saying but with all that's happened to him off the pitch he probably needs time away from football even if he dosen't realise it.

Come back in a years time and pretty sure likes of Norwich will need a manager so he'd have plenty of job offers.

Please don't tell me in two years time he'd get a Norwich promoted from this league and we'd still be down here working out if we could sell Hepburn-Murphy to Brentford for 40m to meet the latest FFP requirements!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: paul_e on May 29, 2018, 11:00:43 AM
All of that is, in my opinion, just further proof that the correct course for us to take is to continue to develop youngsters (and sign promising 15-16 year olds into the academy from other clubs) and when we do spend money it should be on players who will either retain the value or who can part of things for a number of years.  If we want to add experienced players on frees/bosmans then that's ok but once you're paying big money for players in their late 20s you're on a course towards ruin, we've seen this story play out twice now.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: robleflaneur on May 29, 2018, 11:10:52 AM
The thing is, you don't need to spend fortunes and if we can keep the core of our squad together, we don't need to sign too many players either. Defensively we will need some work, but ultimately we have been less than the sum of our parts this season.

Whoever comes in, touch wood, will hopefully by the time the window shuts, have Chester, Jedinak, Grealish and Kodjia running up the spine of the side. With some more pace and attacking intent surrounding that it ought to be a very good side again.

We played less than the sum of our parts but we still accumulated 80 + points.

I really can't see us getting close to that next season and you have no chance of going up automatically if you don't get past 80 points.

So play offs at best which everyone loves now of course. One day we'll finally have an 11 that will play a great game in a major final at Wembley but the much lauded been it, seen it 11 couldn't.

I'd personally let go of SB, get in Dean Smith,tell him he has a season to reconstruct the team and get us in shape (as SB did in 16/17), tell him not to worry about dissent from the Holte End if we draw 1-1 at home to Forest and let him get on with things.

He's had two top 10 finishes with Brentford so the guy can manage at this level. Anyone who expects us to go up next season (automatically) will be a bit bonkers as too much work to do. We can be in the mix for top 6 if we sign well.
Agree with you both that we played less than the sum of our parts,ie we underperformed,which is an indictment of Bruce.All we should ask of any manager is that we progress under him with the financial situation ,at least initially,
being a factor in measuring progress. As you say,getting us in shape so we can be optimistic about future seasons would be acceptable.
The situation is rather like following MON after his stint at clubs but we seem to have a more clued up board than previous regimes.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SoccerHQ on May 29, 2018, 11:19:57 AM
Situaiton is similar to when we came down in 2016 I think. Bloated squad, lots of questions about our future direction.

I think at this level we're going to have two year cycles, a year of consolidation and then the next one we have a good crack at promotion as we just have. I see it panning out that way anyway.

If in 2020 we still haven't gone up then we do run the risk of being another Forest/Sheff Weds/Leeds as those sort of teams became stagnant when they didn' go up after 3/4 years and indeed all went down to league one so things could go very much worse than just losing play off finals.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: David_Nab on May 29, 2018, 11:37:24 AM
According to one of the papers yesterday Jedinak is on 45k a week and Lansbury 35k a week.

If Henri can somehow wrangle 35k a week when I don't think he's played a single minute of premier league football in his career then I imagine Hourihane wouldn't be far off that. If he isn't he needs to sack his agent.

Then you factor in players dropping down from the prem like AEM and Whelan.

As much as I'm trying to put a better spin on things we are in a bit of a hole with yet again the wage bill compared to what we're turning over. We're paying our squad players not far off what the squad players at Spurs are getting.

Either we let Steve Bruce get on with it to sort out his own mess of putting together an ageing expensive squad or we gave that as the main reason for mutually consenting his deal.

Of course that will have to be another manager we pay off so would that go against us on FFP?

How the hell did we end up paying those wages , its not like we were in competition with other teams for them ..Jedinek I can excuse a little as at least he was dropping down a league but Lanbury really FFS
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithe on May 29, 2018, 11:42:03 AM
I think that whatever happens we will be competitive next season, we've just missed capitalising on the massive advantage we've had for these past two seasons.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: David_Nab on May 29, 2018, 11:57:26 AM
I think that whatever happens we will be competitive next season, we've just missed capitalising on the massive advantage we've had for these past two seasons.

Those wages ( and I expect we paid a significant % of wages to the loan players as well ) make a mockery of Bruce's continual I have had to work with FFP crap to put in perspective we lost to a Bolton side with a £5k a week wage cap due to going into administration ..thats real hardship not paying Terry 70k a week , Lansbury 35k a week etc ...
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: wolfman999 on May 29, 2018, 12:14:17 PM
I think that whatever happens we will be competitive next season, we've just missed capitalising on the massive advantage we've had for these past two seasons.

Those wages ( and I expect we paid a significant % of wages to the loan players as well ) make a mockery of Bruce's continual I have had to work with FFP crap to put in perspective we lost to a Bolton side with a £5k a week wage cap due to going into administration ..thats real hardship not paying Terry 70k a week , Lansbury 35k a week etc ...

I would agree except that surely as a club we are operating at a much higher level than Bolton. In terms of club size, support, TV exposure, etc. there's no comparison.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt Collins on May 29, 2018, 12:21:42 PM
Lansbury and hourihane were coming to the end of their contracts so were well placed to negotiate big deals

I think Ads' maths above was a little reasuring. Let's say we do need 40:

C 12 less in wages from those leaving, factoring in win and goal bonuses
C 8 from Amavi
C 1 from Gil
C 3 from sell on fees for veretout and Adama (complete guess,)
C 3 from other non playing sales
C 3 from Recon sponsoring BMH

Theres a lot of guesswork there. But that would be 30 or so

So we need 10 more, but have to factor in the need for some more players (keeper, CB) and amortisation

So would need to sell more than £10m worth of players. But perhaps would be possible to sell, say adomah, hourihane and Hogan?

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on May 29, 2018, 12:26:38 PM
According to one of the papers yesterday Jedinak is on 45k a week and Lansbury 35k a week.

If Henri can somehow wrangle 35k a week when I don't think he's played a single minute of premier league football in his career then I imagine Hourihane wouldn't be far off that. If he isn't he needs to sack his agent.

Then you factor in players dropping down from the prem like AEM and Whelan.

As much as I'm trying to put a better spin on things we are in a bit of a hole with yet again the wage bill compared to what we're turning over. We're paying our squad players not far off what the squad players at Spurs are getting.

Either we let Steve Bruce get on with it to sort out his own mess of putting together an ageing expensive squad or we gave that as the main reason for mutually consenting his deal.

Of course that will have to be another manager we pay off so would that go against us on FFP?

How the hell did we end up paying those wages , its not like we were in competition with other teams for them ..Jedinek I can excuse a little as at least he was dropping down a league but Lanbury really FFS

Lansbury was captain at Forest so was probably their highest earner.  Ditto Hourihane.  £30/£35k a week seems like about the going rate for a mid-table Championship team captain.  You can probably apply the same logic to McCormack (Fulham captain) and Jedi (Palace captain).  It's only the Villa that sign players on this level as squad players.

Therein lies the problem with Bruce's shit or bust approach, which is not a million miles away from MON's shit or bust approach to getting in the Champions League.  The business plan makes sense if you achieve the target.  If you don't though, the house of cards collapses pretty quickly.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt Collins on May 29, 2018, 12:32:31 PM
Yep.

The spurs strategy was more medium term. Focus on large quantities of younger players some of whom will come good and some won't

Anyway, that's all old hat now
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on May 29, 2018, 12:45:04 PM
Lansbury and hourihane were coming to the end of their contracts so were well placed to negotiate big deals

I think Ads' maths above was a little reasuring. Let's say we do need 40:

C 12 less in wages from those leaving, factoring in win and goal bonuses
C 8 from Amavi
C 1 from Gil
C 3 from sell on fees for veretout and Adama (complete guess,)
C 3 from other non playing sales
C 3 from Recon sponsoring BMH

Theres a lot of guesswork there. But that would be 30 or so

So we need 10 more, but have to factor in the need for some more players (keeper, CB) and amortisation

So would need to sell more than £10m worth of players. But perhaps would be possible to sell, say adomah, hourihane and Hogan?
If you sell Hogan for 5 then you still write off another 4 mil, so now you need to find another 4 and assuming Hourihane and Adonai break even on value that’s 14 mil profit they still have to find, if your Mathis are right.
The obvious answer is sell Grealish, and I can not see how that won’t happen.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt Collins on May 29, 2018, 01:00:32 PM
That's true on Hogan. You'd save his wages on top of course

But hourihane only cost 1.5. so you'd see the bulk of what, £7m to a gullible buyer plus £1.5m in wages?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SoccerHQ on May 29, 2018, 07:05:50 PM
In two minds about Hourihane. Limited but does score goals at this level.

Remember the Wyness line about needing 80 goals to go up automatically?

Wolves got 82 and Fulham 79 so Cardiff were the only ones to buck that trend as they got up with just 69 goals. (we scored 72).

So as minimum you need one striker capable of hitting 20 goals (Grabban would've done that for us over a full season), a midifelder capable of hitting 10 + (Hourihane) and one of the wider players also getting double figures (Adomah before xmas).

Alright selling these players but we need to find as good replacements with the limited budget we have.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt Collins on May 29, 2018, 07:07:39 PM
Its gonna involve some hard choices.

We'll need our strikers to contribute more as well
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Newby on May 29, 2018, 07:09:44 PM
Hopefully, Gollini going to Atalanta? 3.5m Euro's.  Another loss but we'll take the money.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SoccerHQ on May 29, 2018, 07:13:44 PM
We have similar players in quite a few positions.

I don't think there's much between Bjarni and Hourihane at all. Bjarni scored some nice goals in his appearences so think he'd hit 10 if he was a week in week out player.

We obviously can't carry Whelan and Jedinak in the squad next season.

De Laet is one who's been forgotten and back from his loan but again you would have him, Bree and AEM as RB options.

Lansbury can't even make the 18 now, he needs to be moved out if possible.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: old man villa fan on May 29, 2018, 08:06:36 PM
Lansbury and hourihane were coming to the end of their contracts so were well placed to negotiate big deals

I think Ads' maths above was a little reasuring. Let's say we do need 40:

C 12 less in wages from those leaving, factoring in win and goal bonuses
C 8 from Amavi
C 1 from Gil
C 3 from sell on fees for veretout and Adama (complete guess,)
C 3 from other non playing sales
C 3 from Recon sponsoring BMH

Theres a lot of guesswork there. But that would be 30 or so

So we need 10 more, but have to factor in the need for some more players (keeper, CB) and amortisation

So would need to sell more than £10m worth of players. But perhaps would be possible to sell, say adomah, hourihane and Hogan?
If you sell Hogan for 5 then you still write off another 4 mil, so now you need to find another 4 and assuming Hourihane and Adonai break even on value that’s 14 mil profit they still have to find, if your Mathis are right.
The obvious answer is sell Grealish, and I can not see how that won’t happen.


Using your example, if somebody wanted to buy Hogan for £5m, wouldn't you ask for a £1m loan fee and a guarantee to buy for a further £4m at the end of next season.  Thus delaying the write off of part of the loss.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on May 29, 2018, 08:55:11 PM
You can delay the loss on sale but you can't delay the amortisation.

If we're saying Hogan's book value is £9m and it's amortising at £3m per year a sale for £5m would crystallise a £4m loss.

Taking a loan fee of £1m would result in a £3m amortisation charge - net result £2m.

So yeah, short term its better but only if the other club is committed to buying the player. Otherwise you stand to lose £4m if you can't sell him the following year.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Richard E on May 29, 2018, 08:56:19 PM
One measly win against bloody Fulham and we wouldn't be having to worry about any of this crap. Ffs.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Nunkin1965 on May 29, 2018, 09:01:52 PM
One measly win against bloody Fulham and we wouldn't be having to worry about any of this crap. Ffs.
I keep seeing Jack's mazy run.
That slight deflection on the shot..
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Stu on May 29, 2018, 09:03:18 PM
Problem now is with the ridiculous TV money in the premier league so many championship clubs will overspend to try to reach the milk and honey. If 10 + do that as seems the case only three can get promoted so very much odds against.

Once you're up in the prem the demand is then to spend 100m + as everyone else is doing it so your wage bill becomes stupid again.

I can see in ten years time every premier league club spending 200m in a summer. Three will still get relegated and 13/14 will finish out of european places so not really sure what the long term aim of all this is.

I don't see how a rich owner leaving a club with a massive wage bill is that different to getting relegated from the Prem. Three clubs get relegated with players on enormous contracts that the relegated clubs can no longer afford due to less tv money coming in and parachute payments give them a go at coming straight back up. That doesn't work, but the owner, who is cash rich, is prevented from speculating. So they sell off the most expensive assets and put their feet up with the also-rans, probably tumbling through the league system. Meanwhile, those clubs with brands to sell, built when FFP was not in place, hoover up the tv cash and get official tyre sponsors, or whatever.

FFP is basically a punishment for being shit. It has nothing to do with competitiveness or wanting to stop clubs going out of business; if it was, then they wouldn't impose fines and points deductions or transfer embargoes. It's about protecting the business plan of a few elite clubs.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Richard E on May 29, 2018, 09:06:07 PM
Spot on. The financial fair play rules have never remotely been about financial fair play.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: LeeB on May 29, 2018, 09:08:10 PM
Doug would have fucking loved FFP, the tight fisted fucker.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on May 29, 2018, 09:11:08 PM
Doug would have fucking loved FFP, the tight fisted fucker.

Don't be so sure - his exorbitant salary would've counted towards the losses too.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: A Northern Soul on May 29, 2018, 09:17:50 PM
In slightly related news Cal O’Hare out for 10 weeks and will miss pre-season & the start of 18/19. So there’s one we can’t just slot in to plug a gap...
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: David_Nab on May 29, 2018, 09:22:11 PM
Spot on. The financial fair play rules have never remotely been about financial fair play.

Fair play would have been some kind of wage cap etc this way it just keep the same clubs at the top .
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: robleflaneur on May 29, 2018, 10:02:26 PM
Can we wait till January to sell any of our better players.The chances are that Grealish and Kodjia will increase in value or a youngster will become valuable property.Certainly get rid of more average players to reduce the wage bill and bring in fees.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: tomd2103 on May 29, 2018, 10:14:49 PM
In two minds about Hourihane. Limited but does score goals at this level.

Good bench option for me to come on in the latter stages of games.  I like Bjarnason but I think we could sell him if he does OK at the World Cup,
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SoccerHQ on May 29, 2018, 10:38:06 PM
In two minds about Hourihane. Limited but does score goals at this level.

Good bench option for me to come on in the latter stages of games.  I like Bjarnason but I think we could sell him if he does OK at the World Cup,


Bjarni wanted to go in January but was persuaded to stay on until the summer. He's the sort that wants to be starting every week and wasn't happy when he was dropped after the good run of form he had.

Can certainly see him wanting away in next few weeks but certainly wise as a good tournament will only increase his values and he did well at euro 2016.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt Collins on May 30, 2018, 05:39:43 AM
Can we wait till January to sell any of our better players.The chances are that Grealish and Kodjia will increase in value or a youngster will become valuable property.Certainly get rid of more average players to reduce the wage bill and bring in fees.

Yes I was thinking the same. But it's obviously a risk as the market is less reliable in January. We really would be desperate at that point. So can't see us going into January still needing to find £20m. Unless we're ultimately prepared to risk breaching the rules. Which maybe we are
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Villafirst on May 30, 2018, 07:42:39 AM
A bit more invention perhaps - Villa Park becoming the "Recon Arena" or "Recon Villa Park" for £30m a season for 5 years? Has Dr Tony got the financial clout??
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Duncan Shaw on May 30, 2018, 08:15:13 AM
One of the less obvious reasons I wanted us to go up was to see the colour of Dr T's money.  I do believe he's genuine and has the financial clout, but there is that nagging suspicion he is hiding behind the FFP thing.  Had we gone up there would have been no excuse and we could have seen what he was all about in his plan to get us to Eurpoean domination.

I'm still confused as to how some teams seem to be able to swerve it better than others - surely Wolves were outspending their turnover - and yet we always seem to have to fall in line.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: old man villa fan on May 30, 2018, 08:33:23 AM
You can delay the loss on sale but you can't delay the amortisation.

If we're saying Hogan's book value is £9m and it's amortising at £3m per year a sale for £5m would crystallise a £4m loss.

Taking a loan fee of £1m would result in a £3m amortisation charge - net result £2m.

So yeah, short term its better but only if the other club is committed to buying the player. Otherwise you stand to lose £4m if you can't sell him the following year.

That's why I said part. It depends how bad the financial position is as to what we have to do.

I don't things are as bad as people are thinking and I think there is a lot of over simplification being used. I am not saying we are in a great financial position but I don't think we are in 'car boot sale' territory.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AsTallAsLions on May 30, 2018, 08:42:16 AM
Is everybody a chartered accountant all of a sudden?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Richard E on May 30, 2018, 08:43:16 AM
More than one poster on here is an accountant, yes.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: VinnieChase84 on May 30, 2018, 08:47:30 AM
A bit more invention perhaps - Villa Park becoming the "Recon Arena" or "Recon Villa Park" for £30m a season for 5 years? Has Dr Tony got the financial clout??

In my opinion we have been preparing for this as soon as we couldn't secure a top 2 place. With the announcement of the training ground sponsorship etc.
If we can add £30m to the coffers to rename the ground then we should do it. Everyone will still call it Villa park anyway.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on May 30, 2018, 08:57:01 AM
One of the less obvious reasons I wanted us to go up was to see the colour of Dr T's money.  I do believe he's genuine and has the financial clout, but there is that nagging suspicion he is hiding behind the FFP thing.  Had we gone up there would have been no excuse and we could have seen what he was all about in his plan to get us to Eurpoean domination.

I'm still confused as to how some teams seem to be able to swerve it better than others - surely Wolves were outspending their turnover - and yet we always seem to have to fall in line.

Wolves made a profit in 2 of the 3 previous seasons. A big loss last season, and you assume they'll have a loss for this one, so would probably have been fecked if they hadn't gone up.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: VinnieChase84 on May 30, 2018, 11:21:20 AM
Are we the only club that seems bothered about FFP? If 12 clubs have failed it this season and we’re yet to see any fines, transfer embargo’s or points deductions it doesn’t seem like the league are taking it that seriously!?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: dave.woodhall on May 30, 2018, 11:25:19 AM
Are we the only club that seems bothered about FFP? If 12 clubs have failed it this season and we’re yet to see any fines, transfer embargo’s or points deductions it doesn’t seem like the league are taking it that seriously!?

I don't know if we're the only club taking it seriously, but we do seem to be the only one that's been worried about it ever since it was introduced.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Risso on May 30, 2018, 11:28:52 AM
Are we the only club that seems bothered about FFP? If 12 clubs have failed it this season and we’re yet to see any fines, transfer embargo’s or points deductions it doesn’t seem like the league are taking it that seriously!?

I don't know if we're the only club taking it seriously, but we do seem to be the only one that's been worried about it ever since it was introduced.

Well we’re the biggest club to have been relegated and then not got back up, so the disparity in our income and outgoings is huge.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AsTallAsLions on May 30, 2018, 11:37:10 AM
Are we the only club that seems bothered about FFP? If 12 clubs have failed it this season and we’re yet to see any fines, transfer embargo’s or points deductions it doesn’t seem like the league are taking it that seriously!?

If it wasn't for Wyness' clear frustration at the regulations and potential restrictions, I'd be suspecting it's all just a clever/convenient excuse for curtailing spending.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Bad English on May 30, 2018, 12:04:14 PM
Is everybody a chartered accountant all of a sudden?
I am English teacher and I can tell you all that the utterance "We must sort our bloody finances out" is an expression of deontic modality.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on May 30, 2018, 12:19:29 PM
A bit more invention perhaps - Villa Park becoming the "Recon Arena" or "Recon Villa Park" for £30m a season for 5 years? Has Dr Tony got the financial clout??

In my opinion we have been preparing for this as soon as we couldn't secure a top 2 place. With the announcement of the training ground sponsorship etc.
If we can add £30m to the coffers to rename the ground then we should do it. Everyone will still call it Villa park anyway.

Which is precisely why renaming Villa Park will have sod all effect on FFP.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: paul_e on May 30, 2018, 12:33:32 PM
A bit more invention perhaps - Villa Park becoming the "Recon Arena" or "Recon Villa Park" for £30m a season for 5 years? Has Dr Tony got the financial clout??

In my opinion we have been preparing for this as soon as we couldn't secure a top 2 place. With the announcement of the training ground sponsorship etc.
If we can add £30m to the coffers to rename the ground then we should do it. Everyone will still call it Villa park anyway.

Which is precisely why renaming Villa Park will have sod all effect on FFP.

I really don't know how true this is despite the number of times you (and others) have repeated it. It gets ruled by an independent panel who have to say whether the value given is reasonable but who really knows what is reasonable in this regard? "but people will still call it Villa Park" is only an argument if you're trying to generate external income, if recon are the sponsor then the 'return on investment' is largely irrelevant.  If Xia argues that his vision for the club and the area is to use the Recon brand to implement smart citytech then he can cite a legitimate 'exposure' value to getting the branding around the stadium and use that to justify the costs.  I really wouldn't be surprised if a figure around £5-6m a year was agreed as acceptable, especially given we have the sheer number of TV games we were selected for also working in our favour.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on May 30, 2018, 12:45:08 PM
A bit more invention perhaps - Villa Park becoming the "Recon Arena" or "Recon Villa Park" for £30m a season for 5 years? Has Dr Tony got the financial clout??

In my opinion we have been preparing for this as soon as we couldn't secure a top 2 place. With the announcement of the training ground sponsorship etc.
If we can add £30m to the coffers to rename the ground then we should do it. Everyone will still call it Villa park anyway.

Which is precisely why renaming Villa Park will have sod all effect on FFP.

I really don't know how true this is despite the number of times you (and others) have repeated it. It gets ruled by an independent panel who have to say whether the value given is reasonable but who really knows what is reasonable in this regard? "but people will still call it Villa Park" is only an argument if you're trying to generate external income, if recon are the sponsor then the 'return on investment' is largely irrelevant.  If Xia argues that his vision for the club and the area is to use the Recon brand to implement smart citytech then he can cite a legitimate 'exposure' value to getting the branding around the stadium and use that to justify the costs.  I really wouldn't be surprised if a figure around £5-6m a year was agreed as acceptable, especially given we have the sheer number of TV games we were selected for also working in our favour.

Naming rights aren't worth much though if no-one uses the name.

It's not a coincidence that the only stadia to sell naming rights in the UK are those which were purpose built - Emirates, Etihad, Bet365, Macron, etc, whilst at the same time, the two most famous stadia in the country, Old Trafford and Anfield, haven't sold naming rights.  It's simply the case that where a stadium is established no-one's going to pay much to rename it because everyone will keep using the old name.

The other obvious example was when Newcastle tried to rename St James Park, and after realising no-one would pay for it, they gave up.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: paul_e on May 30, 2018, 12:52:54 PM
Naming rights aren't worth much though if no-one uses the name.

It's not a coincidence that the only stadia to sell naming rights in the UK are those which were purpose built - Emirates, Etihad, Bet365, Macron, etc, whilst at the same time, the two most famous stadia in the country, Old Trafford and Anfield, haven't sold naming rights.  It's simply the case that where a stadium is established no-one's going to pay much to rename it because everyone will keep using the old name.

The other obvious example was when Newcastle tried to rename St James Park, and after realising no-one would pay for it, they gave up.

This bit show that you didn't really read what I wrote so I'll repeat it, we're not looking to sell naming rights to anyone, we're looking at sponsoring ourselves through another company Xia owns so we don't need to show how they would get a return on investment, all we need to do is prove to a panel that the deal we're looking to put in place is fair.  There are plenty of little ways to do that and all together I think you're looking at a decent sum, not enough to completely ignore FFP but this could well be the difference between selling Chester or not, for example.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: paul_e on May 30, 2018, 12:57:48 PM
Oh, as an aside, an independent valuation a few months back suggested the naming rights for Old Trafford and Anfield were worth £25m and £11m respectively, which suggests that your assertion that no one is going to pay much for them is probably wrong.  Those 2 haven't gone down that route because they haven't needed the money and didn't think it would play well with the fans, not because there wasn't any value.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on May 30, 2018, 01:04:49 PM
Naming rights aren't worth much though if no-one uses the name.

It's not a coincidence that the only stadia to sell naming rights in the UK are those which were purpose built - Emirates, Etihad, Bet365, Macron, etc, whilst at the same time, the two most famous stadia in the country, Old Trafford and Anfield, haven't sold naming rights.  It's simply the case that where a stadium is established no-one's going to pay much to rename it because everyone will keep using the old name.

The other obvious example was when Newcastle tried to rename St James Park, and after realising no-one would pay for it, they gave up.

This bit show that you didn't really read what I wrote so I'll repeat it, we're not looking to sell naming rights to anyone, we're looking at sponsoring ourselves through another company Xia owns so we don't need to show how they would get a return on investment, all we need to do is prove to a panel that the deal we're looking to put in place is fair.  There are plenty of little ways to do that and all together I think you're looking at a decent sum, not enough to completely ignore FFP but this could well be the difference between selling Chester or not, for example.

Yet another example of why I really should stick to my rule of not reading or responding to your posts.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on May 30, 2018, 01:05:02 PM
The other obvious example was when Newcastle tried to rename St James Park, and after realising no-one would pay for it, they gave up.

Which they did, and then sold the naming rights to Wonga as part of a commercial package, Wonga chose to change the name back to St James' Park, but still paid to do so.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AsTallAsLions on May 30, 2018, 01:08:11 PM
Wonga Park might've just been a little bit too close to the bone.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: robleflaneur on May 30, 2018, 01:08:44 PM
Newcastle were going to rename their ground,Sports Direct Arena.It was the fans who stopped it.If Villa Park had been renamed 6 years ago,most of our fans would have been against it .Could be the reason why Old Trafford and Anfield.'s naming rights are not sold,plus they get so much money,another x million is not worth the hassle.
.It's not the usage by the average fan that is important but use in the media,the reason why sponsor names are on shirts.So it has a value and that's why the Oval is known as the Kia Oval,an example of a well established ground being renamed.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on May 30, 2018, 01:08:45 PM
And it doesn't have to be commercially viable if the person sponsoring it is the same person that owns the club and is just using it as a way to pump a few million into the club.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on May 30, 2018, 01:10:19 PM
Newcastle were going to rename their ground,Sports Direct Arena.It was the fans who stopped it.

It spent a year called that and then Wonga bought the commercial rights including stadium naming. They probably, wisely, decided that The Wonga Stadium would be a really shit name and reverted back to SJP, but they still paid for the naming rights.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: robleflaneur on May 30, 2018, 01:27:37 PM
Newcastle were going to rename their ground,Sports Direct Arena.It was the fans who stopped it.

It spent a year called that and then Wonga bought the commercial rights including stadium naming. They probably, wisely, decided that The Wonga Stadium would be a really shit name and reverted back to SJP, but they still paid for the naming rights.
I should have read your posts before posting.Even with my dysfunctional memory,to be able to remember Kia as the Oval's sponsor proves that naming rights can work.However,I was under the illusion that they made an orange drink.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: paul_e on May 30, 2018, 01:50:54 PM
Naming rights aren't worth much though if no-one uses the name.

It's not a coincidence that the only stadia to sell naming rights in the UK are those which were purpose built - Emirates, Etihad, Bet365, Macron, etc, whilst at the same time, the two most famous stadia in the country, Old Trafford and Anfield, haven't sold naming rights.  It's simply the case that where a stadium is established no-one's going to pay much to rename it because everyone will keep using the old name.

The other obvious example was when Newcastle tried to rename St James Park, and after realising no-one would pay for it, they gave up.

This bit show that you didn't really read what I wrote so I'll repeat it, we're not looking to sell naming rights to anyone, we're looking at sponsoring ourselves through another company Xia owns so we don't need to show how they would get a return on investment, all we need to do is prove to a panel that the deal we're looking to put in place is fair.  There are plenty of little ways to do that and all together I think you're looking at a decent sum, not enough to completely ignore FFP but this could well be the difference between selling Chester or not, for example.

Yet another example of why I really should stick to my rule of not reading or responding to your posts.

Sigh, fine, don't read or reply but please stop repeating that the stadium rights are worthless when you have no idea if it's true or not.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: frank black on May 30, 2018, 05:06:16 PM
Posting here as well, no good news from Tony:

I know that all the Villa fans experienced a very frustrating and disappointing Play-Off Final last Saturday. After seeing many Villa supporters on Twitter hoping that I can publish a statement as soon as possible, I feel like it would be best for me to write the following words when I am relatively calm. 

I care as much about this club as anyone. Even though I am back in Beijing, I still can't recover from our game at Wembley. The emotion needs time to heal. However, I know that all our management staff, coaches, players and myself need to get back on our feet and prepare to fight again.  Like everyone else, I'm delighted to see that under Steve’s management this season, we demonstrated character and unity. We fought like a team. Indeed, the loss is a pity, but we know how much effort and hard work our coaching staff and players put in this season. I want to thank Steve from the bottom of my heart, particularly for his remarkable level of professional focus despite losing his parents this year. With that, I would like to say thank you to Steve and his coaching staff once again for leading the team forward wholeheartedly throughout the season. 

We are all aware that we will face severe FFP challenges next season. I am an Aston Villa fan. But I am also a businessman. Under the current circumstances, I think the club needs to rethink not only the past two years but also the past ten years. Villa needs to be a sustainable football club. People join. People leave. That is the cycle of football. But the football club always remains through it all.  This is the ultimate reality that cannot be changed, but I can assure you that everyone behind the scenes is working tirelessly towards achieving our ultimate goal. 

We have been heavily investing for the past two seasons. However, the loss on Saturday means that we need to change a lot of things. No one wanted to see the club have to go through this, but I believe that only changes can help the club to progress towards the positive direction and this requires the joint efforts of everyone associated with this great football club.  No matter what the changes will be, I sincerely hope that everyone can unite and overcome the challenges together. Our goal has not changed and as long as we believe, regardless of how tough the process will be, I am sure we will succeed in the end. 

Thank you very much once again for all your support.

Chairman
Dr Tony Xia
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on May 30, 2018, 05:13:05 PM
And it doesn't have to be commercially viable if the person sponsoring it is the same person that owns the club and is just using it as a way to pump a few million into the club.

It does.  FFP includes anti-abuse rules which say that transactions between connected parties (which Recon clearly is to the Villa) need to be at market value or they're removed from the calculation.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AsTallAsLions on May 30, 2018, 05:20:04 PM
Nothing we didn't already know.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Billy Walker on May 30, 2018, 05:22:42 PM
The biggest thing I take from the statement is that Bruce will be off.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: frank black on May 30, 2018, 05:23:46 PM
The biggest thing I take from the statement is that Bruce will be off.

I thought the opposite? Could be a goodbye perhaps
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: curiousorange on May 30, 2018, 05:28:34 PM
Yeah, I didn't think it read like Bruce was going anywhere. The biggest hint I took from that is that any outgoing is fair game.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: frank black on May 30, 2018, 05:30:19 PM
Yeah, I didn't think it read like Bruce was going anywhere. The biggest hint I took from that is that any outgoing is fair game.

This. The neg ferret in me read it as goodbye Jack 😔
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: footyskillz on May 30, 2018, 05:31:33 PM

I appreciate how he got back to us all so quickly.

It's clear players will be sold under this message

I also like how he is as transparent as he can be. Very honourable and decent.

Fair play. We all feeling the hurt.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Sexual Ealing on May 30, 2018, 05:57:07 PM
I read it once and it meant that Bruce was staying. After second reading it sounds like curtains for Steve.

Fuck knows!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: amfy on May 30, 2018, 06:04:32 PM
At least no talk of Shummanites - although its about as clear.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: paul_e on May 30, 2018, 06:04:58 PM
And it doesn't have to be commercially viable if the person sponsoring it is the same person that owns the club and is just using it as a way to pump a few million into the club.

It does.  FFP includes anti-abuse rules which say that transactions between connected parties (which Recon clearly is to the Villa) need to be at market value or they're removed from the calculation.

But as you say, there aren't really many comparisons they can use to find the market value.

How many clubs are looking at a regen project for the entire area and have a connected party that would be used to do the work and needs the exposure?
How many grounds are going to be used as party of a major international sporting competition in a few years time which would add further exposure?
How many existing grounds have been sponsored and at what value? Newcastle has been mentioned, are there many others?  From what I can find Wonga agreed around £6m a year as shirt and stadium sponsor 6 years ago.  With changes in circumstance and all the extra money in the game I really don't see those, along with the training ground, being ignored if we agreed to a figure about double that, or a touch higher.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: pauliewalnuts on May 30, 2018, 06:22:00 PM
Quote
We are all aware that we will face severe FFP challenges next season. I am an Aston Villa fan. But I am also a businessman. Under the current circumstances, I think the club needs to rethink not only the past two years but also the past ten years. Villa needs to be a sustainable football club. People join. People leave

So

- no pumping in of money
- bye bye Jack
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ozzjim on May 30, 2018, 06:25:03 PM
If we have to find £40 million in savings essentially this summer....

£3 million - Terry leaving
£2 million - Gabby leaving
£3 million - Gollini leaving
£2 million - Gil leaving
£2 million - Snodgrass leaving
£2 million - Elphick to Reading
£6 million - McCormack (4 million fee plus the wages saved)
£1 million - Johnstone leaving
£2 million - Deleat leaving
£1 million - Samba leaving
£1 million - Grabban leaving
£3 million - Lansbury leaving
£1 million - Hutton leaving

Even with all of that we are only at around £30 million, would be seriously screwed as we would be a keeper short, have 1 left back and 1 centre half, need 2 wingers and a centre forward. Going to need an incredibly patient fan base and board for whoever has this task. Could easily end up where Sunderland are (they must even more fucked than we are!)
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Richard E on May 30, 2018, 06:26:36 PM
We bet the farm on red and it came out black.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: chrisw1 on May 30, 2018, 06:31:31 PM
So other than pulling up the drawbridge for the elite few, all FFP really does is fuck over any clubs with the slightest bit of ambition.

I fucking hate modern football.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ozzjim on May 30, 2018, 06:36:05 PM
So other than pulling up the drawbridge for the elite few, all FFP really does is fuck over any clubs with the slightest bit of ambition.

I fucking hate modern football.

Essentially it has protected the top few clubs at the time it was introduced. The fact we invested it poorly under RDM and Bruce on the parachute (£30 million on McCormack, Tsishbola, Hogan, Lansbury plus their wages for what, 15 games this season) is partly what has killed us though.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: amfy on May 30, 2018, 06:36:56 PM
Gollini jas just been sold for 3.5mill - so thats half a mill more + any part wages we were propping up.

Remember most sales put the wages as well.as the transfer fee in the pot.

If Barney has a decent world cup he could draw a good fee and he's not on your list.

If we can keep a reasonable core, we have some decent youths, & we can look at some cheaper loans.

Blackpool got out of this division straight through from league one - it doesn't take loads of money. Its takes organisation and team spirit. Lets see if we can get those
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SamTheMouse on May 30, 2018, 06:45:29 PM
I stand by my assessment that since (fucking) Cardiff got out of this division and didn't even have to do it via the play-offs, anything is possible.

If we build properly for the long term, it will be time and patience we need, not money.

Mind you, money probably helps a lot.

Fuck. Time to start drinking.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on May 30, 2018, 06:53:42 PM
And it doesn't have to be commercially viable if the person sponsoring it is the same person that owns the club and is just using it as a way to pump a few million into the club.

It does.  FFP includes anti-abuse rules which say that transactions between connected parties (which Recon clearly is to the Villa) need to be at market value or they're removed from the calculation.

You miss the point again. Say for arguments sake the experts consider its correct market value is £5m a year to sponsor a stadium like VP, many companies won't bother as they'd consider it poor value for money as everyone will still call it Villa Park, and the only reason they'd want to spend that money is for advertising. If I want to spend £5m a year purely as a way to spend money on the club to help with FFP, I wouldn't care if anyone calls it The PWS Stadium or they all carry on calling it Villa Park as I didn't invest the money for the sponsorship value.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PaulMcGrathsNo5Shirt on May 30, 2018, 07:00:34 PM
If we have to find £40 million in savings essentially this summer....

£3 million - Terry leaving
£2 million - Gabby leaving
£3 million - Gollini leaving
£2 million - Gil leaving
£2 million - Snodgrass leaving
£2 million - Elphick to Reading
£6 million - McCormack (4 million fee plus the wages saved)
£1 million - Johnstone leaving
£2 million - Deleat leaving
£1 million - Samba leaving
£1 million - Grabban leaving
£3 million - Lansbury leaving
£1 million - Hutton leaving

Even with all of that we are only at around £30 million, would be seriously screwed as we would be a keeper short, have 1 left back and 1 centre half, need 2 wingers and a centre forward. Going to need an incredibly patient fan base and board for whoever has this task. Could easily end up where Sunderland are (they must even more fucked than we are!)

£15m for Grealish when he goes to Huddersfield or Watford or wherever - We'll have £5m to buy a squad and pay wages. Job done.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sirlordbaltimore on May 30, 2018, 07:13:17 PM


No we all know what the situation is, from the horses mouth. I hope to fuck people don't start bleating next season if we're nowhere near the play offs

This is going to be a long haul to get back to the PL now, doing it on a budget and with a lot of homegrowns

Time to put on your big boy pants and buckle in for the ride
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 30, 2018, 07:56:12 PM
The biggest thing I take from the statement is that Bruce will be off.

Agreed.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on May 30, 2018, 07:57:17 PM
And it doesn't have to be commercially viable if the person sponsoring it is the same person that owns the club and is just using it as a way to pump a few million into the club.

It does.  FFP includes anti-abuse rules which say that transactions between connected parties (which Recon clearly is to the Villa) need to be at market value or they're removed from the calculation.

You miss the point again. Say for arguments sake the experts consider its correct market value is £5m a year to sponsor a stadium like VP, many companies won't bother as they'd consider it poor value for money as everyone will still call it Villa Park, and the only reason they'd want to spend that money is for advertising. If I want to spend £5m a year purely as a way to spend money on the club to help with FFP, I wouldn't care if anyone calls it The PWS Stadium or they all carry on calling it Villa Park as I didn't invest the money for the sponsorship value.

I haven't missed the point, you're arguing the wrong point.

FFP rules require transactions with related parties to be on a commercial basis.  Like you say yourself, the reason you'd want to sponsor a stadium is for marketing purposes but if no one will call it by the new name, there's no value there.  No "expert" is going to say something's market value is £5m if no-one would pay it.  If, again as you say, you're really just sticking money in to get around FFP then there's clearly no commercial basis for that.

The test is essentially "What would an independent 3rd party pay for this?" so what Tone wants to put in in return for "naming rights" is irrelevant.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 30, 2018, 08:08:18 PM
A subjective test like that is open for discretion. If we bring evidence to the table and we have things in our favour given the explosion of football in emerging markets and our ever pressence on the box- we are better placed than most in this league. Nobody would pay £10 million a year to sponsor your bibs and training ground surely? But they do. Nobody would be an official noodle sponsor? But there are. This is a very peculiar market.

Far better to make use of the opaque nature of Chinese business and circumvent the rules that way. Good luck picking the bones out of that EFL legal team.

Actually a land sale would work. RECON want to change Aston in a similar way that N17 is likely to and around Arsenal and Wembley has. Flog the land and lease it back for peppercorn rent given we're the flagship anchor tenant.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on May 30, 2018, 08:14:05 PM
I could be the shirt sponsor, no one to do with FFP would care why i'm sponsoring the shirt and the players have "PWS" on their shirts, as long as i'm paying the going rate and not a billion a year. The same applies to the stadium, or anything to do with the club that they want to offer for sponsorship.
I specifically said if everyone, including FFP, agreed the market value naming rights to VP was worth £5m a year, it could be £3m, £1m, (the value is totally irrelevant to the point) I could pay it. As could Tony. Or anyone else. It is an easy way for me or Tony, or you, to put money into the club if so inclined, and of course have the cash to do so.

Stadium naming rights have a value, the only things debatable are what that value is, and then whether Tony can, or wants to, pay it.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt Collins on May 30, 2018, 08:28:28 PM
If we have to find £40 million in savings essentially this summer....

£3 million - Terry leaving
£2 million - Gabby leaving
£3 million - Gollini leaving
£2 million - Gil leaving
£2 million - Snodgrass leaving
£2 million - Elphick to Reading
£6 million - McCormack (4 million fee plus the wages saved)
£1 million - Johnstone leaving
£2 million - Deleat leaving
£1 million - Samba leaving
£1 million - Grabban leaving
£3 million - Lansbury leaving
£1 million - Hutton leaving

Even with all of that we are only at around £30 million, would be seriously screwed as we would be a keeper short, have 1 left back and 1 centre half, need 2 wingers and a centre forward. Going to need an incredibly patient fan base and board for whoever has this task. Could easily end up where Sunderland are (they must even more fucked than we are!)

£15m for Grealish when he goes to Huddersfield or Watford or wherever - We'll have £5m to buy a squad and pay wages. Job done.
.
These numbers are a significant over estimate. They take no account of amortisation which is expaliend in various places. 7500 to Holte today published the best explanation
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on May 30, 2018, 08:29:12 PM
Stadium naming rights have a value, the only things debatable are what that value is, and then whether Tony can, or wants to, pay it.

Totally agree.  My point has always been though that the reason you almost never see already existing grounds sell naming rights is because that value is so small it's just not worth it.  So even if Tone decided he'd pay £500m in order to call Villa Park the "Recon Superdome" for FFP purposes it'd get completely ignored because it's nothing like fair market value.

To try to put a bit more science to something that's massively subjective (as Ads says), a consultancy produced a report on "market values" of naming rights for every club in the Premier League.  Traditionally we're considered fairly similar to Everton - we've had similar levels of on-field success, we've both got traditional old grounds and we've probably got similar global fanbases.  The only real difference at the moment is that they're in the Prem with the massive global exposure that brings vs the Championship.  This report set the market value of naming rights to Goodison as £2.8m a year.  What would that be worth in the Championship?  Our overseas correspondents talk about the challenges of watching Championship games live on TV around the world whereas pretty much every Prem game is broadcast live.

I just can't see that there's any merit whatsoever in renaming Villa Park.  FFP-fudge or not.  Bulldose it and rebuild Spurs-style and it'd be a whole different story but I don't want to be giving Tone ideas like that!!!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SoccerHQ on May 30, 2018, 08:38:41 PM
So other than pulling up the drawbridge for the elite few, all FFP really does is fuck over any clubs with the slightest bit of ambition.

I fucking hate modern football.

You can still show ambition. We showed ambition last two years and also the first 3 years under Lerner.

With ambition however you have to deliver. Likes of Chelsea and Man. City have realised it by winning trophies and establishing themselves in the champions league. We couldn't.

Wolves got up so will have no issues with FFP now. We didn't and will face the consquences of that along with many other clubs.

In the last 20 years we've just become a close but no cigar club.

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: old man villa fan on May 30, 2018, 09:54:07 PM
The problem with FFP now is that it hasn't kept up with the growing financial gap between Championship and PL.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: eamonn on May 31, 2018, 12:02:03 AM
Approx £5m saved on Gollini and Terry in the space of a day. At this rate we'll be millionaires by the start of the new season, Rodney. FTF!*

*TF being FFP
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Nastylee on May 31, 2018, 12:05:09 AM
It seems we went half measures. Either you cut your cloth accordingly when relegated or you say fuck it and spend big to get out. It seems we did neither. If FFP was going to wreck us if we weren't promoted then maybe there was a case for going all in last summer and putting a squad together that would piss the division rather than one that would be competitive.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: tomd2103 on May 31, 2018, 12:16:47 AM
It seems we went half measures. Either you cut your cloth accordingly when relegated or you say fuck it and spend big to get out. It seems we did neither. If FFP was going to wreck us if we weren't promoted then maybe there was a case for going all in last summer and putting a squad together that would piss the division rather than one that would be competitive.

We did spend big in that first season.  It’s just that we’ve had to spend again to replace most of those we bought back then.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Nastylee on May 31, 2018, 12:20:42 AM
But were they of the quality required to piss the league? IF FFP was always going to screw us then you make sure you're out of the division in two seasons rather than being mediocre for one then scraping a squad of loans together.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: tomd2103 on May 31, 2018, 12:25:26 AM
But were they of the quality required to piss the league? IF FFP was always going to screw us then you make sure you're out of the division in two seasons rather than being mediocre for one then scraping a squad of loans together.

They were bought as they all had decent pedigree in the division, but it soon transpired that they had been bought with little idea of how to utilise them properly and some just saw us as their golden ticket to easy street (again!!).  The amount of money we wasted in that first season is inexplicable really.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: olaftab on May 31, 2018, 02:54:17 AM
It seems we went half measures. Either you cut your cloth accordingly when relegated or you say fuck it and spend big to get out. It seems we did neither. If FFP was going to wreck us if we weren't promoted then maybe there was a case for going all in last summer and putting a squad together that would piss the division rather than one that would be competitive.
The big mistake was hiring a manager who was incapable of "pissing" the division.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: olaftab on May 31, 2018, 03:16:23 AM
The biggest thing I take from the statement is that Bruce will be off.

Agreed.
Doesn’t that cost us rather than save money?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Virgil Caine on May 31, 2018, 04:19:46 AM
The biggest thing I take from the statement is that Bruce will be off.

Agreed.
Doesn’t that cost us rather than save money?

I thought Bruce was on a rolling contract, which is a concept I admit to not understanding but I assume it means that AVFC do not have to pay a lump some in compensation?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Newby on May 31, 2018, 06:07:23 AM
Perhaps Bruce needs to read the small print in his rolling contract.  I imagine that terms and conditions are very much included!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on May 31, 2018, 06:32:25 AM
The biggest thing I take from the statement is that Bruce will be off.

Agreed.
Doesn’t that cost us rather than save money?

I thought Bruce was on a rolling contract, which is a concept I admit to not understanding but I assume it means that AVFC do not have to pay a lump some in compensation?

If we could bin him at any point without compensation he basically doesn't have a contract.

A rolling contact normally means that at any point in time either party have to give a certain amount of notice, but there's no fixed end point until notice is given.  Normal contacts of employment that most of us will be working under are effectively rolling contracts.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt Collins on May 31, 2018, 07:12:47 AM
It seems we went half measures. Either you cut your cloth accordingly when relegated or you say fuck it and spend big to get out. It seems we did neither. If FFP was going to wreck us if we weren't promoted then maybe there was a case for going all in last summer and putting a squad together that would piss the division rather than one that would be competitive.

Half measures!?!!

Up until we went down we'd only ever paid double digits for a striker once. We then did it three times in 6 months. Three times! And we play one up front

We were the most expensive squad ever assembled in the championship

We're going to need a proper sense of reality for what's coming. In hindsight, if wed decided several years ago to become sustainable even if it meant taking a hit, we'd be in a better position now

The whole club needs to start operating in the real world, fans included 
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: paul_e on May 31, 2018, 08:23:48 AM
The biggest thing I take from the statement is that Bruce will be off.

Agreed.
Doesn’t that cost us rather than save money?

I thought Bruce was on a rolling contract, which is a concept I admit to not understanding but I assume it means that AVFC do not have to pay a lump some in compensation?

