Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: kippaxvilla2 on March 08, 2016, 10:49:55 PM
-
Are imminent. I just went onto Companies House and they are 'processing' the images. It is saying they will be viewable within 5 days. It is normally sooner....
-
I hope we see us making a tidy profit I really do. I would sooner rage against the club not re investing profits versus realising we still have yet more austerity to come to try and get into the black.
-
Of course, and it is an obvious point, it won't be reflective of last summer's incoming and outgoings which could be more relevant - but we will have another year for those be published.
-
Aye, but we should be able to put together a trajectory indicating how we are doing now I hope. I seem to recall after the last accounts we guessed that we would be profitable or thereabouts for the next one? I forget. I just want my clubs philosophy to change to "playing some entertaining football" as opposed to "stop the financial losses" which is what it has been for too long.
-
I hope we see us making a tidy profit I really do. I would sooner rage against the club not re investing profits versus realising we still have yet more austerity to come to try and get into the black.
lol!
-
Love this time of year. Other clubs get excited about the transfer window.
I spend all season looking forward to Risso's accounts report.
-
If this doesn't bring back Villadawg, what will?
-
Of course, and it is an obvious point, it won't be reflective of last summer's incoming and outgoings which could be more relevant - but we will have another year for those be published.
Fear not, the Post Balance Sheet Events note is you friend. It will detail all major incomings and outgoings between 31 May and the date the accounts were signed. Obviously it won't have much to say about January.
-
Ah yes the PBSE...hopefully to say something like 'we now know that the main risks to the business highlighted in the Directors' report are set to become a reality....aka we are fecked.'
-
I note from Companies House that Robin Russell the ex Chief Financial Officer left last month, can't remember the club releasing details of that at the time?
-
There was some press about it but I don't think the club offered it up as an announcement.
-
>:(Given the total lack of quality foofball we have seen for many seasons from our "brave boys" I wonder if there may be a section under "Income" to reflect proposed "Partnership Facilitation Services" (i.e. we are helping other teams to play their football because we have given up ourselves and we now receive income for this).
Can the Accountants among us advise if Gabbi will be classed as a fixed asset due to the total lack of movement? Is there such a thing as a "Fixed Liability."
Presumably at the time these accounts were prepared there would have been a perception that our "players" were indeed assets as opposed to (in some cases) where they are now liabilities (Brad Gazzoony for instance may have perhaps been the subject of some demand last summer but it would be almost impossible to see any demand now where anybody would pay a fee).
In the words of the illustrious Peter Cook and Dudley Moore a reasonable question to the Villa Board and its absentee owner will doubtless be "Is that the way to run a F*****g Ballroom."
-
Fixed liability - very good. And apt.
-
Revenue slightly down due to lower TV revenue, gate receipts were up. £115.7m.
Pre tax loss £27.8m increased from £3.9m previous year.
Net debt reduced to £30m from £102m.
Club remains for sale but no active discussions with potential buyer.
Oh and commercial revenue was actually down £2.6m to £19m.
-
All very worrying...
-
Lifted from elsewhere but things I don't get:
Wages and Salaries.....
2014- 60 406
2015- 74, 321
This was even before the spending this summer, how on earth did staff wages rise by 15K? We signed Senderos, Carlos Sanchez, Richardson, Gil and Joe Cole in that time! Did we not sell anyone that summer, I can't remember? Looks like it was stuff like Man. United making us pay most of Cleverley's wages perhaps for the season.
Yeah continuing my inner Risso....confirmation that we spent £57.1m this season compared to 0.1m the summer before.....
Looks like our the fees for the foreign signings were as high as predicted....Ayew 12m, Traore, 12m etc.
Just looking at the accounts and it claims Tom Fox was appointed on November 5th 2014.
I was sure it was around September but maybe you can exonerate him from the Lambert contract extension if that's true.
Edit: And from reading the accounts our commercial turnover was in 2015 19, 449 down from 22, 020 from previous year if I've intepreted it correctly.
Tom was supposed to increase this particularly as our staff cost numbers went up by about 30...
Apologies if I've interpreted any of this data wrongly but that does not look good at all and that was a season we stayed up and reached a cup final which we don't usually do.
-
Tom Fox was indeed appointed on 5th November 2014 and those wages would have gone up when we switched from young and hungry to experienced and not so hungry.
-
Any indication of cash interest cover, gearing etc?
-
Any indication of cash interest cover, gearing etc?
Wait until Risso wakes up. ;)
-
"Pre tax loss £27.8m increased from £3.9m previous year"
I am not a financial expert so purely in laymans terms...............How the fuck is this allowed to happen ?
I guess that loss will be chicken feed compared to the losses that will follow being relegated.
-
Blaming Fox for falling commercial revenues maybe a bit of a false narrative on this occasion given that he would've only been here six month to that year end. So his boust about increasing shirt sales this year probably means we have done better than £19m in the ensuing period but then again who knows.....
-
How on earth did our wage bill rise that much!
-
The smoking gun aimed at a Fox.
-
How on earth did our wage bill rise that much!
Guess it was D*lph getting an extra 6 month's pay, Hutton got a new contract....Gabby. I fear aswell Man. United got us to pay most of Cleverley's salary aswell, we've been mugged off on loan deals before like Jenas.
Shows you how mess up things are that we spend 0.1m net last summer and the wages still went up by