Personally i would be very surprised if we hired a manager to achieve promotion and didn't add a clause allowing us to fuck him off for nothing if he failed to deliver, that would be Lerner levels of incompetence.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: rougegorge on May 31, 2018, 09:15:34 AM
The sanctions for breaching FFP seem to vary considerably, and it's not fully clear what would happen in that event.

Whilst Man City got a hefty fine, that was chicken feed to the owners and they just carry on in their own sweet way as do the other 'big' clubs.  Bournemouth received a fine of £7m which was easy to pay from the TV coffers. Fulham and Forest had temporary transfer embargoes a couple of years back, but could still sign loan players.

QPR got a big fine, but they don't seem to be doing any worse measured against than their average position over the years.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt Collins on May 31, 2018, 09:18:33 AM
They've toughened it up considerably now
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 31, 2018, 09:46:43 AM
Sanctions above embargo and the scaled fine system are discretionary. The more clubs who fall foul of it the better.

The Noses are clearly wanking themselves into a frenzy without realizing they fell of a cliff, so lets see what happens to them and others like Derby and Wednesday who are in dire risk of falling foul of FFP first.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: old man villa fan on May 31, 2018, 09:58:21 AM
Am I correct in saying that we are in financial trouble with FFP because of our final year in the PL with Lerner.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 31, 2018, 10:05:37 AM
Am I correct in saying that we are in financial trouble with FFP because of our final year in the PL with Lerner.

No. Xia buying the club starts the clock. We're entitled to lose £39 million and he's entitled to inject £8 million in equity.

Given the TV deal, these sums are ridiculously low.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Chico Hamilton III on May 31, 2018, 10:51:13 AM
We bet the farm on red and it came out black.

Walking out of Wembley on Saturday, I had that sick feeling that gamblers must experience when they realise they’ve blown everything.

Also, and this is purely based on gut instinct, I don’t trust Xia to get us out of this shit. Depressing times.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: David_Nab on May 31, 2018, 10:58:31 AM
Sanctions above embargo and the scaled fine system are discretionary. The more clubs who fall foul of it the better.

The Noses are clearly wanking themselves into a frenzy without realizing they fell of a cliff, so lets see what happens to them and others like Derby and Wednesday who are in dire risk of falling foul of FFP first.

I read that there is around 11/12 clubs all with issues in the league Birmingham and QPR are 2 I know of

The rules have been toughened up after Bournmouth and Leicester just cheated , got promoted and paid a small fine now you can expect transfer embargo's and points deductions
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: David_Nab on May 31, 2018, 10:59:14 AM
Am I correct in saying that we are in financial trouble with FFP because of our final year in the PL with Lerner.

No. Xia buying the club starts the clock. We're entitled to lose £39 million and he's entitled to inject £8 million in equity.

Given the TV deal, these sums are ridiculously low.

So if he sold the club would it be reset again ..
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sirlordbaltimore on May 31, 2018, 12:11:03 PM
Am I correct in saying that we are in financial trouble with FFP because of our final year in the PL with Lerner.

No. Xia buying the club starts the clock. We're entitled to lose £39 million and he's entitled to inject £8 million in equity.

You sure about this ?

I've always been told it's based on three year cycles and our plight is mainly down to that last season in the PL where we had some huge losses

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 31, 2018, 12:12:26 PM
New purchases starts the clock of the cycle.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sirlordbaltimore on May 31, 2018, 12:15:54 PM


Then Dr Xia, simply hand the club to me
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on May 31, 2018, 01:26:24 PM
New purchases starts the clock of the cycle.

I'm not sure this is right.

We're fine on FFP for the season just ended, which is based on 2 years of Tone and Randy's last year.  The issue comes next year, which just happens to coincide with three years since Tone took over.  What's more relevant is that it coincides with us getting relegated from the Prem with largely Championship income and a Premier League cost base.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on May 31, 2018, 01:53:04 PM
New purchases starts the clock of the cycle.

Pretty sure it doesn't.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 31, 2018, 01:59:10 PM
Perhaps I am confusing it with an ability to inject £8 million in equity? So while everybody can lose £39 million over three years, in reality, we can inject £24 million across 3 years at the same time.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: paul_e on May 31, 2018, 02:20:20 PM
Am I correct in saying that we are in financial trouble with FFP because of our final year in the PL with Lerner.

No. Xia buying the club starts the clock. We're entitled to lose £39 million and he's entitled to inject £8 million in equity.

You sure about this ?

I've always been told it's based on three year cycles and our plight is mainly down to that last season in the PL where we had some huge losses



It is, but the final year with Lerner drops off the record after today. It used to be the previous 3 seasons but they changed it to the previous 2 and the projections for the current one.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: David_Nab on May 31, 2018, 02:27:19 PM
I looked back from the AGM meeting in March and Wyness comments on FFP the indication was it would be tight but we should be ok , but more importantly was a meeting due to challenge the losses rules at the loss's were set when the Parachute payments were less ..no word of what happened at said meeting and if the rules where changed , only needed 1 more club to vote in favour apparently

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Duncan Shaw on May 31, 2018, 02:39:13 PM
I looked back from the AGM meeting in March and Wyness comments on FFP the indication was it would be tight but we should be ok , but more importantly was a meeting due to challenge the losses rules at the loss's were set when the Parachute payments were less ..no word of what happened at said meeting and if the rules where changed , only needed 1 more club to vote in favour apparently



The more I think about it, and I really didn't want to be believing this, but I think it's a good excuse for them to reign the money in, so the FFP agenda suits them.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: David_Nab on May 31, 2018, 03:17:06 PM
I looked back from the AGM meeting in March and Wyness comments on FFP the indication was it would be tight but we should be ok , but more importantly was a meeting due to challenge the losses rules at the loss's were set when the Parachute payments were less ..no word of what happened at said meeting and if the rules where changed , only needed 1 more club to vote in favour apparently



The more I think about it, and I really didn't want to be believing this, but I think it's a good excuse for them to reign the money in, so the FFP agenda suits them.

Given the poor value for money we have gotten recently its not that bad a thing !!

The other thing from the AGM is KW belives there are 12-14 breaches of it possibly. The 3 relegated sides should be ok ..but I think Us .Norwich ,QPR, Birmingham, Bolton are some of sides in trouble 
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Duncan Shaw on May 31, 2018, 03:32:50 PM
Sounds like Derby as well from the Lampard interview.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: VinnieChase84 on May 31, 2018, 04:22:33 PM
I looked back from the AGM meeting in March and Wyness comments on FFP the indication was it would be tight but we should be ok , but more importantly was a meeting due to challenge the losses rules at the loss's were set when the Parachute payments were less ..no word of what happened at said meeting and if the rules where changed , only needed 1 more club to vote in favour apparently



The more I think about it, and I really didn't want to be believing this, but I think it's a good excuse for them to reign the money in, so the FFP agenda suits them.

Given the poor value for money we have gotten recently its not that bad a thing !!

The other thing from the AGM is KW belives there are 12-14 breaches of it possibly. The 3 relegated sides should be ok ..but I think Us .Norwich ,QPR, Birmingham, Bolton are some of sides in trouble 

We’re not. We would be next summer but not now
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Toronto Villa on May 31, 2018, 09:53:49 PM
The irony is that clubs that might have the financial ability to compete through other resources or to get themselves out of trouble can't do that because of these rules. In effect it is making them less competitive and their revenue streams continue to shrink. The exact of opposite of what it was meant to do.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Newby on May 31, 2018, 10:03:25 PM
Sounds like restraint of trade to me. 
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on May 31, 2018, 11:21:20 PM
I looked back from the AGM meeting in March and Wyness comments on FFP the indication was it would be tight but we should be ok , but more importantly was a meeting due to challenge the losses rules at the loss's were set when the Parachute payments were less ..no word of what happened at said meeting and if the rules where changed , only needed 1 more club to vote in favour apparently



The more I think about it, and I really didn't want to be believing this, but I think it's a good excuse for them to reign the money in, so the FFP agenda suits them.

Given the poor value for money we have gotten recently its not that bad a thing !!

The other thing from the AGM is KW belives there are 12-14 breaches of it possibly. The 3 relegated sides should be ok ..but I think Us .Norwich ,QPR, Birmingham, Bolton are some of sides in trouble
I keep seeing  this repeated, but how would he know?
As they have not been pulled up which suggests the Financials so far are not in breach, how will it help us? and are they in a worse or better position than us?.
Looks like more straw grabbing.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on May 31, 2018, 11:29:01 PM

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-5792685/Powered-spite-vultures-tearing-Aston-Villas-carcass.html

Powered by spite, vultures are tearing at Aston Villa's carcass

If Villa have to give up everything that is good about the club, if they have to surrender players, prospects and facilities, if they have to embrace the mediocre, join a race to the bottom, that is fine. The Football League are only too willing to embrace mundanity. It's ambition that terrifies them.

Item number one: Jack Grealish. A tiny flicker of hope for Villa fans these last two seasons that they might have a young player at last emerging as a significant performer. Grealish has had his disciplinary issues but this season, in particular, he appears to have grown up and grown comfortable with his ability, accepting responsibility as a key member of the team.

Jordan Amavi, Idrissa Gueye, Jordan Ayew, Rudy Gestede, Jordan Veretout and Adama Traore cost a combined total of £47.5million. Not one was sold on beneficially after relegation.

That is what demotion does. It makes a player damaged goods and ruins his asking price.

The seller begins with grandiose claims — Stoke want £30m for goalkeeper Jack Butland, it is reported — but then reality sets in and they take what the market dictates.

Relegation in 2016 destroyed Villa's finances. Their most recently reported figures confirm that. A loss of £29.6m was posted in the relegation season.

Then turnover dropped by £35.6m in 2016-17 as all commercial revenues fell, including £2.9m in gate receipts, £17m in broadcast rights, £9.1m in sponsorship and £6.4m in merchandise, royalties and corporate entertainment. Villa shed 122 full-time staff and 539 personnel in total.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithe on May 31, 2018, 11:32:08 PM
That’s from Martin Samuels piece today isn’t it?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on May 31, 2018, 11:37:22 PM
Full article, Martin Samuels writing for the Daily Mail.

Quote
Aston Villa did not end up in the Championship because they were getting it right. The same as any Premier League team, really. Poor recruitment, poor managerial choices, poor executive decisions; there are many reasons for relegation and few signpost administrative excellence.

Incompetence: that is the common denominator. That is why fortunes are often spent and wasted scrambling to survive. Queens Park Rangers had one final, costly splurge before disappearing below the surface. Sunderland bought 80 players during Ellis Short's time as chairman and could sell only six of them for a profit.

Aston Villa are no different. In the season they went down, they sold Christian Benteke and Fabian Delph for good money — which might explain it — but frittered away those proceeds on players who disappointed or were powerless to arrest the decline.

Jordan Amavi, Idrissa Gueye, Jordan Ayew, Rudy Gestede, Jordan Veretout and Adama Traore cost a combined total of £47.5million. Not one was sold on beneficially after relegation.

That is what demotion does. It makes a player damaged goods and ruins his asking price.

The seller begins with grandiose claims — Stoke want £30m for goalkeeper Jack Butland, it is reported — but then reality sets in and they take what the market dictates.

Relegation in 2016 destroyed Villa's finances. Their most recently reported figures confirm that. A loss of £29.6m was posted in the relegation season.

Then turnover dropped by £35.6m in 2016-17 as all commercial revenues fell, including £2.9m in gate receipts, £17m in broadcast rights, £9.1m in sponsorship and £6.4m in merchandise, royalties and corporate entertainment. Villa shed 122 full-time staff and 539 personnel in total.

Despite the acquisition of a stellar name in John Terry, the last two Championship years have been austere. Finishing 13th in the first season inspired the determination to recruit a player of Terry's stature and experience but, in reality, times are hard. Steve Bruce, the manager, spent only £2.5m last summer, while raising £18m in player sales.

Villa missed out on promotion to the Premier League in the play-off final against Fulham and now the vultures are descending. For there is nothing the Football League enjoys more than tearing through the carcass of a Premier League club that has stuffed up.

Villa still have an estimated £40m hole in their finances, left over from trying to compete in an elite division, and the Football League will not rest until it is plugged.

If Villa have to give up everything that is good about the club, if they have to surrender players, prospects and facilities, if they have to embrace the mediocre, join a race to the bottom, that is fine. The Football League are only too willing to embrace mundanity. It's ambition that terrifies them.

Item number one: Jack Grealish. A tiny flicker of hope for Villa fans these last two seasons that they might have a young player at last emerging as a significant performer. Grealish has had his disciplinary issues but this season, in particular, he appears to have grown up and grown comfortable with his ability, accepting responsibility as a key member of the team.

He is a Villa supporter, Solihull-born, and has been around the club since he was six. At the age of 16 he was named on the bench for a Premier League match against Chelsea and now he has made more than 100 appearances.

There hasn't been much for Villa fans to get excited about of late, but Grealish is the best of it. Naturally, he has to be sold.

So, what is the purpose of that? What is the purpose of a rulebook that punishes a club for its past mistakes, that strips away the best of it, the promise of it just at the time when it could most do with support?

There is even talk of Villa having to sell their Recon Training Complex, formerly known as Bodymoor Heath, one of the most advanced facilities of its kind in the Championship. This is where the next generation of Villa stars learn their trade.

The League are not making Villa economically viable. They are forcing them to cash in on their only assets. If Villa were becoming streamlined by shedding waste, that would be different but this is a yard sale of the family silver.

How does it benefit Villa to lose Grealish and the facility that helped produce him. How is that beneficial or healthy?

From the going to the already gone: Terry, the man Grealish credits with encouraging his new professionalism and a player Bruce says has been inspirational in his influence, was not even offered a new contract. Villa cannot afford a second season of that positivity, so he has already said farewell.

Other loan players, such as Robert Snodgrass, a Scotland international, are expected to follow.

Quality is in short supply where Villa are heading. James Chester is another likely to be sold. Villa took him from West Brom in 2016 for around £8m and would have expected to turn a profit, but can they now, in the circumstances?

As this is a very public fire sale, clubs will try to force the price down — particularly with the transfer window closing earlier than ever, another bright idea. Take it or leave it will be the option in the knowledge that leaving could result in drastic FFP fines, and further ruination.

The old cliche is that Financial Fair Play prevents another crash like the ones at Portsmouth or Leeds, but Villa were not about to go skint. Owner Tony Xia has not been able to turn them back into a Premier League club but the sustainable future that he spoke of this week did not have to be reached in a state of panic.

Villa have suffered losses and setbacks, but the signs are Xia was beginning to bring that under control. To then have to lose his best players, maybe a good manager and a prime club facility to avoid further unjust financial punishment is a savage penalty in itself.

As ever, FFP causes measures to be undertaken in a mood of haste or anxiety. Wolves bet the farm on winning promotion this season, knowing if they failed the Football League would be after them. Villa fell short, so now it is their turn.

Far from achieving financial security, does anyone seriously believe Villa will be better off for losing their best players, including one — Grealish — who is the greatest beacon of hope?

In its current form, the Football League's financial rules are not fair but spiteful and potentially devastating.

Just by being within the grasp of the League's executives, haven't Villa been punished enough?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: pauliewalnuts on May 31, 2018, 11:53:31 PM
It really is looking exceptionally grim.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 31, 2018, 11:54:46 PM
Selling BMH? Only to HS2.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: David_Nab on June 01, 2018, 12:03:30 AM
Samual is spot on abd  not for first time on FFP ,he has been critical of it in the past

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Nastylee on June 01, 2018, 12:19:52 AM
Whilst it may have been well intentioned, it's a pile of shit in reality.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: VinnieChase84 on June 01, 2018, 12:36:30 AM
Genuinely surprised no club has managed to legally challenge FFP. It’s a restriction of trade bottom line. How can an owner be restricted to how much he invests in his business!?
Won’t be long till someone wins a legal case
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Proposition Joe on June 01, 2018, 12:40:28 AM
Seems to me that the only course of action is to just sod FFP and then challenge any punishments later in the courts. It's not worth risking the future success of the club on rules thay were not thought through.

It seems like the article says, that the EFL want to punish clubs for trying to show aspiration. Like in the Simpsons when Homer quits work and then has to come crawling for his old job back - he has to sit and stare at a sign every day thay reads: remember, you're here forever. That's the FFP motto.

By the way, I read the EFL rules and could only find transfer embargoes in the punishments and nothing about points deductions. Are we sure points deductions are on the table?

Either which way, we should just carry on as if FFP doesn't exist, buy/keep the players we want, dump the ones we don't, but aim to finish in the top 2 whatever it takes. And we should pay lip service to FFP and make it look like we're trying, at least from the outside, and not openly flaunt it. I highly doubt they'd deny us promotion.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on June 01, 2018, 12:44:40 AM
Yes, the rules were changed to include points deductions and even being denied promotion. Since the rule change though no one has failed FFP in the football league.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: VinnieChase84 on June 01, 2018, 12:45:44 AM
Yes, the rules were changed to include points deductions and even being denied promotion. Since the rule change though no one has failed FFP in the football league.
Even this year?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on June 01, 2018, 12:46:34 AM
Not even this year. Yet.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ozzjim on June 01, 2018, 12:47:30 AM
That's the problem. With points deductions etc we are screwed if we fail it, and screw ourselves to meet it. Welcome to "fair" play.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on June 01, 2018, 12:51:47 AM
Here is my post about the rule change

http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/financial-fair-play-explained.php

Relevant bits regarding punishments

Quote
Crucially, this harmonisation of the rules comes with the blessing of the Premier League - so we shouldn’t see any repeat of the stand-offs that arose (and are still ongoing) with QPR and Leicester. Previously, the Premier League bosses refused to help the Football League collect the ‘Fair Play Tax’ fines for clubs that overspent but won promotion – this lack of support significantly undermined the Football League and severely impacted on the effectiveness of the Football League punishments.

Quote
Any punishment for breach of the rules will be determined by an independent panel (the ‘Fair Play Panel’).

But what are the potential punishments? Previously the Football League has only been able to either; fine promoted clubs (a fine the Premier League didn’t help them collect), or impose a transfer embargo for historic overspending (which always like a stable-door/horse scenario). With this change, a wide range of punishments are now available. Nothing is off the table; the Football League are now able to impose a points deduction during the current season, or demote a club from an automatic promotion position into the play-offs (or out of the play-offs altogether). Transfer embargoes are also available (with the earliest one potentially applying during the Summer 2017 Transfer window.

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: David_Nab on June 01, 2018, 12:53:00 AM
Derby also have a problem , have cut staff and facing a 10 mil fine

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-5759041/Sky-Sports-plan-reduce-Thierry-Henrys-4m-year-pay-packet.html
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: wittonwarrior on June 01, 2018, 09:00:30 AM
There is talk that if we paid  the fines we  could overcome FFP and continue to spend.  First of all I have also  heard of possible point deductions and Villa being a big name in the Championship would definitely be under scrutiny. 

Also the owner(s) of Aston Villa or should I say the custonians do they really have the funds
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: chrisw1 on June 01, 2018, 09:15:54 AM
That's an excellent article.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Risso on June 01, 2018, 09:29:59 AM
New purchases starts the clock of the cycle.

I'm not sure this is right.

We're fine on FFP for the season just ended, which is based on 2 years of Tone and Randy's last year.  The issue comes next year, which just happens to coincide with three years since Tone took over.  What's more relevant is that it coincides with us getting relegated from the Prem with largely Championship income and a Premier League cost base.

There is a rule in UEFA FFP where a club facing FFP issues can apply for a licence to play in UEFA competitions where they'd usually have been denied one, where there's been a change of owner.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: VinnieChase84 on June 01, 2018, 09:50:20 AM
Here is my post about the rule change

http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/financial-fair-play-explained.php

Relevant bits regarding punishments

Quote
Crucially, this harmonisation of the rules comes with the blessing of the Premier League - so we shouldn’t see any repeat of the stand-offs that arose (and are still ongoing) with QPR and Leicester. Previously, the Premier League bosses refused to help the Football League collect the ‘Fair Play Tax’ fines for clubs that overspent but won promotion – this lack of support significantly undermined the Football League and severely impacted on the effectiveness of the Football League punishments.

Quote
Any punishment for breach of the rules will be determined by an independent panel (the ‘Fair Play Panel’).

But what are the potential punishments? Previously the Football League has only been able to either; fine promoted clubs (a fine the Premier League didn’t help them collect), or impose a transfer embargo for historic overspending (which always like a stable-door/horse scenario). With this change, a wide range of punishments are now available. Nothing is off the table; the Football League are now able to impose a points deduction during the current season, or demote a club from an automatic promotion position into the play-offs (or out of the play-offs altogether). Transfer embargoes are also available (with the earliest one potentially applying during the Summer 2017 Transfer window.


It's all well and good having these options now however if clubs have failed it for season just gone, why has no one had an embargo yet or even a slap on the wrist? doesnt seem like they are doing much about it
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: auntiesledd on June 01, 2018, 09:56:42 AM
Another excellent piece by Martin Samuals, but I can't help but think of sides who haven't flouted FFP rules - yet still achieved promotion to the PL eg B&HA; Huddersfield; Fulham; Watford; Burnley; Cardiff.  Wolves (possibly)...

It strikes me that all those aforementioned clubs have one thing in common: very good managers. Why can't we follow their example & build a sustainable promotion push - without throwing bundles of cash about willy nilly? FWIW, I think it's high time we took a new approach.

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: martin o`who?? on June 01, 2018, 10:13:30 AM
The hollow notion of “Financial fair play” has never stopped Manchester Citeh from buying everything in sight. These days probably the best signing a club can make is a clever accountant with the morals of a snake.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: old man villa fan on June 01, 2018, 10:18:34 AM
Unless an actual points deduction was stipulated in advance wouldn't it be open to challenge later.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SoccerHQ on June 01, 2018, 10:19:58 AM
The hollow notion of “Financial fair play” has never stopped Manchester Citeh from buying everything in sight.

Man. City takeover happened before it came in I think and they then established themselves in CL so could attract massive sponsorship deals.

Problem with us is we never achieve anymore. We couldn't get into top 4 with all the mass spending under Lerner so had to face those consequences and now we can't even get promotion after spending 50m in two years on many proven players at this level.

The way to evade FFP is simply to go up and predictably we're making it look like the most difficult thing to achieve in football.

Surprised at the amount of people who want us to spend another 50m on more unsuitable players, it hasn't worked and we need a more long term approach that will hopefully yield short term success otherwise the club will be in even more financial trouble in a couple of years.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Gareth on June 01, 2018, 10:20:25 AM
FFP does seem like a bit of a dark art.

I would guess the punishments are staggered by how much you go past the threshold ie you won’t get a 20 point deduction for going £50 over the limit so does there have to be a decision made of we’ll break the rules but this is how far we’ll push it?

Also, where it seems a bit stupid is if we know we are going to be £x short of FFP threshold and our one true saleable asset is Jack and we set a price tag of say £40m but the highest bid is £25m because the buyers know we are in the crap from FFP are we forced to sell or would there be grounds to sue as restraint of trade??  I know less about law than I do about football tactics (which is not a lot!) but from a moral point of view it all seems wrong.

Wonder if in time that 45 minutes of gutless nonsense last Saturday & the lack of accountability for the fact that we didn’t get top 2 this season will be defining moments.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: olaftab on June 01, 2018, 10:25:02 AM
I assume the punishment would be moderated by the fact if it’s a non compliance due to difficult trading conditions or an abuse of the system where we deliberately went outside the loss limit.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Lastfootstamper on June 01, 2018, 10:30:01 AM
The hollow notion of “Financial fair play” has never stopped Manchester Citeh from buying everything in sight.

Man. City takeover happened before it came in I think and they then established themselves in CL so could attract massive sponsorship deals.

Problem with us is we never achieve anymore. We couldn't get into top 4 with all the mass spending under Lerner so had to face those consequences and now we can't even get promotion after spending 50m in two years on many proven players at this level.

The way to evade FFP is simply to go up and predictably we're making it look like the most difficult thing to achieve in football.

Surprised at the amount of people who want us to spend another 50m on more unsuitable players, it hasn't worked and we need a more long term approach that will hopefully yield short term success otherwise the club will be in even more financial trouble in a couple of years.

It's this bit, isn't it. Everyone who's allegedly flouted the regulations in the past has made bloody sure they get promoted. We could spend billions in the summer, and I still wouldn't put more than a tenner on us not fucking it up.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SO Villa on June 01, 2018, 10:35:32 AM
There is talk that if we paid  the fines we  could overcome FFP and continue to spend.  First of all I have also  heard of possible point deductions and Villa being a big name in the Championship would definitely be under scrutiny. 

Also the owner(s) of Aston Villa or should I say the custonians do they really have the funds

I've never been convinced that Tony has the funds - if he has, why did he wait until the club was devalued by relegation before buying it?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SoccerHQ on June 01, 2018, 10:36:39 AM
The hollow notion of “Financial fair play” has never stopped Manchester Citeh from buying everything in sight.

Man. City takeover happened before it came in I think and they then established themselves in CL so could attract massive sponsorship deals.

Problem with us is we never achieve anymore. We couldn't get into top 4 with all the mass spending under Lerner so had to face those consequences and now we can't even get promotion after spending 50m in two years on many proven players at this level.

The way to evade FFP is simply to go up and predictably we're making it look like the most difficult thing to achieve in football.

Surprised at the amount of people who want us to spend another 50m on more unsuitable players, it hasn't worked and we need a more long term approach that will hopefully yield short term success otherwise the club will be in even more financial trouble in a couple of years.

It's this bit, isn't it. Everyone who's allegedly flouted the regulations in the past has made bloody sure they get promoted. We could spend billions in the summer, and I still wouldn't put more than a tenner on us not fucking it up.

Same here. The club just dosen't give out the confidence it can achieve its goals anymore. If the "been it seen it" squad couldn't achieve promotion then I won't be holding my breath on next years edition achieving it so we're in another two year cycle imo.

Once you're in the safety net of premier league they don't really care about punishing clubs for issues they had in football league. Bournemouth and Leicester were both fined pocket money for going above FFP limits.

However when QPR got relegated in 2015 they were then hit with big sanctions so not only have you got to go up but stay up and then the problems will largely go away.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: dave.woodhall on June 01, 2018, 10:48:33 AM
There is talk that if we paid  the fines we  could overcome FFP and continue to spend.  First of all I have also  heard of possible point deductions and Villa being a big name in the Championship would definitely be under scrutiny. 

Also the owner(s) of Aston Villa or should I say the custonians do they really have the funds

I've never been convinced that Tony has the funds - if he has, why did he wait until the club was devalued by relegation before buying it?

Because well bought is half sold. Did you learn nothing from Uncle Doug?

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: curiousorange on June 01, 2018, 11:14:22 AM
Why do I get the feeling that we'll flog everything we have of value, firmly entrenching ourselves in the middle reaches of this nothing league, and then they'll do away with FFP?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: old man villa fan on June 01, 2018, 11:30:49 AM
Provided we are clear on FFP for the season just finished, get a decent manager, spend a s*** load on players, get promoted automatically and before the season ends, get sponsored based on PL football (after all, it's supposed to be worth a fortune to clubs), dump the money in the accounts and Bob's your uncle.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on June 01, 2018, 11:34:13 AM
It's all well and good having these options now however if clubs have failed it for season just gone, why has no one had an embargo yet or even a slap on the wrist? doesnt seem like they are doing much about it

Because no one has failed FFP since the rules changed, yet. A number of clubs that have failed it in the past, before the rule changes, had transfer embargos. Forest, Leeds, Bolton, Fulham, sha, Cardiff to name a few.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: old man villa fan on June 01, 2018, 11:44:17 AM
Somebody mentioned previously about the possible points deduction to drop a club from automatic promotion into the play-offs or ply-offs to below. How does this work when accounts are not due until after the season finishes. With the two past years and estimate for the year to come, surely you are not going to admit you are going to fail in advance.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on June 01, 2018, 11:56:05 AM
Your not going to get an auditor to sign off on cooked books!

Man City don't fall foul of FFP as they make an absolute fortune.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: olaftab on June 01, 2018, 11:56:52 AM
I've never been convinced that Tony has the funds - if he has, why did he wait until the club was devalued by relegation before buying it?
I think you will find people who have money usually make it by doing this sort of thing.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Monty on June 01, 2018, 11:57:23 AM
Fining clubs for spending too much is fucking dumb.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: David_Nab on June 01, 2018, 03:00:13 PM
We spent a large amount of cash on championship players so clubs in the league benefited from us spending and for that we get punished ...
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: curiousorange on June 01, 2018, 03:28:18 PM
I suppose the idea is to ensure you don't get a two/three tier league like the Premier League is. But when FFP was mooted there wasn't a titanic, absolutely mindboggling television deal in the pipeline. The financial goalposts are so far from where the league imagined they should be that all they've done is widened that gulf between the Premier League and those striving to be in it. I agree totally with Wenger's comments - at some point in the near future the haves will split off into their own European league based on their money-making potential, leaving the Best League in the World to contemplate life as a second-tier, financially second-rate interest to wither on the vine, like the Football League is now.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on June 01, 2018, 03:29:55 PM
Whatever the ramifications of an FFP that we haven’t even failed yet, it’s a very convenient smokescreen for an owner who has spent the parachute money, taken out loans and now would have to gamble by investing his own money to try and get us up.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt Collins on June 01, 2018, 04:14:55 PM
Whatever the ramifications of an FFP that we haven’t even failed yet, it’s a very convenient smokescreen for an owner who has spent the parachute money, taken out loans and now would have to gamble by investing his own money to try and get us up.

He literally isn't allowed to
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: David_Nab on June 01, 2018, 04:38:43 PM
Whatever the ramifications of an FFP that we haven’t even failed yet, it’s a very convenient smokescreen for an owner who has spent the parachute money, taken out loans and now would have to gamble by investing his own money to try and get us up.

He literally isn't allowed to

QPR owners tried that , they wrote off 60mil as loans and EFL wouldn't allow it and pursued them for a fine
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: four fornicholl on June 01, 2018, 05:19:09 PM
Fuck the EFL, can we not enlist the help of the PL to get us back, after all it would be a better place for all.
A few massively over valued transfer deals for some of our shite, several inspired loans and we're home and hosed.
We must have plenty of friends in high places.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: mr underhill on June 01, 2018, 05:21:28 PM
I thinkthey were probably glad to et rid of us in the final season
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: chrisw1 on June 01, 2018, 05:21:38 PM
Fuck the EFL, can we not enlist the help of the PL to get us back, after all it would be a better place for all.
A few massively over valued transfer deals for some of our shite, several inspired loans and we're home and hosed.
We must have plenty of friends in high places.
Absolutely, and isn't it time HRH ponied up with some sponsorship money and influence?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: mr underhill on June 01, 2018, 05:29:44 PM
follicallly challenged balls.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: four fornicholl on June 01, 2018, 05:31:18 PM
Fuck the EFL, can we not enlist the help of the PL to get us back, after all it would be a better place for all.
A few massively over valued transfer deals for some of our shite, several inspired loans and we're home and hosed.
We must have plenty of friends in high places.
Absolutely, and isn't it time HRH ponied up with some sponsorship money and influence?
Jack Grealish, by Royal Appointment.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ronshirt on June 01, 2018, 05:33:47 PM
Your not going to get an auditor to sign off on cooked books!

We don't need to worry about FFP just hire one of the Big Four.

From Wiki:

On 22 February 2018, MPs contested evidence from KPMG.

In one exchange MP Peter Kyle told KPMG partner Peter Meehan: "I would not hire you to do an audit of the contents of my fridge".

Rachel Reeves, chair of the business select committee, said: "Auditing is a multi-million-pound business for the Big Four. On this morning's evidence from KPMG and Deloitte, these audits appear to be a colossal waste of time and money, fit only to provide false assurance to investors, workers and the public. [...] Carillion staff and investors could see the problems at the company but those responsible - auditors, regulators, and, ultimately, the directors – did nothing to stop Carillion being driven off a cliff".

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on June 01, 2018, 05:41:27 PM
Your not going to get an auditor to sign off on cooked books!

We don't need to worry about FFP just hire one of the Big Four.

From Wiki:

On 22 February 2018, MPs contested evidence from KPMG.

In one exchange MP Peter Kyle told KPMG partner Peter Meehan: "I would not hire you to do an audit of the contents of my fridge".

Rachel Reeves, chair of the business select committee, said: "Auditing is a multi-million-pound business for the Big Four. On this morning's evidence from KPMG and Deloitte, these audits appear to be a colossal waste of time and money, fit only to provide false assurance to investors, workers and the public. [...] Carillion staff and investors could see the problems at the company but those responsible - auditors, regulators, and, ultimately, the directors – did nothing to stop Carillion being driven off a cliff".
The big 4 have so many high profile fuck ups it’s scandalous how they get away with it.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AsTallAsLions on June 01, 2018, 07:37:14 PM
The more I hear about FFP, coupled with the fact that other clubs don't seem to be fearing it one bit, has left me wondering why we're just lying down and taking our fucking without putting up any kind of fight. I suspect we're being taken for a ride.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on June 01, 2018, 07:45:24 PM
The more I hear about FFP, coupled with the fact that other clubs don't seem to be fearing it one bit, has left me wondering why we're just lying down and taking our fucking without putting up any kind of fight. I suspect we're being taken for a ride.
Nobody wants to be a test case.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AsTallAsLions on June 01, 2018, 07:54:02 PM
The more I hear about FFP, coupled with the fact that other clubs don't seem to be fearing it one bit, has left me wondering why we're just lying down and taking our fucking without putting up any kind of fight. I suspect we're being taken for a ride.
Nobody wants to be a test case.

And yet we're the only ones issuing statements about how big and scary it is.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Lastfootstamper on June 01, 2018, 07:54:15 PM
The more I hear about FFP, coupled with the fact that other clubs don't seem to be fearing it one bit, has left me wondering why we're just lying down and taking our fucking without putting up any kind of fight. I suspect we're being taken for a ride.

I don't think it's true that other clubs aren't fearing it. There's these rumours of a dozen clubs falling foul, yet from what I've seen only us and Wolves spent what might be considered loads recently.

In fact, type "[championship club name of your choice] fear ffp" into Google* and you'll get links to other forums and boards debating exactly this. Some Wednesday fans reckon the early window is a blessing as it'll stop them getting sanctioned.

*other search engines are available.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: old man villa fan on June 01, 2018, 08:14:20 PM
How much are we in debt?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sirlordbaltimore on June 01, 2018, 08:26:42 PM


http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt Collins on June 01, 2018, 08:48:46 PM
The more I hear about FFP, coupled with the fact that other clubs don't seem to be fearing it one bit, has left me wondering why we're just lying down and taking our fucking without putting up any kind of fight. I suspect we're being taken for a ride.
Nobody wants to be a test case.

QPR did

Suspect they regretted it
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on June 01, 2018, 08:52:09 PM
How much are we in debt?
It’s not debt that is the problem, it is the last 2 years of trading losses.
The estimations suggest we are carrying £80 million of losses which we have to reduce by producing about £40 million of profits.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on June 01, 2018, 09:39:16 PM
How much are we in debt?
It’s not debt that is the problem, it is the last 2 years of trading losses.
The estimations suggest we are carrying £80 million of losses which we have to reduce by producing about £40 million of profits.

Not quite.

Our losses over the past two seasons indicate that by the end of next season, if we do nothing, we'll have breached FFP by £40-£50m.  So we have to find that much in savings (not profits).  If we manage to break even in 18/19 we'll have done it.  But given two years ago we lost £14m and next year our parachute payments will be £30m less than they were in that year, breaking even is going to need some pretty fundamental changes - as alluded to in Tone's statement.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Stu on June 01, 2018, 09:54:07 PM
It's a backwards situation. Tony has, probably, money to spend on the club but is being prevented from doing so by rules that, 'to ensure fair play', potentially means the club has to sell off its most valuable assets. Makes no sense. Not logical.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SoccerHQ on June 01, 2018, 10:21:16 PM
Slightly different case but apparently Uefa's financial investigators have recommended banning AC Milan from next season's europa league as their spending spree last summer went way over the limit apparently.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: old man villa fan on June 01, 2018, 10:27:26 PM
How much are we in debt?
It’s not debt that is the problem, it is the last 2 years of trading losses.
The estimations suggest we are carrying £80 million of losses which we have to reduce by producing about £40 million of profits.


I understand that but does FFP actually do what it is trying to do when a club is bought by a new owner and a lot of the previous losses are carried away by the former owner.

As an example, if we were £20m in debt but making a £5m operating profit that looked to be sustainable or increased, the club would be in a far healthier financial position than many clubs that are not at risk from FFP.  How is FFP helping, particularly as the previous losses will have gone outside of football.

Wasn't FFP brought in to protect the financial state of clubs and the stability of the leagues.  Perhaps if the clubs that previously went into administration had been demoted to the bottom division, we wouldn't have needed FFP.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on June 01, 2018, 10:55:51 PM
As I said in another thread I read somewhere that 12 clubs have already failed ffp in the season just ended.  Blues are one.  I am guessing Derby might be another.  The teams that went up might be others.  So why the fcuk and when the fcuk is something going to be happening to them?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: David_Nab on June 01, 2018, 11:22:01 PM
As I said in another thread I read somewhere that 12 clubs have already failed ffp in the season just ended.  Blues are one.  I am guessing Derby might be another.  The teams that went up might be others.  So why the fcuk and when the fcuk is something going to be happening to them?

I posted Yesterday that Derby are losing £3mil a month and facing a £10mil fine for FFP

Shef Wednesday made a big loss and could have issues also

Fulham and Cardiff had run out of TV cash so could of been in trouble too and Wolves would likely be in our position now

QPR its well known they have a £40mil fine they are continuing to fight ,there's hilights the flaw of the system they made a loss their owners paid off the debt but the EFL still says its a loss so want to punish them .The whole point was to avoid a Portsmouth situation but when an owner actually has the cash and pays the loss's the EFL still feel the need to take action ..

Birmingham filled accounts late and are apparently in trouble

Most clubs in the league are struggling money wise and unless a club sells someone for a large fee I think the transfer fee's in the league will be low this season
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: old man villa fan on June 01, 2018, 11:32:52 PM
The difference in finances between the PL and Championship is killing the game.  The more the gap widens, the more the parachute payments become and the more it creates an advantage for the relegated clubs.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on June 01, 2018, 11:54:29 PM
The difference is we're Aston Villa and nobody gives a good fuck about these other clubs outside their fan base. We sell copy and bait clicks.

Small Heath going to the wall? So fucking what.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on June 01, 2018, 11:57:28 PM
How much are we in debt?
It’s not debt that is the problem, it is the last 2 years of trading losses.
The estimations suggest we are carrying £80 million of losses which we have to reduce by producing about £40 million of profits.

Not quite.

Our losses over the past two seasons indicate that by the end of next season, if we do nothing, we'll have breached FFP by £40-£50m.  So we have to find that much in savings (not profits).  If we manage to break even in 18/19 we'll have done it.  But given two years ago we lost £14m and next year our parachute payments will be £30m less than they were in that year, breaking even is going to need some pretty fundamental changes - as alluded to in Tone's statement.
We can either achieve by this generating  profit eg player sales over and above their cost or reducing costs or a combination of both if you want to be semantic.
Or we can even create additional revenue by selling other assets above cost or by attracting sponsorship etc.
Either way by your estimation we have to find an additional £40 mil + from somewhere.
Most importantly it looks impossible to do this without selling Grealish.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: David_Nab on June 01, 2018, 11:59:48 PM
The difference in finances between the PL and Championship is killing the game.  The more the gap widens, the more the parachute payments become and the more it creates an advantage for the relegated clubs.

Not so much ,the payments are not  enough if you are carrying over loss's in the Prem League look at Sunderland at as extreme example.They didn't have much money to spend and carried on their form from the season before and went down.

In last 2 seasons only Newcastle who came down have gone straight back up and we made the PO as did Boro but the other teams where no where close at all

But your right the TV money difference is killing the game because if you have budgeted to be in PL and go down the FFP  rules and how they work out loss's ( the EFL version ) will screw you if you can't get back up quickly.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: phantom limb on June 02, 2018, 12:06:50 AM
The more I read about it the more this whole FFP business just sounds like a load of bollocks.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: claret+blue ed on June 02, 2018, 12:07:04 AM
One thing that we can do to help is go to games, we had 38k+ at Wembley, if the same amount went to VP every home game, it would generate roughly an extra £6m

That would be a good start

UTV
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: TheMalandro on June 02, 2018, 12:16:51 AM
The difference is we're Aston Villa and nobody gives a good fuck about these other clubs outside their fan base. We sell copy and bait clicks.

Small Heath going to the wall? So fucking what.

So, you think other people give a fuck because we are Aston Villa?

Unfortunately, you are wrong.

At least you are consistent.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: itbrvilla on June 02, 2018, 12:23:19 AM
The difference is we're Aston Villa and nobody gives a good fuck about these other clubs outside their fan base. We sell copy and bait clicks.

Small Heath going to the wall? So fucking what.

So, you think other people give a fuck because we are Aston Villa?

Unfortunately, you are wrong.

At least you are consistent.
Spot on. Holloway was right as much as we hated hearing it.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: eamonn on June 02, 2018, 12:30:02 AM
As I said in another thread I read somewhere that 12 clubs have already failed ffp in the season just ended.  Blues are one.  I am guessing Derby might be another.  The teams that went up might be others.  So why the fcuk and when the fcuk is something going to be happening to them?

I posted Yesterday that Derby are losing £3mil a month and facing a £10mil fine for FFP

Shef Wednesday made a big loss and could have issues also

Fulham and Cardiff had run out of TV cash so could of been in trouble too and Wolves would likely be in our position now

QPR its well known they have a £40mil fine they are continuing to fight ,there's hilights the flaw of the system they made a loss their owners paid off the debt but the EFL still says its a loss so want to punish them .The whole point was to avoid a Portsmouth situation but when an owner actually has the cash and pays the loss's the EFL still feel the need to take action ..

Birmingham filled accounts late and are apparently in trouble

Most clubs in the league are struggling money wise and unless a club sells someone for a large fee I think the transfer fee's in the league will be low this season

Interesting if true about Derby. An Ipswich fan at work was telling me that they interviewed Lampard for their vacant manager's position but his salary demands were too high. Next thing he's off to Derby on a three year contract and apparently under no pressure to get them promoted next season.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on June 02, 2018, 12:31:31 AM
The difference is we're Aston Villa and nobody gives a good fuck about these other clubs outside their fan base. We sell copy and bait clicks.

Small Heath going to the wall? So fucking what.

So, you think other people give a fuck because we are Aston Villa?

Unfortunately, you are wrong.

At least you are consistent.

Tell me more about Hilary.

Guess we're taking up column inches because nobody cares.

As the late Nasher would say #facepalm
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on June 02, 2018, 12:41:41 AM
The difference is we're Aston Villa and nobody gives a good fuck about these other clubs outside their fan base. We sell copy and bait clicks.

Small Heath going to the wall? So fucking what.

So, you think other people give a fuck because we are Aston Villa?

Unfortunately, you are wrong.

At least you are consistent.
Spot on. Holloway was right as much as we hated hearing it.

We've had many spells of being half arsed. But who hasn't.

Not famous? I'd say you've been living in a jungle on a remote Thai island in the Gulf of Thai, but then I've had a conversation with a man whose English extended to Ashley Young and John Carew when mentioning I was Villa. Give the self loathing a knock on the head. It's unbecoming of a gentlemen.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on June 02, 2018, 03:39:11 AM
If we were to fail FFP it would be a much bigger story than if sha did. sha failing it would be a bigger story than if Burton did, and so on. It's pretty obvious really.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AsTallAsLions on June 02, 2018, 04:54:03 AM
The difference is we're Aston Villa and nobody gives a good fuck about these other clubs outside their fan base. We sell copy and bait clicks.

Small Heath going to the wall? So fucking what.

So, you think other people give a fuck because we are Aston Villa?

Unfortunately, you are wrong.

At least you are consistent.
Spot on. Holloway was right as much as we hated hearing it.

We've had many spells of being half arsed. But who hasn't.

Not famous? I'd say you've been living in a jungle on a remote Thai island in the Gulf of Thai, but then I've had a conversation with a man whose English extended to Ashley Young and John Carew when mentioning I was Villa. Give the self loathing a knock on the head. It's unbecoming of a gentlemen.

We're Aston Villa, we'll fail if we like.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on June 02, 2018, 07:08:00 AM
If we were to fail FFP it would be a much bigger story than if sha did. sha failing it would be a bigger story than if Burton did, and so on. It's pretty obvious really.

Yep. Biggest club in the league being perceived to have a crisis of as yet undetermined proportions will be bigger news than much else going on down here.

I appreciate it's de rigueur for a clutch to have a pop though.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Villafirst on June 02, 2018, 07:29:19 AM
FFP is a disaster for the Championship. If you manage to get up, it's inverably a struggle to survive. It actually protects the big boys. The financial gap between the PL and Championship is far too disproportionate.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: andyh on June 02, 2018, 08:20:57 AM
Wasn’t FFP originally set up to prevent clubs overspending and subsequently going to the wall like Portsmouth or Aldershot etc?

It now seems to have morphed into a money-making machine for the footballing authorities and stifling competition amongst football clubs who ‘could’ afford to incur debt but are now not allowed to.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Nunkin1965 on June 02, 2018, 08:25:32 AM
Wasn’t FFP originally set up to prevent clubs overspending and subsequently going to the wall like Portsmouth or Aldershot etc?

It now seems to have morphed into a money-making machine for the footballing authorities and stifling competition amongst football clubs who ‘could’ afford to incur debt but are now not allowed to.

It's something I've always wondered also.
It doesn't seem to fit the purpose if half of the League could be falling foul to it.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: old man villa fan on June 02, 2018, 08:29:43 AM
When you are looking at the numbers they are talking about in fines, what you are allowed to lose etc. and compare it with the actual value of clubs in the Championship, something doesn't stack up.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithe on June 02, 2018, 08:30:31 AM
I wonder if we are hoping to get back some of the corporate match day business that we lost lock stock and barrel to the Albion in relegation?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: old man villa fan on June 02, 2018, 08:36:18 AM
I'm starting to wonder whether we should just do some house cleaning, build a younger team but not go all out to kill ourselves by selling anything that moves. Then accept our fate from FFP at the end of next season (whatever it is and we are not sure what it is exactly) and move on. We aim for promotion the season after next but give it a good go this season.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Nunkin1965 on June 02, 2018, 08:37:47 AM
I wonder if we are hoping to get back some of the corporate match day business that we lost lock stock and barrel to the Albion in relegation?
That's a good point.
There will be more around I would imagine with Albion being with us again.
No comparison now that they don't offer PL footy.
I hate the phrase with a passion but Every Little will Help in our situation.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Nunkin1965 on June 02, 2018, 08:39:25 AM
I'm starting to wonder whether we should just do some house cleaning, build a younger team but not go all out to kill ourselves by selling anything that moves. Then accept our fate from FFP at the end of next season (whatever it is and we are not sure what it is exactly) and move on. We aim for promotion the season after next but give it a good go this season.
What is our fate likely to be?
This thing is such a bloody confusing mess to try and get your head around.
Well mine anyway
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on June 02, 2018, 08:42:38 AM
The fine is scaled so that's more easily worked out.

Points deductions etc are impossible to gauge given the discretionary nature of the sanction.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: TheMalandro on June 02, 2018, 08:44:30 AM
The difference is we're Aston Villa and nobody gives a good fuck about these other clubs outside their fan base. We sell copy and bait clicks.

Small Heath going to the wall? So fucking what.

So, you think other people give a fuck because we are Aston Villa?

Unfortunately, you are wrong.

At least you are consistent.

Tell me more about Hilary.

Guess we're taking up column inches because nobody cares.

As the late Nasher would say #facepalm

Not much bravado about Bruce now is there?
Hilarious how you now decide to criticise a manager that was in charge for about three months.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Richard E on June 02, 2018, 08:45:31 AM
If we'd approached last Saturday as if we were playing Fulham rather than Barca we might not be having to fret about this now. Cheers, Steve, really appreciate it, mate.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on June 02, 2018, 08:45:52 AM
You ok Joleon? I've not rattled your missus have I?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on June 02, 2018, 08:47:43 AM
If we'd approached last Saturday as if we were playing Fulham rather than Barca we might not be having to fret about this now. Cheers, Steve, really appreciate it, mate.

That 1st half. We could still have been 1-0 down, but it will haunt us. Still, it was only half as bad as 2000, so by 2036 we will likely have a good 90 minute performance in a final.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: TheMalandro on June 02, 2018, 08:50:10 AM
You ok Joleon? I've not rattled your missus have I?

We'll smash it next year, we are Aston Villa.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on June 02, 2018, 08:55:03 AM
You ok Joleon? I've not rattled your missus have I?

We'll smasdh it next year, we are Aston Villa.

That's the spirit.

I'm not sure why you think me seeing the awful Remi Garde is hilarious. Or quite what Bruce and bravado and I have to do with anything really.

Look, I get it, you're next in line to have a go. But you're reaching Delinquent, really reaching to grasp at something. I am, as always, flattered. But best leave it to the bigger boys, blame it on the phone and move on.

Go lad, off you pop.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: TheMalandro on June 02, 2018, 08:59:28 AM
You ok Joleon? I've not rattled your missus have I?

We'll smasdh it next year, we are Aston Villa.

That's the spirit.

I'm not sure why you think me seeing the awful Remi Garde is hilarious. Or quite what Bruce and bravado and I have to do with anything really.

Look, I get it, you're next in line to have a go. But you're reaching Delinquent, really reaching to grasp at something. I am, as always, flattered. But best leave it to the bigger boys, blame it on the phone and move on.

Go lad, off you pop.

"Snidey twat" Another poster was quite correct.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on June 02, 2018, 09:03:17 AM
Oh did-dums. Do you have a kewl name like the Anti-Ads Alliance? Ticks the boxes that.

I'm not snidey, I'm just too bigger game for you to hunt. And that burns, I can tell. I'll condescend the shit of you to be fair, but only in retaliation. There's nothing snidey about me, I'm entirely honest and more than happy to oblige you or anybody who wants to be confrontational with me.

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: TheMalandro on June 02, 2018, 09:08:25 AM
Big game. Retaliation?

Absurd.

Carry on with your battles on here. You've had a few.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on June 02, 2018, 09:17:15 AM
Surrender accepted.

A future tip, it's better to focus your strength on one thing rather than kiss chase me around multiple threads. It keeps your element of surprise in tact.

Better luck next time slick.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Bad English on June 02, 2018, 09:29:57 AM
Jesus wept!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: JD on June 02, 2018, 09:36:34 AM
Jesus wept!

Yep exactly BE, just wasted some of my life reading this shit.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on June 02, 2018, 09:42:45 AM
If a succession of people weren't lining up to have a pop then you wouldn't have to waste your life reading it.

I'm a know it all, I get it, but only one of many on here. I appreciate I'm the only Tory know it all so I stick out a bit more. Yet when you've got people out of the blue, who I've never engaged with before, chipping away having clearly been briefed privately by the last lot who tried and failed, then what am I to do? I ignore more than I swing back at.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: JD on June 02, 2018, 09:46:59 AM
If a succession of people weren't lining up to have a pop then you wouldn't have to waste your life reading it.

I'm a know it all, I get it, but only one of many on here. I appreciate I'm the only Tory know it all so I stick out a bit more. Yet when you've got people out of the blue, who I've never engaged with before, chipping away having clearly been briefed privately by the last lot who tried and failed, then what am I to do? I ignore more than I swing back at.

Ad's I'm not having a go at you mate, far from it. i just don't into reading pages of two posters arguing. I still love you Ads.   
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on June 02, 2018, 09:48:47 AM
I appreciste that to be fair. Next rung down from a punathon I imagine!

I feel your love buddy!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Bad English on June 02, 2018, 10:03:28 AM
You sound a little paranoid Ads. I'm not having a go but all the I'm a victim stuff is a little tiresome.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on June 02, 2018, 10:11:25 AM
We can agree to disagree.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Stu on June 02, 2018, 10:11:32 AM
Also - internet football forum.

It's really not important.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Stu on June 02, 2018, 10:12:26 AM
*what others think of you.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Bad English on June 02, 2018, 10:12:34 AM
Up the Villa!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on June 02, 2018, 10:19:18 AM
We can agree to agree on that!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: eddiemunster on June 02, 2018, 11:11:42 AM
When do the accounts get published? And when do the powers that be fine/punish otherwise clubs who have failed FFP?
At least when the accounts are published, we will have some idea as to how deep a mess we are in.

Don't forget, with Terry and Gabby gone, we're already saving £ 100,000+ per week in wages alone.
Oh and we'll be getting a payment from selling Mr Pointy, and Gil (if the clause in his loan is to be believed), and we sold Amavi in the last financial year didn't we?? Add the latter two's wages to Messrs Terry and Gabbys and we have already made a substantial saving.

Or am I hoping too much?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: olaftab on June 02, 2018, 11:26:15 AM
Oh did-dums. Do you have a kewl name like the Anti-Ads Alliance? Ticks the boxes that.

I'm not snidey, I'm just too bigger game for you to hunt. And that burns, I can tell. I'll condescend the shit of you to be fair, but only in retaliation. There's nothing snidey about me, I'm entirely honest and more than happy to oblige you or anybody who wants to be confrontational with me.
No you are not and another balanced post to underline that fact.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Dave on June 02, 2018, 11:29:38 AM
Surrender accepted.

A future tip, it's better to focus your strength on one thing rather than kiss chase me around multiple threads. It keeps your element of surprise in tact.

Better luck next time slick.

Can we pack this bullshit in please?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Dave on June 02, 2018, 11:30:02 AM
You ok Joleon? I've not rattled your missus have I?

We'll smasdh it next year, we are Aston Villa.

That's the spirit.

I'm not sure why you think me seeing the awful Remi Garde is hilarious. Or quite what Bruce and bravado and I have to do with anything really.

Look, I get it, you're next in line to have a go. But you're reaching Delinquent, really reaching to grasp at something. I am, as always, flattered. But best leave it to the bigger boys, blame it on the phone and move on.

Go lad, off you pop.

"Snidey twat" Another poster was quite correct.

This too.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: dave.woodhall on June 02, 2018, 11:30:46 AM
Nobody is too big, too important or too snide to ban.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Brassneck on June 02, 2018, 11:34:30 AM
When do the accounts get published? And when do the powers that be fine/punish otherwise clubs who have failed FFP?
At least when the accounts are published, we will have some idea as to how deep a mess we are in.

Don't forget, with Terry and Gabby gone, we're already saving £ 100,000+ per week in wages alone.
Oh and we'll be getting a payment from selling Mr Pointy, and Gil (if the clause in his loan is to be believed), and we sold Amavi in the last financial year didn't we?? Add the latter two's wages to Messrs Terry and Gabbys and we have already made a substantial saving.

Or am I hoping too much?

Football is all about hope and I'm feeling exactly the same as you.  It will take a miracle to keep Grealish IMO but while he's still here, I will keep hoping.  Hopefully we can drop another half a dozen from the squad, ridding us of even more wages.  I'm also hoping that Traore moves on from Boro because we have a sell on fee there as well.

The problem with moving on players is that looking at the wages of Gardner, Hogan, Taylor, DeLaet, Bunn, Elphick and Lansbury, no Championship side will be able to match them and none are good enough for the prem.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Lastfootstamper on June 02, 2018, 11:34:51 AM
When do the accounts get published? And when do the powers that be fine/punish otherwise clubs who have failed FFP?
At least when the accounts are published, we will have some idea as to how deep a mess we are in.

Don't forget, with Terry and Gabby gone, we're already saving £ 100,000+ per week in wages alone.
Oh and we'll be getting a payment from selling Mr Pointy, and Gil (if the clause in his loan is to be believed), and we sold Amavi in the last financial year didn't we?? Add the latter two's wages to Messrs Terry and Gabbys and we have already made a substantial saving.

Or am I hoping too much?

I'm sure I've read, and possibly posted on here, maybe, that provisional figures had to be in in March so's that any spankings can be meted out before any promoted sides get their "golden share" or whatever it's called.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on June 02, 2018, 11:46:26 AM
At the end of next March, the management accounts will need to have demonstrated we have balanced the books in order not to attract a penalty.  I assume that is in line with the tax year or possibly the last chunk of TV payments because our financial year end is May.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on June 02, 2018, 12:38:16 PM
I wonder if it is possible to have a “ kitchen sink year” under FFP.
This is where you throw all the bad news into the current financial year and clear the decks.
For Villa it would mean clearing all the deadwood and taking all the contractualhits this year, taking the FFP punishment and starting afresh 2019.
This would require pre negotiations with the authorities now and agreeing the penalty. Just as Financial institutions do with the regulators.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: paul_e on June 02, 2018, 12:44:11 PM
I wonder if it is possible to have a “ kitchen sink year” under FFP.
This is where you throw all the bad news into the current financial year and clear the decks.
For Villa it would mean clearing all the deadwood and taking all the contractualhits this year, taking the FFP punishment and starting afresh 2019.
This would require pre negotiations with the authorities now and agreeing the penalty. Just as Financial institutions do with the regulators.

The problem is you'd risk failing for the next 2 seasons as well, unless there's something that accounts for that so you're not repeatedly punished for the same thing.

Honestly the whole thing seems like a mess to me, there's just so many things that aren't clear about how it works.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on June 02, 2018, 12:47:43 PM
I don't think there would be anything wrong with approaching the authorities. Nothing to lose in any event.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AsTallAsLions on June 02, 2018, 12:52:42 PM
So now we want the club to turn itself in and negotiate a sanction for essentially just doing what everyone else is doing. FFS. No.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: TheMalandro on June 02, 2018, 12:53:42 PM
You ok Joleon? I've not rattled your missus have I?

We'll smasdh it next year, we are Aston Villa.

That's the spirit.

I'm not sure why you think me seeing the awful Remi Garde is hilarious. Or quite what Bruce and bravado and I have to do with anything really.

Look, I get it, you're next in line to have a go. But you're reaching Delinquent, really reaching to grasp at something. I am, as always, flattered. But best leave it to the bigger boys, blame it on the phone and move on.

Go lad, off you pop.

"Snidey twat" Another poster was quite correct.

This too.

Fair enough. Apologies.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: frank black on June 02, 2018, 12:55:15 PM
They’d probably tell us that we don’t need to fail FFP, you just need to sell a few stars.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sickbeggar on June 02, 2018, 02:25:07 PM
I wonder if it is possible to have a “ kitchen sink year” under FFP.
This is where you throw all the bad news into the current financial year and clear the decks.
For Villa it would mean clearing all the deadwood and taking all the contractualhits this year, taking the FFP punishment and starting afresh 2019.
This would require pre negotiations with the authorities now and agreeing the penalty. Just as Financial institutions do with the regulators.


I was thinking similar although for different reasons. If we do need to find 40m, say we managed to do that, BUT then chose to spend 10m on players. failed FFP and took the fine and/or point deduction, but the following season wouldn't we be better off, because we'd have a rebuilt squad on smaller wages? So basically writing off next season so we can have a squad again rather than making do with what's left and the kids. Obviously if they hit us with a 15m fine it wouldn't be worth doing, but if it was a points deduction so they stop us getting into the play-offs, overall would playing the system mean we would be stronger long-term?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Rico on June 02, 2018, 04:00:58 PM
Would taking a sponsorship deal on the name of the stadium help towards ffp? I don't know if it's allowed under football league rules, but I wouldn't care if the stadium was renamed. To me, and probably most other football fans it would always be Villa Park anyway. So if it's allowed then Dr Tony could consider sponsoring the stadium and chuck in some cash to help the ffp situation. Could also be a barometer of Dr T's actual personal wealth.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on June 02, 2018, 04:04:16 PM
Would taking a sponsorship deal on the name of the stadium help towards ffp? I don't know if it's allowed under football league rules, but I wouldn't care if the stadium was renamed. To me, and probably most other football fans it would always be Villa Park anyway. So if it's allowed then Dr Tony could consider sponsoring the stadium and chuck in some cash to help the ffp situation. Could also be a barometer of Dr T's actual personal wealth.

It can be done, but it has to be deemed 'market value' and no one really knows what that is. So even if he wanted to he couldn't spend £15m a year for stadium naming rights for example.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt Collins on June 02, 2018, 04:07:06 PM
Is it possible to put a thread on 'loop mode' as we seem to be going round in circles a bit now!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on June 02, 2018, 10:06:37 PM
Would taking a sponsorship deal on the name of the stadium help towards ffp? I don't know if it's allowed under football league rules, but I wouldn't care if the stadium was renamed. To me, and probably most other football fans it would always be Villa Park anyway. So if it's allowed then Dr Tony could consider sponsoring the stadium and chuck in some cash to help the ffp situation. Could also be a barometer of Dr T's actual personal wealth.

It can be done, but it has to be deemed 'market value' and no one really knows what that is. So even if he wanted to he couldn't spend £15m a year for stadium naming rights for example.
A number of Firms now provide This type of valuation.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on June 02, 2018, 10:14:11 PM
So now we want the club to turn itself in and negotiate a sanction for essentially just doing what everyone else is doing. FFS. No.
I think you may be over reacting a little.
You would prefer us to play Russian roulette with FFP ?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: amfy on June 02, 2018, 11:25:41 PM
Has sponsoring the stadium for no more than market value become the new 'Why didn't Barry take the penalty?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on June 02, 2018, 11:59:26 PM
Has sponsoring the stadium for no more than market value become the new 'Why didn't Barry take the penalty?
And just as funny.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: pauliewalnuts on June 03, 2018, 10:15:44 AM
Isn't this FFP discussion a bit of a red herring, in that it assumes Xia actually wants to put more money in.

In his statement, he also said this:

Quote
We are all aware that we will face severe FFP challenges next season. I am an Aston Villa fan. But I am also a businessman. Under the current circumstances, I think the club needs to rethink not only the past two years but also the past ten years. Villa needs to be a sustainable football club. People join. People leave. That is the cycle of football. But the football club always remains through it all.  This is the ultimate reality that cannot be changed, but I can assure you that everyone behind the scenes is working tirelessly towards achieving our ultimate goal. 

We have been heavily investing for the past two seasons. However, the loss on Saturday means that we need to change a lot of things. No one wanted to see the club have to go through this, but I believe that only changes can help the club to progress towards the positive direction and this requires the joint efforts of everyone associated with this great football club. 

That does not sound to me like a man desperately looking for ways to get more money into the club.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ozzjim on June 03, 2018, 11:12:58 AM
I think it's an ego thing. Had we gone up I think he would have pumped more in because it gets him press and he likes the attention of it all. Slumming it for a 3rd year in the Championship takes that prestige away. He wants to be in the Premier league, for his ego IMO as much as anything else.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Clampy on June 03, 2018, 11:18:58 AM
I think it's an ego thing. Had we gone up I think he would have pumped more in because it gets him press and he likes the attention of it all. Slumming it for a 3rd year in the Championship takes that prestige away. He wants to be in the Premier league, for his ego IMO as much as anything else.

A bit harsh to be honest.  He doesn't across to me as an ego manic.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: robleflaneur on June 03, 2018, 11:27:53 AM
I think it's an ego thing. Had we gone up I think he would have pumped more in because it gets him press and he likes the attention of it all. Slumming it for a 3rd year in the Championship takes that prestige away. He wants to be in the Premier league, for his ego IMO as much as anything else.
A good summary of Ellis as well. A lot of businessmen will  just see the ridiculous amount of money that the clubs receive for being just a member of that league.Ego will be secondary.It was a pity that Lerner didn't have any business acumen despite his background.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Woofles The Wonder Dog on June 03, 2018, 11:30:40 AM
Wasn't part of the sale conditions that Tony had to pay Lerner an additional significant wedge on regaining Premier League status? So he clearly budgeted for that. But I do feel FFP and a tightening of funds are a happy coincidence for him.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sirlordbaltimore on June 03, 2018, 11:53:09 AM
Wasn't part of the sale conditions that Tony had to pay Lerner an additional significant wedge on regaining Premier League status? So he clearly budgeted for that. But I do feel FFP and a tightening of funds are a happy coincidence for him.

This to me is barmy. How would FFP, which means he's making no money be a happy thing for him ???
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AsTallAsLions on June 03, 2018, 11:55:01 AM
Isn't this FFP discussion a bit of a red herring, in that it assumes Xia actually wants to put more money in.

In his statement, he also said this:

Quote
We are all aware that we will face severe FFP challenges next season. I am an Aston Villa fan. But I am also a businessman. Under the current circumstances, I think the club needs to rethink not only the past two years but also the past ten years. Villa needs to be a sustainable football club. People join. People leave. That is the cycle of football. But the football club always remains through it all.  This is the ultimate reality that cannot be changed, but I can assure you that everyone behind the scenes is working tirelessly towards achieving our ultimate goal. 

We have been heavily investing for the past two seasons. However, the loss on Saturday means that we need to change a lot of things. No one wanted to see the club have to go through this, but I believe that only changes can help the club to progress towards the positive direction and this requires the joint efforts of everyone associated with this great football club. 

That does not sound to me like a man desperately looking for ways to get more money into the club.

Well this has been my whole point. Other owners aren't coming out and issuing statements and talking about FFP because either they're busy ignoring it or they're working behind the scenes to find ways around it. I don't actually believe Xia has any desire to spend more money on us one way or the other, I'd imagine he's looked at what successive managers have spent 'his' (?) millions on and thought "Right, well that hasn't worked." FFP is a convenient way of battening down the hatches while avoiding alienating the entire fanbase.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Newby on June 03, 2018, 12:00:33 PM
If that's the case, Xia needs to sell the club and move on.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Toronto Villa on June 03, 2018, 12:26:13 PM
It’s possible he’s just massively fucked off like the rest of us. That he needed to make a statement, get away for a bit, let things calm down and come back a little more rationale in thought. I expect we will hear from the club starting with Bruce’s future this week.

It has to be frustrating for someone who has come to love the club he bought, has huge ambitions for it, finding it mired in the second tier yet again and not being able to personally invest in it. And I think in part it is am ego thing, because he probably had business partners or friends back home that he wanted to claim he owned a PL club.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: themossman on June 03, 2018, 12:35:34 PM
I think it's an ego thing. Had we gone up I think he would have pumped more in because it gets him press and he likes the attention of it all. Slumming it for a 3rd year in the Championship takes that prestige away. He wants to be in the Premier league, for his ego IMO as much as anything else.

A bit harsh to be honest.  He doesn't across to me as an ego manic.

I like the doc but that must be a joke?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on June 03, 2018, 12:39:39 PM
He must have thought he had done enough with the money he put in, the resources that were available and a manager that was a promotion expert.
His statement was full of emotion but light on action and strategy which is understandable but not reassuring.
We don’t know where he goes from here, maybe he doesn’t either.
Let’s hope he doesn’t turn into Lerner.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: old man villa fan on June 03, 2018, 12:40:07 PM
I think it's an ego thing. Had we gone up I think he would have pumped more in because it gets him press and he likes the attention of it all. Slumming it for a 3rd year in the Championship takes that prestige away. He wants to be in the Premier league, for his ego IMO as much as anything else.

In the West we would call it 'ego' but in China and the Far East it is 'face'. It will be a massive loss of face for him to fail so I do not expect him to do a Lerner.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sickbeggar on June 03, 2018, 12:42:06 PM
He's just the latest in the long line of businessmen who think this football lark is easy and then find out it's not like running a normal company.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: old man villa fan on June 03, 2018, 12:43:24 PM
Isn't this FFP discussion a bit of a red herring, in that it assumes Xia actually wants to put more money in.

In his statement, he also said this:

Quote
We are all aware that we will face severe FFP challenges next season. I am an Aston Villa fan. But I am also a businessman. Under the current circumstances, I think the club needs to rethink not only the past two years but also the past ten years. Villa needs to be a sustainable football club. People join. People leave. That is the cycle of football. But the football club always remains through it all.  This is the ultimate reality that cannot be changed, but I can assure you that everyone behind the scenes is working tirelessly towards achieving our ultimate goal. 

We have been heavily investing for the past two seasons. However, the loss on Saturday means that we need to change a lot of things. No one wanted to see the club have to go through this, but I believe that only changes can help the club to progress towards the positive direction and this requires the joint efforts of everyone associated with this great football club. 

That does not sound to me like a man desperately looking for ways to get more money into the club.

Or it could mean not throwing money at it but a clear progressive business plan.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: themossman on June 03, 2018, 01:01:59 PM
Out of interest, has a relegated team thrown vast sums at getting straight back up to and failed before? There must be examples but I can’t think of any.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Toronto Villa on June 03, 2018, 01:46:00 PM
He's just the latest in the long line of businessmen who think this football lark is easy and then find out it's not like running a normal company.

what exactly did you expect him to do differently? And if we are going to question his managerial appointments which is fine, given the state he bought us in there was no guarantee at all that whoever would have corrected things. As much as it very disappointing not to go up, we have no doubt arrested a very bad situation that could have left us where Sunderland is today. That we are now in the this position due to a "football" regulation and cannot spend out of it isn't directly tied to the stewardship of the owner. Like all people in business, mistakes are made. But in hindsight for the past two years he's not made that many that have really negatively impacted the club. He's put faith in managers and given them money to get us back up as quickly as possible. I was rather hoping for that post Randy.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sirlordbaltimore on June 03, 2018, 02:20:49 PM
Out of interest, has a relegated team thrown vast sums at getting straight back up to and failed before? There must be examples but I can’t think of any.

Er, Boro last season and us the season before
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: David_Nab on June 03, 2018, 02:51:38 PM
Out of interest, has a relegated team thrown vast sums at getting straight back up to and failed before? There must be examples but I can’t think of any.

Not really however previously it wouldn't be an issue as there was no FFP..
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: old man villa fan on June 03, 2018, 02:54:48 PM
He's just the latest in the long line of businessmen who think this football lark is easy and then find out it's not like running a normal company.

what exactly did you expect him to do differently? And if we are going to question his managerial appointments which is fine, given the state he bought us in there was no guarantee at all that whoever would have corrected things. As much as it very disappointing not to go up, we have no doubt arrested a very bad situation that could have left us where Sunderland is today. That we are now in the this position due to a "football" regulation and cannot spend out of it isn't directly tied to the stewardship of the owner. Like all people in business, mistakes are made. But in hindsight for the past two years he's not made that many that have really negatively impacted the club. He's put faith in managers and given them money to get us back up as quickly as possible. I was rather hoping for that post Randy.

You do wonder whether anybody advised Xia before he started spending money that we would run into problems with FFP.  Or did we get towards the end of the 2016/17 season and then somebody realised.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Toronto Villa on June 03, 2018, 03:09:40 PM
He's just the latest in the long line of businessmen who think this football lark is easy and then find out it's not like running a normal company.

what exactly did you expect him to do differently? And if we are going to question his managerial appointments which is fine, given the state he bought us in there was no guarantee at all that whoever would have corrected things. As much as it very disappointing not to go up, we have no doubt arrested a very bad situation that could have left us where Sunderland is today. That we are now in the this position due to a "football" regulation and cannot spend out of it isn't directly tied to the stewardship of the owner. Like all people in business, mistakes are made. But in hindsight for the past two years he's not made that many that have really negatively impacted the club. He's put faith in managers and given them money to get us back up as quickly as possible. I was rather hoping for that post Randy.

You do wonder whether anybody advised Xia before he started spending money that we would run into problems with FFP.  Or did we get towards the end of the 2016/17 season and then somebody realised.

I think they have been fully aware but the rules have also got more stringent in that time. Clearly the mission was promotion supported by what should have been more than sufficient level of investment. And it was promotion at the first attempt under RDM, then Bruce. There was more than enough time for Bruce to correct the poor start. But in the end it hasn't worked out that way. I think they would have spoken about the consequences of not being promoted many times confident it wouldn't come to that. In the end it has.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Brassneck on June 03, 2018, 03:20:55 PM
He's just the latest in the long line of businessmen who think this football lark is easy and then find out it's not like running a normal company.

what exactly did you expect him to do differently? And if we are going to question his managerial appointments which is fine, given the state he bought us in there was no guarantee at all that whoever would have corrected things. As much as it very disappointing not to go up, we have no doubt arrested a very bad situation that could have left us where Sunderland is today. That we are now in the this position due to a "football" regulation and cannot spend out of it isn't directly tied to the stewardship of the owner. Like all people in business, mistakes are made. But in hindsight for the past two years he's not made that many that have really negatively impacted the club. He's put faith in managers and given them money to get us back up as quickly as possible. I was rather hoping for that post Randy.

You do wonder whether anybody advised Xia before he started spending money that we would run into problems with FFP.  Or did we get towards the end of the 2016/17 season and then somebody realised.

Wyness always stated that next year (meaning the season that's just finished) was OK but the worry was always going to be if we were still here for the following season (meaning next season).

I think they were fully aware of the ramifications of failure.  It would be an insult to them to suggest that they hadn't discussed and allowed for it.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Dante Lavelli on June 03, 2018, 03:36:09 PM
Are there cases where clubs show willing, say find 50-60% of the required amount but still fall short?  I know we've fucked up over a series of years and we should have addressed the situation before however finding £40m is pretty impossible with out paralysing the club's future.  That shouldn't be the motivation of FFP.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: frank black on June 03, 2018, 03:49:45 PM
Are there cases where clubs show willing, say find 50-60% of the required amount but still fall short?  I know we've fucked up over a series of years and we should have addressed the situation before however finding £40m is pretty impossible with out paralysing the club's future.  That shouldn't be the motivation of FFP.

It is the motivation , they don’t want clubs bankrolling success. So therefore forcing us into a fire sale and effectively paralyzing our future has achieved the objective.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: themossman on June 03, 2018, 04:29:59 PM
Out of interest, has a relegated team thrown vast sums at getting straight back up to and failed before? There must be examples but I can’t think of any.

Er, Boro last season and us the season before

Er, why are you counting us as two teams and Boro were more or less neutral in terms of ins and outs last season.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sickbeggar on June 03, 2018, 06:17:33 PM
He's just the latest in the long line of businessmen who think this football lark is easy and then find out it's not like running a normal company.

what exactly did you expect him to do differently? And if we are going to question his managerial appointments which is fine, given the state he bought us in there was no guarantee at all that whoever would have corrected things. As much as it very disappointing not to go up, we have no doubt arrested a very bad situation that could have left us where Sunderland is today. That we are now in the this position due to a "football" regulation and cannot spend out of it isn't directly tied to the stewardship of the owner. Like all people in business, mistakes are made. But in hindsight for the past two years he's not made that many that have really negatively impacted the club. He's put faith in managers and given them money to get us back up as quickly as possible. I was rather hoping for that post Randy.


Just an observation rather than a specific criticism. I think in most businesses, if you invest far more capital than your rivals then you expect a return. Football can be different. Maybe if he realised that he wouldn't have gone down the instant promotion route with Bruce, or maybe he wouldn't have bought us at all. End of the day, he gambled on getting up and lost. No-one can say we weren't aware of the price of losing.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: themossman on June 03, 2018, 06:47:30 PM
The great thing is that in the last few years we’ve been an unsuccessful not spending as much as our rivals club AND an unsuccessful outspending all of our rivals club. A change is as good as a holiday as they say.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sirlordbaltimore on June 03, 2018, 07:26:30 PM
Out of interest, has a relegated team thrown vast sums at getting straight back up to and failed before? There must be examples but I can’t think of any.

Er, Boro last season and us the season before

Er, why are you counting us as two teams and Boro were more or less neutral in terms of ins and outs last season.


I didn't realise that Boro had recouped so much to be honest

Mind you, going by what i just read we are 25m in the black on last seasons transfer business once Amavi's fee is included

So, over our two seasons in the Championship we've only had a net spend of about 20m

Hardly throwing the kitchen sink at it


Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Lastfootstamper on June 03, 2018, 08:38:03 PM
It's the wage bill. I bet this season's wasn't massively different to the last one in the PL. Plenty of big earners still on the books, players convinced to drop down a division, assembling the creme de la creme of Championship players.

It will not have come cheap.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: old man villa fan on June 03, 2018, 09:27:36 PM
He's just the latest in the long line of businessmen who think this football lark is easy and then find out it's not like running a normal company.

what exactly did you expect him to do differently? And if we are going to question his managerial appointments which is fine, given the state he bought us in there was no guarantee at all that whoever would have corrected things. As much as it very disappointing not to go up, we have no doubt arrested a very bad situation that could have left us where Sunderland is today. That we are now in the this position due to a "football" regulation and cannot spend out of it isn't directly tied to the stewardship of the owner. Like all people in business, mistakes are made. But in hindsight for the past two years he's not made that many that have really negatively impacted the club. He's put faith in managers and given them money to get us back up as quickly as possible. I was rather hoping for that post Randy.

You do wonder whether anybody advised Xia before he started spending money that we would run into problems with FFP.  Or did we get towards the end of the 2016/17 season and then somebody realised.

Wyness always stated that next year (meaning the season that's just finished) was OK but the worry was always going to be if we were still here for the following season (meaning next season).

I think they were fully aware of the ramifications of failure.  It would be an insult to them to suggest that they hadn't discussed and allowed for it.

I meant going back to when he first came in.  The first I heard of it was at the end of the 2016/17 season at the time when Bruce was looking towards bringing players in.  The comments from Wyness have mostly been during the last 12 months.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: wolfman999 on June 04, 2018, 05:35:55 PM
Are there cases where clubs show willing, say find 50-60% of the required amount but still fall short?  I know we've fucked up over a series of years and we should have addressed the situation before however finding £40m is pretty impossible with out paralysing the club's future.  That shouldn't be the motivation of FFP.

It is the motivation , they don’t want clubs bankrolling success. So therefore forcing us into a fire sale and effectively paralyzing our future has achieved the objective.

Bankrolling success eh. That never happens does it Manchester City and Chelsea.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: cheltenhamlion on June 04, 2018, 05:39:58 PM
It's the wage bill. I bet this season's wasn't massively different to the last one in the PL. Plenty of big earners still on the books, players convinced to drop down a division, assembling the creme de la creme of Championship players.

It will not have come cheap.

Our wage bill last season was about the tenth highest in the country.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Exeter 77 on June 04, 2018, 05:53:35 PM
As a matter of interest - how much of our wage bill do gate receipts cover?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: cheltenhamlion on June 04, 2018, 06:08:25 PM
As a matter of interest - how much of our wage bill do gate receipts cover?

Next to bugger all.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Lastfootstamper on June 04, 2018, 06:41:42 PM
I was going to quote of an article that I was sure I'd seen somewhere which I thought had said that our wage bill for 16/17 was going to be £62million. I did a quick bit of mental rithmatic, and decided that it had to be bollocks. For anyone that might have some knowledge of this, can you please tell me I saw no such article, and it was just a nightmare I once had, a result of too much cheese?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sickbeggar on June 04, 2018, 07:10:01 PM
this article says the wage bill was 53.3m in 16/17

 :-[https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/43088167 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/43088167)

That includes most of the rdm and bruce signings apart from whelan and elmo. Seeing we've lost gabby, Hutton, gollini, johnstone, bunn from those figures and the loss of terry, snodgrass, samba, gabban, onamha since, you would hope we'd be down in the 30-40m mark by now. Large for the championship perhaps but not unmanageable,
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sirlordbaltimore on June 04, 2018, 07:30:56 PM


It really is completely baffling how the wage bill can be so high if you go through the squad and try and work out what everyone's earning

You'd still come up way short of what we're told it actually is
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sickbeggar on June 04, 2018, 07:37:46 PM
well i think when i first read the article i divided the wage figure versus the number of players at that time and i got a rough figure of 30k a week on average. obviously that wages bill of 53.3m also includes wages to players that left during 16/17 so that would bump it up a bit
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Lastfootstamper on June 04, 2018, 07:41:55 PM
It'd be like 25 players on 40k a week. That's why I dismissed my recollection. I know there's the youngsters, ladies, staff, execs all need weighing in, but the vast bulk must surely go on the First Team squad. I just cor get me 'ead round it.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Exeter 77 on June 04, 2018, 07:47:56 PM
As a matter of interest - how much of our wage bill do gate receipts cover?

Next to bugger all.
Pretty much what I figured. I would have guessed less than 10%.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on June 04, 2018, 07:51:18 PM
Here we go.....

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2018/06/04/steve-bruces-aston-villa-future-uncertain-against-backdrop-financial/
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: dave.woodhall on June 04, 2018, 07:51:33 PM
As a matter of interest - how much of our wage bill do gate receipts cover?

Next to bugger all.
Pretty much what I figured. I would have guessed less than 10%.

A million years ago Mark Ansell said he hoped we could increase TV/prize and commercial income so that that figure would reduce to 33%.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Lastfootstamper on June 04, 2018, 07:58:33 PM
32,000 bums, 23 games, £20 a pop, near £15million. It's not too shabby if all it had to go towards was wages. And at this level, it does show that playing in front of a full house can make a sizeable financial difference.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Nelly on June 04, 2018, 07:58:40 PM
Depressing. Bruce was the wrong man for the job.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: dave.woodhall on June 04, 2018, 07:59:57 PM
32,000 bums, 23 games, £20 a pop, near £15million. It's not too shabby if all it had to go towards wages. And at this level, it does show that playing in front of a full house can make a sizeable financial difference.

It's nowhere near £20 after season ticket discounts and concessions.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on June 04, 2018, 08:03:30 PM
Won't that be countered with boxes, corporate etc though? An 8 seater box in Witton Lane Stand is £1000-1700 a game.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Lastfootstamper on June 04, 2018, 08:04:23 PM
I was basing that on my fucking shit seat that I have to sit in AGAIN (clenches fist, grinds teeth) being valued at a nominal £14.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: dave.woodhall on June 04, 2018, 08:08:35 PM
Won't that be countered with boxes, corporate etc though? An 8 seater box in Witton Lane Stand is £1000-1700 a game.

I'm not sure if that doesn't count as commercial rather than matchday.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ozzjim on June 04, 2018, 08:09:58 PM
Plus it's a 23 game season. A 500 season ticket gives about 21 per match. Concessions much less. Probably evens out sons 16-17 per bum on seat. About 12.5 million. Or a McCormack, Richards, Lansbury, Gabby, Terry etc. If it wage bill is still over £50 million a season we need to seriously trim it and fast. Getting it down to £30 million ish in this division would still be high.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: cheltenhamlion on June 04, 2018, 08:13:18 PM
Won't that be countered with boxes, corporate etc though? An 8 seater box in Witton Lane Stand is £1000-1700 a game.

I'm not sure if that doesn't count as commercial rather than matchday.

Commercial.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on June 04, 2018, 08:58:36 PM
Based on the 16/17 accounts (our first season in the Championship):


In the Summer following the above figures we signed:


plus others who will all have added to the wage bill.

We got rid of a few too but not high earners (ie Veretout, Baker, Sanchez, Amavi, Bacuna, Kozak, De Laet, Gardner, Elphick, Tshibola, McCormack, Sissoko).

I would estimate that for the season just finished the wage bill will have got worse rather than better - Terry alone (if £60k a week is to be believed) represented more than 1/20th of our entire club's wage bill!!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Lastfootstamper on June 04, 2018, 09:08:23 PM
So I didn't imagine that £62m.

Faaarkin ell.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sickbeggar on June 04, 2018, 09:14:28 PM
Based on the 16/17 accounts (our first season in the Championship):

  • Gate receipts = £10.7m
  • Commercial revenue = £12.3m
  • Wages costs = £61.5m (of which £8m was NIC and pension costs)
  • 401 full time employees - 175 players and coaches; 168 commercial, 58 maintenance & admin

In the Summer following the above figures we signed:

  • Terry
  • Snodgrass
  • Whelan
  • Elmohamady

plus others who will all have added to the wage bill.

We got rid of a few too but not high earners (ie Veretout, Baker, Sanchez, Amavi, Bacuna, Kozak, De Laet, Gardner, Elphick, Tshibola, McCormack, Sissoko).

I would estimate that for the season just finished the wage bill will have got worse rather than better - Terry alone (if £60k a week is to be believed) represented more than 1/20th of our entire club's wage bill!!


nah, the reality is that 53.3m includes the wages of gestade, westwood, and those you mentioned.. All on premiership wages. You only have to look at the drop in wages of 30m from the season before to realise they weren't on peanuts. Most of that drop was relegation clauses
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SirSteveUK on June 05, 2018, 04:18:58 AM
Here we go.....

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2018/06/04/steve-bruces-aston-villa-future-uncertain-against-backdrop-financial/


Two errors

The playoff was over two weeks ago ?....10 days actually

Parachute payments have finished ??  No - one payment left.

Schoolboy errors - do we trust the rest of it?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: IFWaters on June 05, 2018, 04:56:02 AM
I read a few articles about Championship wages. From what I can glean, average player wages in the league 2 seasons ago were about £8k a week but included some examples such as Jonjo Shelvey at Newcastle on £80,000 a week.

This is before any NI and pensions costs which probably add 20-25% to that

I tried to work out what all the non-playing and youth team costs would be, allowing for some expensive execs and decided an average of £40k per year, including NI and pensions should be enough, then times 450 non first team staff makes £18 million. Then you've got the costs of keeping the ground and training ground up and running, rates, the leccy bill, IT etc etc probably take that up to £25 million.

So that's £25 million before any first team wages. Which is most of the gate and commercial money.

So the TV and parachute payments have to cover the rest. By the way, I read parachute payments last 4 years.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AsTallAsLions on June 05, 2018, 07:14:57 AM
I read a few articles about Championship wages. From what I can glean, average player wages in the league 2 seasons ago were about £8k a week but included some examples such as Jonjo Shelvey at Newcastle on £80,000 a week.

This is before any NI and pensions costs which probably add 20-25% to that

I tried to work out what all the non-playing and youth team costs would be, allowing for some expensive execs and decided an average of £40k per year, including NI and pensions should be enough, then times 450 non first team staff makes £18 million. Then you've got the costs of keeping the ground and training ground up and running, rates, the leccy bill, IT etc etc probably take that up to £25 million.

So that's £25 million before any first team wages. Which is most of the gate and commercial money.

So the TV and parachute payments have to cover the rest. By the way, I read parachute payments last 4 years.

Pretty sure they last 3 years only.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Lastfootstamper on June 05, 2018, 07:32:03 AM
I thought it was three, but seems not. They drop to £9.6m for each of the third and fourth years, from what I can see. A still tidy sum, but half of what we received in year two. What saving are we looking at with the departures of Gabby, Terry and the loan players?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: four fornicholl on June 05, 2018, 07:45:54 AM
Looking at all these figures gets me wondering if we may become unsustainable, yet unable to invest. Madness I tell you, madness.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Lastfootstamper on June 05, 2018, 08:27:03 AM
It's becoming easier to understand how the likes of Forest, Wednesday and Leeds got bogged down in here.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: TheMalandro on June 05, 2018, 10:34:14 AM
"In a document on Companies House dated February 2, 48 hours after the transfer window shut, the club sold on future income due on Amavi and Sanchez to the Australian Macquarie bank"

From the Daily Record.

It's going to be a very interesting summer and season.

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ozzjim on June 05, 2018, 10:39:14 AM
Which means we will have lost money on that. Sounds a bit odd. I'm sure there's an accountant or 2 that will tell us what the implications of it are.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Risso on June 05, 2018, 10:50:45 AM
"In a document on Companies House dated February 2, 48 hours after the transfer window shut, the club sold on future income due on Amavi and Sanchez to the Australian Macquarie bank"

From the Daily Record.

It's going to be a very interesting summer and season.



That sounds like a standard factoring arrangement to be honest.  Although I can't see where it's mentioned on Companies House to have a closer look.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: andyh on June 05, 2018, 11:19:46 AM
I read a very valid point somewhere that said something along the lines of:-

“when the outcome of a single football match sends one club into financial nervana and the losing club into (what looks like) financial meltdown, then something is not right with the system”.

I think they are right.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: TheMalandro on June 05, 2018, 11:20:14 AM
"In a document on Companies House dated February 2, 48 hours after the transfer window shut, the club sold on future income due on Amavi and Sanchez to the Australian Macquarie bank"

From the Daily Record.

It's going to be a very interesting summer and season.



That sounds like a standard factoring arrangement to be honest.  Although I can't see where it's mentioned on Companies House to have a closer look.

I can't see it either, weird.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Risso on June 05, 2018, 11:30:26 AM
It's not unusual for companies to take such measures to smooth cash flow when they know something is coming in, but for a company like Villa it's a little bit odd I'd say.  If Tony has got oodles of cash, why doesn't he just give the club a short term sub until outstanding transfer fee installments from other clubs are paid, rather than paying a percentage of the fee to a bank in factoring charges?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sirlordbaltimore on June 05, 2018, 11:34:01 AM


I know absolutely nothing about accounts, but that does sound a bit worrying to me
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AsTallAsLions on June 05, 2018, 11:37:02 AM
Hmmm. Tony Tony Tony. What have you been up to.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: andyh on June 05, 2018, 11:39:18 AM
If you know nothing about accounting why would anyone be worried about some accounting practices ?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Risso on June 05, 2018, 11:42:05 AM


I know absolutely nothing about accounts, but that does sound a bit worrying to me

Invoice discounting and factoring are used by companies to smooth their cash flow.  They basically sell their debts to the bank/factoring comany for a small percentage of the amount outstanding, in order to get the cash in more quickly.  It tends to happen where a company has say, 30 day payment terms with its customers, but has to pay staff or suppliers sooner than that.  You often see it where a small company is dealing with a much bigger one, eg Tesco suppliers, who are being held to difficult credit terms, eg 90 days, or smaller companies who are in their first few years of operation.  When I was an auditor for PwC, I used to audit a few factoring companies and banks who provided this sort of finance, and never saw a company like Villa using their services.  It's not necessarily a big deal, but you know, something else to make you go "hmmmmmm".
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Lastfootstamper on June 05, 2018, 12:10:58 PM
The mirror (https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/aston-villa-put-alan-hutton-12648187.amp) have now picked up this story, with the added information that we weren't due the final instalment of €4m of the Amavi fee until July '19. We hadn't had the first one yet, either.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Drummond on June 05, 2018, 12:19:37 PM
Hello Mirror journo. Nice to see you trawling around for stories
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: pauliewalnuts on June 05, 2018, 12:26:07 PM
It's not unusual for companies to take such measures to smooth cash flow when they know something is coming in, but for a company like Villa it's a little bit odd I'd say.  If Tony has got oodles of cash, why doesn't he just give the club a short term sub until outstanding transfer fee installments from other clubs are paid, rather than paying a percentage of the fee to a bank in factoring charges?

Indeed. It looks somewhat concerning.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: David_Nab on June 05, 2018, 12:27:54 PM
Well it doesn't sound good does it .....
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: tomd2103 on June 05, 2018, 12:28:06 PM
I read a very valid point somewhere that said something along the lines of:-

“when the outcome of a single football match sends one club into financial nervana and the losing club into (what looks like) financial meltdown, then something is not right with the system”.

I think they are right.

Also something wrong with a system where billions of pounds are generated by a particular sport each year yet grassroots facilities in that sport remain a substandard in many cases. 
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: eddiemunster on June 05, 2018, 12:35:06 PM
31 pages so far on FFP, and no one is the wiser.
All I can say, is why are we worrying??
The shite down the road and about 9 or 10 other clubs are rumoured to be in the same boat, but have we heard anything from their fans??? Have we feck!!!
When the REAL NEWS breaks, we can see where we're at, until then lets all CALM THE FECK DOWN and start bullshitting ourselves that ENGERLAND are going to win the World Cup!!Lol.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on June 05, 2018, 12:36:43 PM
I thought it was three, but seems not. They drop to £9.6m for each of the third and fourth years, from what I can see. A still tidy sum, but half of what we received in year two. What saving are we looking at with the departures of Gabby, Terry and the loan players?

It used to be 4 years, now it's 3 so this season will be our last payment.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on June 05, 2018, 01:04:01 PM
"In a document on Companies House dated February 2, 48 hours after the transfer window shut, the club sold on future income due on Amavi and Sanchez to the Australian Macquarie bank"

From the Daily Record.

It's going to be a very interesting summer and season.



That sounds like a standard factoring arrangement to be honest.  Although I can't see where it's mentioned on Companies House to have a closer look.
Nothing standard about this, around 45000 company’s use Recivables Finance in the UK based on B2B whole turnover arrangements. Macquarie are not one of the standard providers.
This is a transaction based arrangement  FutureFunds Flow, Discounted Revenue , there are various terms to describe these facilities.
There is nothing wrong or illegal about this but the money will be a lot more expensive than a Bank loan for example.



Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Lastfootstamper on June 05, 2018, 01:04:20 PM
Isn't it three for clubs relegated from the season after we went down, ones that had benefited from the increased telly deal?

From a legal help site,  From the 2016/17 season, the payment system was changed so that the money will be distributed to relegated clubs over three years rather than four. (https://www.inbrief.co.uk/football-law/premier-league-parachute-payment/)
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AsTallAsLions on June 05, 2018, 01:05:47 PM
Isn't it three for clubs relegated from the season after we went down, ones that had benefited from the increased telly deal?

From a legal help site,  From the 2016/17 season, the payment system was changed so that the money will be distributed to relegated clubs over three years rather than four. (https://www.inbrief.co.uk/football-law/premier-league-parachute-payment/)

Yep.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on June 05, 2018, 01:16:23 PM
Yep, that's why I said it's 3 now ;)

Apparently if you go up and are relegated after 1 season you only get 2 payments.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Lastfootstamper on June 05, 2018, 01:19:44 PM
So clubs coming down now, assuming they weren't massively in the red beforehand, can* bankroll it and lump the lot on going back up first time of asking. Which makes me wonder what state 'boro, Hull and Sunderland were in, and have they cautiously settled in for a stay?

*I in no way endorse this as a sensible thing to do.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on June 05, 2018, 01:22:53 PM
I assume the first 2 payments are the same amount as a club receiving 3 payments receive, but they don't get the third payment.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: VinnieChase84 on June 05, 2018, 01:27:28 PM
Usually there’s no smoke without fire and the more coming out about us and Dr is very concerning.
I do think he wants rid and has run into financial issues which is making the day to day harder. Let’s be honest, no one knows anything about Xia or his ‘wealth’
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Clampy on June 05, 2018, 01:34:18 PM
Usually there’s no smoke without fire and the more coming out about us and Dr is very concerning.
I do think he wants rid and has run into financial issues which is making the day to day harder. Let’s be honest, no one knows anything about Xia or his ‘wealth’

If you don't know anything about him, why do you think he wants rid? There's no evidence of it really.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: VinnieChase84 on June 05, 2018, 01:42:56 PM
Usually there’s no smoke without fire and the more coming out about us and Dr is very concerning.
I do think he wants rid and has run into financial issues which is making the day to day harder. Let’s be honest, no one knows anything about Xia or his ‘wealth’

If you don't know anything about him, why do you think he wants rid? There's no evidence of it really.

Just a gut feeling on this. No actual context. Last year and his first in charge when any articles or press were questioning his intent he would always fire back. Just seems odd we are now having specific articles claiming he needs to sell/has no cash and yet he doesn’t respond to them!?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Lastfootstamper on June 05, 2018, 01:52:17 PM
I've seen nothing specific which says he needs to sell nor has no cash. Plenty of regurgitated speculation, but not specific.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: David_Nab on June 05, 2018, 01:55:09 PM
Usually there’s no smoke without fire and the more coming out about us and Dr is very concerning.
I do think he wants rid and has run into financial issues which is making the day to day harder. Let’s be honest, no one knows anything about Xia or his ‘wealth’

If you don't know anything about him, why do you think he wants rid? There's no evidence of it really.

I'm not sure he wants rid but im also not sure he has the collateral or the expertise to take us forward ..
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Lastfootstamper on June 05, 2018, 02:00:37 PM
I'm flabbergasted, as I get to peer deeper, at just how hand-to-mouth all clubs at every level exist. I know they're not expected to be profitable for the sake of being profitable, but it's mental! Today's today, and tomorrow can go hang.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: A Northern Soul on June 05, 2018, 02:23:31 PM
"In a document on Companies House dated February 2, 48 hours after the transfer window shut, the club sold on future income due on Amavi and Sanchez to the Australian Macquarie bank"

From the Daily Record.

It's going to be a very interesting summer and season.



That sounds like a standard factoring arrangement to be honest.  Although I can't see where it's mentioned on Companies House to have a closer look.

What is does suggest though is that we’ve cashed on our chips on any Amavi money already, so any netting off of the FFP shortfall with this cash can be forgotten
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on June 05, 2018, 02:32:40 PM
"In a document on Companies House dated February 2, 48 hours after the transfer window shut, the club sold on future income due on Amavi and Sanchez to the Australian Macquarie bank"

From the Daily Record.

It's going to be a very interesting summer and season.



That sounds like a standard factoring arrangement to be honest.  Although I can't see where it's mentioned on Companies House to have a closer look.

What is does suggest though is that we’ve cashed on our chips on any Amavi money already, so any netting off of the FFP shortfall with this cash can be forgotten
It should make no difference to FFP.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Gareth on June 05, 2018, 02:40:24 PM
One thing Keith Wyness mentioned when was doing the forums earlier in year and was transcribed by Bham Mail was;

"Financial Fair Play is a very boring and complex subject. The politics around it are also potentially changing right now.“

Does that possibly mean that the FFP rules might have changed / be changing?

Clutching at straws :-)
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: David_Nab on June 05, 2018, 04:14:53 PM
One thing Keith Wyness mentioned when was doing the forums earlier in year and was transcribed by Bham Mail was;

"Financial Fair Play is a very boring and complex subject. The politics around it are also potentially changing right now.“

Does that possibly mean that the FFP rules might have changed / be changing?

Clutching at straws :-)

There was a meeting of clubs to discuss it in March it needed one more club to vote against it , I'm assuming it didn't go our way as nothing more as been said about it
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PaulWinch again on June 05, 2018, 05:00:16 PM
In light of current events is anyone starting to think FFP is a smokescreen?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: frank black on June 05, 2018, 05:01:28 PM
Tony Sly me thinks
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: frank black on June 05, 2018, 05:04:47 PM
I will be very surprised if we are not officially for sale by the end of the week
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Lastfootstamper on June 05, 2018, 05:14:38 PM
In light of current events is anyone starting to think FFP is a smokescreen?

No. I'm fully satisfied that our wage bill is astronomical for where we are, and it'd be a massive millstone for whoever owned us and was looking to take us forward, given the current ffp framework.

All the other stuff is incidental, and if ffp was supposed to be a smokescreen, it's not working very well, is it?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt Collins on June 05, 2018, 05:26:16 PM
In light of current events is anyone starting to think FFP is a smokescreen?

Its not just a smokescreen. Its a real problem

But I agree it could be a convenient excuse

Worrying times.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Tony Boucher on June 06, 2018, 09:40:30 AM
Does anyone know what the likely punishment is for failing the FFP test?  If it's a fine, or a transfer embargo, surely that's a price worth paying for keeping the family silver for another season?  Otherwise we will be another Forest or Leeds.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt Collins on June 06, 2018, 09:50:03 AM
Theres a range

Bigger risk is administration driven by short term cash flow. Xia apparently has been putting in £4m per month but can't get his money out of the country.

Administration comes with a 12 point reduction. That plus a fire sale and only two months till the transfer window closes spells potential relegation if you start badly
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Drummond on June 06, 2018, 10:09:26 AM
31 pages so far on FFP, and no one is the wiser.
All I can say, is why are we worrying??
The shite down the road and about 9 or 10 other clubs are rumoured to be in the same boat, but have we heard anything from their fans??? Have we feck!!!
When the REAL NEWS breaks, we can see where we're at, until then lets all CALM THE FECK DOWN and start bullshitting ourselves that ENGERLAND are going to win the World Cup!!Lol.

Has the REAL NEWS broken now?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Chris_Jephcott on June 06, 2018, 10:25:47 AM
Just a thought from this side: the legal aspect...

ANNEX XII: Voluntary agreements for break-even requirement
A. Principles
1. A club may apply to the UEFA Club Financial Control Body investigatory chamber
to enter into a voluntary agreement with the aim of complying with the break-even
requirement.
2. A club is eligible to apply to enter into a voluntary agreement if it:
i) has been granted a valid licence to enter the UEFA club competitions by
its national licensor but has not qualified for a UEFA club competition in the
season that precedes the entry into force of the voluntary agreement; or
ii) has qualified for a UEFA club competition and fulfils the break-even
requirement in the monitoring period that precedes the entry into force of
the voluntary agreement; or
iii) has been subject to a significant change in ownership and/or control within
the 12 months preceding the application deadline.


Could point iii above be what we are strategically angling towards at the moment?? Change ownership, abandon FPP?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: David_Nab on June 06, 2018, 10:30:09 AM
Just a thought from this side: the legal aspect...

ANNEX XII: Voluntary agreements for break-even requirement
A. Principles
1. A club may apply to the UEFA Club Financial Control Body investigatory chamber
to enter into a voluntary agreement with the aim of complying with the break-even
requirement.
2. A club is eligible to apply to enter into a voluntary agreement if it:
i) has been granted a valid licence to enter the UEFA club competitions by
its national licensor but has not qualified for a UEFA club competition in the
season that precedes the entry into force of the voluntary agreement; or
ii) has qualified for a UEFA club competition and fulfils the break-even
requirement in the monitoring period that precedes the entry into force of
the voluntary agreement; or
iii) has been subject to a significant change in ownership and/or control within
the 12 months preceding the application deadline.


Could point iii above be what we are strategically angling towards at the moment?? Change ownership, abandon FPP?

Looks like it could be an option ..hopefully
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on June 06, 2018, 12:18:33 PM
Just a thought from this side: the legal aspect...

ANNEX XII: Voluntary agreements for break-even requirement
A. Principles
1. A club may apply to the UEFA Club Financial Control Body investigatory chamber
to enter into a voluntary agreement with the aim of complying with the break-even
requirement.
2. A club is eligible to apply to enter into a voluntary agreement if it:
i) has been granted a valid licence to enter the UEFA club competitions by
its national licensor but has not qualified for a UEFA club competition in the
season that precedes the entry into force of the voluntary agreement; or
ii) has qualified for a UEFA club competition and fulfils the break-even
requirement in the monitoring period that precedes the entry into force of
the voluntary agreement; or
iii) has been subject to a significant change in ownership and/or control within
the 12 months preceding the application deadline.


Could point iii above be what we are strategically angling towards at the moment?? Change ownership, abandon FPP?

Those are the UEFA rules - unless the Anglo Italian is coming back I'm not sure we'll need to worry about these rules for a while.

The key thing is whether there's a similar clause in the EFL rules.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: eddiemunster on June 06, 2018, 09:22:14 PM
31 pages so far on FFP, and no one is the wiser.
All I can say, is why are we worrying??
The shite down the road and about 9 or 10 other clubs are rumoured to be in the same boat, but have we heard anything from their fans??? Have we feck!!!
When the REAL NEWS breaks, we can see where we're at, until then lets all CALM THE FECK DOWN and start bullshitting ourselves that ENGERLAND are going to win the World Cup!!Lol.

Has the REAL NEWS broken now?


Exactly, has the REAL NEWS broken. That is;
If you believe the SkySports News "We understand...." and the BBC "sources etc.." and a certain SVC and his "3 sources" then yes the real news has broken.
Until its in an official statement from the club that we are being sold, wound up or going into administration and players x,y and z have been sold, then sorry I'm not buying into the clickbait bullshit, and as I said before, maybe we should all take a step back, take a deep breath and wait.
And while we're waiting, look forward to the press and media ripping into our national teams manager and players as soon as we drop a bollock in the World Cup.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: berneboy on June 13, 2018, 05:52:43 PM
BBC days PSG has to sell 60m euros of players to fit within ffp rules.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/44474415
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Bren'd on June 13, 2018, 06:05:09 PM
It will be interesting to see how they respond.  Do nothing and take a derisory fine or sell a reserve player to a Qatari team for €60 million?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: jwarry on June 13, 2018, 06:08:34 PM
As its turned out FFP seems to have been a convenient excuse all along......
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Toronto Villa on July 27, 2018, 11:31:19 AM
QPR have lost their claim that FFP is unlawful and will have to pay £42m in penalties having agreed to settle.

https://twitter.com/bbcsport/status/1022784076154056704?s=12
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Woofles The Wonder Dog on July 27, 2018, 11:32:49 AM
That’s got to sting.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on July 27, 2018, 11:44:13 AM
Won’t that mean their owner the Malaysian chap will have to lend them the £42m as a soft loan?  Thus meaning their losses could get worse?!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: David_Nab on July 27, 2018, 11:49:36 AM
The settlement includes a £17m fine, paying £3m of the EFL's legal costs and the agreement from club shareholders to write off £22m of outstanding loans.

January 2019 transfer embargo


The £17mil fine is paid of 10 years as well so I don't actually think its worked out too bad for them
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: cdbullyweefan on July 27, 2018, 11:49:36 AM
Will the £42 million count against them for the purposes of calculating their next FFP period, thus making them likely to fail again? Does this relate to the era before they got promoted to the Premier League or is this under the new rules?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: chrisw1 on July 27, 2018, 11:52:07 AM
That has to be a major warning to us.  I presume we are banking on Jack to sort FFP for us.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AsTallAsLions on July 27, 2018, 11:54:11 AM
So somebody sticks their neck out to challenge how lawful FFP is and gets an unjust £42m fine. I have no love for QPR whatsoever, but it's all very hard to swallow for me. Lots of comments on that tweet saying it wouldn't happen to a top tier club, and how true is that? All designed to protect the Premier League and the sexy Sky clubs. Awful.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: jwarry on July 27, 2018, 12:01:31 PM
How much did QPR overshoot FFP by. Does anybody know?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: guyavfc on July 27, 2018, 12:03:46 PM
I don’t think QPR’s fine is actually that bad as it’s paid over 10 years. Will be very interesting to see if we decide to gamble.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: jwarry on July 27, 2018, 12:07:02 PM
I don’t think QPR’s fine is actually that bad as it’s paid over 10 years. Will be very interesting to see if we decide to gamble.

If by gamble you mean take a £17m fine as opposed to selling Jack for £20m instead of £40m or just keeping him, where is the gamble?!?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: David_Nab on July 27, 2018, 12:08:00 PM
I don’t think QPR’s fine is actually that bad as it’s paid over 10 years. Will be very interesting to see if we decide to gamble.

Yes and some of it is a share right off as far I can tell so its 17mil over 10 years so 1.7ml a year and a 1 window embargo

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: jwarry on July 27, 2018, 12:10:32 PM
Unfortunately this’ll prove Doc was a phoney all along and gambled on going up with the bit of dosh he had. I for one didn’t want to believe that but it’s clear now FFP was a smokescreen
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AsTallAsLions on July 27, 2018, 12:16:42 PM
Unfortunately this’ll prove Doc was a phoney all along and gambled on going up with the bit of dosh he had. I for one didn’t want to believe that but it’s clear now FFP was a smokescreen

I had suspicions around that too, but in fairness I don't think it's self-evident yet. The new owners have done nothing yet to suggest that we aren't still trying to comply with FFP and reduce our losses, and until such a time as there is a statement made - either explicit or implicit, such as retaining Grealish despite a serious bid coming in - we can't assume or deduce that IMO.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Leicester_Villian on July 27, 2018, 12:18:26 PM
Seems if you simply ignore FFP and pay a fine of 4 million a year there is little risk ...we have been paying that amount for Micah Richards past two seasons
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on July 27, 2018, 12:24:50 PM
£3m in costs. 5% bonus on that would go down well. Be fuck tonne of Counsel fees mind.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: footyskillz on July 27, 2018, 12:30:50 PM
Yeah pay the fine once Villa are up. Have the tools to take us up if we can just push on.

More chance of going up by keeping this group of players and owners can afford it.

If the chessie staying on and signing a contract is true then some indication where we are at
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AsTallAsLions on July 27, 2018, 01:08:35 PM
This is Villa. You know we would be the one club to get the points deduction. EFL would lick their lips at making an example of us.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Brassneck on July 27, 2018, 01:16:04 PM
£3m in costs. 5% bonus on that would go down well. Be fuck tonne of Counsel fees mind.

The costs were due to QPR challenging the decision weren't they? It has dragged on over a 4 year period.

Again, the costs will be spread over a long period so will not impact too greatly.

I wonder how the money will ever be paid if the club are permitted to operate at a £39 million loss over a 3 year period. How do you enforce it against a business that is operating at a loss? Your only option would be to apply to get the company struck off.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on July 27, 2018, 01:18:44 PM
You wind the motherfuckers up.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: paul_e on July 27, 2018, 01:25:00 PM
This is Villa. You know we would be the one club to get the points deduction. EFL would lick their lips at making an example of us.

I'll go on record as saying I don't think anyone will be docked points under the current setup, if it has no effect (i.e. a club in 8th drops to 10th) then it's pointless but if it takes someone out of a promotion/play off place or puts them into a relegation place then it would obviously go to appeal, given the tight timescales of everything you'd need to have the appeal heard between the sanction being applied (probably in April) and the playoffs/end of season.  That's a tiny window for that process given the 4 year precedent above.  Even being a couple of weeks late could have huge ramifications with teams not knowing which league they'll be in and playoff games being cancelled until the teams can be confirmed.

If they put specifics into the rules (if you're over by £xm then we'll deduct y points and a sliding scale of values) then it's enforceable but the current vague nature of it means the clubs would hold all the cards.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Brassneck on July 27, 2018, 01:25:47 PM
You wind the motherfuckers up.

Exactly but the EFL wouldn't do that would they?  It is a ridiculous situation.

The only people who might are the lawyers involved in the proceedings. Even then, they may prefer £300,000 a year for 10 years as an alternative.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: old man villa fan on July 27, 2018, 02:32:13 PM
This is Villa. You know we would be the one club to get the points deduction. EFL would lick their lips at making an example of us.

I'll go on record as saying I don't think anyone will be docked points under the current setup, if it has no effect (i.e. a club in 8th drops to 10th) then it's pointless but if it takes someone out of a promotion/play off place or puts them into a relegation place then it would obviously go to appeal, given the tight timescales of everything you'd need to have the appeal heard between the sanction being applied (probably in April) and the playoffs/end of season.  That's a tiny window for that process given the 4 year precedent above.  Even being a couple of weeks late could have huge ramifications with teams not knowing which league they'll be in and playoff games being cancelled until the teams can be confirmed.

If they put specifics into the rules (if you're over by £xm then we'll deduct y points and a sliding scale of values) then it's enforceable but the current vague nature of it means the clubs would hold all the cards.

That's how I see it but the club would seek a court injunction to prevent the deduction until a case was heard in court.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt Collins on July 27, 2018, 02:43:25 PM
As has been said countless times. The rules have been toughened precisely because of what QPR and other clubs did. But they have to be punished according to previous rules 

I'd say this is a signal that they're pretty serious
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: The Edge on July 27, 2018, 02:57:35 PM
This whole ffp malarkey is way too complicated. Surely they could devise a simpler more transparent set of rules so those of us who aren't a legal and financial boffin can understand what it's all about.  Also what happens to all the fines?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: paul_e on July 27, 2018, 02:59:06 PM
As has been said countless times. The rules have been toughened precisely because of what QPR and other clubs did. But they have to be punished according to previous rules 

I'd say this is a signal that they're pretty serious

I think the fines and transfer sanctions will be but as I say, points deductions are either meaningless or massively punishing to the point that they would be contested, for that reason I just don't see it happening, and blocking a promotion definitely won't happen.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AsTallAsLions on July 27, 2018, 03:02:28 PM
As has been said countless times. The rules have been toughened precisely because of what QPR and other clubs did. But they have to be punished according to previous rules 

I'd say this is a signal that they're pretty serious

I think the fines and transfer sanctions will be but as I say, points deductions are either meaningless or massively punishing to the point that they would be contested, for that reason I just don't see it happening, and blocking a promotion definitely won't happen.

Points deductions are never meaningless. Really don't understand your previous argument either. They wouldn't apply the deductions as a penalty in the first place if it was to be overturned on appeal. Whatever they do in this space will stick, because it has to, otherwise the whole league laughs at it/them. It's literally a waste of their time and resources to do anything that can be easily overturned.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: paul_e on July 27, 2018, 03:18:30 PM
As has been said countless times. The rules have been toughened precisely because of what QPR and other clubs did. But they have to be punished according to previous rules 

I'd say this is a signal that they're pretty serious

I think the fines and transfer sanctions will be but as I say, points deductions are either meaningless or massively punishing to the point that they would be contested, for that reason I just don't see it happening, and blocking a promotion definitely won't happen.

Points deductions are never meaningless. Really don't understand your previous argument either. They wouldn't apply the deductions as a penalty in the first place if it was to be overturned on appeal. Whatever they do in this space will stick, because it has to, otherwise the whole league laughs at it/them. It's literally a waste of their time and resources to do anything that can be easily overturned.

It's meaningless because prize money, isn't based on league places so dropping from 7th to 21st (and anything in between) is irrelevant so giving a points deduction to those teams is a worthless punishment. Whereas for team who drop out of the playoffs or into the relegation places that points deduction could be crippling and have far reaching consequences for the club.  The argument would therefore be that, because the punishment is decided by a panel with no precedent or guidelines in place, clubs are being punished unfairly based on either who they are or on their league position.  I'm not saying they'd win but it would be something that could be going through courts for a fair while, and that creates huge problems for the leagues and the clubs involved. They can only avoid this if they provide documentation to the clubs giving specific details of what infringement would instigate a deduction and the number of points involved.

Look at the deduction for going into admin, no contests it because it's very clear but, in this circumstance, the vague nature of the ruling is in the favour of the clubs not the league.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on July 27, 2018, 03:58:00 PM
I agree, the lack of precedent or specifics means that a points deduction leading to relegation or lack of promotion would without doubt be challenged.
We now have owners that have the ammunition to take this on.
They do have good grounds to calculate serious fines based on the QPR ruling though.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on August 08, 2018, 08:47:57 PM
Given all the inward transfer activity, seems that the new owners fancy their lawyers over the EFL's when it comes to FFP!!!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: four fornicholl on August 08, 2018, 08:51:02 PM
Given all the inward transfer activity, seems that the new owners fancy their lawyers over the EFL's when it comes to FFP!!!
Or two very rich gamblers.Read into that what you wish, 40 mill or so between them isn't much.God forbid.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: brian green on August 08, 2018, 08:55:18 PM
To paraphrase what the great man said  "would you want to bet against them?"
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: four fornicholl on August 08, 2018, 08:58:39 PM
To paraphrase what the great man said  "would you want to bet against them?"
Not a chance  :)
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: b23 on August 15, 2018, 11:35:02 AM
An interesting article about FFP on the BBC.

Record TV rights deal saw gap from Premier League to EFL widen to £133m in first year.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/44981103
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: OCD on August 15, 2018, 12:38:01 PM
"This loss is not the same as the accounting losses published by clubs, as some costs - such as infrastructure, academy, community and women's football - are excluded."
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Cleybrooke on August 15, 2018, 02:05:00 PM
And that is our get out jail free card.

The figures for the 2015-16 period show that with an operating loss of £81.3m.  Which is were our "£40m FFP hole" comes from.

However, the club’s statement states losses of £79.6m due to “exceptional items” for “for the impairment of tangible fixed assets and intangible assets”.

As the BBC has stated, (as in Appendix D of the EFL FFP rules) these don't count!

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Hookeysmith on August 15, 2018, 02:15:21 PM
It seems that financial accounting is the new rock n roll - whoo hoo






I don't have a clue what any of it means  :(
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: paul_e on August 15, 2018, 02:34:39 PM
And that is our get out jail free card.

The figures for the 2015-16 period show that with an operating loss of £81.3m.  Which is were our "£40m FFP hole" comes from.

However, the club’s statement states losses of £79.6m due to “exceptional items” for “for the impairment of tangible fixed assets and intangible assets”.

As the BBC has stated, (as in Appendix D of the EFL FFP rules) these don't count!



actually that was our explanation for the last 2 seasons, those figures have no impact on this years assessment.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on August 15, 2018, 06:46:11 PM
The figures for the 2015-16 period show that with an operating loss of £81.3m.  Which is were our "£40m FFP hole" comes from.


No it isn't.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Hookeysmith on August 15, 2018, 08:05:29 PM
There is no way our very rich business men would have even blinked in our direction if they had not had a team of experts looking into every financial nook and crannie and ways to not incur any penalties with FFP. Men like this amass this sort of wealth not by fortune but by managing detail.

It did not take long for the EFL team to speak with them, listen to thier plan and ratify the deal.

It may still take a while to have full financial support from them but I'm sure it is already being planned for
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Mister E on August 15, 2018, 08:36:27 PM
Record TV rights deal saw gap from Premier League to EFL widen to £133m in first year.
The gap = the drawbridge between the rich top 6-ish and the rest.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Marlon From Bearwood on August 15, 2018, 11:13:59 PM
There is no way our very rich business men would have even blinked in our direction if they had not had a team of experts looking into every financial nook and crannie and ways to not incur any penalties with FFP. Men like this amass this sort of wealth not by fortune but by managing detail.

It did not take long for the EFL team to speak with them, listen to thier plan and ratify the deal.

It may still take a while to have full financial support from them but I'm sure it is already being planned for

Whilst driving home from VP last Saturday I listened to Pat Murphy say the Villa takeover incredibly only took 6 days as the new owners had 30 accountants and lawyers working 24 hours a day reviewing the accounts etc to get the deal done. He also said the Wigan manager had informed him that their takeover took a year.

I concluded that these guys mean business and know what they are doing.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sickbeggar on August 15, 2018, 11:28:02 PM
Well if their clever accountants have found a way round FFP then explain the transfers..... If you have a fortune available then transfers happen because you meet the inflated fees asked.  you're certainly not struggling to buy a championship quality centre half. I don't see any evidence we aren't going to follow fpp
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Percy McCarthy on August 16, 2018, 07:33:24 AM
Well if their clever accountants have found a way round FFP then explain the transfers..... If you have a fortune available then transfers happen because you meet the inflated fees asked.  you're certainly not struggling to buy a championship quality centre half. I don't see any evidence we aren't going to follow fpp

We probably are... sort of. It will take a while to get the bullshit sponsorships in place that will allow us to spend more freely.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: DB on August 16, 2018, 08:29:38 AM
Well if their clever accountants have found a way round FFP then explain the transfers..... If you have a fortune available then transfers happen because you meet the inflated fees asked.  you're certainly not struggling to buy a championship quality centre half. I don't see any evidence we aren't going to follow fpp

We probably are... sort of. It will take a while to get the bullshit sponsorships in place that will allow us to spend more freely.

You mean we could end up with a boiler doing dance moves on the touch line like some other club?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Drummond on August 16, 2018, 10:36:42 AM
If it's a wealthy boiler I'm all for it.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: DB on August 16, 2018, 11:18:18 AM
Yeah  Bosch /  Worcester, not your Pottertons. Show us your money.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Hookeysmith on August 16, 2018, 01:32:13 PM
Well if their clever accountants have found a way round FFP then explain the transfers..... If you have a fortune available then transfers happen because you meet the inflated fees asked.  you're certainly not struggling to buy a championship quality centre half. I don't see any evidence we aren't going to follow fpp

As I said we may have to play this slowly at the moment and I would suggest the last thing we need now is to start throwing money around - these guys will have to show a measured and business like approach over time. Getting into the Prem opens a completely new set of rules and doors but we still cannot just buy our way there
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: mrfuse on September 08, 2018, 09:50:41 AM
Birmingham City, who are 20th in the Championship with four points, are facing a 12-point deduction for breaking rules on spending, in a landmark case for the English Football League.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2018/09/07/exclusive-birmingham-facing-12-point-deduction-breaking-efl/

I just thought I would drag this back up as it has obvious implications regarding our own situation.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on September 08, 2018, 10:02:59 AM
Not quite the same.

The Noses have really pissed the league off. They were under embargo and still tried to sign and register Pederson.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: mrfuse on September 08, 2018, 11:04:16 AM
Yes I agree and I'm not really comparing their situation with ours.

But with FFP looming over us and many other teams its interesting to see how this pans out.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: paul_e on September 08, 2018, 11:04:36 AM
Not quite the same.

The Noses have really pissed the league off. They were under embargo and still tried to sign and register Pederson.

Yep, this is a follow on sanction because they ignored the first one, it's really not the same thing. I can understand a points deduction in this case and, if they included the threat of a points deduction (and the number of points involved) when placing the transfer embargo then Blues really haven't got a case to argue against it.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: eamonn on September 08, 2018, 11:10:28 AM
He's one of our own, he's one of our own, journo John Perry - he's one of our own!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Fasth56 on September 08, 2018, 10:09:25 PM
Not quite the same.

The Noses have really pissed the league off. They were under embargo and still tried to sign and register Pederson.

Yep, this is a follow on sanction because they ignored the first one, it's really not the same thing. I can understand a points deduction in this case and, if they included the threat of a points deduction (and the number of points involved) when placing the transfer embargo then Blues really haven't got a case to argue against it.

Discussing their own problems with FFP, it took them a full page and a half to get round to talking about us.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Dave P on September 09, 2018, 09:26:20 AM
Aston Villa

- Have not failed FFP
- Have cooperated with authorities when minor embargo was sanctioned.
- Have new owners with a business plan to ease issues.

Birmingham City

- have failed FFP
- Were placed under embargo and tried to register a player

There is no comparison but still they try.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: chrisw1 on September 09, 2018, 02:27:20 PM
I keep reading we haven't breached FFP, which is great.  But are we on course to at the end of this season?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: jwarry on September 22, 2018, 09:48:45 AM
Mat Hughes reporting in today’s Times that we are keeping a close eye on what happens to the rags as we are potentially facing the same punishment ie 12 points, albeit next season.  Does this mean we are gambling on going up again this season?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: VinnieChase84 on September 22, 2018, 10:37:21 AM
Mat Hughes reporting in today’s Times that we are keeping a close eye on what happens to the rags as we are potentially facing the same punishment ie 12 points, albeit next season.  Does this mean we are gambling on going up again this season?

Announcing to the league in March that we are selling jack come season end for £25m would bide us a little time ;-)
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on September 22, 2018, 11:13:13 PM
Aston Villa could face a points deduction next season if they are found in breach of financial rules.

According to a report in The Times, Villa could be docked 12 Championship points next season.


It comes as rivals Birmingham City prepare to face a disciplinary panel on charges of breaking the EFL's profit and sustainability rules.

The Times claims Villa are also set to face chares for breaking the spending cap.

"Villa have posted an aggregate loss of £37.1 million during their two seasons in the second tier, giving them very little room to comply with rules that permit losses of £39 million over a three-year period before submitting their next results to the EFL in March," states the report in The Times.

The reduction in Villa's parachute payments this season from £33 million to £15 million and transfer proceeds smaller than last summer could also hinder Villa's cause.

If the breach is more than £15 million over three years then under new EFL guidelines Villa could face a 12 point deduction in the 2019-20 season.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: A Northern Soul on September 23, 2018, 12:11:56 AM
If true this only emphasises further the absolute criticality in going up this season. Tick tock
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PaulWinch again on September 23, 2018, 07:30:58 AM
Well sort of, I reckon at the moment Bruce is worth about the equivalent of a 20
point penalty.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Marlon From Bearwood on September 23, 2018, 09:17:30 AM
So apparently we are paying Bolasie wages in full - £80k per week!

I’m no expert on FFP but that has to be a concern.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: andyh on September 23, 2018, 09:25:07 AM
FFP is such a big deal. I can’t belive that our new owners are so naive or stupid that they have not performed all of the necessary due diligence and analysis that makes sure we will not break the rules.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt Collins on September 23, 2018, 10:53:04 AM
You really wouldn't think they'd just do the same mistake again

But I have to say I don't understand how it isn't going to be a big concern. We've got almost no headroom to make further losses this season I think - last season we were losing £5m per month by the end of it and that was on higher parachute payments

The 'sell Grealish' card isn't going to raise enough now, ditto Chester Kodjia or adomah

But as I say you just have to think the new owners haven't gone for shit or bust again. I just can't figure out how
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sickbeggar on September 23, 2018, 11:57:00 AM
So apparently we are paying Bolasie wages in full - £80k per week!

I’m no expert on FFP but that has to be a concern.


Just a bit! Besides you have to ask if that 3 and a half million outlay could have been spent more wisely on signing a permanent centre half or indeed other positions. At least if we buy them its not "dead" money.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Clampy on September 23, 2018, 12:00:55 PM
So apparently we are paying Bolasie wages in full - £80k per week!

I’m no expert on FFP but that has to be a concern.


Just a bit! Besides you have to ask if that 3 and a half million outlay could have been spent more wisely on signing a permanent centre half or indeed other positions. At least if we buy them its not "dead" money.

I'd be surprised if that was the case bearing in mind we couldn't afford to bring Terry back in for the same reason. I'd say we're possibly paying half.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sickbeggar on September 23, 2018, 12:06:23 PM
So apparently we are paying Bolasie wages in full - £80k per week!

I’m no expert on FFP but that has to be a concern.


Just a bit! Besides you have to ask if that 3 and a half million outlay could have been spent more wisely on signing a permanent centre half or indeed other positions. At least if we buy them its not "dead" money.

I'd be surprised if that was the case bearing in mind we couldn't afford to bring Terry back in for the same reason. I'd say we're possibly paying half.


I hope so clampy. I can see the advantages of using the loan market, and give Bruce his due it worked pretty well for him last season, but its still a hell of a lot of money we've spent over the last couple of seasons with not one playing asset to show for it
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SoccerHQ on September 23, 2018, 12:14:55 PM
So apparently we are paying Bolasie wages in full - £80k per week!

I’m no expert on FFP but that has to be a concern.

That can't be true surely?!

I imagine for example we're paying pretty much all of McCormack's wages still, it's a regular thing when high earning players are loaned out to leagues below that the parent club pays vast majority of their salary.

Please don't tell me this is another promotion or bust style gamble as we did last season. Hopefully the owners didn't have the same brainwave as a few posters on here in early August saying if we kept Grealish we'd win the league.

The option was there to sell him for 20m and significantly lessen the liabilities we have to FFP.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: VillaLoyal on September 23, 2018, 06:20:48 PM
Aston Villa could face a points deduction next season if they are found in breach of financial rules.

According to a report in The Times, Villa could be docked 12 Championship points next season.


It comes as rivals Birmingham City prepare to face a disciplinary panel on charges of breaking the EFL's profit and sustainability rules.

The Times claims Villa are also set to face chares for breaking the spending cap.

"Villa have posted an aggregate loss of £37.1 million during their two seasons in the second tier, giving them very little room to comply with rules that permit losses of £39 million over a three-year period before submitting their next results to the EFL in March," states the report in The Times.

The reduction in Villa's parachute payments this season from £33 million to £15 million and transfer proceeds smaller than last summer could also hinder Villa's cause.

If the breach is more than £15 million over three years then under new EFL guidelines Villa could face a 12 point deduction in the 2019-20 season.

Not good if true. Never be surprised how easy it is to repeat the mistakes of the past. I get the feeling promotion is just as important this season.

The communication of our financial situation to the fans has been terribly poor throughout all my time following Villa. Doug, Lerner, Xia and now the new owners.

I dont just want a new flag or to be "part of the pride". I want to know whats happening to safeguard the club first and foremost as it is a business with many loyal customers.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: pbavfckuwait on September 24, 2018, 12:05:55 PM
Just wonder if the new owners see where we are by January and for the sake of FFP have a bit of a fire sale then if promotion is not on the horizon.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: chrisw1 on September 24, 2018, 12:14:27 PM
Just wonder if the new owners see where we are by January and for the sake of FFP have a bit of a fire sale then if promotion is not on the horizon.
Yep, it's hard to see how we won't have to sell at least Grealish in Jan, particularly if we need to shore up the defence and find compensation money to pay Bruce off and maybe lever a replacement out of their current role.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: itbrvilla on September 24, 2018, 12:30:21 PM
What a fucking joy...
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: mike on September 24, 2018, 12:41:40 PM
I cannot see how they can possibly have dragged us from the fire then tossed us straight back in. There has to be a plan other than 'we'll get promoted'. I'm no businessman, but that is not an acceptable risk to take on a multi million pound investment.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Clark W Griswold on September 24, 2018, 01:18:39 PM
We'll sell Grealish surely? Not sure we'll get a massive amount for him mind, the way he's played this season.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Sexual Ealing on September 24, 2018, 01:24:05 PM
Is it possible that the new owners have taken legal advice, and said advice has recommended that we take it to the courts if they imposeba deduction? Restraint of trade or something like it?

I obviously have no idea but they haven't acted like they care too much about it
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: mike on September 24, 2018, 01:26:32 PM
We'll sell Grealish surely? Not sure we'll get a massive amount for him mind, the way he's played this season.

We’re supposedly trying to get him to sign a new contract? I’m an institutionalised pessimist but I can’t see they don’t have this covered in some way. It would be monumentally stupid after the near miss last summer to do it all again.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Clark W Griswold on September 24, 2018, 01:30:43 PM
You'd hope so.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: mike on September 24, 2018, 02:32:36 PM
Over on the Purslow thread, there is talk of a possible 20 point deduction? I thought it was a maximum of 12?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Drummond on September 24, 2018, 03:09:07 PM
Now that he's signed a 5 year deal, does Grealish's value, and probable release clause, help us towards FFP in any way? i.e. by being an asset on the books..
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: aj2k77 on September 24, 2018, 03:10:28 PM
Now that he's signed a 5 year deal, does Grealish's value, and probable release clause, help us towards FFP in any way? i.e. by being an asset on the books..

No, his value is in the transfer fee as he is a youth player who cost nothing so would be pure profit on the books.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: mike on September 24, 2018, 03:13:34 PM
Now that he's signed a 5 year deal, does Grealish's value, and probable release clause, help us towards FFP in any way? i.e. by being an asset on the books..

No, his value is in the transfer fee as he is a youth player who cost nothing so would be pure profit on the books.

I thought he would now be counted as a saleable asset worth £X as opposed to £Y previously? However, I know nothing about finance. let alone FFP.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: aj2k77 on September 24, 2018, 03:39:59 PM
Now that he's signed a 5 year deal, does Grealish's value, and probable release clause, help us towards FFP in any way? i.e. by being an asset on the books..

No, his value is in the transfer fee as he is a youth player who cost nothing so would be pure profit on the books.

I thought he would now be counted as a saleable asset worth £X as opposed to £Y previously? However, I know nothing about finance. let alone FFP.

That wouldn't work because who's to say how much a player is worth until they've been sold and someone has paid that amount.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Dante Lavelli on September 24, 2018, 04:00:09 PM
Just wonder if the new owners see where we are by January and for the sake of FFP have a bit of a fire sale then if promotion is not on the horizon.

Due to the playoffs though, pretty much everyone down to the bottom five or six clubs could theoretically finish 6th at Christmas.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on September 24, 2018, 06:52:44 PM
It’s got to help hasn’t it?  He will amortise over five years as opposed to the 1.5 years that was left?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: mike on September 24, 2018, 07:01:49 PM
It’s got to help hasn’t it?  He will amortise over five years as opposed to the 1.5 years that was left?

I think that's what I was trying to say...
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Risso on September 24, 2018, 07:06:13 PM
There is no amortisation with Grealish.  He's a former youth player, so has no value in the accounts.  The fact that he's signed a new contract doesn't change that.  Whatever his theoretical value is, is totally irrelevant.  The only time he'll appear in a set of accounts for transfer value and amortisation is when we sell him.  His whole sales value will be profit for us, and then his cost will appear in Spurs' accounts, written off over the length of the contract there.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: mike on September 24, 2018, 07:28:19 PM
There is no amortisation with Grealish.  He's a former youth player, so has no value in the accounts.  The fact that he's signed a new contract doesn't change that.  Whatever his theoretical value is, is totally irrelevant.  The only time he'll appear in a set of accounts for transfer value and amortisation is when we sell him.  His whole sales value will be profit for us, and then his cost will appear in Spurs' accounts, written off over the length of the contract there.

Bugger.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Villafirst on September 24, 2018, 07:35:07 PM
The FFP rules are an absolute joke. The very clubs who created this like Man City and Chelsea have flouted the rules for years and haven't received a single point deduction.  Even Bournemouth have broke the rules twice and just received fines only. The hounding of Championship clubs is totally unfair. FFP actually protects the top sides, ridiculous!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: dave.woodhall on September 24, 2018, 07:52:48 PM
The FFP rules are an absolute joke. The very clubs who created this like Man City and Chelsea have flouted the rules for years and haven't received a single point deduction.  Even Bournemouth have broke the rules twice and just received fines only. The hounding of Championship clubs is totally unfair. FFP actually protects the top sides, ridiculous!

FFP has worked in the Championship as it was introduced to prevent the amount of clubs going into administration due to spending way more than their income. The problem was to apply the same regulations to the Premier League, where a different problem occurs.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: old man villa fan on September 24, 2018, 08:20:31 PM
The FFP rules are an absolute joke. The very clubs who created this like Man City and Chelsea have flouted the rules for years and haven't received a single point deduction.  Even Bournemouth have broke the rules twice and just received fines only. The hounding of Championship clubs is totally unfair. FFP actually protects the top sides, ridiculous!

FFP has worked in the Championship as it was introduced to prevent the amount of clubs going into administration due to spending way more than their income. The problem was to apply the same regulations to the Premier League, where a different problem occurs.

The intention was sound but they made no room for new owners coming in and wiping away all debt.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: jwarry on September 24, 2018, 09:28:41 PM
The FFP rules are an absolute joke. The very clubs who created this like Man City and Chelsea have flouted the rules for years and haven't received a single point deduction.  Even Bournemouth have broke the rules twice and just received fines only. The hounding of Championship clubs is totally unfair. FFP actually protects the top sides, ridiculous!

FFP has worked in the Championship as it was introduced to prevent the amount of clubs going into administration due to spending way more than their income. The problem was to apply the same regulations to the Premier League, where a different problem occurs.

The intention was sound but they made no room for new owners coming in and wiping away all debt.

That’s exactly what I struggle to understand. I totally get Tony fucked up and we should be penalised but it makes no sense to punish us if we solved our own problems by getting new investment in
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: dave.woodhall on September 24, 2018, 09:32:00 PM
The FFP rules are an absolute joke. The very clubs who created this like Man City and Chelsea have flouted the rules for years and haven't received a single point deduction.  Even Bournemouth have broke the rules twice and just received fines only. The hounding of Championship clubs is totally unfair. FFP actually protects the top sides, ridiculous!

FFP has worked in the Championship as it was introduced to prevent the amount of clubs going into administration due to spending way more than their income. The problem was to apply the same regulations to the Premier League, where a different problem occurs.

The intention was sound but they made no room for new owners coming in and wiping away all debt.

That’s exactly what I struggle to understand. I totally get Tony fucked up and we should be penalised but it makes no sense to punish us if we solved our own problems by getting new investment in

The reverse to that argument is that it disadvantages the smaller clubs who have little chance of attracting a billionaire or three.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: old man villa fan on September 24, 2018, 09:48:09 PM
The FFP rules are an absolute joke. The very clubs who created this like Man City and Chelsea have flouted the rules for years and haven't received a single point deduction.  Even Bournemouth have broke the rules twice and just received fines only. The hounding of Championship clubs is totally unfair. FFP actually protects the top sides, ridiculous!

FFP has worked in the Championship as it was introduced to prevent the amount of clubs going into administration due to spending way more than their income. The problem was to apply the same regulations to the Premier League, where a different problem occurs.

The intention was sound but they made no room for new owners coming in and wiping away all debt.

That’s exactly what I struggle to understand. I totally get Tony fucked up and we should be penalised but it makes no sense to punish us if we solved our own problems by getting new investment in

The reverse to that argument is that it disadvantages the smaller clubs who have little chance of attracting a billionaire or three.

Surely, the FL would want to encourage money coming in through new ownership as there is very little coming in from elsewhere.  Money coming in would generally circulate at this level.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: brontebilly on September 24, 2018, 10:02:52 PM
The FFP rules are an absolute joke. The very clubs who created this like Man City and Chelsea have flouted the rules for years and haven't received a single point deduction.  Even Bournemouth have broke the rules twice and just received fines only. The hounding of Championship clubs is totally unfair. FFP actually protects the top sides, ridiculous!

Surely under the Xia reign, we have effectively tried to do a Chelsea or City and tried to buy success? Stoke seem to be doing likewise and it's going to pot for them too...

What's incredibly worrying is that little appears to have changed in the new regime. Sanctioning the Bolasie loan deal while we had one centre back at the club...It's like a conscious decision was taken to gamble again on promotion this season to avoid FFP.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: dave.woodhall on September 24, 2018, 10:10:45 PM

Surely, the FL would want to encourage money coming in through new ownership as there is very little coming in from elsewhere.  Money coming in would generally circulate at this level.

And circulate all the way into the players' pockets.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: brian green on September 24, 2018, 10:11:40 PM
Spot on Bronte.  It becomes more worrying every day that the Lerner/Xia ethos of legitimised inertia is taking root with the new owners.  No green shoots of hope anywhere to be seen.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on September 24, 2018, 10:41:17 PM
The problem is that Bruce stepped into the vacuume created by the previous regime leaving.
He has, until recently been the most senior person at the club.
So it’s been dodgy transfers, burgers chips and ice cream every day.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: mike on September 24, 2018, 10:41:41 PM
Spot on Bronte.  It becomes more worrying every day that the Lerner/Xia ethos of legitimised inertia is taking root with the new owners.  No green shoots of hope anywhere to be seen.

I find it unbelievable that the new owners would look at the clusterfuck that went before, buy the club and then repeat the exact same mistakes at enormous financial cost to themselves. But this is the Villa, so who knows.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: brian green on September 24, 2018, 10:45:38 PM
Any other organization and I would agree with you Mike.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: mike on September 24, 2018, 10:55:41 PM
Any other organization and I would agree with you Mike.

I'm trying really hard to believe but it's all so opaque except where it's downright contradictory.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: purpletrousers on September 25, 2018, 12:00:21 AM
Paying potential player coaches/managers by means of shares (now or in the future) wouldn't get around any FFP would it? (Unlikely, but just wondering...)

Am still presuming paying off Bruce and adding a new guy to the payroll is an issue, except we managed to bring in some expensive loans so it kind of discounts that presumably?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SoccerHQ on September 25, 2018, 12:19:55 AM
I wonder what the view from the football league is on us? They probably look at us with our history of bringing through many youth products and are probably chuckling at us paying full whack for likes of Bolaise yet youth teams products that could save us money like O'Hare and RHM can't even make the bench.

I imagine that would be the line from them, if FFP is such an issue just play more young players like QPR are doing currently so it will be completely self inflicted if we actually get deducted points for breaching in 12 months time.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on September 25, 2018, 07:02:41 AM
Why should a club the size of the us be expected to bear the same losses as a club the size of QPR, whose ground is a tad bigger than the Holte End?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: aj2k77 on September 25, 2018, 09:16:26 AM
Is it legally enforceable for them to set the punishments for breaking the rules after the rules have been broken. As far as I'm aware the actual punishments are pretty hazy and more of a general threat but no specifics. A sliding scale of punishment for losses which may be 2/3years old which were accrued before the actual punishments were known... it sounds like a legal minefield to me. As much as I'd find it hilarious to see the Rags get a points deduction, the league couldn't even enforce their own transfer embargo.

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Mister E on September 25, 2018, 09:56:45 AM
The FFP rules are an absolute joke. The very clubs who created this like Man City and Chelsea have flouted the rules for years and haven't received a single point deduction.  Even Bournemouth have broke the rules twice and just received fines only. The hounding of Championship clubs is totally unfair. FFP actually protects the top sides, ridiculous!

FFP has worked in the Championship as it was introduced to prevent the amount of clubs going into administration due to spending way more than their income. The problem was to apply the same regulations to the Premier League, where a different problem occurs.
Platini was keen to get FFP off the ground in order to prevent more Chelseas and Citehs - other European clubs do not want the sudden emergence of English teams via a massive injection of money way beyond their ‘normal’ revenue norms.
The problem for teams below the Prem is that FFP reduces the likelihood of the ‘white knight’ investor for clubs in financial dire straits. And, the Championship is a far easier place politically to impose strict rules than the Prem.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Stan Drew 01 on September 25, 2018, 10:07:33 AM
Opposition to FFP is something that should unite all EFL fans.

In the dim and distant past when I studied a bit of Law we learnt, as a general principle, that no Laws were made with retrospective effect. The very good principle behind this is that no-one should be punished for an action that was legal at the time it was carried out. It seems to me that this is precisely what the EFL are doing with their persistent after the event changing and tinkering with the, so called, FFP regulations. Also some would argue that the proposed restrictions and punishments amount to a restraint of trade.

But the real issue with so called FFP is that it will actually result in producing UNFAIR competition on the pitch. BCFC are already under a transfer embargo and bizarrely it seems the EFL can even dictate what wages the club can pay to free agents. Not to mention rumoured points deductions! Recent press reports suggest Villa could face similar sanctions if they don’t go up this year.

So Cardiff City, who are shit, will probably get relegated this season but why should they care? They’ll come down with their pockets stuffed with a £100+ millions parachute payment whilst Blues and Villa will have their hands tied behind their backs, unable to compete in the transfer market. It will be hugely frustrating if you have plenty of money but are prevented from spending it by an arbitrary, one size fits all FFP policy! (not that we’ve got any money)

In a very short period, probably no more than 5 years, the majority of Premier League clubs will be pretty much cemented permanently in place while a handful of clubs will yo yo between the Premier and the Championship.

It’s hard to say what can be done but unless it’s done very soon it will be too late and our game will be changed for ever. Maybe a one-day strike when as many fans as can be persuaded stay away from all Championship games. I know only a small proportion of club’s income comes from gate money but the big selling point about English football is the atmosphere generated by the fans. Also watch Strictly Come Dancing instead of EFL Championship on TV, that will piss off both the TV companies and their advertisers. And don’t just stay away go and see Solihull Moors, Pelsall Villa etc etc.

KRO




Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Risso on September 25, 2018, 10:53:44 AM
You're right about FFP.  The thing is, they could with a bit of thought come up with a way of having that financial stability without making the leagues less competitive.  It's hardly "Fair Play" when certain clubs can spend what they like.  I get that they don't want lower league clubs going out of business, but that could be achieved by actually doing some proper due diligence on oweners, and putting in liquidity requirements.  So, they introduce a rule where owners can spend what they like and predict a loss of say, £20m a year, but they have to put that amount in a bond, so that if they pull out, there's money there for the club to continue in existence.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: aj2k77 on September 25, 2018, 11:20:18 AM
Love how the noses all hate FFP now that it's bitten them in the arse with likelihood of a bumming from it as seconds some time soon after spending all summer fantasizing about it and it's imaginary effects on us.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on September 25, 2018, 12:33:58 PM
Why should a club the size of the us be expected to bear the same losses as a club the size of QPR, whose ground is a tad bigger than the Holte End?

You're talking about revenue there.  Think of it another way, FFP allows you to spend your revenue plus the allowable losses.  If your revenue is higher, you can spend more.  Hence why it favours the already wealthy clubs.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: paul_e on September 25, 2018, 01:14:00 PM
My biggest issue with points deductions as a punishment is that, for me, they run against the supposed purpose of FFP. If we take it that the idea is to stop clubs going to the wall then how would potentially relegating a club over mistakes made 2-3 years earlier help them?  The drop in income from championship to league 1 isn't on the same scale as dropping from the premier league but it's still a significant drop. For a club that has been expecting to finish midtable that's a big hit.

Move on to Villa how does denying us promotion (if we get there) because we overspent after our relegation prove anything?  I'm all for there being rules but this one doesn't promote fairness.  I'd go with something like every penny over the limit you go you have to put the same into a lottery style fund which is used to develop training facilities, provide training for coaches, etc at the smaller clubs giving them a chance of bringing through more quality themselves and naturally improving (and thus raising standards across the league). The message then becomes that if you want to 'buy' the title you can but you have to contribute back into the league for doing it. It doesn't stop clubs doing what Leicester, Bournemouth and QPR have done but it gives them a big end of season bill to pay and it helps keep the depth of the leagues in place.


There's probably plenty of problems with this, it's practically a 'back of a fag packet' solution but it does much more to address the problems in the game than points deductions.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: exigo on September 26, 2018, 01:24:39 PM
I'm convinced that Jack's release clause is an integral part of us getting around FFP. Because, in essence, we have increased one particular asset's value from £35m to £60m – the equivalent of an extra £25m income. I'm sure someone who knows more about accounting regulations will be along shortly to burst that bubble.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: chrisw1 on September 26, 2018, 02:19:46 PM
I'm convinced that Jack's release clause is an integral part of us getting around FFP. Because, in essence, we have increased one particular asset's value from £35m to £60m – the equivalent of an extra £25m income. I'm sure someone who knows more about accounting regulations will be along shortly to burst that bubble.
Nope.  ignoring that your quoted prices are crazy, I think FFP is based on actual revenue not book values.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: paul_e on September 26, 2018, 02:33:11 PM
I'm convinced that Jack's release clause is an integral part of us getting around FFP. Because, in essence, we have increased one particular asset's value from £35m to £60m – the equivalent of an extra £25m income. I'm sure someone who knows more about accounting regulations will be along shortly to burst that bubble.
Nope.  ignoring that your quoted prices are crazy, I think FFP is based on actual revenue not book values.

It's both signings are all about their book value. The issue is a release clause is no guarantee of anything so Grealish has no book value.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Risso on September 26, 2018, 09:57:20 PM
Players you buy from another club - the purchase price goes into the accounts, and is then amortised over the length of the contract.  A £10m signing on a four year contract will be worth £5m after two years.  If you then sell him for £12m, you'd make a £7m profit.  If he leaves on a free transfer, it's a £5m loss.

Youth team players - there's never any value in the accounts, even if they sign a new contract or have a release clause.  You only make a profit when you sell them, so at any point, whatever you sell them for, eg if it's Jack for £30m, then £30m is the profit.  If there's a release clause, the profit is only realised if a club matches that valuation and pays that for him.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Drummond on September 26, 2018, 10:32:28 PM
Players you buy from another club - the purchase price goes into the accounts, and is then amortised over the length of the contract.  A £10m signing on a four year contract will be worth £5m after two years.  If you then sell him for £12m, you'd make a £7m profit.  If he leaves on a free transfer, it's a £5m loss.

Youth team players - there's never any value in the accounts, even if they sign a new contract or have a release clause.  You only make a profit when you sell them, so at any point, whatever you sell them for, eg if it's Jack for £30m, then £30m is the profit.  If there's a release clause, the profit is only realised if a club matches that valuation and pays that for him.

Which shows why the system is shit. Teams have to sell their prized assets to stay afloat, rather than growing them and growing a team.

It's plain to see that Grealish is worth so much more than nothing.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: andyh on September 26, 2018, 10:35:00 PM
I'm convinced that Jack's release clause is an integral part of us getting around FFP. Because, in essence, we have increased one particular asset's value from £35m to £60m – the equivalent of an extra £25m income. I'm sure someone who knows more about accounting regulations will be along shortly to burst that bubble.
Nope.  ignoring that your quoted prices are crazy, I think FFP is based on actual revenue not book values.
If it were that easy to get round FFP, we could just revalue Richards at £10m, Hutton at £30m and Mcginniesta at £100m
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on September 26, 2018, 10:38:51 PM
It's plain to see that Grealish is worth so much more than nothing.

Accounting rules for footballers have nothing to do with reflecting their "value" as it's such a subjective matter. Instead all you do is spread the cost of their registration over the length of their contact. Hence why youth team players carry no value on the balance sheet, as their was no cost in their registration.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on September 26, 2018, 10:41:12 PM
All clubs don't have to, just the ones that have been run badly. Like us.

While the FFP system isn't perfect, it's better than no FFP. From 2008-2013, 20 clubs from the Conference North/South level upwards went into administration, 12 were league clubs, since 2013 I don't think any have.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sickbeggar on September 26, 2018, 10:41:22 PM
Thing is, we're all moaning about FFP in the championship but if they had bought it in for the premiership wouldn't we have been in the shit earlier. I seem to remember us making an 80m loss somewhere along the line. wouldn't we have had a points deduction anyway?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: paul_e on September 26, 2018, 11:14:30 PM
I don't think so because I believe a huge amount of that was related to the sale of the club and a conversion of loans to equity.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: mike on October 16, 2018, 12:11:39 PM
Calling H & V accountants. Christian Purslow appears to have unequivocally stated that we are fine by FFP regs. Can I now stop worrying or is this double speak?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on October 16, 2018, 12:20:46 PM
Calling H & V accountants. Christian Purslow appears to have unequivocally stated that we are fine by FFP regs. Can I now stop worrying or is this double speak?

He's lost me.   I don't know the details of the FFP regs but unless there is something in there about changes in ownership I don't see how we won't be massively over the allowable loss limit by the end of this season.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Newby on October 16, 2018, 12:47:02 PM
I always thought there was latitude for a change of ownership. Great to finally move forward after the doom and gloom of the summer.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Tuscans on October 16, 2018, 01:33:37 PM
Calling H & V accountants. Christian Purslow appears to have unequivocally stated that we are fine by FFP regs. Can I now stop worrying or is this double speak?

He's lost me.   I don't know the details of the FFP regs but unless there is something in there about changes in ownership I don't see how we won't be massively over the allowable loss limit by the end of this season.
That's the only way I see it but surely the journos would of reported all that when the new owners bought us. So we were in the shit under Xia, new owners buy us, wipe all debts and FFP disappears?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Hookeysmith on October 16, 2018, 01:49:34 PM
When Xia bought the club there was an issue over if he had the necessary funds. At some point someone in the FA hierarchy saw a bank balance and said "ok"

Although not fully up to speed with the nuances of FFP (who actually is?) I always was under the impression that it was to safe guard against teams busting themselves financially chasing the premiership dream. Surely one glance at our owners bank balance would result in possibly a limit on how much we could throw at it at this time but as far as going bust more likely a  "That will do nicely Sir"
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Drummond on October 16, 2018, 02:02:09 PM
FFP shouldn't make big clubs the "great unwashed" - Chelsea chairman

Alan Baldwin- Reuters
3 MIN READ

LONDON (Reuters) - Financial fair play rules should not lump big clubs like Chelsea and Manchester City with the ranks of the “great unwashed”, Chelsea chairman Bruce Buck said on Thursday.

The American suggested inequality in soccer was not necessarily a bad thing and said the rules now denied other clubs the chance of one day rising like Chelsea to the top of the Premier League.

“I personally believe that for the development of football, marquee clubs and marquee players are important,” Buck told the Leaders Sport Business summit at Chelsea’s Stamford Bridge ground.

“I am not, as a general proposition, in favour of dumbing down the large clubs in order to make all clubs the great unwashed. They’ve done that in the U.S. over the last 20 years and I think it’s been to the detriment, particularly of baseball.

“MLS (Major League Soccer) started with that model of competitive balance...and I just don’t think it works for the long term.”

Buck said there were 10 or 12 big clubs in Europe at present and he expected those same ones to be at the top in five or 10 years time.

“The dream in England is, if you support a Conference team, that some day you’ll win the Premier League. Financial Fair Play has pluses and minuses, and one of the minuses is that dream is now over.

“What Chelsea did in 2003, what Man City did five years later, that’s virtually impossible to do under financial fair play,” he added.

Chelsea had won only one English league top tier title, in 1954-55, until Russian billionaire Roman Abramovich bought the club in 2003. They have since won five Premier League championships.

Champions Manchester City, now level on points with Chelsea and Liverpool at the top, had not won the league title since 1968 when they were taken over in 2008 by Abu Dhabi United Group.

The following year they spent more in the transfer market than any other English club and have since won three Premier League titles.

Buck said clubs had to find their “natural position” in the football hierarchy, while also seeking to improve.

With the exception of Leicester City in 2016 and Blackburn Rovers in 1995, Manchester United, Chelsea, Manchester City and Arsenal have won every Premier League title since the 1992-93 season.

“I don’t think we should assume that because every club is not equal, that therefore it’s bad,” Buck said.

European soccer’s governing body UEFA introduced a Financial Fair Play break-even rule in 2011 to stop clubs spending beyond their generated revenue.

The policy is designed to prevent rich owners from trying to buy success and distort the transfer market.

Teams can be thrown out of European competition for breaching the rules but UEFA has generally negotiated settlements with offending clubs.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's all you need to know about FFP for the big clubs isn't it? What an utter twat.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Duncan Shaw on October 16, 2018, 02:14:53 PM
Wanker
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: itmustbe_it is! on October 16, 2018, 02:40:45 PM
FFP shouldn't make big clubs the "great unwashed" - Chelsea chairman

Alan Baldwin- Reuters
3 MIN READ

LONDON (Reuters) - Financial fair play rules should not lump big clubs like Chelsea and Manchester City with the ranks of the “great unwashed”, Chelsea chairman Bruce Buck said on Thursday.

The American suggested inequality in soccer was not necessarily a bad thing and said the rules now denied other clubs the chance of one day rising like Chelsea to the top of the Premier League.

“I personally believe that for the development of football, marquee clubs and marquee players are important,” Buck told the Leaders Sport Business summit at Chelsea’s Stamford Bridge ground.

“I am not, as a general proposition, in favour of dumbing down the large clubs in order to make all clubs the great unwashed. They’ve done that in the U.S. over the last 20 years and I think it’s been to the detriment, particularly of baseball.

“MLS (Major League Soccer) started with that model of competitive balance...and I just don’t think it works for the long term.”

Buck said there were 10 or 12 big clubs in Europe at present and he expected those same ones to be at the top in five or 10 years time.

“The dream in England is, if you support a Conference team, that some day you’ll win the Premier League. Financial Fair Play has pluses and minuses, and one of the minuses is that dream is now over.

“What Chelsea did in 2003, what Man City did five years later, that’s virtually impossible to do under financial fair play,” he added.

Chelsea had won only one English league top tier title, in 1954-55, until Russian billionaire Roman Abramovich bought the club in 2003. They have since won five Premier League championships.

Champions Manchester City, now level on points with Chelsea and Liverpool at the top, had not won the league title since 1968 when they were taken over in 2008 by Abu Dhabi United Group.

The following year they spent more in the transfer market than any other English club and have since won three Premier League titles.

Buck said clubs had to find their “natural position” in the football hierarchy, while also seeking to improve.

With the exception of Leicester City in 2016 and Blackburn Rovers in 1995, Manchester United, Chelsea, Manchester City and Arsenal have won every Premier League title since the 1992-93 season.

“I don’t think we should assume that because every club is not equal, that therefore it’s bad,” Buck said.

European soccer’s governing body UEFA introduced a Financial Fair Play break-even rule in 2011 to stop clubs spending beyond their generated revenue.

The policy is designed to prevent rich owners from trying to buy success and distort the transfer market.

Teams can be thrown out of European competition for breaching the rules but UEFA has generally negotiated settlements with offending clubs.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's all you need to know about FFP for the big clubs isn't it? What an utter twat.

I don't think the headline actually reflects what he's saying though.....he's basically saying what we all are , which is that if you have rich owners then it should be ok for them to use those funds to make the club  better and FFP trying to create a level playing field is what means that the same handful of clubs (which have already become big, in 2 cases directly through investment before FFP came in) will dominate the league now. What he says in that article is pretty much exactly what we say about Villa now  isn't it?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Dave P on October 16, 2018, 03:44:13 PM
Didn't Purslow also say he was on the committee that devised FFP?  If so, surely he will know it like the back of his hand and can navigate round it just fine?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: chrisw1 on October 16, 2018, 04:14:25 PM
Didn't Purslow also say he was on the committee that devised FFP?  If so, surely he will know it like the back of his hand and can navigate round it just fine?
He did.  But I still think the way he said ‘buy and sell players in January’ the plan is still to fund with the sale of Grealish or some other assets
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: andyh on October 16, 2018, 04:25:28 PM
How can the club possibly ‘plan’ based on the sale of Grealish, that just makes no sense whatsoever and makes all kinds of assumptions about, fitness, injury, form and most importantly, someone willing to pay the release clause.


Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: paul_e on October 16, 2018, 04:28:47 PM
How can the club possibly ‘plan’ based on the sale of Grealish, that just makes no sense whatsoever and makes all kinds of assumptions about, fitness, injury, form and most importantly, someone willing to pay the release clause.

I agree, I think that's highly unlikely.  I think he was just talking about backing Smith to get rid of people he doesn't want, even with the mess of the defence it's still the case that our squad is a bit too big which makes it hard to get the young players involved, I suspect that will be addressed over the next 2-3 windows, especially with there being a fair few contracts coming to an end next summer.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: old man villa fan on October 16, 2018, 08:39:11 PM
How can the club possibly ‘plan’ based on the sale of Grealish, that just makes no sense whatsoever and makes all kinds of assumptions about, fitness, injury, form and most importantly, someone willing to pay the release clause.




If we want to sell Grealish, we can sell him for whatever fee (below the release clause fee) we want.  If we do not want to sell him, a club can only buy him if they meet the release clause fee.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: martin o`who?? on October 17, 2018, 07:43:55 AM
If the likes of Citeh and Chelski can drive a coach and Horses through it so can anyone else - oh sorry they can`t...
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Damo70 on October 17, 2018, 11:52:29 AM
Calling H & V accountants. Christian Purslow appears to have unequivocally stated that we are fine by FFP regs. Can I now stop worrying or is this double speak?

You would think that he knows the FFP rules inside out and as you say he seemed totally unconcerned about it possibly holding us back. Although I suppose ultimately only time will tell. Our in and out transfer dealings in January should tell us more.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Hookeysmith on October 17, 2018, 01:23:45 PM
I would imagine that the sight of our owners lawyers walking into the FA offices might put a dampener on any action they may want to take against us
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Toronto Villa on October 17, 2018, 01:26:17 PM
He said the debts are cleared and categorically stages we would respect the FFP rules. Players will no doubt be sold but there’s clearly some resources beyond that to help Dean in January.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: KRS on October 17, 2018, 01:57:38 PM
Guess it depends on how much we’ll be spending...I’m guessing we’ll bring in loans, cheaper players identified by Deano and Mendes rather than shopping in the £10m+ market.
 
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: brian green on October 17, 2018, 02:07:15 PM
I think Dean will make saleable assets out of players Bruce refused to use.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: eamonn on October 17, 2018, 05:17:43 PM
I wonder is there a "gentleman's agreement" with Brentford that we not come after their bright lights in January, though I'm not sure how common that kind of thing is.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: purpletrousers on October 17, 2018, 05:20:07 PM
I wonder is there a "gentleman's agreement" with Brentford that we not come after their bright lights in January, though I'm not sure how common that kind of thing is.

With the Brentford model, more likely they'd make an agreement that we had to!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SashasGrandad on October 17, 2018, 08:07:17 PM
He said the debts are cleared and categorically stages we would respect the FFP rules. Players will no doubt be sold but there’s clearly some resources beyond that to help Dean in January.

By not having to pay interest on the loans we can probably afford at least an extra loan player.

If we keep selling out home games that will also provide an extra income to spend.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt Collins on October 17, 2018, 10:21:50 PM
I really don't understand how we can be ok

Its a profit and loss test. We cant retrospectively change historic losses. And I thought we were right up against the limit such that we needed to break even this year, despite a) losing £5m per month and b) losing our parachute payments

Id like a clearer explanation having bought the plan B bollocks last year
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on October 17, 2018, 11:17:35 PM
Whatever happens I imagine being very serious about compliance gets you a lot more discretion, as it is discretionary, than going fuck it, I'll do what I want.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on October 18, 2018, 05:52:05 AM
Whatever happens I imagine being very serious about compliance gets you a lot more discretion, as it is discretionary, than going fuck it, I'll do what I want.

I can't imagine that us saying all the right things publicly while absolutely blitzing the spend limits will be much of a defence.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on October 18, 2018, 06:54:49 AM
Maybe Jacks new contract and sell on clause has helped.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on October 18, 2018, 07:10:29 AM
No I agree, but I don't think we have. Snoddy and Terry were £110k a week in wages. I would imagine that the signings we've made are covered by that. I highly doubt we've made Bolasie our hughest paid player ever, especially when Boro agreed the same package with Everton.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithe on October 18, 2018, 07:35:20 AM
Maybe Jacks new contract and sell on clause has helped.

How so?

He’d presumably be on more money than on his previous contract and the sell on fee can’t help until it’s realised?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: old man villa fan on October 18, 2018, 02:15:57 PM
What I cannot understand with FFP is the ignoring of a new owner coming in and wiping away the debt. In effect the losses built up by the previous owner have been wiped off, providing it is capital investment.  The protection of FFP rules are therefore not required against the past.  Going forward, they should then apply so as to protect the Club if the owner then leaves/runs into financial difficulties.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: simboy on October 18, 2018, 02:30:49 PM
But wouldn't that just lead to rather unscrupulous owners "selling" a club to a trusted associate to wipe the debt out for FFP purposes? There are many ways to look as though its a "transaction at arms length" when in fact it is nothing of the sort.

just wondering
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: chrisw1 on October 18, 2018, 03:06:20 PM
Their is also the ‘fair play’ element.  In addition to protecting clubs they are in theory trying to create a more level playing field and wiping the slate clean at each change of ownership would hardly do that.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: simboy on October 18, 2018, 03:23:42 PM
The "fair play" element isn't really that though is it? As far as i can see it is the epitome of the ladder being pulled up by the premier league and then the magic circle within the premier league by the "Sky Six".

Take Chelsea, a team with a capacity smaller than us [41,400] but

2016 Total Revenue    £335m

of which

Commercial revenue    £122m
Broadcasting revenue   £143m
Matchday revenue:    £70m

Outgoings
 
Wage Bill   £224m

Net Total Debt   £1.14bn owed to Abramovich

 Chelsea posted a loss of £85 million in 2016 up from 32 Million the year before

where's the "fair play" in this?


Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: mallo on October 18, 2018, 03:47:33 PM
The "fair play" element isn't really that though is it? As far as i can see it is the epitome of the ladder being pulled up by the premier league and then the magic circle within the premier league by the "Sky Six".

Take Chelsea, a team with a capacity smaller than us [41,400] but

2016 Total Revenue    £335m

of which

Commercial revenue    £122m
Broadcasting revenue   £143m
Matchday revenue:    £70m

Outgoings
 
Wage Bill   £224m

Net Total Debt   £1.14bn owed to Abramovich

 Chelsea posted a loss of £85 million in 2016 up from 32 Million the year before

where's the "fair play" in this?

That's why they've renamed it - but I would suggest the fair play would be when Abramovich gets bored things might not be so rosy in the garden.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: chrisw1 on October 18, 2018, 03:53:27 PM
Oh I agree.  The c***s just pulled up the drawbridge.  But I suspect it is the notion of fair play that will stop the slate being wiped with every sale.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Damo70 on October 18, 2018, 07:08:25 PM
Oh I agree.  The c***s just pulled up the drawbridge.  But I suspect it is the notion of fair play that will stop the slate being wiped with every sale.


I totally agree with the 'pulling up the drawbridge' analogy. If you had a filthy rich owner/owners who wanted to spunk hundreds of millions a few years back it was fine but now it isn't. Allowing Chelsea to stockpile lots of players they can loan out for loan fees (sorry I meant 'experience')  and then sell on for a profit and allowing Man City to do the same (albeit to a lesser extent) and also buy feeder clubs in other countries.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: john e on October 18, 2018, 08:14:57 PM
Has he pulled up the drawbridge or is he just not allowed to stay in the country very long anymore
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on October 18, 2018, 09:31:13 PM
Maybe Jacks new contract and sell on clause has helped.

How so?

He’d presumably be on more money than on his previous contract and the sell on fee can’t help until it’s realised?
If an asset goes up in value you can take the excess value as a profit in that accounting period, so the justification is a new contract and sell on clause,I am not sure that it is valid under FFP.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: old man villa fan on October 18, 2018, 09:48:28 PM
In a way, I can understand the PL not want another Man City situation as this could financially destabilise the teams at the top as it would up the spending by the existing clubs to compete with the new 'rich' club.  If this happened, the whole bubble could burst.

If a club gets into difficulties financially, the league should be encouraging anything that gets them out of it for the long term.  The obvious one is capital investment to put the club on an even keel so that they can work within the financial guidelines in the future.  It would appear that FFP is preventing this.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on October 18, 2018, 09:57:51 PM
A release clause has no bearing on FFP.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Bad English on October 18, 2018, 09:59:06 PM
Welease Wichards! That would be financial fair play.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on October 18, 2018, 10:55:50 PM
Maybe Jacks new contract and sell on clause has helped.

How so?

He’d presumably be on more money than on his previous contract and the sell on fee can’t help until it’s realised?
If an asset goes up in value you can take the excess value as a profit in that accounting period, so the justification is a new contract and sell on clause,I am not sure that it is valid under FFP.

OK, so firstly accounting standards make no attempt to "fair value" footballers - it's impossible to do so.  They're accounted for at amortised cost.

Secondly, the only time you take asset value appreciation in to the income statement is when it's an investment property or you're reversing a previous downward revaluation recognised through the income statement.

And thirdly, a sell on clause has no bearing on a players value in any case.  It's a term in a contract which is unlikely to ever get triggered.  If it did, would that mean players who didn't have a release clause would be worth nothing?!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: pauliewalnuts on October 18, 2018, 11:13:05 PM
Reaching the vinegar strokes now, just need someone to mention Spurs wage bill and I'm going to climax.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on October 19, 2018, 06:30:59 AM
Reaching the vinegar strokes now, just need someone to mention Spurs wage bill and I'm going to climax.

You dirty Dawg!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Drummond on October 19, 2018, 09:21:08 AM
What's to stop the owners buying a club elsewhere and then loaning/selling those players to Villa on the cheap?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SashasGrandad on October 19, 2018, 09:23:22 AM
What's to stop the owners buying a club elsewhere and then loaning/selling those players to Villa on the cheap?

They could buy Small Heath - loan them Richards and insist he plays in every game.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: paul_e on October 19, 2018, 10:21:29 AM
Maybe Jacks new contract and sell on clause has helped.

How so?

He’d presumably be on more money than on his previous contract and the sell on fee can’t help until it’s realised?
If an asset goes up in value you can take the excess value as a profit in that accounting period, so the justification is a new contract and sell on clause,I am not sure that it is valid under FFP.

OK, so firstly accounting standards make no attempt to "fair value" footballers - it's impossible to do so.  They're accounted for at amortised cost.

Secondly, the only time you take asset value appreciation in to the income statement is when it's an investment property or you're reversing a previous downward revaluation recognised through the income statement.

And thirdly, a sell on clause has no bearing on a players value in any case.  It's a term in a contract which is unlikely to ever get triggered.  If it did, would that mean players who didn't have a release clause would be worth nothing?!

I don't know anything about accounting but what I find interesting is that the confirmation statement in May listed our share value as £84m but last week there was a statement of capital which put us closer to £186m. What difference does that make and how is that additional value generated? I'd guess part of it is conversion of debt to equity but does anyone know what impact this would have on FFP?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: GarTomas on October 19, 2018, 12:35:50 PM
Maybe Jacks new contract and sell on clause has helped.

How so?

He’d presumably be on more money than on his previous contract and the sell on fee can’t help until it’s realised?
If an asset goes up in value you can take the excess value as a profit in that accounting period, so the justification is a new contract and sell on clause,I am not sure that it is valid under FFP.

OK, so firstly accounting standards make no attempt to "fair value" footballers - it's impossible to do so.  They're accounted for at amortised cost.

Secondly, the only time you take asset value appreciation in to the income statement is when it's an investment property or you're reversing a previous downward revaluation recognised through the income statement.

And thirdly, a sell on clause has no bearing on a players value in any case.  It's a term in a contract which is unlikely to ever get triggered.  If it did, would that mean players who didn't have a release clause would be worth nothing?!

I don't know anything about accounting but what I find interesting is that the confirmation statement in May listed our share value as £84m but last week there was a statement of capital which put us closer to £186m. What difference does that make and how is that additional value generated? I'd guess part of it is conversion of debt to equity but does anyone know what impact this would have on FFP?

Debt written off an converted to equity.

You can finance a company by putting your own money in and creating shares or equity or by borrowing someone else’s and putting that in as debt.

Lerner and Xia lent the money the club. So Xia paid Lerner around £84m which was the equity and then lent the club another £100m.

When the new owners came in they effectively cancelled or the debt for equity.

I think - an accountant may explain it better.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: paul_e on October 19, 2018, 01:02:34 PM
I don't know anything about accounting but what I find interesting is that the confirmation statement in May listed our share value as £84m but last week there was a statement of capital which put us closer to £186m. What difference does that make and how is that additional value generated? I'd guess part of it is conversion of debt to equity but does anyone know what impact this would have on FFP?

Debt written off an converted to equity.

You can finance a company by putting your own money in and creating shares or equity or by borrowing someone else’s and putting that in as debt.

Lerner and Xia lent the money the club. So Xia paid Lerner around £84m which was the equity and then lent the club another £100m.

When the new owners came in they effectively cancelled or the debt for equity.

I think - an accountant may explain it better.

Yeah, I get all of that but how much of the difference is a debt conversion and what other changes would cause this?  If, for example, we revalued BMH based on the valuation used in the HS2 buyout, would that justify an increase in share value and if so would that increase in asset value cancel out some the 'book debt' that is against us for FFP?

What I'm really getting at is what actions that lead to a share value increase would help with FFP and what actions wouldn't?  I'd assume that debt conversion makes no difference because the asset value of the club hasn't changed and we know that perceived value of players is irrelevant but fixed asset value surely helps.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on October 19, 2018, 01:23:04 PM
FFP is a profit measure.  So anything balance sheet related (assets, liabilities and equity) are irrelevant unless they drive income or expenditure in the last 3 financial years.

It wouldn't work if it was a balance sheet measure as in that case, the richest bloke wins - nothing therefore stopping another Chelsea or Man City.  But by making it a profit measure and thereby linking it to revenue, the drawbridge is pulled up firmly to stop any of those pesky "small" clubs breaking the dominance of the (current) "big" clubs.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: GarTomas on October 19, 2018, 02:31:10 PM
I don't know anything about accounting but what I find interesting is that the confirmation statement in May listed our share value as £84m but last week there was a statement of capital which put us closer to £186m. What difference does that make and how is that additional value generated? I'd guess part of it is conversion of debt to equity but does anyone know what impact this would have on FFP?

Debt written off an converted to equity.

You can finance a company by putting your own money in and creating shares or equity or by borrowing someone else’s and putting that in as debt.

Lerner and Xia lent the money the club. So Xia paid Lerner around £84m which was the equity and then lent the club another £100m.

When the new owners came in they effectively cancelled or the debt for equity.

I think - an accountant may explain it better.

Yeah, I get all of that but how much of the difference is a debt conversion and what other changes would cause this?  If, for example, we revalued BMH based on the valuation used in the HS2 buyout, would that justify an increase in share value and if so would that increase in asset value cancel out some the 'book debt' that is against us for FFP?

What I'm really getting at is what actions that lead to a share value increase would help with FFP and what actions wouldn't?  I'd assume that debt conversion makes no difference because the asset value of the club hasn't changed and we know that perceived value of players is irrelevant but fixed asset value surely helps.

The shares only have a nominal value of say £1 each usually linked to when the company was started.
So if someone starts a company with £1m they can have 1m shares of nominal value of £1

If the company is very successful the actual value of the shares can increase without the nominal value changing.

A really simple (and unrealistic!) example is to start a football club with £1m and then buy one player for 500k and agree to pay him 500k for a year.

At the end of the year sell the same player (because he’s don’t really well in this fictional one man team) fo £2m

Your now left with £2m in cash (as the original £1m was spent buying the player and paying his wages) but now have £2m from the buying club.

The nominal value of the shares is still £1 but the actual value is £2

I don’t know the ins and outs of FFP but I’m certain there is a lot in there to stop this.

All assets on a balance sheet depreciate or amortise over time.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on October 19, 2018, 04:34:23 PM
All assets on a balance sheet depreciate or amortise over time.

At the risk of taking this off topic, no they don't.

The only assets that depreciate are Property, Plant & Equipment (Tangible Fixed Assets in the good ol' days) and the only assets that amortise are (some) Intangibles. 

All other assets (investment properties, inventory/stock, trade debtors/receivables, cash, prepayments, accrued revenue/income, etc) don't.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Risso on October 19, 2018, 04:42:42 PM
Land isn’t depreciated either.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: cheltenhamlion on October 19, 2018, 05:49:46 PM
No I agree, but I don't think we have. Snoddy and Terry were £110k a week in wages. I would imagine that the signings we've made are covered by that. I highly doubt we've made Bolasie our hughest paid player ever, especially when Boro agreed the same package with Everton.

We are on for the full whack on Bolasie.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: GarTomas on October 19, 2018, 06:27:33 PM
All assets on a balance sheet depreciate or amortise over time.

At the risk of taking this off topic, no they don't.

The only assets that depreciate are Property, Plant & Equipment (Tangible Fixed Assets in the good ol' days) and the only assets that amortise are (some) Intangibles. 

All other assets (investment properties, inventory/stock, trade debtors/receivables, cash, prepayments, accrued revenue/income, etc) don't.

I’m no accountant!!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Mister E on October 19, 2018, 06:36:51 PM
We are on for the full whack on Bolasie.
… which begs the question: why??
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on October 19, 2018, 06:43:20 PM
All assets on a balance sheet depreciate or amortise over time.

At the risk of taking this off topic, no they don't.

The only assets that depreciate are Property, Plant & Equipment (Tangible Fixed Assets in the good ol' days) and the only assets that amortise are (some) Intangibles. 

All other assets (investment properties, inventory/stock, trade debtors/receivables, cash, prepayments, accrued revenue/income, etc) don't.

I’m no accountant!!

Evidently! ;)
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: cheltenhamlion on October 19, 2018, 06:44:10 PM
We are on for the full whack on Bolasie.
… which begs the question: why??

One imagines Bruce.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: cdbullyweefan on October 19, 2018, 07:07:56 PM
It doesn't seem that unreasonable to me. He cost twenty odd million last season. You wouldn't expect to get him on the cheap.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: eamonn on October 19, 2018, 08:18:20 PM
You'd expect his parent club to chip in if we're paying them a loan fee as is normal.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: adrenachrome on October 19, 2018, 08:48:26 PM
You'd expect his parent club to chip in if we're paying them a loan fee as is normal.

Not when there are plenty of bidders. And we don't even know that there is a loan fee.

Agents are creative when it comes to generating revenue.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Nastylee on October 19, 2018, 09:57:33 PM
We don't know for certain we are paying 100% of his wages other than a couple of paper articles. The same papers that had Henry nailed on for the manager's role, twice!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: dcdavecollett on October 21, 2018, 03:04:31 PM
Could the large chunks of land that we have reportedly purchased in Warwickshire be used in the calculations for FFP?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: eamonn on October 21, 2018, 05:07:00 PM
Doubt it, as it will likely be a fixed asset and so Balance-Sheet based. It's Income and Expenditure where we, apparently, need to show an improvement.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Cleybrooke on October 22, 2018, 11:03:21 AM
The best way of avoiding FFP issues is to make a profit.  You can do that by ensuring commercial sponsorship is as good as rules allow.

Now if only we had an Owner who was also on the board of big sports brand like Adidas...
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Sexual Ealing on October 22, 2018, 11:12:22 AM
The best way of avoiding FFP issues is to make a profit.  You can do that by ensuring commercial sponsorship is as good as rules allow.

Now if only we had an Owner who was also on the board of big sports brand like Adidas...

No need, we have a bloke called Luke!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Dave P on February 11, 2019, 10:44:04 AM
The local media are reporting that the EFL will recommend to the disciplinary board that small heath will get a 12 point penalty for failing FFP.  They seem to think they could get that down on appeal to something like 6 now and 6 suspended but, given they are on course to break it again next year, they will get those points off, and possibly more, next season.

Before we snigger, should we be worried?  Any potential punishment for us would be next season as we haven't failed anything as yet.  Also, a lot of the EFL's gripe with blues is that the brazenly signed a player under embargo and haven't done much to make money.  Turning down £12m+ for Che Adams last week must have raised some questions.

Going up this season will dispel the worry once and for all but, if we don't, surely a deep dive into our accounts is coming?

The blues case is surely going to be the precedent and us, Forest and Bolton in particular should be watching quite closely.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SoccerHQ on February 11, 2019, 11:04:13 AM
I think we'd get an embargo before any points deduction. It seems we were quietly given one in the chaos of last summer and it was lifted once we got the new owners on.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Smoke on February 11, 2019, 11:17:26 AM
FFP aint a thing. It's Profit & Sustainability.

Maybe one could argue, Billionnaire owners wiping all debt and placing £200 million into a clubs bank account for the sole and only use by that football would ensure that club is sustainable for the foreseeable future.

I'm not saying that has happened, but I think the rules aren't as cut & dried as some suggest on here.

I.e. those wierd equations we get on here where someone says we paid £3m for Joe Bloggs, paid him £40k a week for 6 years. If we sold him now for £2m it wouldn't make a difference to FFP so can't.

The only thing we all know for sure is, You MUST pay the tax man otherwise shit goes bad, fast.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on February 11, 2019, 11:20:49 AM
FFP aint a thing. It's Profit & Sustainability.

Maybe one could argue, Billionnaire owners wiping all debt and placing £200 million into a clubs bank account for the sole and only use by that football would ensure that club is sustainable for the foreseeable future.

I'm not saying that has happened, but I think the rules aren't as cut & dried as some suggest on here.

I.e. those wierd equations we get on here where someone says we paid £3m for Joe Bloggs, paid him £40k a week for 6 years. If we sold him now for £2m it wouldn't make a difference to FFP so can't.

The only thing we all know for sure is, You MUST pay the tax man otherwise shit goes bad, fast.
Is a rules based protocol.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on February 11, 2019, 11:37:12 AM
The Noses are going to get a points deduction because they stuck two fingers up to the EFL.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: UK Redsox on February 11, 2019, 11:42:44 AM
The local media are reporting that the EFL will recommend to the disciplinary board that small heath will get a 12 point penalty for failing FFP.  They seem to think they could get that down on appeal to something like 6 now and 6 suspended but, given they are on course to break it again next year, they will get those points off, and possibly more, next season.

Before we snigger, should we be worried?  Any potential punishment for us would be next season as we haven't failed anything as yet.  Also, a lot of the EFL's gripe with blues is that the brazenly signed a player under embargo and haven't done much to make money.  Turning down £12m+ for Che Adams last week must have raised some questions.

Going up this season will dispel the worry once and for all but, if we don't, surely a deep dive into our accounts is coming?

The blues case is surely going to be the precedent and us, Forest and Bolton in particular should be watching quite closely.

If Birmingham City signed a player when they were not allowed to, did the EFL allow the registration to go through ?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SoccerHQ on February 11, 2019, 11:52:42 AM
The local media are reporting that the EFL will recommend to the disciplinary board that small heath will get a 12 point penalty for failing FFP.  They seem to think they could get that down on appeal to something like 6 now and 6 suspended but, given they are on course to break it again next year, they will get those points off, and possibly more, next season.

Before we snigger, should we be worried?  Any potential punishment for us would be next season as we haven't failed anything as yet.  Also, a lot of the EFL's gripe with blues is that the brazenly signed a player under embargo and haven't done much to make money.  Turning down £12m+ for Che Adams last week must have raised some questions.

Going up this season will dispel the worry once and for all but, if we don't, surely a deep dive into our accounts is coming?

The blues case is surely going to be the precedent and us, Forest and Bolton in particular should be watching quite closely.

If Birmingham City signed a player when they were not allowed to, did the EFL allow the registration to go through ?

I think at the time the case was made it would be unfair to the player (Pedersen) to put him in limbo until January by not being allowed to play so transfer was reluctantly signed off with the EFL briefing to the media shaking their heads at the state of it all.

Seems certain now SHA will be deduced points which is good job as with Bolton at home tomorrow they'll likely only be a point or two off top 6 which can't be happening.

Them potentially finishing ahead of us after spending last two years scraping survival is bad enough.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: eamonn on February 11, 2019, 11:55:37 AM
It's the only way we're going to finish ahead of them the way we're both playing at the moment. They were even able to put out the deckchairs in Sheps Bush on Saturday for the second half - oh the humanity!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: dave.woodhall on February 11, 2019, 12:13:19 PM
It's the only way we're going to finish ahead of them the way we're both playing at the moment. They were even able to put out the deckchairs in Sheps Bush on Saturday for the second half - oh the humanity!

I don't think winning thanks to a last-minute penalty save is putting the deckchairs out.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Damo70 on February 11, 2019, 12:20:20 PM
It's the only way we're going to finish ahead of them the way we're both playing at the moment. They were even able to put out the deckchairs in Sheps Bush on Saturday for the second half - oh the humanity!

I don't think winning thanks to a last-minute penalty save is putting the deckchairs out.

You could argue that they got complacent at 4-0 up and took their foot off the gas. But as we showed against Sheffield United one side gaining momentum in a game and the other losing all momentum changes the game a lot.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sirlordbaltimore on February 11, 2019, 01:33:27 PM


I'm not going to start gloating if/when they get a points deduction certainly not after our own troubles last summer. And perhaps this summer coming for all i know.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: jwarry on February 11, 2019, 01:39:44 PM
To be fair, Monk has done a brilliant job for them with a squad that wasn't his...…. shame DS has not been able to do the same
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on February 11, 2019, 01:45:25 PM
Yes I hate them as much as the next person but, quite frankly, (albeit with 11 or so regular settled players) Monk and they have done unbelievably well.  Which again proves the point that you don't have to sign a load of start thrown together to make progress in this league.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Chris Stares on February 11, 2019, 01:55:41 PM
Slightly off-topic, but I wonder if Dean Smith could get a tune out of Gary Gardner as Monk seems to have done with him so far this season?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: olaftab on February 11, 2019, 02:03:43 PM
To be fair, Monk has done a brilliant job for them with a squad that wasn't his...…. shame DS has not been able to do the same
You have tarnished a reasonable post about Monk with your unreasonable sledge on Smith.
And don’t forget they nearly threw away a 4 goal lead.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithe on February 11, 2019, 02:15:38 PM
Slightly off-topic, but I wonder if Dean Smith could get a tune out of Gary Gardner as Monk seems to have done with him so far this season?

We’ll never know, he’s out of contract in the Summer.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on February 11, 2019, 02:34:58 PM
I'd rather not find out.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: mr underhill on February 11, 2019, 02:42:43 PM
Monk's done a great job there to be totally fair and I thought he got the tin tack too early from trigger happy Leeds.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Risso on February 11, 2019, 03:10:06 PM
Slightly off-topic, but I wonder if Dean Smith could get a tune out of Gary Gardner as Monk seems to have done with him so far this season?

He needs to get a tune out of the players he's got first.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Dave P on February 11, 2019, 03:27:15 PM
Monk's done a great job there to be totally fair and I thought he got the tin tack too early from trigger happy Leeds.

Said no Leeds fan ever.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: mr underhill on February 11, 2019, 04:25:16 PM
I don't give a shiny shite what Leeds fans think, in my opinion he did a good job as he is as Birmingham.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Hookeysmith on February 11, 2019, 07:46:08 PM
Guys with this amount of money do not leave anything to chance. If there was a whiff of issues relating to FFP then they very quickly made their first appointment not only a very experienced CEO  but a guy who helped write the FFP rules.

His first statement was along the lines of "clean slate" & "No issues with FFP"

They must know things we dont
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Newby on February 11, 2019, 08:04:50 PM
We are getting good gates and have a rake of players out of contract in the summer. I reckon we will pull off a nice couple of sponsorship deals in the summer too.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SoccerHQ on February 11, 2019, 08:08:24 PM
Slightly off-topic, but I wonder if Dean Smith could get a tune out of Gary Gardner as Monk seems to have done with him so far this season?

We’ll never know, he’s out of contract in the Summer.

Didn't he sign a four year deal in 2016?

Would be surprised if he was out of contract, surely we'd have sold him full time in January for a small fee and to get him off the books earlier.

He's clearly a good enough player at championship level even if he can never show it for us.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SoccerHQ on February 11, 2019, 08:09:34 PM
Monk's done a great job there to be totally fair and I thought he got the tin tack too early from trigger happy Leeds.

Said no Leeds fan ever.

He actually walked out on Leeds, they were happy to keep him on.

Boro was the club where he was arguably sacked prematurely.

Soon SHA are back to appointments like Zola and Cotterill the better.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: paul_e on February 11, 2019, 08:15:14 PM
It's also important to remember that come the summer the RDM and Bruce first window spending is all off the books, along with a fuck load of wages.

The embargo that was supposedly in palce in the summer was, as I understand it, about money in the bank more than anything else.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on February 11, 2019, 08:22:58 PM
Must admit that not once this season have I thought "what we need is Gary Gardner in the team".
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on February 11, 2019, 08:23:34 PM
Adidas Villa FC
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: cdbullyweefan on February 11, 2019, 09:33:20 PM
Must admit that not once this season have I thought "what we need is Gary Gardner in the team".

We really need another ponderous, plodding midfielder to slow things down. That's the trouble with our midfield, too much pace.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: eamonn on February 11, 2019, 09:51:35 PM
Dunno...he'd be an upgrade on Jedinak and better off the ball than Hologram.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on February 11, 2019, 09:53:17 PM
We'd have to play like the Noses though and they're utter filth to watch with their 7% possession and long ball biffing.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: jwarry on February 11, 2019, 09:56:34 PM
Dunno...he'd be an upgrade on Jedinak and better off the ball than Hologram.

That’s true, so why didn’t Dean recall him?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on February 11, 2019, 09:57:50 PM
I'd say because Gary Gardner is shit. And we have enough shit and slow and weak midfielders as it is.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: pooligan on February 11, 2019, 09:59:42 PM
I don't really want to see Gardner in our team ,i just hate loaning one of our players to a club  who loathe us .Other than the Villa match i think he has only missed one game for the noses,so he must be doing ok
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on February 11, 2019, 10:01:33 PM
Because we didn't have a recall option. No one cared when he went out on loan and his stats this season are crap.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Toronto Villa on February 11, 2019, 10:18:44 PM
Must admit that not once this season have I thought "what we need is Gary Gardner in the team".

“The missing link is Gary Gardner”

Said nobody ever
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Villa in Denmark on February 11, 2019, 10:20:22 PM
Must admit that not once this season have I thought "what we need is Gary Gardner in the team".

“The missing link is Gary Gardner”

Said nobody ever
However plenty have wondered if his brother is THE missing link.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on February 11, 2019, 10:21:49 PM
Ironic really as his brother looks like the missing link.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on February 11, 2019, 10:22:09 PM
Bollocks, too slow.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: olaftab on February 11, 2019, 10:22:50 PM
Craig Gardner is the pissing link.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: cdbullyweefan on February 12, 2019, 01:26:07 AM
Dunno...he'd be an upgrade on Jedinak and better off the ball than Hologram.

Saying he'd be better than Jedinak is the very epitomy of damning someone with faint praise. For all his faults, Hot Lips still contributes a reasonable number of assists and goals. He's not the long-term answer, but he's certainly far closer to it than Gardner, who contributes fuck all.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: eamonn on February 12, 2019, 08:52:06 AM
All I'm saying is that Gardner has been getting decent reviews in a team far shorter on quality than us but which works a lot harder, where players know their jobs and that seems to be one of the big problems with us at the moment.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: cdbullyweefan on February 12, 2019, 10:39:20 AM
Lots of players get decent reviews elsewhere. Jedinak, Whelan and Hot Lips were all loved by their former clubs. In terms of performances for Villa, though, Gardner has had far fewer reasonable ones. He also lacks in the area in which we suffer most... pace. I'd rather he wasn't helping out those twats, but I'm still glad he doesn't play for us. And his brother's a twat. And his other brother is a chav.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Des Little on February 12, 2019, 11:19:32 AM
They're all chavs.  The whole jolly well lot.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: mr underhill on February 12, 2019, 11:59:43 AM
you can't go round saying he's a chav nowadays surely? A cnunt possibly but not a chav.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AVH87 on February 12, 2019, 12:49:02 PM
He plays for Small Heath, the majority of their players and fans are chavs.

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on February 12, 2019, 01:24:51 PM
He plays for Small Heath, the majority of their players and fans are chavs.

I'd imagine that lot see being called a chav as a badge of honour.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AVH87 on February 12, 2019, 03:06:56 PM
So far this season we've had Pedersen on video 'im gonna fuck Grealish up', Gary Monk holding up a 'sotv' banner, and the other day on twitter I saw their fans boasting about how they hadn't been allowed the lower tier at QPR because of what they'd done their previously.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: mr underhill on February 12, 2019, 03:51:52 PM
c***s it is then
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Newby on February 12, 2019, 10:30:29 PM
Dunno...he'd be an upgrade on Jedinak and better off the ball than Hologram.

Saying he'd be better than Jedinak is the very epitomy of damning someone with faint praise. For all his faults, Hot Lips still contributes a reasonable number of assists and goals. He's not the long-term answer, but he's certainly far closer to it than Gardner, who contributes fuck all.

The same old argument.  Hourihane takes every free kick, every corner.  I'm surprised he doesn't take all the goal kicks and thrown ins too.  He scores the odd goal, granted, but he only creates assists because he takes all the dead ball situations.  Give all the dead ball situations to Taylor and no doubts he'd be talked up as the assist king. Not having a pop at you but Hourihane is a shadow and talked up far too much in my view.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on February 12, 2019, 10:43:09 PM
Lots of players take all the set pieces for their clubs, not many are as good at it as him though which is why he's joint 3rd for assists in the league. He's a limited player but he gets so many assists because he's very good at that part of his job.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on February 12, 2019, 11:18:16 PM
Lots of players take all the set pieces for their clubs, not many are as good at it as him though which is why he's joint 3rd for assists in the league. He's a limited player but he gets so many assists because he's very good at that part of his job.
Do all the others offer so little else?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on February 12, 2019, 11:58:35 PM
Which wasn't the point.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on February 13, 2019, 12:27:45 PM
Lots of players take all the set pieces for their clubs, not many are as good at it as him though which is why he's joint 3rd for assists in the league. He's a limited player but he gets so many assists because he's very good at that part of his job.

Exactly.  Also, of the 13 goals and assists he's contributed this season, only 8 of them have come from set pieces, so he's not exactly a one-trick pony.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt Collins on February 15, 2019, 05:49:02 PM
I don't see how anyone can doubt his productivity. All you need to do is compare his stats to others. Other team have midfielders who take set pieces too! Seems fricking obvious to me

It's more that his influence on the game outside of that is so poor
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on February 15, 2019, 06:35:41 PM
The stat that says since we built the midfield around him we have have won 2 in 12.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: LowerNorthStand on February 17, 2019, 07:56:27 AM
Guys with this amount of money do not leave anything to chance. If there was a whiff of issues relating to FFP then they very quickly made their first appointment not only a very experienced CEO  but a guy who helped write the FFP rules.

His first statement was along the lines of "clean slate" & "No issues with FFP"

They must know things we dont

Haha sounds like a brown envelope job to me
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Des Little on February 17, 2019, 09:48:56 AM
How devasting would it be to be clobbered by FFP and still be absolutely shit.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on February 17, 2019, 10:06:54 AM
I don't think we will be.

Everything about the Noses 12 point penalty seems to me to be brought about by their aggravation of their rule breaking, by not only violating them, but putting their fingers in their ears to the EFL's plan.

We are losing Whelan, Elmo, Elphick, Jedinak and Hutton as a matter of course. I wouls imagine thats anywhere between £7-8m in wages.

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: LowerNorthStand on February 17, 2019, 10:20:40 AM
I don't think we will be.

Everything about the Noses 12 point penalty seems to me to be brought about by their aggravation of their rule breaking, by not only violating them, but putting their fingers in their ears to the EFL's plan.

We are losing Whelan, Elmo, Elphick, Jedinak and Hutton as a matter of course. I wouls imagine thats anywhere between £7-8m in wages.

And Big Micah  8)
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Captain Sensible on February 17, 2019, 10:25:35 AM
I don't think we will be.

Everything about the Noses 12 point penalty seems to me to be brought about by their aggravation of their rule breaking, by not only violating them, but putting their fingers in their ears to the EFL's plan.

We are losing Whelan, Elmo, Elphick, Jedinak and Hutton as a matter of course. I wouls imagine thats anywhere between £7-8m in wages.

Sadly that’s not correct. Our very clear problem is far exceeding the maximum permitted losses of £39m in 3 seasons, being 2016/7, 2017/8 and now 2018/9.  We have done nowhere near enough to slash the wage bill and sell players over the past 12 months and have effectively stuck two fingers up to the EFL.

Maybe we gambled on going up this season (which wouldn’t have saved us as the PL and EFL have now committed to enforce each other’s sanctions).  Maybe the club has relied on new owners wiping the FFP slate clean (no, that doesn’t work otherwise a sale of a club would always be a get-our for reckless behavior).  Maybe the board gambled on selling Grealish in January (which his injury scuppered and selling anyone in the summer won’t work because it’s our accounts to 31/5/19 which count, and the window doesn’t open till 1st July.  Maybe Purslow thinks selling the training ground for an inflated price will wipe out the FFP losses before 31 May (the EFL will be all over the value attributed to any such sale to ensure that it is a fully arms length price).

I’ve been astonished at our transfer activity (or lack of sales) in the past 12 months.  I’ve been even more astonished at our signings of loan players on high wages. We’ve done nothing to try to comply with the very clear FFP problem.   

Rocky waters ahead, but there are few similarities with Blues’  position.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: LowerNorthStand on February 17, 2019, 10:26:55 AM
How devasting would it be to be clobbered by FFP and still be absolutely shit.

Yes I agree with this. At least the kids may get a chance.

We are still lumbered with Hogan, Lansbury, Kodjia etc what exactly are they contributing for the amount we are paying them?

Ross McCormack still has a year or so on his deal I think??  ::) He gets 2.3 million a year...

Once again I dont believe Aston Villa in terms of this FFP as Captain Sensible writes above. The numbers dont add up folks.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on February 17, 2019, 10:48:12 AM
I don't think we will be.

Everything about the Noses 12 point penalty seems to me to be brought about by their aggravation of their rule breaking, by not only violating them, but putting their fingers in their ears to the EFL's plan.

We are losing Whelan, Elmo, Elphick, Jedinak and Hutton as a matter of course. I wouls imagine thats anywhere between £7-8m in wages.

Sadly that’s not correct. Our very clear problem is far exceeding the maximum permitted losses of £39m in 3 seasons, being 2016/7, 2017/8 and now 2018/9.  We have done nowhere near enough to slash the wage bill and sell players over the past 12 months and have effectively stuck two fingers up to the EFL.

Maybe we gambled on going up this season (which wouldn’t have saved us as the PL and EFL have now committed to enforce each other’s sanctions).  Maybe the club has relied on new owners wiping the FFP slate clean (no, that doesn’t work otherwise a sale of a club would always be a get-our for reckless behavior).  Maybe the board gambled on selling Grealish in January (which his injury scuppered and selling anyone in the summer won’t work because it’s our accounts to 31/5/19 which count, and the window doesn’t open till 1st July.  Maybe Purslow thinks selling the training ground for an inflated price will wipe out the FFP losses before 31 May (the EFL will be all over the value attributed to any such sale to ensure that it is a fully arms length price).

I’ve been astonished at our transfer activity (or lack of sales) in the past 12 months.  I’ve been even more astonished at our signings of loan players on high wages. We’ve done nothing to try to comply with the very clear FFP problem.   

Rocky waters ahead, but there are few similarities with Blues’  position.

My point was I don't think the Noses would have received a recommendation for 12 points deducted, but for promising new sources of income, which didn't materialise and then deciding to sign players while embargoed.

Our wage bill dramatically reduce  plus we have saleable assets if needs be.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Dave P on February 17, 2019, 10:58:19 AM
Agreed. Simply failing the financial loss threshold is punishable by a fine as has been the case in the past. The EFL are looking to throw the book at the noses by, amongst other things, signing a player under embargo.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Captain Sensible on February 17, 2019, 11:01:42 AM
I don't think we will be.

Everything about the Noses 12 point penalty seems to me to be brought about by their aggravation of their rule breaking, by not only violating them, but putting their fingers in their ears to the EFL's plan.

We are losing Whelan, Elmo, Elphick, Jedinak and Hutton as a matter of course. I wouls imagine thats anywhere between £7-8m in wages.

Sadly that’s not correct. Our very clear problem is far exceeding the maximum permitted losses of £39m in 3 seasons, being 2016/7, 2017/8 and now 2018/9.  We have done nowhere near enough to slash the wage bill and sell players over the past 12 months and have effectively stuck two fingers up to the EFL.

Maybe we gambled on going up this season (which wouldn’t have saved us as the PL and EFL have now committed to enforce each other’s sanctions).  Maybe the club has relied on new owners wiping the FFP slate clean (no, that doesn’t work otherwise a sale of a club would always be a get-our for reckless behavior).  Maybe the board gambled on selling Grealish in January (which his injury scuppered and selling anyone in the summer won’t work because it’s our accounts to 31/5/19 which count, and the window doesn’t open till 1st July.  Maybe Purslow thinks selling the training ground for an inflated price will wipe out the FFP losses before 31 May (the EFL will be all over the value attributed to any such sale to ensure that it is a fully arms length price).

I’ve been astonished at our transfer activity (or lack of sales) in the past 12 months.  I’ve been even more astonished at our signings of loan players on high wages. We’ve done nothing to try to comply with the very clear FFP problem.   

Rocky waters ahead, but there are few similarities with Blues’  position.

My point was I don't think the Noses would have received a recommendation for 12 points deducted, but for promising new sources of income, which didn't materialise and then deciding to sign players while embargoed.

Our wage bill dramatically reduce  plus we have saleable assets if needs be.

The Blues recommendation seems to be 6 points for the loss levels (ours are far higher) and 9 points for signing a player whilst under embargo.

You are completely missing the point re timing.  Any steps to sell assets or to reduce wages had to have happened in this current financial year (which ends 31st May 2019) in order to be effective. What we do in the summer window doesn’t affect the figures to 31st May 2019!   The ONLY asset of any value which can be sold before 31 May 2019 is the training ground, and it would need to be at a massively inflated and artificial price to cover the FFP losses - and anything inflated or artificial won’t pass the test. 

It’s all far too late.  The amount of ground to make up is far too vast.  Don’t forget also that FFP is a rolling 3-year test.  Maximum permitted losses are £39m in each 3-year period. It looks certain therefore that we will breach it again next season, and the season after, before the impact of the remedial steps to cut the annual losses (which haven’t really started yet) have the required effect.

The extent of the problem is massive - unless a sale of the training ground somehow succeeds.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Captain Sensible on February 17, 2019, 11:05:33 AM
Agreed. Simply failing the financial loss threshold is punishable by a fine as has been the case in the past. The EFL are looking to throw the book at the noses by, amongst other things, signing a player under embargo.

Wrong.  QPR got clobbered with £42m fines and transfer embargoes and that was BEFORE the rules were tightened up to make everything far more enforceable.

This is the sort of complacency that the club’s hierarchy is guilty of.  Last summer needed drastic action.  It didn’t happen.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Clampy on February 17, 2019, 11:08:44 AM
Well Purslow doesn't seem to think there will be a problem so let's wait and see shall we.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Captain Sensible on February 17, 2019, 11:29:55 AM
Well Purslow doesn't seem to think there will be a problem so let's wait and see shall we.

Purslow appears to be staking everything on number 26 red coming up at the casino.  If he’s right, then he’s played a blinder. But if he’s wrong....
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Risso on February 17, 2019, 11:33:05 AM
The sales of Jack and McGinn this summer should add about £40m to our net profit.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Captain Sensible on February 17, 2019, 12:07:11 PM
The sales of Jack and McGinn this summer should add about £40m to our net profit.

That won’t help one iota re the immediate FFP issue. They cannot he sold until the transfer window opens on 1st July and it is the accounts for the year ended 31st May 2019 which is relevant.  They cannot be sold before 31st May!  Grealish should have been sold last summer, along with Chester and any other valuable players.  It’s all too late!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: andyh on February 17, 2019, 12:08:46 PM
The sales of Jack and McGinn this summer should add about £40m to our net profit.
Sadly I think you are right.
It’s not a case of wanting to sell our best players but it’s the stark reality of spending 3 (going on 4) years in this division.
I think regardless of how rich our owners are, they won’t be allowed to spend any where the amount needed to rebuild the squad without bringing in significant cash first.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: brian green on February 17, 2019, 12:09:25 PM
We're doomed I tell ye.  Doomed.  *rolls eyeballs*.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Captain Sensible on February 17, 2019, 12:18:56 PM
The sales of Jack and McGinn this summer should add about £40m to our net profit.
Sadly I think you are right.
It’s not a case of wanting to sell our best players but it’s the stark reality of spending 3 (going on 4) years in this division.
I think regardless of how rich our owners are, they won’t be allowed to spend any where the amount needed to rebuild the squad without bringing in significant cash first.

The absurdity of FFP is that they must sell, raise a lot of money to generate profit to wipe out FFP losses, but not then be able to sign players for fees with a transfer embargo, and still must keep the wage bill right down to make sure that we stay within the FFP limits.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: four fornicholl on February 17, 2019, 12:25:55 PM
Is blaming the previous owners an option?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Dave P on February 17, 2019, 12:28:30 PM
Is blaming the previous owners an option?

Not when he is still here. Unless you mean Lerner?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Risso on February 17, 2019, 12:30:06 PM
The sales of Jack and McGinn this summer should add about £40m to our net profit.

That won’t help one iota re the immediate FFP issue. They cannot he sold until the transfer window opens on 1st July and it is the accounts for the year ended 31st May 2019 which is relevant.  They cannot be sold before 31st May!  Grealish should have been sold last summer, along with Chester and any other valuable players.  It’s all too late!

I didn't say it would with this year's accounts.  But there's also provision in the rules for showing that you're making an effort in years after you've had a problem, and are at least attempting to get your house in order.  It's why the Blues are in bother, because they effectively stuck two fingers up at the League.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sirlordbaltimore on February 17, 2019, 02:57:59 PM
Grealish should have been sold last summer, along with Chester and any other valuable players.  It’s all too late!

and yet the club hierarchy say absolutely everything is fine and in order

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Captain Sensible on February 17, 2019, 03:40:47 PM
The sales of Jack and McGinn this summer should add about £40m to our net profit.

That won’t help one iota re the immediate FFP issue. They cannot he sold until the transfer window opens on 1st July and it is the accounts for the year ended 31st May 2019 which is relevant.  They cannot be sold before 31st May!  Grealish should have been sold last summer, along with Chester and any other valuable players.  It’s all too late!

I didn't say it would with this year's accounts.  But there's also provision in the rules for showing that you're making an effort in years after you've had a problem, and are at least attempting to get your house in order.  It's why the Blues are in bother, because they effectively stuck two fingers up at the League.

The FPP position was well known last summer.  What steps did the board take to address it?  Going out and signing expensive players like Abraham and Mings without selling valuable players doesn’t show any attempt to get the house in order!   It looks like the board has also stuck two fingers up to the board (and maybe the plan was to sell Grealish in January to solve the problem).
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Captain Sensible on February 17, 2019, 03:41:28 PM
Grealish should have been sold last summer, along with Chester and any other valuable players.  It’s all too late!

and yet the club hierarchy say absolutely everything is fine and in order

Indeed they do.  All will be revealed soon enough.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sirlordbaltimore on February 17, 2019, 03:53:49 PM
Grealish should have been sold last summer, along with Chester and any other valuable players.  It’s all too late!

and yet the club hierarchy say absolutely everything is fine and in order

Indeed they do.  All will be revealed soon enough.

Correct. Hence me being completely relaxed about it.

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sickbeggar on February 17, 2019, 03:57:23 PM
How much did we spend on Kalinic? If its really that dire then surely that deal would have been cancelled because only a complete nutter would have gambled on this squad going up in Jaunuary.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on February 17, 2019, 04:40:20 PM
Grealish should have been sold last summer, along with Chester and any other valuable players.  It’s all too late!

and yet the club hierarchy say absolutely everything is fine and in order

Indeed they do.  All will be revealed soon enough.

Do you like Kit-Kats?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Richard E on February 17, 2019, 04:43:00 PM
Grealish should have been sold last summer, along with Chester and any other valuable players.  It’s all too late!

and yet the club hierarchy say absolutely everything is fine and in order

Indeed they do.  All will be revealed soon enough.

Do you like Kit-Kats?
Buys loads of them from Tesco’s.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on February 17, 2019, 04:46:15 PM
Do they taste bitter?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on February 17, 2019, 04:47:00 PM
Grealish should have been sold last summer, along with Chester and any other valuable players.  It’s all too late!

and yet the club hierarchy say absolutely everything is fine and in order

Indeed they do.  All will be revealed soon enough.

Do you like Kit-Kats?
Buys loads of them from Tesco’s.

Takes them back in those wanky blue and white stripey bags I imagine.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Richard E on February 17, 2019, 04:47:48 PM
Stores them on a boiler
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: aj2k77 on February 17, 2019, 04:49:34 PM
You'd think Captain Senseless and his ilk would have learnt from last Summer when they wanked themselves into a stupor imagining us going bankrupt, then we were taken over by more billionaires. Don't count your Chickens you c***, we will see where we all are this time in 12 months. You'll still be reading about us obsessively, I'm sure of that and the Villa won't be ponderous shit, deep down you know it too.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Risso on February 17, 2019, 04:50:24 PM
The sales of Jack and McGinn this summer should add about £40m to our net profit.

That won’t help one iota re the immediate FFP issue. They cannot he sold until the transfer window opens on 1st July and it is the accounts for the year ended 31st May 2019 which is relevant.  They cannot be sold before 31st May!  Grealish should have been sold last summer, along with Chester and any other valuable players.  It’s all too late!

I didn't say it would with this year's accounts.  But there's also provision in the rules for showing that you're making an effort in years after you've had a problem, and are at least attempting to get your house in order.  It's why the Blues are in bother, because they effectively stuck two fingers up at the League.

The FPP position was well known last summer.  What steps did the board take to address it?  Going out and signing expensive players like Abraham and Mings without selling valuable players doesn’t show any attempt to get the house in order!   It looks like the board has also stuck two fingers up to the board (and maybe the plan was to sell Grealish in January to solve the problem).

Well the 2018 accounts will be out in the next three weeks, so we'll get a clue then.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on February 17, 2019, 04:51:35 PM
Our response when the EFL question our finances

(https://thumbs.gfycat.com/ExcellentFeminineCockroach-max-1mb.gif)
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: aj2k77 on February 17, 2019, 04:53:56 PM
We've got money anyway. So we should spend it. I couldn't give a fuck anymore about penny pinching and selling anyone any good to spend roughly the same amount as Rotherham, even though your owners could buy every single club in the division 10 times over.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Richard E on February 17, 2019, 04:54:43 PM
We’ll just do what we did in 1888 and form a brand new ‘Football League’ from scratch.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Risso on February 17, 2019, 04:55:33 PM
We’ll just do what we did in 1888 and form a brand new ‘Football League’ from scratch.

Please can we be the only team in it, so that we stand a chance of actually winning it.  And the associated cup competition.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: cdbullyweefan on February 18, 2019, 10:08:28 AM
We'd still find a way to fuck it up.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Toronto Villa on February 18, 2019, 01:46:25 PM
We'd still find a way to fuck it up.

We’ll lose to our U23’s
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: GordonCowansisthegreatest on February 18, 2019, 02:54:26 PM
We'd still find a way to fuck it up.

We’ll lose to our U23’s
I'd treat that as a win win
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: mr underhill on February 18, 2019, 04:15:16 PM
Was 1888  the last time we were any good?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: brian green on February 18, 2019, 05:01:06 PM
My grandfather said we were brilliant.  Then again he attempted suicide the first time we were relegated.  Clearly runs in the family.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on February 19, 2019, 11:36:41 AM
Be interesting to see the situation as accounts are due in a couple of weeks.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SoccerHQ on February 19, 2019, 07:32:53 PM
We lose parachute payments this summer don't we so you to balance that out with losing some more high earners and possibly selling a crown jewel like Jack.

What I don't understand is why we just didn't sell Jack last summer. Yes Spurs weren't paying our valuation but it's still something to avert a potential FFP sanction.

Would be disappointed in the new lot if we get hit with any sort of points deduction (we can barely challenge for top 6 starting on 0 points). We had a massive warning last summer which we were lucky to get away with.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on February 19, 2019, 07:49:31 PM
Thank god we didn’t sell Jack, can you imagine what Bruce would have done with any spare cash.
The Club has said FFP is not a problem,
I am baffled by this aswell.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on February 20, 2019, 12:40:20 AM
Last summer was a capital issue as Dr Tony had maxed out the credit card.

Shaun Harvey is going. We've probably bought the new CEO or donated an airport to the EFL or something.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: andyh on February 20, 2019, 07:57:08 AM
We lose parachute payments this summer don't we so you to balance that out with losing some more high earners and possibly selling a crown jewel like Jack.

What I don't understand is why we just didn't sell Jack last summer. Yes Spurs weren't paying our valuation but it's still something to avert a potential FFP sanction.

Would be disappointed in the new lot if we get hit with any sort of points deduction (we can barely challenge for top 6 starting on 0 points). We had a massive warning last summer which we were lucky to get away with.
Why should we sell him for less than his worth? Especially if the club understands that we didn’t ‘need’ to at that time.
I’m glad we told spurs to fuck off.

If we ‘must’ sell him in the future, and I’m resigned to the fact we do, then at least his true worth to Aston Villa is covered by a minimum valuation in his contract, hopefully.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: eamonn on February 20, 2019, 08:05:52 AM
Plus there was always the hope with promotion this season that Jack would stay for just one more year of dross. As it is we're stuck here, I just hope we don't have another saga all summer about him going and that it's all done by July.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SoccerHQ on February 20, 2019, 12:04:23 PM
We lose parachute payments this summer don't we so you to balance that out with losing some more high earners and possibly selling a crown jewel like Jack.

What I don't understand is why we just didn't sell Jack last summer. Yes Spurs weren't paying our valuation but it's still something to avert a potential FFP sanction.

Would be disappointed in the new lot if we get hit with any sort of points deduction (we can barely challenge for top 6 starting on 0 points). We had a massive warning last summer which we were lucky to get away with.
Why should we sell him for less than his worth? Especially if the club understands that we didn’t ‘need’ to at that time.
I’m glad we told spurs to fuck off.

If we ‘must’ sell him in the future, and I’m resigned to the fact we do, then at least his true worth to Aston Villa is covered by a minimum valuation in his contract, hopefully.

Probably around the period we were trying to pay our tax bills in instalments and  cashing in on our sell on clauses for players we sold in 2016.

I agree things changed when Wes and Nas turned up. Let's hope they're owners who have properly looked at the long term rather than just paying lip service to it.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Newby on February 20, 2019, 12:34:19 PM
Fuck it. Spend spend spend, get promoted, take the fine. Totally worth it so long as we get promoted! Risk? What risk? 😬
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SoccerHQ on February 20, 2019, 12:37:12 PM
Fuck it. Spend spend spend, get promoted, take the fine. Totally worth it so long as we get promoted! Risk? What risk? 😬

We tried that method in 16/17! Unlike Bournemouth and Leicester we just forgot the get promoted part of the job.

Could be wrong but read somewhere the new rules coming in know mean FL or independent board can now recommend to premier league teams that break rules and get promoted can be deducted points in the premier league to stop that little loophole.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: paul_e on February 20, 2019, 01:19:04 PM
We lose parachute payments this summer don't we so you to balance that out with losing some more high earners and possibly selling a crown jewel like Jack.

What I don't understand is why we just didn't sell Jack last summer. Yes Spurs weren't paying our valuation but it's still something to avert a potential FFP sanction.

Would be disappointed in the new lot if we get hit with any sort of points deduction (we can barely challenge for top 6 starting on 0 points). We had a massive warning last summer which we were lucky to get away with.
Why should we sell him for less than his worth? Especially if the club understands that we didn’t ‘need’ to at that time.
I’m glad we told spurs to fuck off.

If we ‘must’ sell him in the future, and I’m resigned to the fact we do, then at least his true worth to Aston Villa is covered by a minimum valuation in his contract, hopefully.

Probably around the period we were trying to pay our tax bills in instalments and  cashing in on our sell on clauses for players we sold in 2016.

I agree things changed when Wes and Nas turned up. Let's hope they're owners who have properly looked at the long term rather than just paying lip service to it.

From what i understand Spurs never actually made an offer during that time, instead holding off until much later in the window in an attempt to push the price down and make us desperate. The new owners coming in and fixing the cashflow issues meant we could give them a "£40m or fuck off" style ultimatum so there was never really an offer to accept.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Risso on February 20, 2019, 01:23:21 PM
Didn't they make an early extremely derisory offer of £3m and Onomah?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: paul_e on February 20, 2019, 03:55:10 PM
Didn't they make an early extremely derisory offer of £3m and Onomah?

They may have (but I don't recall it being widely reported and I'm fairly sure there was something from the club saying no offer had been received after that came out) buteven if they did that would've done nothing to help the finances so the point remains that Villa never really had a decision to make until we no longer needed the cash.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Tuscans on February 20, 2019, 04:04:58 PM
Companies house saying the owners have put in another 13 squillion to cover January.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Dave P on February 20, 2019, 04:53:43 PM
Companies house saying the owners have put in another 13 squillion to cover January.

That sounds a bit hand to mouth which can't be good long term?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Risso on February 20, 2019, 05:56:14 PM
It obviously doesn't say anything about "covering January".  They've injected some more capital, that's all.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Toronto Villa on February 20, 2019, 08:04:53 PM
Didn't they make an early extremely derisory offer of £3m Onomah?

correct, so a net bid of £1.5m
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on February 20, 2019, 08:42:56 PM
It obviously doesn't say anything about "covering January".  They've injected some more capital, that's all.
Exactly, it says that we have owners that are making sure we don’t have cash flow problems.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Toronto Villa on February 20, 2019, 08:44:13 PM
(http://villaunderground.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Screenshot-2019-02-20-at-19.18.29.png)
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AVH87 on February 20, 2019, 08:57:14 PM
I'm dreading the accounts coming out later this month, cant see past more bad news to go with the cluster fuck of a season we've ended up having.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SoccerHQ on February 20, 2019, 10:23:17 PM
We lose parachute payments this summer don't we so you to balance that out with losing some more high earners and possibly selling a crown jewel like Jack.

What I don't understand is why we just didn't sell Jack last summer. Yes Spurs weren't paying our valuation but it's still something to avert a potential FFP sanction.

Would be disappointed in the new lot if we get hit with any sort of points deduction (we can barely challenge for top 6 starting on 0 points). We had a massive warning last summer which we were lucky to get away with.
Why should we sell him for less than his worth? Especially if the club understands that we didn’t ‘need’ to at that time.
I’m glad we told spurs to fuck off.

If we ‘must’ sell him in the future, and I’m resigned to the fact we do, then at least his true worth to Aston Villa is covered by a minimum valuation in his contract, hopefully.

Probably around the period we were trying to pay our tax bills in instalments and  cashing in on our sell on clauses for players we sold in 2016.

I agree things changed when Wes and Nas turned up. Let's hope they're owners who have properly looked at the long term rather than just paying lip service to it.

From what i understand Spurs never actually made an offer during that time, instead holding off until much later in the window in an attempt to push the price down and make us desperate. The new owners coming in and fixing the cashflow issues meant we could give them a "£40m or fuck off" style ultimatum so there was never really an offer to accept.

I have no doubt they were low balling. Ultimately though Jack thought Hull first game was going to be his last game for us so we must've been close to accepting whatever they were offering for him to have that impression.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on February 20, 2019, 10:25:21 PM
Or he was under the impression they were going to make a sensible offer and we'd have to accept it as we were fecked. They never did and we didn't end up having to sell any way.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: eamonn on February 21, 2019, 12:28:00 AM
Does that injection of new capital dilute Xia's stake further?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: cdbullyweefan on February 21, 2019, 12:40:59 AM
I don't think he has a stake anymore.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sid1964 on February 21, 2019, 07:35:37 AM
I would guess that the Accounts will show a loss of £20+ million, until we realise that we have to operate as a championship club, paying championship wages, we will never sort out the mess we are in with regards to expenditure.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: LowerNorthStand on February 23, 2019, 05:28:59 AM
I would guess that the Accounts will show a loss of £20+ million, until we realise that we have to operate as a championship club, paying championship wages, we will never sort out the mess we are in with regards to expenditure.

I agree. I fear its too late now. I wish they would have focused on balancing the books more.

I dont like the silence from the club on the end of season plans if we dont get promoted.

Do the fans union groups ask the club about this in the meetings they have?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Newby on February 23, 2019, 07:59:18 AM
There are minutes posted here if you have a look at the right thread mate.  I'm not sure which one it is but I'm sure Dave or Mr Shin et al will point you in the right direction.  The questions are asked but I don't suppose the club can ever be completely sure of the answer.  For arguments sake, it does not look right now that we will hit the play off's.  But, what if.......
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: dave.woodhall on February 23, 2019, 10:42:26 AM
It's damned if they do in some quarters. If they say nothing they're wrong and if they say promotion isn't vital they don't care.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on February 23, 2019, 11:37:00 AM
Last summer was a capital issue as Dr Tony had maxed out the credit card.

Shaun Harvey is going. We've probably bought the new CEO or donated an airport to the EFL or something.

The new CEO will have a lovely brand new pair of Adidas Adastripe trainers waiting for him or her on their desk when they arrive.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Villa75 on February 23, 2019, 02:49:50 PM
It's damned if they do in some quarters. If they say nothing they're wrong and if they say promotion isn't vital they don't care.

"Vital"? Not quite what what they said.

They said they weren't "expecting" this manager and team to get promoted.

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Toronto Villa on February 23, 2019, 02:56:36 PM
It's damned if they do in some quarters. If they say nothing they're wrong and if they say promotion isn't vital they don't care.

"Vital"? Not quite what what they said.

They said they weren't "expecting" this manager and team to get promoted.



Purslow said it wasn't imperative because they wanted to build something concrete for the future. We've all being crying out for a long term approach to things versus a quick fix that falls apart. Why are you constantly spinning the negative?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: dave.woodhall on February 23, 2019, 03:00:11 PM
It's damned if they do in some quarters. If they say nothing they're wrong and if they say promotion isn't vital they don't care.

"Vital"? Not quite what what they said.

They said they weren't "expecting" this manager and team to get promoted.



You're starting to get a bit boring now.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on February 23, 2019, 03:01:44 PM
"Starting to"?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Villa75 on February 23, 2019, 03:42:38 PM
It's damned if they do in some quarters. If they say nothing they're wrong and if they say promotion isn't vital they don't care.

"Vital"? Not quite what what they said.

They said they weren't "expecting" this manager and team to get promoted.



Purslow said it wasn't imperative because they wanted to build something concrete for the future. We've all being crying out for a long term approach to things versus a quick fix that falls apart. Why are you constantly spinning the negative?

I'm not the one spinning anything.

The words "not expecting" were used in relation to promotion.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Fred Crump on February 23, 2019, 03:45:31 PM
Zzzzzzz .....
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Toronto Villa on February 23, 2019, 03:46:19 PM
It's damned if they do in some quarters. If they say nothing they're wrong and if they say promotion isn't vital they don't care.

"Vital"? Not quite what what they said.

They said they weren't "expecting" this manager and team to get promoted.



Purslow said it wasn't imperative because they wanted to build something concrete for the future. We've all being crying out for a long term approach to things versus a quick fix that falls apart. Why are you constantly spinning the negative?

I'm not the one spinning anything.

The words "not expecting" were used in relation to promotion.

Read what said in context of the word “expecting”.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Villa Lew on March 23, 2019, 09:04:41 AM
Article in today's Daily Mail

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-6840541/Villa-Derby-Sheffield-Wednesday-clubs-face-sanctions.html
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Newby on March 23, 2019, 09:18:55 AM
That article is a bit 'yeah?, No shit Sherlock' isn't it. Given that Purslow helped to write the rules, I trust him far more than the Mail.  I'm sure the club has a plan.  Oh, and the smaller clubs are less sympathetic? I'm sure Birmingham are seething.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: aj2k77 on March 23, 2019, 10:09:51 AM
How are the limits not increased on a yearly basis anyway seeing as wages, transfer fees and general running costs increase year on year?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Villafirst on March 23, 2019, 10:37:01 AM
Article

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-6840541/Villa-Derby-Sheffield-Wednesday-clubs-face-sanctions.html

Daily Mail spreading the dirt, who'd have thought ! They need to tread carefully.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on March 23, 2019, 10:39:51 AM
Speculative article is speculative.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on March 23, 2019, 10:51:22 AM
Alan Nixon reckons we're not concerned.

Combination of a crafty CEO who wrote the rules and being richer than all the other 72, the EFL, Jesus, the Beatles and Crosesus combined I suppose.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: VinnieChase84 on March 23, 2019, 11:04:47 AM
Key points of the blues report.

EFL took into consideration who was to blame, the managers or the owners.
Our owners inherited what the past regime did.

I’m told Purslow from day one has engaged in the league and they rubber stamped a 3 year plan for us.
We’ve not even breached FFP yet as this years figures is a forecast document.
- this seasons financials will be looked at again in the summer to see if we have breached this season and by how much
- The past 2 seasons is mitigation as how can current owners change the past when not at the helm
- We have a 3 year plan working with the EFL
- we’ve been open and transparent unlike them down the road who tried to cover it up

Ultimately if we don’t go up then a Jack sale well and truly bails us out. Even if the scum sell Adams for say £15m they can only allocate a portion of that fee over the length of his contract (say £3m per season for 5 years)
With Jack his WHOLE fee goes straight into the current years books.

All this showing how the club are committed to being sustainable and working with the P&S EFL rules.
I would be astounded if we got stung and would expect us to challenge it in court of arbitration if we did
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: VinnieChase84 on March 23, 2019, 11:06:56 AM
Speculative article is speculative.

It’s using us as the biggest name in the league to say “look, punishments can happen now”
The article is crap. It mentions derby being in danger but then says a sale would sort them out. That’s exactly where we are now
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on March 23, 2019, 11:37:03 AM
How long before we say screw this and form a ‘PL2’
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: eddiemunster on March 23, 2019, 11:44:33 AM
With regards to the 9 point deduction to those down the road, and the article in the Daily Heil, I suggest everyone actually read the EFL statement, which blows the Daily Heil article to bits.
https://www.efl.com/news/2019/march/efl-statement-birmingham-city/ or see below,

Note in the following, that Blues were the only team found to have breached the rules;

An EFL spokesman said: “The Profitability and Sustainability Rules, aligned with those in the Premier League, became effective in 2015/16. Season 2017/18 was the end of the first full reporting period with Birmingham City the only Club found to have breached those requirements, when it incurred adjusted losses of £48.787 million, £9.787 million in excess of the permitted losses.

Also for those crowing mind the gap etc the statement also says the following;

The parties have 14 days in which to appeal the decision, and in the circumstances no further comment will be made.
The Championship league table will be amended with immediate effect but it must be recognised that this remains subject to the outcome of any appeal.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: footyskillz on March 23, 2019, 12:17:35 PM
I can see an appeal coming and them getting potentially getting a reduced points deduction to at best half so 4/5 pts half or maybe 6pts rather than the 9pts.
Whatever finally happens that club creates it's own problems ! And they don't deserve Gary Monk. He should leave come season end and go WBA after their failure to be promoted and we the villa have gone back up !!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on March 23, 2019, 02:49:06 PM
Tweet
Conversation

Alan Nixon
@reluctantnicko
Villa not worried. Sheff Wed been cutting and will cut again. Derby not been spending madly lately either.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Dave P on March 23, 2019, 02:56:13 PM
Key points of the blues report.

EFL took into consideration who was to blame, the managers or the owners.
Our owners inherited what the past regime did.

I’m told Purslow from day one has engaged in the league and they rubber stamped a 3 year plan for us.
We’ve not even breached FFP yet as this years figures is a forecast document.
- this seasons financials will be looked at again in the summer to see if we have breached this season and by how much
- The past 2 seasons is mitigation as how can current owners change the past when not at the helm
- We have a 3 year plan working with the EFL
- we’ve been open and transparent unlike them down the road who tried to cover it up

Ultimately if we don’t go up then a Jack sale well and truly bails us out. Even if the scum sell Adams for say £15m they can only allocate a portion of that fee over the length of his contract (say £3m per season for 5 years)
With Jack his WHOLE fee goes straight into the current years books.

All this showing how the club are committed to being sustainable and working with the P&S EFL rules.
I would be astounded if we got stung and would expect us to challenge it in court of arbitration if we did

This is very interesting and reassuring. People look at the hard losses but the rules are for profit and SUSTAINABILITY. A sensible business plan all ratified by the EFL will surely work in our favour. Those lot down the road seemed to have just closed their eyes and hoped it will be fine.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on March 23, 2019, 03:04:09 PM
Price of Football (believe he's a bod at Liverpool Uni) reckons we've complied with FFP anyway.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: LowerNorthStand on March 23, 2019, 03:37:10 PM
Price of Football (believe he's a bod at Liverpool Uni) reckons we've complied with FFP anyway.

Is that the bloke on twitter who posts on clubs accounting reports? He seems to know what he’s talking about
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Behind Bluenose Lines on March 23, 2019, 03:39:55 PM
Price of Football (believe he's a bod at Liverpool Uni) reckons we've complied with FFP anyway.

Is that the bloke on twitter who posts on clubs accounting reports? He seems to know what he’s talking about
I hope he's right. Would shut up Richard Wilford on WM up!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on March 23, 2019, 03:42:33 PM
Yeah, a lecturer on Finance at Liverpool Uni.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on March 23, 2019, 04:29:48 PM
Kieran Maguire.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: villa `cross the mersey on March 23, 2019, 06:31:08 PM
Kieran Maguire.
Unfortunately SHA listened to advice given by Kylie Minoghue
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Exeter 77 on March 23, 2019, 06:51:08 PM
Kieran Maguire.
He did an extensive live stream on Benjamin Bloom's YouTube channel last week but has now been split into several separate videos.



Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Villafirst on March 23, 2019, 07:29:16 PM
SHA Forum clutching at any straw hoping we'll be punished. But they accept we'll probably "jam" our way out of it. I'd like to think our owners have got FFP nailed down. Purslow surely has the best understanding of the rules?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Holte132 on March 24, 2019, 09:40:46 AM
From today's Sunday Telegraph:

In the Football League’s fulsome and damning judgment of Birmingham City’s chronic overspend, there is a passage in which the club, in their desperation, try to assert the argument that although they broke financial fair play rules, they did it so badly that no advantage was gained.

This is what might reasonably be described as the idiot’s defence. Having accepted that their losses far exceeded the £39 million permitted over the three seasons in question, the owners of Birmingham tried to run one more play. This one was crazy but it might just work. Yes, they said, almost £10 million more than permitted had been spent but they invited the EFL to prove that the outgoings had yielded anything approaching a “measurable sporting advantage”.

In short, they and their lawyers tried to make a virtue of their own ineptitude. The helpless fools powerless to stop themselves spending way too much on players who were never going to get them promoted. At this point Charles Flint QC, chairman of the EFL commission, was obliged to point out that was simply not how FFP worked, and if it was there would be little point having the sanction – although all the grown-ups in the room would have known that anyway.

By their own admission, Trillion Trophy Asia are not good owners, and the nine-point deduction will be their badge of dishonour. What is it, one might ask, that would persuade the owners of a solid Championship club to go on a suicidal spending mission doomed to propel them into a relegation fight? The answer would be, because many in the Championship are doing the same and their reasons are entirely for the benefit of ownership.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: brian green on March 24, 2019, 09:51:56 AM
There is a great television play starring David Kossof (sp?) from the days of black and white called The Dock Brief in which a petty crook (played by Alfie Bass I think) gets off because his lawyer is so incompetent.  Somebody at The Sty must have seen it and been inspired by it.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: eamonn on March 24, 2019, 10:14:46 AM
Blose are lucky in that being mired in mid-table they've not missed out on a play-off push with this deduction and they likely will have too much to be involved in a relegation scrap.

If the deduction had been 12-15 points it would have made the last few weeks of the season interesting for them, they might even have filled the Sty for their last few home games instead of only when they play us...

Given that they will face no further fines I think they should be grateful that their punishment will turn out to be negligible (it's not like each Championship final position is worth the £750k or whatever it is in the PL), so they should stop moaning and shut the fcuk up.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: DeeBoy1 on March 24, 2019, 01:49:13 PM
Kieran Maguire.
Unfortunately SHA listened to advice given by Kylie Minoghue

That made me laugh out loud!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Villafirst on March 24, 2019, 02:35:14 PM
Perhaps Villa ought to put out a statement addressing this issue. If we are indeed compliant within the rules, perhaps the threat of a lawsuit against the Daily Mail might focus minds? This is damaging publicity against the club.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: dave.woodhall on March 24, 2019, 02:49:42 PM
Perhaps Villa ought to put out a statement addressing this issue. If we are indeed compliant within the rules, perhaps the threat of a lawsuit against the Daily Mail might focus minds? This is damaging publicity against the club.

Letting the media walk all over us is as much a part of our identity now as winning trophies used to be.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on March 24, 2019, 07:36:10 PM
Perhaps Villa ought to put out a statement addressing this issue. If we are indeed compliant within the rules, perhaps the threat of a lawsuit against the Daily Mail might focus minds? This is damaging publicity against the club.

Letting the media walk all over us is as much a part of our identity now as winning trophies used to be.
If , as has been reported we are working with and are in discussions with the EFL then there is little point in making this a media matter and drawing unnecessary attention to it.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: adrenachrome on March 24, 2019, 09:40:45 PM
Perhaps Villa ought to put out a statement addressing this issue. If we are indeed compliant within the rules, perhaps the threat of a lawsuit against the Daily Mail might focus minds? This is damaging publicity against the club.

Letting the media walk all over us is as much a part of our identity now as winning trophies used to be.
If , as has been reported we are working with and are in discussions with the EFL then there is little point in making this a media matter and drawing unnecessary attention to it.

But DW's point still stands, since it  is true; but what is truth in these post-modern times.

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on March 25, 2019, 12:48:10 AM
Perhaps Villa ought to put out a statement addressing this issue. If we are indeed compliant within the rules, perhaps the threat of a lawsuit against the Daily Mail might focus minds? This is damaging publicity against the club.

Letting the media walk all over us is as much a part of our identity now as winning trophies used to be.
If , as has been reported we are working with and are in discussions with the EFL then there is little point in making this a media matter and drawing unnecessary attention to it.

But DW's point still stands, since it  is true; but what is truth in these post-modern times.
Agree, just thinking this might be an occasion when it is in our best interests to keep our powder dry.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: mike on March 25, 2019, 11:56:44 AM
I haven't been able to face up to this. I've had a quick skim over the last couple of pages and there seems to be reason to believe that we are not cattle trucked. Am I right?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on March 25, 2019, 01:33:09 PM
We're compliant. If we stay down, then we'll need to find a way of reducing losses to £7m or less.

Basically flog Grealish for £35m and shed the endless non-contributors and we will be left ok.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: eamonn on March 25, 2019, 01:55:47 PM
There's no way of keeping Jack then if we're stuck here even if he wanted to stay?
Please get promoted...please!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on March 25, 2019, 03:42:07 PM
Parachute payments reduce income, while our permitted losses decrease to £39m from £61m, so we would need to find around £30m to comply.

Grealish going and 7 or 8 large contracts going is probably worth about £45m. Our average salary is £1.8m, but I'd imagine the likes of Jedinak, Whelan etc are on north of £34k per week.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Villan For Life on March 25, 2019, 04:23:23 PM
Price of Football (believe he's a bod at Liverpool Uni) reckons we've complied with FFP anyway.

Is that the bloke on twitter who posts on clubs accounting reports? He seems to know what he’s talking about
I hope he's right. Would shut up Richard Wilford on WM up!

Kieron Maguire is on t’ wireless tonight. This news comes with a caveat, It’s on WM during their football phone in and Richard Wilford will be involved.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: b23 on March 25, 2019, 07:22:51 PM
An interesting article on the BBC internet sport.

Blackburn, Bolton and Birmingham: Seven charts showing how Championship clubs reached this point

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47691385
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sirlordbaltimore on March 25, 2019, 08:34:31 PM


Only caught the last 40 minutes of the WM thing tonight. Just as well as my heads still aching now.

From what i gather, if we don't get promoted then we're really got to sell Jack to balance the books. If we don't go up i'd expect that to happen anyway obviously. The problem then is, who do we sell to balance the books the next summer if we still aren't promoted ?

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: The Left Side on March 25, 2019, 08:37:50 PM


Only caught the last 40 minutes of the WM thing tonight. Just as well as my heads still aching now.

From what i gather, if we don't get promoted then we're really got to sell Jack to balance the books. If we don't go up i'd expect that to happen anyway obviously. The problem then is, who do we sell to balance the books the next summer if we still aren't promoted ?



SJM probably
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Newby on March 25, 2019, 09:52:00 PM
Bringing the age of the squad down, making players more sellable is also a way of minimising FFP issues as we can agree that we will be able to sell to survive.  With such an ageing squad, there aren't too many in there that are of any real value, other than Jack and SJM, of course.  Smith has to make sure that he has a squad of 20, all sellable and of value to the club.  Instead of the Bruce valueless trash which have left us scrabbling around this coming summer to replace them all.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: rougegorge on March 25, 2019, 11:25:56 PM


Only caught the last 40 minutes of the WM thing tonight. Just as well as my heads still aching now.

From what i gather, if we don't get promoted then we're really got to sell Jack to balance the books. If we don't go up i'd expect that to happen anyway obviously. The problem then is, who do we sell to balance the books the next summer if we still aren't promoted ?
Yes that was insightful stuff on WM. Lots of people on here slate the station,  but that was a good listen this evening. The guy they had on,  Kieran Maguire,  was very knowledgeable.

Blues were spending nearly twice as much as they were bringing in, and Wolves would have been in trouble had they not been promoted. They lost far more than anyone last season but apparently promotion bonuses aren't included in any calculation. Also an interesting article on Redknapp in the Observer yesterday.

We were so close to liquidation in the summer, that the criticism Bruce gets about leaving the squad in a parlous state now seems quite harsh.

We may need to get creative ourselves in the summer if we don't go up or inevitably we'll sell Jack and maybe McGinn.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: KRS on March 25, 2019, 11:31:40 PM
There's only one thing for it...we need to support the team all the way to the playoff final then rock Wembley to its foundations as we roar them on to victory.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: adrenachrome on March 26, 2019, 01:11:11 AM
An interesting article on the BBC internet sport.

Blackburn, Bolton and Birmingham: Seven charts showing how Championship clubs reached this point

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47691385

Thanks for that, B23. Quite interesting. Kieran Maguire seems to know a thing or two about a thing or two on the issue.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: eamonn on March 26, 2019, 08:50:39 AM
Does anyone have a link to the WM show and is it playable outside of the West-Mids?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on March 26, 2019, 01:55:13 PM
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p07328z3
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: eamonn on March 26, 2019, 02:36:00 PM
Ta.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: clash city rocker on March 26, 2019, 07:57:43 PM


Only caught the last 40 minutes of the WM thing tonight. Just as well as my heads still aching now.

From what i gather, if we don't get promoted then we're really got to sell Jack to balance the books. If we don't go up i'd expect that to happen anyway obviously. The problem then is, who do we sell to balance the books the next summer if we still aren't promoted ?
Yes that was insightful stuff on WM. Lots of people on here slate the station,  but that was a good listen this evening. The guy they had on,  Kieran Maguire,  was very knowledgeable.

Blues were spending nearly twice as much as they were bringing in, and Wolves would have been in trouble had they not been promoted. They lost far more than anyone last season but apparently promotion bonuses aren't included in any calculation. Also an interesting article on Redknapp in the Observer yesterday.

We were so close to liquidation in the summer, that the criticism Bruce gets about leaving the squad in a parlous state now seems quite harsh.

We may need to get creative ourselves in the summer if we don't go up or inevitably we'll sell Jack and maybe McGinn.

Bruce was a major contributor to us being in the shit.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sirlordbaltimore on March 26, 2019, 08:03:26 PM


Only caught the last 40 minutes of the WM thing tonight. Just as well as my heads still aching now.

From what i gather, if we don't get promoted then we're really got to sell Jack to balance the books. If we don't go up i'd expect that to happen anyway obviously. The problem then is, who do we sell to balance the books the next summer if we still aren't promoted ?
Yes that was insightful stuff on WM. Lots of people on here slate the station,  but that was a good listen this evening. The guy they had on,  Kieran Maguire,  was very knowledgeable.

Blues were spending nearly twice as much as they were bringing in, and Wolves would have been in trouble had they not been promoted. They lost far more than anyone last season but apparently promotion bonuses aren't included in any calculation. Also an interesting article on Redknapp in the Observer yesterday.

We were so close to liquidation in the summer, that the criticism Bruce gets about leaving the squad in a parlous state now seems quite harsh.

We may need to get creative ourselves in the summer if we don't go up or inevitably we'll sell Jack and maybe McGinn.

Bruce was a major contributor to us being in the shit.

So was O'Neill, how far we gonna go back into our repertoire of making awful business decisions ?

It's been one bad decision after another for god knows how long now.



Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SheffieldVillain on March 26, 2019, 08:20:16 PM
We were so close to liquidation in the summer, that the criticism Bruce gets about leaving the squad in a parlous state now seems quite harsh.

Not really. The new owners took charge in late July.  I'm not sure how being close to liquidation the month before meant he had to:
- loan out Elphick (31st Aug) and leave us without a back-up centre half,
- spunk good money on loaning Moereira (26th July) and buying Nyland (7th Aug) while loaning out Jed Steer who is at least their equal
- bring in 2 wingers (Bolasie and El Ghazi) on the 22nd and 25th August while loaning out Green, but not bring in a left back.

Those were nothing to do with the financial situation, just shit management of resources.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on March 26, 2019, 09:13:38 PM
Yes, I really wish we had Bruce back in charge of this football team, with his strong financial skills and brilliant transfer dealing.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: KRS on March 26, 2019, 09:19:24 PM
We were so close to liquidation in the summer, that the criticism Bruce gets about leaving the squad in a parlous state now seems quite harsh.

Not really. The new owners took charge in late July.  I'm not sure how being close to liquidation the month before meant he had to:
- loan out Elphick (31st Aug) and leave us without a back-up centre half,
- spunk good money on loaning Moereira (26th July) and buying Nyland (7th Aug) while loaning out Jed Steer who is at least their equal
- bring in 2 wingers (Bolasie and El Ghazi) on the 22nd and 25th August while loaning out Green, but not bring in a left back.

Those were nothing to do with the financial situation, just shit management of resources.
Can't really argue with that. I have sympathy with him for his family and personal issues, but there are no excuses for some of his decisions regarding his management of Aston Villa.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: mike on March 26, 2019, 10:51:02 PM
We were so close to liquidation in the summer, that the criticism Bruce gets about leaving the squad in a parlous state now seems quite harsh.

Not really. The new owners took charge in late July.  I'm not sure how being close to liquidation the month before meant he had to:
- loan out Elphick (31st Aug) and leave us without a back-up centre half,
- spunk good money on loaning Moereira (26th July) and buying Nyland (7th Aug) while loaning out Jed Steer who is at least their equal
- bring in 2 wingers (Bolasie and El Ghazi) on the 22nd and 25th August while loaning out Green, but not bring in a left back.

Those were nothing to do with the financial situation, just shit management of resources.

Absolutely. It was all very nice signing attacking players but it did seem obvious we had massively failed to fill a JT shaped hole in our defence. Then there was his continued belief that playing a midfielder at centre half, a centre half at right back and a right back at left back was a good idea.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on March 26, 2019, 11:55:02 PM
Villa were two hours from Administration/Liquidation last summer.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: brentastonb6 on March 27, 2019, 12:07:59 AM
We were so close to liquidation in the summer, that the criticism Bruce gets about leaving the squad in a parlous state now seems quite harsh.

Not really. The new owners took charge in late July.  I'm not sure how being close to liquidation the month before meant he had to:
- loan out Elphick (31st Aug) and leave us without a back-up centre half,
- spunk good money on loaning Moereira (26th July) and buying Nyland (7th Aug) while loaning out Jed Steer who is at least their equal
- bring in 2 wingers (Bolasie and El Ghazi) on the 22nd and 25th August while loaning out Green, but not bring in a left back.

Those were nothing to do with the financial situation, just shit management of resources.

Absolutely. It was all very nice signing attacking players but it did seem obvious we had massively failed to fill a JT shaped hole in our defence. Then there was his continued belief that playing a midfielder at centre half, a centre half at right back and a right back at left back was a good idea.
And even when we signed attacking players like Abraham he then just dropped Kodjia to the bench at Blackburn away insisting on playing just one up front arrrgh !
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: eamonn on March 27, 2019, 08:38:59 AM
And we still play one up front to this day. What a visionary!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Newby on March 27, 2019, 08:59:56 AM
75k a week on Bolasie. Absolutely criminal. From near liquidation to criminal masterclass. 
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: amfy on March 27, 2019, 09:26:54 AM


Only caught the last 40 minutes of the WM thing tonight. Just as well as my heads still aching now.

From what i gather, if we don't get promoted then we're really got to sell Jack to balance the books. If we don't go up i'd expect that to happen anyway obviously. The problem then is, who do we sell to balance the books the next summer if we still aren't promoted ?
Yes that was insightful stuff on WM. Lots of people on here slate the station,  but that was a good listen this evening. The guy they had on,  Kieran Maguire,  was very knowledgeable.

Blues were spending nearly twice as much as they were bringing in, and Wolves would have been in trouble had they not been promoted. They lost far more than anyone last season but apparently promotion bonuses aren't included in any calculation. Also an interesting article on Redknapp in the Observer yesterday.

We were so close to liquidation in the summer, that the criticism Bruce gets about leaving the squad in a parlous state now seems quite harsh.

We may need to get creative ourselves in the summer if we don't go up or inevitably we'll sell Jack and maybe McGinn.

Bruce was a major contributor to us being in the shit.

So was O'Neill, how far we gonna go back into our repertoire of making awful business decisions ?

It's been one bad decision after another for god knows how long now.

Well you can’t go back further than O’Neill because before that we had Doug - & The we didn’t make bad business decisions, we made bad football decisions instead!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: paul_e on March 27, 2019, 11:32:47 AM


Only caught the last 40 minutes of the WM thing tonight. Just as well as my heads still aching now.

From what i gather, if we don't get promoted then we're really got to sell Jack to balance the books. If we don't go up i'd expect that to happen anyway obviously. The problem then is, who do we sell to balance the books the next summer if we still aren't promoted ?
Yes that was insightful stuff on WM. Lots of people on here slate the station,  but that was a good listen this evening. The guy they had on,  Kieran Maguire,  was very knowledgeable.

Blues were spending nearly twice as much as they were bringing in, and Wolves would have been in trouble had they not been promoted. They lost far more than anyone last season but apparently promotion bonuses aren't included in any calculation. Also an interesting article on Redknapp in the Observer yesterday.

We were so close to liquidation in the summer, that the criticism Bruce gets about leaving the squad in a parlous state now seems quite harsh.

We may need to get creative ourselves in the summer if we don't go up or inevitably we'll sell Jack and maybe McGinn.

Bruce was a major contributor to us being in the shit.

So was O'Neill, how far we gonna go back into our repertoire of making awful business decisions ?

It's been one bad decision after another for god knows how long now.

The current situation falls on 6 people to varying degrees, Lerner and Sherwood for making a fucking mess of the summer before relegation, Wyness, Xia and RDM for signings like McCormack in the first summer down and Bruce for adding to that with the likes of Hogan, Lansbury, Bjarnason (who cost a fair bit, are on big wages and never play) and some incredibly expensive loans.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: VikingWarrior on March 27, 2019, 11:39:34 AM
I know he is everywhere, but I think this column from Kieran Maguire is a really interesting read: Villa saved by the train?
https://offthepitch.com/a/villa-saved-train

Unfortunately it is behind a paywall but they offer 30-day free trial and if you also like to read about Football Finance and the industry, it seems like a good site. Only been a subscriber for a few days so please don't take me up on it, if you think it is bullshit.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: dave.woodhall on March 27, 2019, 11:56:58 AM
I know he is everywhere, but I think this column from Kieran Maguire is a really interesting read: Villa saved by the train?
https://offthepitch.com/a/villa-saved-train

Unfortunately it is behind a paywall but they offer 30-day free trial and if you also like to read about Football Finance and the industry, it seems like a good site. Only been a subscriber for a few days so please don't take me up on it, if you think it is bullshit.

If they/you would like to advertise we can always discuss rates.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Damo70 on March 27, 2019, 12:31:09 PM
An interesting article on the BBC internet sport.

Blackburn, Bolton and Birmingham: Seven charts showing how Championship clubs reached this point

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47691385

Thanks for that, B23. Quite interesting. Kieran Maguire seems to know a thing or two about a thing or two on the issue.


I was surprised to see Cardiff so high up the list. I thought they had achieved promotion by spending relatively little money. As for Small Heath, whatever we say about Carson they appeared to be relatively financially stable under him. I do remember when they went down they sold off a number of high earners and didn't spend much to replace them under Hughton. It all went very wrong very quickly when Trillion Trophies and Triffic Harry started spending money like a drunken sailor on shore leave.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: VikingWarrior on March 27, 2019, 12:42:52 PM
I know he is everywhere, but I think this column from Kieran Maguire is a really interesting read: Villa saved by the train?
https://offthepitch.com/a/villa-saved-train

Unfortunately it is behind a paywall but they offer 30-day free trial and if you also like to read about Football Finance and the industry, it seems like a good site. Only been a subscriber for a few days so please don't take me up on it, if you think it is bullshit.

If they/you would like to advertise we can always discuss rates.

Sorry. Did not mean to advertise. Just thought it could be interesting for other Villa fan to read - like the BBC-url two or three replies above. Please let me know what I did wrong so I don't do it again.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: GordonCowansisthegreatest on March 27, 2019, 02:25:12 PM
Can some one copy and paste the article? Then we can all have a read.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: VinnieChase84 on March 27, 2019, 02:31:53 PM
75k a week on Bolasie. Absolutely criminal. From near liquidation to criminal masterclass. 

Bruce was SOLELY in charge of transfers/contracts at that point
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Newby on March 27, 2019, 10:14:16 PM
75k a week on Bolasie. Absolutely criminal. From near liquidation to criminal masterclass. 

Bruce was SOLELY in charge of transfers/contracts at that point

Yes, my point exactly. Criminal, and yet some think blaming Bruce is harsh!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: eamonn on March 27, 2019, 10:30:56 PM
If Steve was paying out of his own piggy bank fair enough like.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: mike on March 28, 2019, 02:51:25 PM


Only caught the last 40 minutes of the WM thing tonight. Just as well as my heads still aching now.

From what i gather, if we don't get promoted then we're really got to sell Jack to balance the books. If we don't go up i'd expect that to happen anyway obviously. The problem then is, who do we sell to balance the books the next summer if we still aren't promoted ?
Yes that was insightful stuff on WM. Lots of people on here slate the station,  but that was a good listen this evening. The guy they had on,  Kieran Maguire,  was very knowledgeable.

Blues were spending nearly twice as much as they were bringing in, and Wolves would have been in trouble had they not been promoted. They lost far more than anyone last season but apparently promotion bonuses aren't included in any calculation. Also an interesting article on Redknapp in the Observer yesterday.

We were so close to liquidation in the summer, that the criticism Bruce gets about leaving the squad in a parlous state now seems quite harsh.

We may need to get creative ourselves in the summer if we don't go up or inevitably we'll sell Jack and maybe McGinn.

Bruce was a major contributor to us being in the shit.

So was O'Neill, how far we gonna go back into our repertoire of making awful business decisions ?

It's been one bad decision after another for god knows how long now.

The current situation falls on 6 people to varying degrees, Lerner and Sherwood for making a fucking mess of the summer before relegation, Wyness, Xia and RDM for signings like McCormack in the first summer down and Bruce for adding to that with the likes of Hogan, Lansbury, Bjarnason (who cost a fair bit, are on big wages and never play) and some incredibly expensive loans.

But all of that was set in motion the day that O'Neill cynically walked out at the worst possible time having been naively trusted by Lerner to the point that there was no-one at the club who could steady the ship.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on March 28, 2019, 02:54:37 PM


Only caught the last 40 minutes of the WM thing tonight. Just as well as my heads still aching now.

From what i gather, if we don't get promoted then we're really got to sell Jack to balance the books. If we don't go up i'd expect that to happen anyway obviously. The problem then is, who do we sell to balance the books the next summer if we still aren't promoted ?
Yes that was insightful stuff on WM. Lots of people on here slate the station,  but that was a good listen this evening. The guy they had on,  Kieran Maguire,  was very knowledgeable.

Blues were spending nearly twice as much as they were bringing in, and Wolves would have been in trouble had they not been promoted. They lost far more than anyone last season but apparently promotion bonuses aren't included in any calculation. Also an interesting article on Redknapp in the Observer yesterday.

We were so close to liquidation in the summer, that the criticism Bruce gets about leaving the squad in a parlous state now seems quite harsh.

We may need to get creative ourselves in the summer if we don't go up or inevitably we'll sell Jack and maybe McGinn.

Bruce was a major contributor to us being in the shit.

So was O'Neill, how far we gonna go back into our repertoire of making awful business decisions ?

It's been one bad decision after another for god knows how long now.

The current situation falls on 6 people to varying degrees, Lerner and Sherwood for making a fucking mess of the summer before relegation, Wyness, Xia and RDM for signings like McCormack in the first summer down and Bruce for adding to that with the likes of Hogan, Lansbury, Bjarnason (who cost a fair bit, are on big wages and never play) and some incredibly expensive loans.

But all of that was set in motion the day that O'Neill cynically walked out at the worst possible time having been naively trusted by Lerner to the point that there was no-one at the club who could steady the ship.
Yes,you can argue that.
But it does not forgive those that came after and fucked up and that includes Bruce.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: mike on March 28, 2019, 11:15:07 PM


Only caught the last 40 minutes of the WM thing tonight. Just as well as my heads still aching now.

From what i gather, if we don't get promoted then we're really got to sell Jack to balance the books. If we don't go up i'd expect that to happen anyway obviously. The problem then is, who do we sell to balance the books the next summer if we still aren't promoted ?
Yes that was insightful stuff on WM. Lots of people on here slate the station,  but that was a good listen this evening. The guy they had on,  Kieran Maguire,  was very knowledgeable.

Blues were spending nearly twice as much as they were bringing in, and Wolves would have been in trouble had they not been promoted. They lost far more than anyone last season but apparently promotion bonuses aren't included in any calculation. Also an interesting article on Redknapp in the Observer yesterday.

We were so close to liquidation in the summer, that the criticism Bruce gets about leaving the squad in a parlous state now seems quite harsh.

We may need to get creative ourselves in the summer if we don't go up or inevitably we'll sell Jack and maybe McGinn.

Bruce was a major contributor to us being in the shit.

So was O'Neill, how far we gonna go back into our repertoire of making awful business decisions ?

It's been one bad decision after another for god knows how long now.

The current situation falls on 6 people to varying degrees, Lerner and Sherwood for making a fucking mess of the summer before relegation, Wyness, Xia and RDM for signings like McCormack in the first summer down and Bruce for adding to that with the likes of Hogan, Lansbury, Bjarnason (who cost a fair bit, are on big wages and never play) and some incredibly expensive loans.

But all of that was set in motion the day that O'Neill cynically walked out at the worst possible time having been naively trusted by Lerner to the point that there was no-one at the club who could steady the ship.
Yes,you can argue that.
But it does not forgive those that came after and fucked up and that includes Bruce.

I don’t disagree it’s just that O’Neill is not on the list of people Paul names as responsible and he should be. Bruce was the second most brainless appointment after McLeish.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: paul_e on March 29, 2019, 10:12:10 AM
I don’t disagree it’s just that O’Neill is not on the list of people Paul names as responsible and he should be. Bruce was the second most brainless appointment after McLeish.

Not on that list. MoN leaving in the way he did after spending the way he had was a massive problem but by the time Sherwood was bringing in Gestede to replace Benteke and making Richards his captain we'd had 5 years to recover from that.

The relegation came about because we had 2 different transfer strategies running at the same time that summer which meant we made more signings than we should've and we split the squad in 2, with a manager who did nothing to fix that split and instead decided to use it as an excuse for his own failings.

The imbalance it left in the squad meant that when Xia, Wyness and RDM came in the following summer they repeated the mistake, signing too many players and not really having a proper plan of how to fit them together and integrate them into the existing squad. The lack of familiarity in the squad leading to RDM being sacked within a couple of months.

Then we get to Bruce who got initial results by simplifying things down to the most basic tactics possible before he falling into the exact same trap and signing players without a plan for 3 windows out of 4. The only window that didn't cause us problems was January last season where the financial position meant that all he could do was get Grabban on loan.

All of those things put us in a position of having a squad with a handful of players we could sell for a profit which had too many players in some positions and not enough in others and that was costing us premier league level wages despite us having a significantly smaller income.

MON, McLeish, Lambert and plenty of others got us to the point where this started but the 3 seasons up until this summer is the worst the club has been run in my time and put us on a clear path to oblivion.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SoccerHQ on March 29, 2019, 11:13:42 AM
Our whole business model has been wrong since coming down.

2016 we just bet the house on promotion when our squad still had losing mentality which was a bizarre policy.

Signing likes of McCormack and Kodjia when we still had likes of Bacuna and Richards not just on our books but actually starting games, didn't get it at all.

Would've been better to just use 16-17 as a transitional season and weed out the misfits in the squad which we eventually had to do given how poor we started.

We essentially spent 50m to finish 11th or12th so laughably bad management.

17-18 was better as we just signed free transfers and loans, trouble was majority were over 30 so again we don't go up we run into trouble.

At least with the people we have in top jobs now we can get past this mentality we just have to sign premier league players who cost a fortune. Tammy has been good of course but then we have Bolasie.

Let's find some gems from elsewhere, McGinn has been good after all and hopefully the French RB will be a great pick up. If we'd had that mentality in summer 2016 I reckon we'd be out of this league by now and FFP would be an afterthought as it is for Wolves.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on March 30, 2019, 01:23:51 PM
Agre, I allways thought that the first season down was more about affording the clear out than bringing players in.
We continued to try to buy our way out of trouble.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Nastylee on April 10, 2019, 10:24:20 AM
Any updates on this? When are we likely to know if which side of the £39m we fall?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on April 10, 2019, 03:00:34 PM
It's not £39m, its £61m and we haven't failed it.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on April 10, 2019, 03:22:51 PM
Any updates on this? When are we likely to know if which side of the £39m we fall?

You're looking in the wrong place.

The SHA site will no doubt have (at least) an entire thread and they'll all be far more knowledgeable about the current status than than us!!!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: eddiemunster on April 10, 2019, 05:18:49 PM
As previously posted;

With regards to the 9 point deduction to those down the road, and the article in the Daily Heil, I suggest everyone actually read the EFL statement, which blows the Daily Heil article to bits.
https://www.efl.com/news/2019/march/efl-statement-birmingham-city/ or see below,

Note in the following, that Blues were the only team found to have breached the rules;

An EFL spokesman said: “The Profitability and Sustainability Rules, aligned with those in the Premier League, became effective in 2015/16. Season 2017/18 was the end of the first full reporting period with Birmingham City the only Club found to have breached those requirements, when it incurred adjusted losses of £48.787 million, £9.787 million in excess of the permitted losses.

Also for those crowing mind the gap etc the statement also says the following;

The parties have 14 days in which to appeal the decision, and in the circumstances no further comment will be made.
The Championship league table will be amended with immediate effect but it must be recognised that this remains subject to the outcome of any appeal.

Until we are named, as having broken the FFP rules, (which the EFL statement proves that we haven't), lets stop worrying eh??
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Newby on April 10, 2019, 07:16:32 PM
I presume with the fantastic attendances at Villa Park, we must be making quite a dent in FFP with gate receipts and merchandise too?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on April 10, 2019, 07:46:11 PM
I presume with the fantastic attendances at Villa Park, we must be making quite a dent in FFP with gate receipts and merchandise too?

An extra 5,000 people paying £30 each gets you about 3 weeks of Scott Hogan - let that one sink in!!!!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: amfy on April 12, 2019, 08:51:07 AM
Having a season ticket in The Holte End for 50 years would pay Micah Richards for about 2 days.

That’s why you need to be a vocal supporter - your money on its own doesn’t help!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt Collins on April 13, 2019, 06:41:52 AM
The risk is about this season, which will be based on accounts posted next spring (but which will be being monitored in real time)

Yorkshire villain on twitter the most informative stuff I've found on this
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: London Villan on April 13, 2019, 07:22:28 AM
Normal ticket gate revenue makes up about 10% of our income.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on April 13, 2019, 08:50:02 AM
Randy should have rebuilt the North when he could. We'd be having 50k attendances for the remaining games.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: adrenachrome on April 15, 2019, 11:11:10 PM
ToryGraph (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2019/04/15/middlesbrough-chairman-steve-gibson-pushes-efl-investigate-rivals/)

Quote
Middlesbrough chairman Steve Gibson pushes EFL to investigate rivals over financial conduct

John Percy

15 April 2019 • 10:30pm




Middlesbrough chairman Steve Gibson is demanding an English Football League investigation into the financial conduct of three Championship rivals.

Gibson wants the EFL to scrutinise Derby County, Aston Villa and Sheffield Wednesday over what he believes to be breaches of financial regulations, in a move which could trigger a bitter dispute between the clubs.

The 61-year-old is insisting the three clubs are attempting to bypass the new profitability and sustainability rules by unfair means, and he has arranged a special meeting of all Championship clubs for a week on Wednesday.

Gibson is understood to be “furious” that Middlesbrough have sold over £40 million worth of players, including Adama Traore, Ben Gibson and Patrick Bamford, to balance the books, while in his view other clubs are manipulating the rules by allocating some costs to stay in line.

Derby, for example, recently sold their Pride Park stadium to owner Mel Morris and then leased it back to ensure the club recorded a profit in their 2017/18 accounts.



Sources at Derby insist they have been fully compliant with the new profitability and sustainability rules and do not fear a similar fate to Birmingham, who were docked nine points by the EFL last month.

But Derby are said to be operating under a “soft transfer embargo”, which is preventing them from registering Aberdeen captain Graeme Shinnie.

The midfielder held talks with Derby last week but cannot sign a pre-contract at this stage, as the club’s accounts are being looked at by the EFL.

It is understood the embargo should be lifted later this week, however, enabling Derby manager Frank Lampard to make Shinnie his first signing ahead of next season.

Villa, who are five points ahead of Middlesbrough in the table, have declined to comment. Wednesday owner Dejphon Chansiri admitted in January they could be placed under a transfer embargo.

Gibson will address the issue at the meeting with representatives from the other 23 clubs, and has also contacted the EFL to register his concerns.



At the last meeting, held at Nottingham Forest’s City Ground, it is alleged that Gibson even turned on the three clubs to vent his frustration.

In his programme notes before last month’s game against Norwich, Middlesbrough manager Tony Pulis wrote: “Steve has worked hard to abide by the EFL’s financial rules, but it’s clear that a number of clubs aren’t, and that simply cannot be right.

“Birmingham’s nine-point deduction should set a precedent now for those other clubs who are not complying with the rules.

“Over the past year here, we have brought money in through the sales of players and reduced the wages, and we have cut our cloth accordingly.

“Yet at the same time, there are others in apparent breach of the rules, and that cannot be right.”

Middlesbrough are seventh in the Championship. Villa appear on course for a place in the top six after eight straight wins while Derby and Wednesday remain in play-off contention.

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Sexual Ealing on April 15, 2019, 11:25:18 PM
Steve Gibson sounds like a man who's frustrated that he can't afford to sack Tony Pulis. Tony Pulis sounds like a man who knows he is too expensive to sack.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: adrenachrome on April 15, 2019, 11:28:46 PM
Steve Gibson sounds like a man who's frustrated that he can't afford to sack Tony Pulis. Tony Pulis sounds like a man who knows he is too expensive to sack.

Gibbo is trying to put the mockers on Pulis's destroy and exit mission. Fat chance.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: cdbullyweefan on April 15, 2019, 11:30:12 PM
The Derby thing does seem a blatant attempt to get around the rules, to be fair. If they can do that then it makes a mockery of the whole rules. There is no quote in there from Gibson mentioning Villa, so adding Villa into the mix could just be media mischief-making.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ozzjim on April 15, 2019, 11:52:25 PM
If Derby do get away with it, and we don't go up, we need to be exploiting that loophole ASAP.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on April 15, 2019, 11:59:21 PM
That Derby stunt is a bit of a pisstake it has to be said. Steve Gibson can fuck off though, smog munching twat.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on April 16, 2019, 06:38:46 AM
It  is easy to calculate if a Sale and Leaseback arrangement is A valid commercial transaction or otherwise.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Lastfootstamper on April 16, 2019, 06:42:34 AM
"At the last meeting, held at Nottingham Forest’s City Ground, it is alleged that Gibson even turned on the three clubs to vent his frustration." By whom? And if there's 24 people at this meeting, why did no-one else weigh in too?

And no, they can't afford to sack Pulis does indeed seem to be the concensus from a look at a forum of theirs the other week.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on April 16, 2019, 06:48:43 AM
We've not breached FFP, so...?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: andyh on April 16, 2019, 07:02:02 AM
It’s scary that he knows more about our clubs finances than our owners.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Risso on April 16, 2019, 09:19:13 AM
The Derby thing does seem a blatant attempt to get around the rules, to be fair. If they can do that then it makes a mockery of the whole rules.

It's really not a loophole of any sort.  Sale and leaseback is standard business practice in the 'real world' and has actual economic consequences. Derby County no longer own their stadium.  The fact that it's to another company owned by their chairman is neither here nor there.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Dave P on April 16, 2019, 10:26:13 AM
The Derby thing does seem a blatant attempt to get around the rules, to be fair. If they can do that then it makes a mockery of the whole rules.

It's really not a loophole of any sort.  Sale and leaseback is standard business practice in the 'real world' and has actual economic consequences. Derby County no longer own their stadium.  The fact that it's to another company owned by their chairman is neither here nor there.

Yes, it’s not wrong. Very very stupid but not wrong.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: chrisw1 on April 16, 2019, 12:23:43 PM
We've not breached FFP, so...?
How do you know we wont though this season though?  Isn't the calculation made in June?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sid1964 on April 16, 2019, 12:47:09 PM
If I remember rightly, I read that the last CEO we had, said that even if we had been beaten Fulham and been promoted we would not have been able to splash the cash in the premier league due to FFP constraints.

If we don't get promoted this summer, will we have to be careful on what we spend due to FFP?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ian J on April 16, 2019, 12:50:10 PM
What a crap rule though, in a world where we have a home grown lad, nurtured, raised and helped guide him to being an incredible player and we are rewarded by rules which may force us to sell. Absolutely nonsense.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Pat Mustard on April 16, 2019, 12:50:22 PM
If I remember rightly, I read that the last CEO we had, said that even if we had been beaten Fulham and been promoted we would not have been able to splash the cash in the premier league due to FFP constraints.

If we don't get promoted this summer, will we have to be careful on what we spend due to FFP?

I think that was probably more down to the fact that the previous owner didn't have a pot to piss in.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: KRS on April 16, 2019, 01:12:39 PM
From what’s been previously discussed on here, FFP doesn’t apply in the Premier League and you only have to comply with UEFA FFP rules if you’re playing in Europe. I don’t know how accurate or true that is, however the explanation at the time made sense.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SaddVillan on April 16, 2019, 02:14:54 PM
Transfermkt.com shows that in the 5 years since 2014/15 Boro spent £152.9m on players and recouped £115.8 via sales.

A net spend of £37.1m.

Gibson's complaints sound like sour grapes, as last summer was the only year in the last 5 in which sales exceeded purchases.

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ktvillan on April 16, 2019, 02:34:35 PM
I can see why they do it to stop reckless owners spending clubs into oblivion (although didn't stop our Tone having a damn good go) but FFP sucks as a means of control.  Football clubs are businesses and I think any business should be allowed to speculate to accumulate otherwise it's restraint of trade.   If the authorities want to protect against potential liquidations, any owners planning to spend big could be asked to place a bond of £50-£100m in escrow to bail the club out if their plans go tits up.  In UEFA's case however the whole scam is designed to stop too many clubs doing a Citeh/Chelski/PSG and catching up and overtaking the likes of Real, Barca, Bayern, Man Yoo and other established wealthy clubs.  Incidentally I seem to recall Real Fascist only being able to survive the galactico era because they  "sold" their training ground to Madrid City Council for something like £200m and then leased it back.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: themossman on April 16, 2019, 03:10:59 PM
Sale and leaseback worked well for Debenhams.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: eamonn on April 16, 2019, 03:50:19 PM
Gibson seems butt-hurt, maybe cos he tries to look like Tom Hanks whereas we actually have Tom as a fan.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on April 16, 2019, 04:18:06 PM
He was going to smash this league last year now he just wants to smash those within it.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Dazvillain on April 24, 2019, 09:35:52 PM
So his motion of wanting teams to publish their ffp and accounts to others got voted out at today’s meeting 👍🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 . Not much headline news or detail around about it that I’ve seen though
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: cdbullyweefan on April 24, 2019, 10:28:49 PM
The Derby thing does seem a blatant attempt to get around the rules, to be fair. If they can do that then it makes a mockery of the whole rules.

It's really not a loophole of any sort.  Sale and leaseback is standard business practice in the 'real world' and has actual economic consequences. Derby County no longer own their stadium.  The fact that it's to another company owned by their chairman is neither here nor there.

Hypothetically, if he, or rather his company, was to sell the stadium back to Derby at a much reduced rate, would that be any sort of breach of FFP?

Also, not sure what the "real world" has to do with this. Most billionaire business owners can invest what they want without worrying that it might upset their competitors, so football is already ignoring business norms in applying such rules in the first place, isn't it?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Newby on April 24, 2019, 11:00:54 PM
Restraint of trade. If they have it to spend, spend it. Bloody rules!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on April 25, 2019, 06:08:03 AM
The stadium was on the books at 41m and they got an “ independent “ valuation of 80m and booked a 39mil profit by SALB.
The justification is that the new owner can use the stadium for events on the 330 days it is not in use by the club.
Now it he had paid 250 mil without a valuation then that would a completely different kettle of fish.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: UK Redsox on April 25, 2019, 08:03:58 AM
Restraint of trade. If they have it to spend, spend it. Bloody rules!

It always amazes me that that the most capitalist of countries, the USA, runs it's sports leagues on an almost communist basis. Revenue sharing, salary caps, new players sent to the teams that need them the most etc
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Villa75 on April 25, 2019, 10:50:56 AM
I thought we lost £36.1 million just in one season? How are we going to stay within the limits over three seasons? Surely we're not expecting to make a massive profit from this season?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: OzVilla on April 25, 2019, 10:57:30 AM
I thought we lost £36.1 million just in one season? How are we going to stay within the limits over three seasons? Surely we're not expecting to make a massive profit from this season?

I presume if we don’t go up there’s players that will be sold for big money. We’d get £60 mill for SJ and SJM. Can’t think of another club in our position that can say that. Just hope we don’t have to.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: chrisw1 on April 25, 2019, 11:17:13 AM
The stadium was on the books at 41m and they got an “ independent “ valuation of 80m and booked a 39mil profit by SALB.
The justification is that the new owner can use the stadium for events on the 330 days it is not in use by the club.
Now it he had paid 250 mil without a valuation then that would a completely different kettle of fish.

I wouldn't want us to go down the stadium sale route just to meet short term FFP needs, just in case the ownership goes sour.  If there was a buy back clause at a fixed price then that would be more comforting.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Lsvilla on April 25, 2019, 11:43:15 AM
I thought we lost £36.1 million just in one season? How are we going to stay within the limits over three seasons? Surely we're not expecting to make a massive profit from this season?
Has anyone seen the amount of compo relating to HS2 going through Bodymoor quantified. I wonder if this is a sizeable sum not in the ordinary budgets?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Risso on April 25, 2019, 12:32:46 PM
The Derby thing does seem a blatant attempt to get around the rules, to be fair. If they can do that then it makes a mockery of the whole rules.

It's really not a loophole of any sort.  Sale and leaseback is standard business practice in the 'real world' and has actual economic consequences. Derby County no longer own their stadium.  The fact that it's to another company owned by their chairman is neither here nor there.

Hypothetically, if he, or rather his company, was to sell the stadium back to Derby at a much reduced rate, would that be any sort of breach of FFP?

Also, not sure what the "real world" has to do with this. Most billionaire business owners can invest what they want without worrying that it might upset their competitors, so football is already ignoring business norms in applying such rules in the first place, isn't it?

Yes, if he then sold it back at a much lower rate, then the whole transaction would be viewed as "artificial" and not at arm's length market rates, which is supposed to be the key component of FFP.  You're right about FFP being contrary to any sort of normal business behaviour, which is why as I've said before, I can't understand why it hasn't been challenged in law yet.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: brian green on April 25, 2019, 12:43:12 PM
I get the same feeling about why no club has ever, as far as my limited knowledge extends, sued a player for failing to discharge the requirements of his contract with the club eg to attend training even if his front gates are jammed.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: cheltenhamlion on April 25, 2019, 06:27:04 PM
The stadium was on the books at 41m and they got an “ independent “ valuation of 80m and booked a 39mil profit by SALB.
The justification is that the new owner can use the stadium for events on the 330 days it is not in use by the club.
Now it he had paid 250 mil without a valuation then that would a completely different kettle of fish.

I wouldn't want us to go down the stadium sale route just to meet short term FFP needs, just in case the ownership goes sour.  If there was a buy back clause at a fixed price then that would be more comforting.

Under the terms of the ACV the Trust organised then I dont think they can anyway but would have to read up on it.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on April 25, 2019, 09:02:33 PM
I thought we lost £36.1 million just in one season? How are we going to stay within the limits over three seasons? Surely we're not expecting to make a massive profit from this season?

2016
FFP Loss of £26.3m
2017
FFP Loss of £5.7m
2018
FFP loss of £26.4m

Total FFP Loss of £58.4m

Allowable Loss of £61m

We're compliant by £2.6m
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: TheMalandro on April 25, 2019, 09:16:41 PM
I get the same feeling about why no club has ever, as far as my limited knowledge extends, sued a player for failing to discharge the requirements of his contract with the club eg to attend training even if his front gates are jammed.

Completely different circumstances, but is Mutu the only player that has been sued for breach of contract - or indeed sued for any reason by their club?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Villa75 on April 25, 2019, 09:50:18 PM
I thought we lost £36.1 million just in one season? How are we going to stay within the limits over three seasons? Surely we're not expecting to make a massive profit from this season?

2016
FFP Loss of £26.3m
2017
FFP Loss of £5.7m
2018
FFP loss of £26.4m

Total FFP Loss of £58.4m

Allowable Loss of £61m

We're compliant by £2.6m


If we don't get promoted this season are allowable losses are reduced to £39 million.

BBC are reporting our losses for last season were £36.1 million. Is that incorrect?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Dave P on April 26, 2019, 10:06:49 AM
I thought we lost £36.1 million just in one season? How are we going to stay within the limits over three seasons? Surely we're not expecting to make a massive profit from this season?

2016
FFP Loss of £26.3m
2017
FFP Loss of £5.7m
2018
FFP loss of £26.4m

Total FFP Loss of £58.4m

Allowable Loss of £61m

We're compliant by £2.6m


If we don't get promoted this season are allowable losses are reduced to £39 million.

BBC are reporting our losses for last season were £36.1 million. Is that incorrect?

Losses associated to FFP are different.  For example, losses for academy spend is not accounted for.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Villa75 on April 26, 2019, 11:58:34 AM
I thought we lost £36.1 million just in one season? How are we going to stay within the limits over three seasons? Surely we're not expecting to make a massive profit from this season?

2016
FFP Loss of £26.3m
2017
FFP Loss of £5.7m
2018
FFP loss of £26.4m

Total FFP Loss of £58.4m

Allowable Loss of £61m

We're compliant by £2.6m


If we don't get promoted this season are allowable losses are reduced to £39 million.

BBC are reporting our losses for last season were £36.1 million. Is that incorrect?

Losses associated to FFP are different.  For example, losses for academy spend is not accounted for.

Ah. Right.

So, if we don't get promoted this season, and our FFP losses are less than £4 million, we'll be ok.

Does anyone know the cut off date, for getting our figures right?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on April 26, 2019, 01:02:57 PM
If we do not get promoted this season, Jack and the others out of contract will be moved on to balance the books.  Jack, on the face of it, is a straight to the bottom line upside of whatever he goes for. 
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Dave P on April 26, 2019, 06:15:25 PM
If we do not get promoted this season, Jack and the others out of contract will be moved on to balance the books.  Jack, on the face of it, is a straight to the bottom line upside of whatever he goes for. 

Correct as he is an academy graduate. Anything we get is pure 100% profit
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Villa75 on April 27, 2019, 11:06:22 AM
Again, when do the figures have to match up?

Could we keep everybody until the next Jan transfer window, and then sell to balance the books?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: amfy on April 27, 2019, 11:14:23 AM
Again, when do the figures have to match up?

Could we keep everybody until the next Jan transfer window, and then sell to balance the books?

I imagine that’d be a pretty risky strategy. The January window is not such a good trading time and if other clubs know we need to sell it could drive prices down & force us to sell more players.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Villa75 on April 27, 2019, 11:50:49 AM
Again, when do the figures have to match up?

Could we keep everybody until the next Jan transfer window, and then sell to balance the books?

I imagine that’d be a pretty risky strategy. The January window is not such a good trading time and if other clubs know we need to sell it could drive prices down & force us to sell more players.

I agree, to a certain extent. But isn't it already common knowledge that  we'd be selling because we have to?

It would be nice to start next season on the front foot, and get a decent start, before selling the crown jewels. If that's even possible.

Of course we could always get promoted. Fingers crossed.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: amfy on April 27, 2019, 11:21:58 PM
In the summer we would still have January though, & January is a tight window so the whole thing just gets more difficult I think.

 There’s also a good chance of everyone being fit at the start of the season - we could go into January with injuries to players who we need to shift. That would have been the case this year if we had needed to seek Jack in January!

.....or injuries to other players could make us more reliant on players that we had hoped to move on.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sid1964 on April 30, 2019, 04:26:16 PM
Just read that the owners have given us another £22 million - are we heading towards an FFP fine?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Villafirst on April 30, 2019, 06:40:56 PM
Just read that the owners have given us another £22 million - are we heading towards an FFP fine?

A share issue though?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Woofles The Wonder Dog on April 30, 2019, 07:40:40 PM
Just read that the owners have given us another £22 million - are we heading towards an FFP fine?

A share issue though?

There’s a limit to what the owners can contribute through share issues. According to the EFL site for 2015/16 it was £8m, so it’s probably more now but I’d guess not £22m.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on May 05, 2019, 11:11:49 AM
Isn’t it £8m per shareholder.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on May 05, 2019, 12:16:25 PM
There is no way that the league can stop someone giving money to the club ( unless of course the money is the proceeds of crime).
The way it is accounted is a different matter.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: nigel on May 13, 2019, 06:55:51 PM
Although I've got the jist off FFP, i have to admit it still baffles me at times.

Was having a conversation with my lad about if we don't go up. We both reckon Jack and SJM will probably go. Jack £40m (buy out clause) SJM £25? (cost £3m). That would give us £62m profit. What portion of that could be reinvested in the team to stay compliant?
My guess would be £39m to keep us compliant with £23m to spend. Or is that way too easy 😯
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Tokyo Sexwhale on May 13, 2019, 07:28:09 PM
Getting £65m for Grealish and McGinn is very optimistic I think - especially if other clubs know we need to sell to keep within FFP and that Jack wants/needs to leave for the sake of his career.

We will however save a pretty penny by offloading most of the players who are out of contract  - Hutton, DeLaet, Jedinak, Whelan, Richards, Elphick, and Bunn.  Other than Whelan, none of them are vital.

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: nigel on May 13, 2019, 08:07:27 PM
Cheers, bud.
I got the £65m simply from that  I'd heard Jack has a £40 clause in his contract, and McGinn is surely worth £25m.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: chrisw1 on May 14, 2019, 01:27:33 PM
Notwithstanding the clause, if we don't go up we will need to sell him.  Buying clubs will know this and I suspect we'd be lucky to get much more than £20-£25m.

Same if we sell McGinn really.  Prob £15m tops.

They are both clearly worth more, but our circumstances would mean we'd be selling under duress.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: paul_e on May 14, 2019, 01:49:42 PM
Notwithstanding the clause, if we don't go up we will need to sell him.  Buying clubs will know this and I suspect we'd be lucky to get much more than £20-£25m.

Same if we sell McGinn really.  Prob £15m tops.

They are both clearly worth more, but our circumstances would mean we'd be selling under duress.

I think if the offers are around that then we just won't sell and they'll handle it. The current lot don't come across as the sort who'd be fucked around by someone like Levy. I reckon we'd be looking at £45m as the absolute minimum that those 2 will raise with £50-60m more likely.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: KRS on May 25, 2019, 02:36:58 AM
Apparently Boro are going to attempt to sue Derby over breach of financial rules:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2019/05/24/exclusive-middlesbrough-sue-derby-alleged-breaches-offinancial/amp/
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: achilles on May 30, 2019, 08:17:11 PM
Just viewed this and I found it fascinating as I knew we were in trouble but never realised just how much trouble, real knife edge stuff:

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: mr underhill on May 30, 2019, 08:33:59 PM
I've just read that Sawiris is buying the ground and putting it into a separate company. Anyone else pick up on this?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt Collins on May 30, 2019, 08:35:16 PM
It's speculation based on some changes in our details recorded at companies House
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: sirlordbaltimore on May 30, 2019, 09:06:07 PM
I've just read that Sawiris is buying the ground and putting it into a separate company. Anyone else pick up on this?

Why would we even need to do this with 170m guaranteed coming in over the next three years just from Sky even if we went straight back down?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on May 30, 2019, 09:16:08 PM
I've just read that Sawiris is buying the ground and putting it into a separate company. Anyone else pick up on this?

Why would we even need to do this with 170m guaranteed coming in over the next three years just from Sky even if we went straight back down?
To invest a boat load of cash
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Des Little on May 30, 2019, 10:01:41 PM
No idea, but if anyone knows their way around ffp, it’s these three!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: aev on May 30, 2019, 11:01:24 PM
Soft transfer embargo?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: andyh on May 30, 2019, 11:03:49 PM
I read that, what does it even mean?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: aev on May 30, 2019, 11:06:15 PM
Not sure but doesn’t sound good.

The difference in money between the 2 leagues is ridiculous to be honest.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on May 30, 2019, 11:19:58 PM
Matt Lawton

Quote
Championship clubs are concerned that the Premier League will not impose a points deduction on Aston Villa if they are found to have breached profit and sustainability rules.

Villa, who were promoted to the top flight after beating Derby County in Monday's Championship play-off final at Wembley, are among a number of clubs — Derby included — currently operating under a soft transfer embargo while the English Football League continue to assess their P and S submission.

Officials at Villa Park have insisted they will be compliant with financial fair play regulations despite reports of heavy losses.

But Sportsmail understands high-level discussions are currently taking place between the EFL and the Premier League - discussions being led by the Football League's interim chair Debbie Jevans, amid concern that there could be lack of consistency in applying the appropriate sanctions.

In March an independent panel concluded that Birmingham City should be hit with a nine-point deduction by the EFL after incurring losses of nearly £48.8m between 2015 and 2018 — and therefore breaching the £39m three-year limit — and clubs would certainly like to see consistency should Villa also be found to be in breach.

But insiders believe poor communication between the EFL and the Premier League has led to 'a disconnect'.

'The rules are supposed to be aligned across the leagues but there is a concern that the interpretation of those rules is different,' said one source.

Sportsmail understands there would be a reluctance among senior Premier League officials to hit a newly-promoted club with a points deduction, and so making it all the more harder for them to survive in the top flight.

However, what concerns the clubs, and is likely to be the point being made by the EFL, is the message the Premier League will be delivering if they don't agree with a points deduction for a club that breaks financial rules to reach football's promised land with its television riches.

'The winner of the Championship play-off final lands a £170m jackpot so if the only punishment if you are then found guilty of breaching the regulations is a fine, you take that gamble,' said one club official. 'Because the worst that then happens, if you fail to get promoted, is you start the new Championship season with a points deduction.'

The dispute that has been raging for much of the season between Championship clubs is likely to remain on the agenda at next week's AGM in Portugal.

Reports last week suggested Middlesbrough have issued a legal letter to Derby in the belief a side that finished one point ahead of them, and in the play-offs, broke the rules when owner Mel Morris essentially bought the stadium with another company he also owns for what, at £80m, was double the value of what Pride Park was listed in the club's books as an asset.

It meant Derby were able to report a pre-tax profit of £14.6m and while the EFL might yet conclude the stadium purchase has been completed within the rules, Boro owner and chairman Steve Gibson has made no secret of the fact that he has a different view.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Sexual Ealing on May 30, 2019, 11:22:31 PM
Why the fuck is their AGM in Portugal?!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: cdbullyweefan on May 30, 2019, 11:30:43 PM
How many points have Wolves and Bournemouth had deducted? None. The Small Heath comparison is a nonsense. They haven't been done for making excessive losses, they were deducted points for signing a player when under a transfer embargo, which we haven't done.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: KevinGage on May 30, 2019, 11:31:42 PM
Steve Gibson really needs to find some worthwhile hobby over the summer.

Top tip:  Don't employ shithouses like Tiny Penis as manager and spend £15 million on Britt Assbumbaclah.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on May 30, 2019, 11:33:26 PM
Bournemouth went up before the new rules came into play.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on May 30, 2019, 11:34:02 PM
We’ve sold the ground now.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: cdbullyweefan on May 30, 2019, 11:37:41 PM
We’ve sold the ground now.

Where have you got this from?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Stu on May 30, 2019, 11:44:09 PM
Right, so the outcome is that teams which have spent more money than they can afford are ok now, because awww...the rules have changed you guys. *shrug*

Sucks to be you.

FFP - financial fair play.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on May 30, 2019, 11:48:10 PM
The rules were changed because the FL were fed up of clubs getting away with it. The new rules were posted on here a fair few times as they came into effect our first season down, as the big change was that the PL would work with the FL over clubs.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on May 30, 2019, 11:48:47 PM
We’ve sold the ground now.

Because Sawiris became a person of significant control over NSWE Stadium Limited on 14th May.  I assumed he had therefore bought it from Aston Villa Limited.

Where have you got this from?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AsTallAsLions on May 30, 2019, 11:50:45 PM
So are we, or are we not, in breach of FFP? Can't be that fucking hard for the authorities to determine. We publish our figures every single year.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: cdbullyweefan on May 30, 2019, 11:52:02 PM
The rules were changed because the FL were fed up of clubs getting away with it. The new rules were posted on here a fair few times as they came into effect our first season down, as the big change was that the PL would work with the FL over clubs.

So... Wolves, then?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on May 30, 2019, 11:53:27 PM
The rules were changed because the FL were fed up of clubs getting away with it. The new rules were posted on here a fair few times as they came into effect our first season down, as the big change was that the PL would work with the FL over clubs.

So... Wolves, then?

I have no idea if they breached them or not over the 3 year period.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: pauliewalnuts on May 30, 2019, 11:53:28 PM
We’ve sold the ground now.

Because Sawiris became a person of significant control over NSWE Stadium Limited on 14th May.  I assumed he had therefore bought it from Aston Villa Limited.

Where have you got this from?

In fairness, the fact NSWE have set up a company called that does not in any way suggest we've actually sold the ground.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: avfcpg on May 30, 2019, 11:55:39 PM
We’ve sold the ground now.

Because Sawiris became a person of significant control over NSWE Stadium Limited on 14th May.  I assumed he had therefore bought it from Aston Villa Limited.

Where have you got this from?

In fairness, the fact NSWE have set up a company called that does not in any way suggest we've actually sold the ground.

Wasn't that done 15th May or around then? Maybe just a back up plan for if we didn't win the final?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 30, 2019, 11:59:57 PM
The limit was £61m, not £39m.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on May 30, 2019, 11:59:59 PM
http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/financial-fair-play-explained.php

relevant bits about punishments

Quote
Crucially, this harmonisation of the rules comes with the blessing of the Premier League - so we shouldn’t see any repeat of the stand-offs that arose (and are still ongoing) with QPR and Leicester. Previously, the Premier League bosses refused to help the Football League collect the ‘Fair Play Tax’ fines for clubs that overspent but won promotion – this lack of support significantly undermined the Football League and severely impacted on the effectiveness of the Football League punishments.

Quote
Any punishment for breach of the rules will be determined by an independent panel (the ‘Fair Play Panel’).

But what are the potential punishments? Previously the Football League has only been able to either; fine promoted clubs (a fine the Premier League didn’t help them collect), or impose a transfer embargo for historic overspending (which always like a stable-door/horse scenario). With this change, a wide range of punishments are now available. Nothing is off the table; the Football League are now able to impose a points deduction during the current season, or demote a club from an automatic promotion position into the play-offs (or out of the play-offs altogether). Transfer embargoes are also available (with the earliest one potentially applying during the Summer 2017 Transfer window.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Toronto Villa on May 31, 2019, 12:00:31 AM
I’ll brick it when Purslow does. And nothing suggests to me he is concerned. Not saying we will lash out £200m on new players but from everything he’s said since promotion they are taking a very measured approach to the new financial reality at the club.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AsTallAsLions on May 31, 2019, 12:05:18 AM
We've been trying to cooperate, unlike other clubs, for the last couple of seasons. I'd say we'll be fine.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 31, 2019, 12:09:49 AM
Article appears to suggest that somebody such as Gibson is having a cry on the chance that we have breached FFP.

We say we haven't.

Balance is the EFL talking to the PL back, as PL do not appear to give a good fuck (shock).

How can we be under an embargo when we're not in their remit or when you cant register players for a few more days, I have no idea.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: danno on May 31, 2019, 12:17:56 AM
The limit was £61m, not £39m.

As I understand it, it's allowable losses over a three year period.
£35 million per year in the premiership, £13 million per year in the Championship.

So allowable losses for a relegated team would be:
£83 million in the first year ( 2 premier seasons + 1 championship)
then £61 million  ( 1 premier season + 2 championship)
then £39 million ( 3 championship seasons)

So for us last year our limit was £61 million.  Whereas Birmingham's limit has always been £39 million as they've not been in the premier league since err... 2011 ?!?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 31, 2019, 12:24:10 AM
Your report financial year to year though, so we would be reporting on whatever our losses are post filing of annual returns until next February/March. It's just estimates until then, so the hard limit ought to be £61m as of now and £39m for the estimate. We've been regularly engaging with the EFL and surely now we can increase our estimate to include a minimum £93m additional income.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: danno on May 31, 2019, 12:29:45 AM
I tend to agree with the opinion that it's probably just Steve Gibson screaming at clouds.

of smog obviously
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: eamonn on May 31, 2019, 01:29:01 AM
Is any other news outlet reporting us being under a soft transfer embargo? If it's true, I'd be a bit miffed at Purslow's consistent "we are fine" mantra.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Newby on May 31, 2019, 04:32:38 AM
Just read that Purslow and Xia are no longer Directors. Reshuffle on May 15th as part of the NWSE thing.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: mr underhill on May 31, 2019, 06:55:36 AM
Hopefully this is just more of Gibbo's sour grapery - I thought any attempt to 'investigate' us had been thwarted at the recent League meeting at Forest. If not, the hierarchy are going to want to revise 'the sky's the limit' statement.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: KRS on May 31, 2019, 07:03:16 AM
I wouldn’t worry about this unless there is a definitive statement from the club. At the moment this is just panic from a single media source with no quotes from any sources, and our management have clearly stated and can be quoted as saying that there are no issues at this stage. Let’s see how this pans out over the next few weeks before we all start questioning and panicking.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ad@m on May 31, 2019, 07:11:00 AM
Why the fuck is their AGM in Portugal?!

My thoughts exactly.

Flying the board of the football league out to Portugal for a fucking meeting hardly gives them the moral high ground on financial prudence!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 31, 2019, 07:11:06 AM
Just read that Purslow and Xia are no longer Directors. Reshuffle on May 15th as part of the NWSE thing.

Where have you read that?

Edit: that's the NWSE Stadium Ltd subsidiary.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Newby on May 31, 2019, 07:17:09 AM
Just read that Purslow and Xia are no longer Directors. Reshuffle on May 15th as part of the NWSE thing.

Where have you read that?

Edit: that's the NWSE Stadium Ltd subsidiary.

Newsnow headlines mate.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Villan For Life on May 31, 2019, 07:17:47 AM
Just read that Purslow and Xia are no longer Directors. Reshuffle on May 15th as part of the NWSE thing.

Where have you read that?

Edit: that's the NWSE Stadium Ltd subsidiary.

It’s on the Meaning Evil website too
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 31, 2019, 07:18:50 AM
Purslow is still Chief Exec of RECON and the AVFC subsidiaries, just not apart of NWSE Stadium Ltd.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithe on May 31, 2019, 07:37:06 AM
Why would Boro send a legal letter to Derby and not the FL about the issue?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Dazvillain on May 31, 2019, 07:39:34 AM
Just read that Purslow and Xia are no longer Directors. Reshuffle on May 15th as part of the NWSE thing.

Where have you read that?

Edit: that's the NWSE Stadium Ltd subsidiary.
Loads of changes and comings and goings made on companies house  listings
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: LeeB on May 31, 2019, 07:40:43 AM
I reckon thete's enough on this to get the noses excited, only to have their hopes dashed again.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: robbo1874 on May 31, 2019, 07:55:42 AM
Was having similar thoughts LeeB!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AsTallAsLions on May 31, 2019, 08:59:37 AM
Why would Boro send a legal letter to Derby and not the FL about the issue?

Tbh, given what an eejit Steve Gibson is, this is the most believable part of the article for me...
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Rigadon on May 31, 2019, 09:06:08 AM
Would be good if the club can quash this (hopefully non-)story quickly.  First thing I thought was that we wouldn't be letting any players go if we were operating under some kind of embargo, and AA has left the building. 
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Dave P on May 31, 2019, 09:13:16 AM
Albert was out of contract wasn't he?

EDIT: Jut saw he had a year left.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ASHTONVILLA on May 31, 2019, 09:20:42 AM
Purslow has all along seemed very confident that we are not in any danger of breaching FFP. I know he would hardly be shouting about problems if we had any, but neither would he be being so categoric about there being no problems.

I think it is shit stirring from Gibson, that they have to pay lip service to but will come to nothing (as we have not breached the rules). Wasn't Purslow involved in drafting the rules? Can't see him being wrong on them.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 31, 2019, 09:22:04 AM
Guess he's just upset that for a second year running they've not "smashed the league" as he said they would. Diddums.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: cdbullyweefan on May 31, 2019, 09:36:06 AM
Are we actually under embargo or is that bullshit? Even if there is doubt hanging over us this could severely delay our plans to get players in. And we need shitloads of players in.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Lastfootstamper on May 31, 2019, 09:38:11 AM
Is any other news outlet reporting us being under a soft transfer embargo? If it's true, I'd be a bit miffed at Purslow's consistent "we are fine" mantra.


That probably means something like we can't buy anyone until the PL window opens.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: thick_mike on May 31, 2019, 09:43:24 AM
Is any other news outlet reporting us being under a soft transfer embargo? If it's true, I'd be a bit miffed at Purslow's consistent "we are fine" mantra.


That probably means something like we can't buy anyone until the PL window opens.

It means we can’t buy any soft players, so we should be able to get Mings in.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: London Villan on May 31, 2019, 10:19:36 AM
Isn't that tomorrow? June 1st?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: TheMalandro on May 31, 2019, 10:31:34 AM
The window opened in the middle of May.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on May 31, 2019, 10:44:51 AM
Registrations are kept until 1st June though.

Guess we will see, but how we can be embargoed when we're not in the EFL, who knows.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: fredm on May 31, 2019, 10:47:21 AM
Think it is 1st July to register players. If you look on BBC website for transfers several have an asterisk with "to take place on 1st July" underneath.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Dave P on May 31, 2019, 10:47:22 AM
Isn't there a formal cut off point for being in the EFL / Prem for administration purposes.  I.e. we wouldn't have switched all our admin to premier league once the full time whistle went on Monday surely.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Villafirst on May 31, 2019, 02:20:10 PM
I see the Meaning Evil has jumped on the bandwagon and rehashed the DM's story. Now other clubs are "furious" with us! Where's their evidence to back this up??
Villa need to make some sort of response to these accusations.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Risso on May 31, 2019, 02:29:55 PM
I see the Meaning Evil has jumped on the bandwagon and rehashed the DM's story. Now other clubs are "furious" with us! Where's their evidence to back this up??
Villa need to make some sort of response to these accusations.

"Fuck off you bitter twats!"
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: pauliewalnuts on May 31, 2019, 02:40:04 PM
Villa need to make some sort of response to these accusations.

Something like this.

(https://media.giphy.com/media/1vZaDKwvQXvuYGMw0l/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Bren'd on May 31, 2019, 03:20:12 PM
Our embargo is as severe as Wolves' was when they went up.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: exiled on the wirral! on May 31, 2019, 05:48:16 PM
I think I'm more inclined to take Purslows word rather than Gregg fucking Evans's
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on May 31, 2019, 09:02:12 PM
Wolves lost £57m in their last championship season.  How can we possibly be punished if they weren’t?  That assumes we’ve even broken it. 
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Dante Lavelli on May 31, 2019, 09:14:08 PM
Why the fuck is their AGM in Portugal?!

My thoughts exactly.

Flying the board of the football league out to Portugal for a fucking meeting hardly gives them the moral high ground on financial prudence!

Pretty sure it’d be cheaper to stump up the cost to charter a few flights and then be paying local prices for three or fours days than doing the same in the UK, unless they’re going full Alan Partridge.

Morally, ethically, from an environmental perspective I agree.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Risso on May 31, 2019, 09:17:35 PM
Our financial year end is the 31 May, ie today.  We then get 10 months to prepare the accounts.  I can't see how we can really be held to account for this season's results until we've had time to prepare them.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: hilts_coolerking on May 31, 2019, 09:18:41 PM
Pretty sure it’d be cheaper to stump up the cost to charter a few flights and then be paying local prices for three or fours days than doing the same in the UK, unless they’re going full Alan Partridge.
"What part of Birmingham are you from?"
"No Alan, I'm actually from South Africa."
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on May 31, 2019, 09:44:29 PM
Our financial year end is the 31 May, ie today.  We then get 10 months to prepare the accounts.  I can't see how we can really be held to account for this season's results until we've had time to prepare them.

Especially with the likelihood of Post Balance Sheet Events?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Sexual Ealing on May 31, 2019, 10:05:17 PM
I wonder whether this 'soft embargo' became a thing shortly after Pulis managed to convince Gibson that Boro had achieved 'soft promotion' by spending most of the season in the top six?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: adrenachrome on May 31, 2019, 10:06:26 PM
Our financial year end is the 31 May, ie today.  We then get 10 months to prepare the accounts.  I can't see how we can really be held to account for this season's results until we've had time to prepare them.

Especially with the likelihood of Post Balance Sheet Events?

That's hard to credit.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: KRS on May 31, 2019, 11:41:19 PM
What’s the difference between a soft embargo and a hard embargo? Surely embargo means embargo. It’s all getting a bit too Brexit for my liking.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Eckybloke on June 01, 2019, 12:37:16 AM
Soft embargos enable you to pick up frees and pay them about 600k a year. You can’t pay fees for players, also you need to be able to show you’re working towards being more sustainable.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: KRS on June 01, 2019, 12:44:11 AM
So everything we’re reading so far about signing players and paying fees suggests that this soft embargo thing is a load of media speculative nonsense.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Eckybloke on June 01, 2019, 12:50:34 AM
Either that or we’re doing a blose and telling the league to F off I’d go for the former though!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Risso on June 01, 2019, 08:58:59 AM
Soft embargos enable you to pick up frees and pay them about 600k a year. You can’t pay fees for players, also you need to be able to show you’re working towards being more sustainable.

I think getting promoted ticks that last box!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: The_ads on June 01, 2019, 09:00:24 AM
Isn’t this story from the Daily fucking Mail?  I rest my case. If John Percy reports it I’ll take some notice
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: mr underhill on June 01, 2019, 09:43:12 AM
#fucktheffpfuckers
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AsTallAsLions on June 08, 2019, 06:13:52 PM
So after a number of reports that we were set to be roasted at the big EFL chin-wag in Portugal on Thur/Fri - nothing been reported about it today? Should be an onus on the league to let fans know what's going on if their clubs are being discussed in the same context as penalties for bullshit. I don't think anything will come of it but at the same time I'd appreciate confirmation of that, if only to shut the likes of Steve Gibson the fuck up.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on June 09, 2019, 09:58:42 AM
Interesting article on the ownership of Southampton, Mr GAO a Chinese businessman with some questions over source of funds and ownership structures.
Has told the club they need to be self sufficient.
Brings back a few memories.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: LeeB on June 09, 2019, 10:57:15 AM
Interesting article on the ownership of Southampton, Mr GAO a Chinese businessman with some questions over source of funds and ownership structures.
Has told the club they need to be self sufficient.
Brings back a few memories.

Good, I hope they go the same way we nearly did.

I can't stand Southampton, they must be close to being banned on environmental grounds as they're so plastic.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Risso on June 09, 2019, 11:12:30 AM
Hard to see how they culd be any more sustainable given the players they've sold in the last few years.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Rodders on June 09, 2019, 11:17:18 AM
Interesting article on the ownership of Southampton, Mr GAO a Chinese businessman with some questions over source of funds and ownership structures.
Has told the club they need to be self sufficient.
Brings back a few memories.

Good, I hope they go the same way we nearly did.

I can't stand Southampton, they must be close to being banned on environmental grounds as they're so plastic.

Isn't their owner so crooked even the Premier League tried to block his takeover a couple of years ago? Takes some doing, that.

I didn't really have anything much against them as a club until five minutes after the whistle blew on the playoff final when my elder son's stepdad - a Southampton supporter - rang to congratulate me then in the same breath said he thought we'd be immediately relegated again. My most fervent desire now this season (other than winning the league, obviously) is to take six points from them, thrashing them mercilessly at Villa Park and whatever their plastic stadium is called nowadays, whilst seeing them implode, go into administration, be docked points, get relegated and then go bust, with Matt LeTissier snotting live on telly from his big wonky nose, the soapy twat.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on June 09, 2019, 11:18:07 AM
Hard to see how they culd be any more sustainable given the players they've sold in the last few years.
Exactly.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on June 09, 2019, 11:19:37 AM
Interesting article on the ownership of Southampton, Mr GAO a Chinese businessman with some questions over source of funds and ownership structures.
Has told the club they need to be self sufficient.
Brings back a few memories.

Good, I hope they go the same way we nearly did.

I can't stand Southampton, they must be close to being banned on environmental grounds as they're so plastic.

Isn't their owner so crooked even the Premier League tried to block his takeover a couple of years ago? Takes some doing, that.

I didn't really have anything much against them as a club until five minutes after the whistle blew on the playoff final when my elder son's stepdad - a Southampton supporter - rang to congratulate me then in the same breath said he thought we'd be immediately relegated again. My most fervent desire now this season (other than winning the league, obviously) is to take six points from them, thrashing them mercilessly at Villa Park and whatever their plastic stadium is called nowadays, whilst seeing them implode, go into administration, be docked points, get relegated and then go bust, with Matt LeTissier snotting live on telly from his big wonky nose, the soapy twat.
Stop sitting on the fence.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on June 09, 2019, 11:26:29 AM
The PL got interested when a Chinese Government owned entity bought a stake in his Chinese Holding company as concerns Southampton could be owned by China. Then pops up a HK company which he claims is the owner via an offshore co which he is beneficial owner of and the PL back off.

It’s pretty obvious that the PL is way out of its depth when dealing with this stuff, but as long as the money keeps flowing in I suppose.
At some point though it is obvious that they will get tripped up by Money Laundering legislators.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Rodders on June 09, 2019, 12:56:34 PM
All sounds perfectly legitimate, eh?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: cheltenhamlion on June 11, 2019, 06:15:29 PM
Dear Premier League

Can you fix it for me for us to have Southampton away in October half term week as I will be on the Isle of Wight.

Cheers
Chelts
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: GordonCowansisthegreatest on June 11, 2019, 06:28:05 PM
I'll be on the IoW then as well ;-)
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: cheltenhamlion on June 11, 2019, 07:19:17 PM
And if we arent playing them you can fetch the first round!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: GordonCowansisthegreatest on June 11, 2019, 07:32:49 PM
I'll be in Pedmore tomorrow as well !!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: cheltenhamlion on June 11, 2019, 07:53:06 PM
I dont finish in Brum until 5pm but The Crabmill or Foley look appealing!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: GordonCowansisthegreatest on June 11, 2019, 11:36:45 PM
I dont finish in Brum until 5pm but The Crabmill or Foley look appealing!
Tied up with family, Baggies by the way, and flying off to Portugal so will have to wait till you're on the island in October.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: cheltenhamlion on June 12, 2019, 08:54:02 AM
I dont finish in Brum until 5pm but The Crabmill or Foley look appealing!
Tied up with family, Baggies by the way, and flying off to Portugal so will have to wait till you're on the island in October.

Done. We are staying in Shanklin.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: wozwebs on June 12, 2019, 09:34:28 AM
As posted from someone who was at the FCG meeting last night -

Positive news coming out of last night’s FCG meeting with Christian Purslow. Mr P saying that the EFL have now confirmed we are compliant with the Profit and Sustainability rules (FFP) 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
He’s asked the EFL to release an official statement to this effect. Gonna be some unhappy journos around when that happens......😃💪🏻😃
Away Scheme in Current Format to Be Scrapped
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AsTallAsLions on June 12, 2019, 09:46:27 AM
As posted from someone who was at the FCG meeting last night -

Positive news coming out of last night’s FCG meeting with Christian Purslow. Mr P saying that the EFL have now confirmed we are compliant with the Profit and Sustainability rules (FFP) 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
He’s asked the EFL to release an official statement to this effect. Gonna be some unhappy journos around when that happens......😃💪🏻😃
Away Scheme in Current Format to Be Scrapped

Great news, assuming it's true. Will await that official statement with baited breath so we can get on with being a successful PL club and Steve Gibson can curdle away in silence.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: andrew08 on June 12, 2019, 09:56:14 AM
Interesting news about the away scheme. Happy enough to take my £40 off me when we were skint, but now everyone wants to go to again it’s scrapped. As long as my attendance record transfers it will be fine, but when they’re selling £6k trips to watch preseason friendlies I expect we will be seeing the return of the VIP away package for the bigger games again.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Hookeysmith on June 12, 2019, 12:56:25 PM
As posted from someone who was at the FCG meeting last night -

Positive news coming out of last night’s FCG meeting with Christian Purslow. Mr P saying that the EFL have now confirmed we are compliant with the Profit and Sustainability rules (FFP) 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
He’s asked the EFL to release an official statement to this effect. Gonna be some unhappy journos around when that happens......😃💪🏻😃
Away Scheme in Current Format to Be Scrapped

Can we get the Samaritans number posted on SHA and whatever poses as the Bitters web site

There will be some that just will not be able to cope with this news :)
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: GordonCowansisthegreatest on June 12, 2019, 01:49:01 PM
I dont finish in Brum until 5pm but The Crabmill or Foley look appealing!
Tied up with family, Baggies by the way, and flying off to Portugal so will have to wait till you're on the island in October.

Done. We are staying in Shanklin.
I’m in Ryde a couple of miles from the ferry!
Give us a shout when you’re about 👍
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: KevinGage on June 12, 2019, 02:10:11 PM
As posted from someone who was at the FCG meeting last night -

Positive news coming out of last night’s FCG meeting with Christian Purslow. Mr P saying that the EFL have now confirmed we are compliant with the Profit and Sustainability rules (FFP) 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
He’s asked the EFL to release an official statement to this effect. Gonna be some unhappy journos around when that happens......😃💪🏻😃
Away Scheme in Current Format to Be Scrapped

Can we get the Samaritans number posted on SHA and whatever poses as the Bitters web site

There will be some that just will not be able to cope with this news :)

We've just given the B-lose £4 million when they needed it most.   Bailing them out as we did with the compo for their duff manager in 2011.

We're great when it comes to needy causes.

You'd think they'd show some gratitude.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: SamTheMouse on June 12, 2019, 04:56:39 PM
I dont finish in Brum until 5pm but The Crabmill or Foley look appealing!
Tied up with family, Baggies by the way, and flying off to Portugal so will have to wait till you're on the island in October.

Done. We are staying in Shanklin.
I’m in Ryde a couple of miles from the ferry!
Give us a shout when you’re about 👍

I spent the first ten years of my life living in Ryde. Most of my family still lives on the island. I still love it.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: cheltenhamlion on June 12, 2019, 05:30:56 PM
I dont finish in Brum until 5pm but The Crabmill or Foley look appealing!
Tied up with family, Baggies by the way, and flying off to Portugal so will have to wait till you're on the island in October.

Done. We are staying in Shanklin.
I’m in Ryde a couple of miles from the ferry!
Give us a shout when you’re about 👍

Cool. Portsmouth to Fishbourne ferry and we are in a lodge in Landguard. I will shout up nearer the time to arrange a beer and we might have a game to squeeze in as well.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: GordonCowansisthegreatest on June 12, 2019, 08:10:43 PM
I dont finish in Brum until 5pm but The Crabmill or Foley look appealing!
Tied up with family, Baggies by the way, and flying off to Portugal so will have to wait till you're on the island in October.

Done. We are staying in Shanklin.
I’m in Ryde a couple of miles from the ferry!
Give us a shout when you’re about 👍

Cool. Portsmouth to Fishbourne ferry and we are in a lodge in Landguard. I will shout up nearer the time to arrange a beer and we might have a game to squeeze in as well.
Sounds like a plan. I’m in Pedmore now with the France Norway ladies game on before flying to Faro in the morning.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: cheltenhamlion on June 12, 2019, 09:18:17 PM
I am on the sofa in Pedmore with a glass of wine and Deadliest Catch on the telly. Bedecked in dressing gown.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Jon Crofts on June 14, 2019, 12:25:34 PM
I am on the sofa in Pedmore with a glass of wine and Deadliest Catch on the telly. Bedecked in dressing gown.

Pass me the mind bleach.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: cheltenhamlion on June 14, 2019, 02:43:00 PM
Oh yes, there is nothing to worry about FFP wise either. All sorted.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Hookeysmith on June 14, 2019, 04:05:48 PM
Oh yes, there is nothing to worry about FFP wise either. All sorted.

Have we got any actual evidence of that? I read somewhere we had asked the EFL to put that in writing?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Lastfootstamper on June 14, 2019, 04:38:01 PM
Oh yes, there is nothing to worry about FFP wise either. All sorted.

Have we got any actual evidence of that? I read somewhere we had asked the EFL to put that in writing?


I remember reading somebody saying that we should ask the EFL to put it in writing.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: chrisw1 on June 14, 2019, 04:40:17 PM
I think MOMS mentioned it after the FFG meeting - that we were going to ask for the EFL to issue a statement.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: mike on June 14, 2019, 04:42:23 PM
They could make a statement themselves on the club website. If it's true, the EFL can't complain.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Toronto Villa on June 14, 2019, 04:48:12 PM
Oh yes, there is nothing to worry about FFP wise either. All sorted.

Have we got any actual evidence of that? I read somewhere we had asked the EFL to put that in writing?

Didn’t they ask for that so everyone stopped talking about it and just make it official?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AsTallAsLions on June 14, 2019, 05:54:50 PM
Point is, the EFL hasn't said anything, and neither has the club. So we haven't a clue and until put in writing it's hard to trust.

I do get the impression they are quietly embarrassed by the likes of Gibson but so long as he keeps pointing out he's the only one trying to follow their rules, it's difficult for them to tell him to shut up.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: jwarry on June 14, 2019, 06:08:30 PM
Point is, the EFL hasn't said anything, and neither has the club. So we haven't a clue and until put in writing it's hard to trust.

I do get the impression they are quietly embarrassed by the likes of Gibson but so long as he keeps pointing out he's the only one trying to follow their rules, it's difficult for them to tell him to shut up.

I see he’s had another moan today, he really is making a tit of himself. I guess the problem is he believed the pre-season pundits last season that they were favourites to top the table and in his head the only reason they weren’t is because everybody else broke the rules! Somebody needs to tell him that a certain Tiny Penis might have been the problem
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AsTallAsLions on June 14, 2019, 06:14:54 PM
Point is, the EFL hasn't said anything, and neither has the club. So we haven't a clue and until put in writing it's hard to trust.

I do get the impression they are quietly embarrassed by the likes of Gibson but so long as he keeps pointing out he's the only one trying to follow their rules, it's difficult for them to tell him to shut up.

I see he’s had another moan today, he really is making a tit of himself. I guess the problem is he believed the pre-season pundits last season that they were favourites to top the table and in his head the only reason they weren’t is because everybody else broke the rules! Somebody needs to tell him that a certain Tiny Penis might have been the problem

Spot on, he seemed to think they'd walk it despite not signing anyone decent. Even their loans were a bit shite.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: clash city rocker on June 14, 2019, 09:48:52 PM
At the end of the day we pulled ourselves into the premiership lifeboat so we have nothing to worry about.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: aj2k77 on June 15, 2019, 01:59:34 AM
I started this thread 12 months ago. 1000 replies later we are promoted and back in the Premier League. FFP can kiss my arse.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Comrade Blitz on June 15, 2019, 02:05:30 AM
When Cuntiano Dildonaldo went to Juventus all of the "rules" of FFP were exposed...along with Mancunter Cunty failing to win a Cuntions League trophy.

There will be a major re-think of how to favour the UEFA darlings again....
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: eamonn on June 15, 2019, 11:03:36 PM
I started this thread 12 months ago. 1000 replies later we are promoted and back in the Premier League. FFP can kiss my arse.

You fuckin tell 'em AJ!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: kippaxvilla2 on June 21, 2019, 12:54:05 PM
According to Mr Purslow we are compliant with the rules for 2018-19.  Subject to the final audit of the accounts which is standard practice.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Villafirst on June 21, 2019, 03:13:45 PM
According to Mr Purslow we are compliant with the rules for 2018-19.  Subject to the final audit of the accounts which is standard practice.

That will piss off Gibson at Boro!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Sexual Ealing on June 28, 2019, 02:54:41 PM
Is this bad? https://offthepitch.com/a/new-filing-reveals-aston-villa-sold-stadium-owners-5-weeks-ago
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: andyh on June 28, 2019, 03:30:56 PM
I am sure people will be up in arms about it.
Nas and Wes own the club and all it’s assets anyway, so if it’s a way to generate money, what does it matter if another arm of their business is the holding company?

Anything that fucks off the Middlesboro owner even more is ok by me.

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Yeltzer on June 28, 2019, 03:42:57 PM
Selling the ground is better than having to sell Grealish
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Sexual Ealing on June 28, 2019, 04:26:32 PM
Also, in what universe is VP worth £25m less than Derby's ground?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: dave.woodhall on June 28, 2019, 04:35:39 PM
Also, in what universe is VP worth £25m less than Derby's ground?

The land value is probably right. Theirs is in the middle of prime commercial land, ours isn't.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Sexual Ealing on June 28, 2019, 04:49:41 PM
Ah, fair enough.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: dalians umbrella on July 02, 2019, 03:04:33 PM
Has anyone seen this article in the Times? I don't know how to get full access.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/aston-villa-facing-investigation-after-stadium-sale-0tcrzjl7b

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Chipsticks on July 02, 2019, 03:24:55 PM
Has anyone seen this article in the Times? I don't know how to get full access.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/aston-villa-facing-investigation-after-stadium-sale-0tcrzjl7b



This is a good site for dodging paywalls: https://outline.com/
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: dalians umbrella on July 02, 2019, 03:29:44 PM
Thanks.

Also, apologies,  I should have realised that I'm never the first person to spot anything - I see this came up on the Villa Park thread 24 hours ago.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Border villan on July 02, 2019, 07:29:08 PM
If the new White fart lane cost a rumoured £1billion then surely at £56million the home of a team that actually have experience of being European Champions is, if anything, undervalued.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: cdbullyweefan on July 02, 2019, 11:54:58 PM
I don't think the valuation of £56.7 million is based on how much it would cost to build a football stadium of that size, you'd have no chance of building a Villa Park for that.

It's based on how much the land would fetch if sold to developers.

This may be wrong, someone who understands these things will be able to advise.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Damo70 on July 03, 2019, 12:05:04 AM
No disrespect to anyone on H&V but if I need any advice on anything relating to Villa and FFP I go onto the Small Heath Alliance website. I think they can even tell you exactly how much we spent on paper clips and envelopes in the last financial year.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Lastfootstamper on July 03, 2019, 12:10:05 AM
My house has a footprint of ≈330 ft², no parking, shared access across the garden, and it's not even in Brum. It's apparently worth £170k. That valuation seems reasonable.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Risso on July 03, 2019, 12:10:18 AM
I don't think the valuation of £56.7 million is based on how much it would cost to build a football stadium of that size, you'd have no chance of building a Villa Park for that.

It's based on how much the land would fetch if sold to developers.

This may be wrong, someone who understands these things will be able to advise.

Yes, fair value is what somebody would pay in an arm's length transaction.  Some idiot Brizzle fan on Twitter has been trying to tell me it's the same as valuing a house.  It isn't.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Damo70 on July 03, 2019, 10:05:27 AM
I don't think the valuation of £56.7 million is based on how much it would cost to build a football stadium of that size, you'd have no chance of building a Villa Park for that.

It's based on how much the land would fetch if sold to developers.

This may be wrong, someone who understands these things will be able to advise.

Yes, fair value is what somebody would pay in an arm's length transaction.  Some idiot Brizzle fan on Twitter has been trying to tell me it's the same as valuing a house.  It isn't.


It probably is if you have a house and garden the size of Villa Park and the car parks around it plus any other land we own. ;)
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AsTallAsLions on July 03, 2019, 04:29:30 PM
What a nothing story yesterday being circulated by some reputable news sources (and some not so reputable). The likes of the Times should really know better. There is more chance of us winning the Premier League than being punished for fairly valuing our biggest asset and selling it to a pair of businessmen. We're talking about a league that sold TV rights for 4 BILLION pounds and has no problem with Leicester City valuing Harry frigging Maguire higher than £70m - far in excessive of how we valued the VP land asset. The whole game is about generating silly amounts of money so it would be the height of hypocrisy for them to "investigate" Villa for generating £50 million to cover costs and quite frankly it's not worth the time it would take to do so.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ktvillan on July 04, 2019, 12:25:12 AM
If our FFP "issues" occurred when we were in the EFL,  under EFL FFP rules, and our solution was accepted by the EFL,   I don't see how the PL has any jurisdiction to pick us up on anything.  It smacks of bullshit to me.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AV82EC on July 04, 2019, 08:27:08 AM
Not sure if he posts on here but one of the Yorkshire Villa lot did a good thread on this on Twatter yesterday. In summary it’s bullshit by the Times and any view the EPL want to take on it can’t be until they review next seasons books and even then as Risso says it’s as simple as proving your fair value process.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Damo70 on July 04, 2019, 09:22:33 AM
I am pretty sure that with the business and sporting knowledge and experience of our owners, the Premier League money and the expertise of Christian Purslow despite some people seeming to have it in for us we will be fine when it comes to FFP. Which will be a huge disappointment to those trying to stir things up.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: paul_e on July 04, 2019, 10:59:30 AM
I think this whole story comes down to a misunderstanding. I seem to remember Leicester and/or Bournemouth and/or QPR all going through a situation where they failed FFP in the championship but weren't punished because there was no collaboration between the 2 leagues and after the last of them there was an agreement reached. I suspect that, as part of that agreement, bothe the EFL and EPL agreed to do independent checks on promoted and relegated teams and this is just a case of them completing that process, nothing will come of it but it makes for good headlines for one of the newspapers to post nonsense about us.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Risso on July 04, 2019, 11:32:32 AM
Last time we were in the Premier League, the stadium and land were valued at over £80m, so we've clearly not pushed things to the absolute limits in terms of current valuation.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Matt Collins on July 05, 2019, 06:38:36 AM
Not sure if he posts on here but one of the Yorkshire Villa lot did a good thread on this on Twatter yesterday. In summary it’s bullshit by the Times and any view the EPL want to take on it can’t be until they review next seasons books and even then as Risso says it’s as simple as proving your fair value process.

Agree

I think "the Yorkshire villa lot" is one guy by the way

He's excellent on ffp. His analysis over the last year has been spot on. He predicted this sort of deal as the only way we could comply
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: oldhill_avfc on July 05, 2019, 08:22:48 AM
My understanding of accounts is basic so bear with me.

This is the sale of a fixed asset and I assume had a value on the balance sheet.

Therefore a sale is essentially a conversion of equity into cash.  The profit element for the purposes of FFP would only come in on the amount raised above book value.

So my questions are :-

How much profit was actually made?

Is this more to do with cashflow/summer transfers (and if so the FFP rumblings shouldn't matter)?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Dave P on July 05, 2019, 12:35:53 PM
Do I understand the Premier League looking into this?  Yes.

Do I anticipate a problem?  No.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on July 05, 2019, 12:41:36 PM
My understanding of accounts is basic so bear with me.

This is the sale of a fixed asset and I assume had a value on the balance sheet.

Therefore a sale is essentially a conversion of equity into cash.  The profit element for the purposes of FFP would only come in on the amount raised above book value.

So my questions are :-

How much profit was actually made?

Is this more to do with cashflow/summer transfers (and if so the FFP rumblings shouldn't matter)?
See Risso post above, the purchase price over and above the book value will be treated as profit.
The most important part will Be FFP  compliance but as this is real money it will be used to fund cash flow.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: oldhill_avfc on July 05, 2019, 03:59:57 PM
That's what I thought.

So, the assets were valued at £80m 3 years ago, that means that unless the stadium was very much a minority of the total assets/land then there's not a lot of profit in the sale for the purposes of FFP (but maybe they only needed a small amount to meet the regulations?).

Not that I think it's a big deal btw - just curious. 
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: ChicagoLion on July 05, 2019, 04:22:33 PM
Without the Balance Sheet in front of me I am guessing you are referring to Net Assets or Net Worth = Total Assets less Total Liabilities.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: cheltenhamlion on July 08, 2019, 07:08:45 PM
The amount paid appears to be the exact amount we lost last season if the guesstimate numbers are correct. Fuck it. There is nothing anyone can argue based on book value so this thread can now disappear quietly. I presume it has caused a meltdown elsewhere mind.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Toronto Villa on July 08, 2019, 07:34:37 PM
Can we send this thread over to the noses? It will be a wonderful story, full of laughs and hope and hilarity that ends as a fucking nightmare for them.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Risso on July 08, 2019, 09:23:32 PM
That's what I thought.

So, the assets were valued at £80m 3 years ago, that means that unless the stadium was very much a minority of the total assets/land then there's not a lot of profit in the sale for the purposes of FFP (but maybe they only needed a small amount to meet the regulations?).

Not that I think it's a big deal btw - just curious. 

The stadium and land were valued at £80m 3 years ago, then we were relegated and there was an impairment review, and it was written down to just over £40m.  So I reckon there's round about a £15m boost to profit, ad the whole proceeds amount as a cashflow boost.  On paper, anyway.

Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: pauliewalnuts on July 09, 2019, 02:31:05 PM
The owners have just put another £30m in by issuing shares:

https://twitter.com/KieranMaguire/status/1148581195187441664
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: olaftab on July 09, 2019, 02:38:22 PM
The owners have just put another £30m in by issuing shares:

https://twitter.com/KieranMaguire/status/1148581195187441664
The owners have put in another £40m into the club today apparently - maybe the sky is the limit.
Come on chaps is it 30 or 40?😊
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Toronto Villa on July 09, 2019, 02:44:40 PM
A roll of cash they found tucked into their socks.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: pauliewalnuts on July 09, 2019, 03:02:54 PM
The owners have just put another £30m in by issuing shares:

https://twitter.com/KieranMaguire/status/1148581195187441664
The owners have put in another £40m into the club today apparently - maybe the sky is the limit.
Come on chaps is it 30 or 40?😊

It is 41,666,667 shares at £0.72 each - £30m.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: cdbullyweefan on July 09, 2019, 03:04:31 PM
Aren't Recon Tony Xia's bunch? Isn't this just him selling a bit more of his stake as was always likely to happen?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on July 09, 2019, 03:07:56 PM
No, but it dillutes his holding further by issuing further shares he cannot buy. He must be under 10% now.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: pauliewalnuts on July 09, 2019, 03:08:53 PM
No, but it dillutes his holding further by issuing further shares he cannot buy. He must be under 10% now.

Unless he's bought some of them, obvs.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: hilts_coolerking on July 09, 2019, 03:10:42 PM
That's Bale's wages covered for a year then.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Rudy Can't Fail on July 09, 2019, 03:18:32 PM
No, but it dillutes his holding further by issuing further shares he cannot buy. He must be under 10% now.

Unless he's bought some of them, obvs.

We (Xia) still have to pay an additional few million to Randy Lerner based on our promotion. That may explain the £30m. The other obvious reason for dropping it in the bank account is we won't receive our PL millions until sometime next year. These new players' clubs require payments.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: pauliewalnuts on July 09, 2019, 03:25:05 PM
No, but it dillutes his holding further by issuing further shares he cannot buy. He must be under 10% now.

Unless he's bought some of them, obvs.

We (Xia) still have to pay an additional few million to Randy Lerner based on our promotion. That may explain the £30m. The other obvious reason for dropping it in the bank account is we won't receive our PL millions until sometime next year. These new players' clubs require payments.

If there is another 30m due to Randy as part of the purchase, it won't be coming through the club, it'll be coming from the new owners hence no need for this jiggery pokery.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: pauliewalnuts on July 09, 2019, 03:26:06 PM
That's Bale's wages covered for a year then.

#welcomeGarethHale

(https://alchetron.com/cdn/gareth-hale-4cd37647-1f0a-44f4-aad8-1b3e1cc4b79-resize-750.jpeg)
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: danno on July 09, 2019, 05:43:19 PM
That's Bale's wages covered for a year then.

#welcomeGarethHale

(https://alchetron.com/cdn/gareth-hale-4cd37647-1f0a-44f4-aad8-1b3e1cc4b79-resize-750.jpeg)

Poor footballer far too reliant on Pace.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AV82EC on July 09, 2019, 06:35:15 PM
That's Bale's wages covered for a year then.

#welcomeGarethHale

(https://alchetron.com/cdn/gareth-hale-4cd37647-1f0a-44f4-aad8-1b3e1cc4b79-resize-750.jpeg)

Poor footballer far too reliant on Pace.

👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on July 09, 2019, 07:27:53 PM
No, but it dillutes his holding further by issuing further shares he cannot buy. He must be under 10% now.

Unless he's bought some of them, obvs.

More chance of him buying decent shoes.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AV82EC on July 09, 2019, 08:48:06 PM
No, but it dillutes his holding further by issuing further shares he cannot buy. He must be under 10% now.

Unless he's bought some of them, obvs.

More chance of him buying decent shoes.

I think I saw on Twatter earlier someone say he’s now diluted to something like 13.5%.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: LeeB on July 09, 2019, 10:29:09 PM
No, but it dillutes his holding further by issuing further shares he cannot buy. He must be under 10% now.

Unless he's bought some of them, obvs.

More chance of him buying decent shoes.

I think I saw on Twatter earlier someone say he’s now diluted to something like 13.5%.

Wow, he must be tiny by now.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AV82EC on July 09, 2019, 10:30:35 PM
No, but it dillutes his holding further by issuing further shares he cannot buy. He must be under 10% now.

Unless he's bought some of them, obvs.

More chance of him buying decent shoes.

I think I saw on Twatter earlier someone say he’s now diluted to something like 13.5%.

Wow, he must be tiny by now.

Chortle.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Dave P on July 09, 2019, 10:30:38 PM
No, but it dillutes his holding further by issuing further shares he cannot buy. He must be under 10% now.

Unless he's bought some of them, obvs.

More chance of him buying decent shoes.

I think I saw on Twatter earlier someone say he’s now diluted to something like 13.5%.

Wow, he must be tiny by now.

Tiny Xia?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Ads on July 10, 2019, 07:25:49 AM
No, he's just far away.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: chrisw1 on July 10, 2019, 08:24:17 AM
That's Bale's wages covered for a year then.

#welcomeGarethHale

(https://alchetron.com/cdn/gareth-hale-4cd37647-1f0a-44f4-aad8-1b3e1cc4b79-resize-750.jpeg)

Poor footballer far too reliant on Pace.
You win!
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: robbo1874 on July 10, 2019, 08:32:18 AM
That's Bale's wages covered for a year then.

#welcomeGarethHale

(https://alchetron.com/cdn/gareth-hale-4cd37647-1f0a-44f4-aad8-1b3e1cc4b79-resize-750.jpeg)

Poor footballer far too reliant on Pace.
as new signing shirt stretches go, that’s the best of all
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Villafirst on August 13, 2019, 06:20:05 PM
I see Man Citeh have escaped a transfer ban for breaching FIFA rules on transfers & registration of players under age of 18. A measly £315k fine instead which will obviously dent their bank balance. Fucking joke - a 10 point deduction would've been far more severe.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Smirker on August 13, 2019, 06:32:14 PM
I see Man Citeh have escaped a transfer ban for breaching FIFA rules on transfers & registration of players under age of 18. A measly £315k fine instead which will obviously dent their bank balance. Fucking joke - a 10 point deduction would've been far more severe.

A £100bn fine would be nice. Pay within seven days or The Etihad is bulldozed  8)
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Villafirst on August 13, 2019, 06:49:06 PM
I see Man Citeh have escaped a transfer ban for breaching FIFA rules on transfers & registration of players under age of 18. A measly £315k fine instead which will obviously dent their bank balance. Fucking joke - a 10 point deduction would've been far more severe.

A £100bn fine would be nice. Pay within seven days or The Etihad is bulldozed  8)

Silly thing is they could probably pay it! A £315k fine is hardly a deterrent to Citeh
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Villafirst on August 13, 2019, 06:57:48 PM
Sheikh Mansour, citeh's owner is worth at least £17 billion and the family fortune is estimated at $1 trillion.....
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AsTallAsLions on August 14, 2019, 04:24:43 PM
I see Man Citeh have escaped a transfer ban for breaching FIFA rules on transfers & registration of players under age of 18. A measly £315k fine instead which will obviously dent their bank balance. Fucking joke - a 10 point deduction would've been far more severe.

Any explanation as to why they've escaped a transfer ban which is what Chelsea received for the exact same offense?

Unbelievable when you think about it. This level of preferential treatment of moneyed clubs doesn't happen in any other sport.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: paul_e on August 14, 2019, 04:35:16 PM
I see Man Citeh have escaped a transfer ban for breaching FIFA rules on transfers & registration of players under age of 18. A measly £315k fine instead which will obviously dent their bank balance. Fucking joke - a 10 point deduction would've been far more severe.

Any explanation as to why they've escaped a transfer ban which is what Chelsea received for the exact same offense?

Unbelievable when you think about it. This level of preferential treatment of moneyed clubs doesn't happen in any other sport.

Man City it's the first time they've been punished, Chelsea it's the 2nd.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Villafirst on August 14, 2019, 04:48:23 PM
I thought Citeh had been fined before for breaching FFP?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on August 14, 2019, 05:00:31 PM
They are currently under investigation by UEFA over FFP, and a couple of years ago the Premier League fined them and also banned them from signing academy players for a couple of years.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: paul_e on August 14, 2019, 05:11:51 PM
I'm just repeating something I read a few days ago but I should've said Fifa punishments.

Looking at the cases it seems Chelsea's breeches were far more serious than Man City.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: AsTallAsLions on August 14, 2019, 05:19:38 PM
I'm just repeating something I read a few days ago but I should've said Fifa punishments.

Looking at the cases it seems Chelsea's breeches were far more serious than Man City.

Were they larger? More soiled?
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Damo70 on August 14, 2019, 05:28:19 PM
I'm just repeating something I read a few days ago but I should've said Fifa punishments.

Looking at the cases it seems Chelsea's breeches were far more serious than Man City.

Were they larger? More soiled?


Maybe Citeh were let off for being too big for their breeches.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: Villafirst on August 14, 2019, 06:18:33 PM
I see Man Citeh have escaped a transfer ban for breaching FIFA rules on transfers & registration of players under age of 18. A measly £315k fine instead which will obviously dent their bank balance. Fucking joke - a 10 point deduction would've been far more severe.

Any explanation as to why they've escaped a transfer ban which is what Chelsea received for the exact same offense?

Unbelievable when you think about it. This level of preferential treatment of moneyed clubs doesn't happen in any other sport.

Man City it's the first time they've been punished, Chelsea it's the 2nd.

No, Man City were fined £49m by UEFA in 2014 for breaching FFP rules, and had their squad numbers capped. They are anything but squeaky clean. A 10 point deduction would hurt them far more.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: PeterWithesShin on August 14, 2019, 06:33:35 PM
Them getting a 10 point deduction and still winning the league with Liverpool second would have been very, very, very, entertaining.
Title: Re: Financial fair play
Post by: paul_e on August 14, 2019, 07:05:35 PM
I see Man Citeh have escaped a transfer ban for breaching FIFA rules on transfers & registration of players under age of 18. A measly £315k fine instead which will obviously dent their bank balance. Fucking joke - a 10 point deduction would've been far more severe.

Any explanation as to why they've escaped a transfer ban which is what Chelsea received for the exact same offense?

Unbelievable when you think about it. This level of preferential treatment of moneyed clubs doesn't happen in any other sport.

Man City it's the first time they've been punished, Chelsea it's the 2nd.

No, Man City were fined £49m by UEFA in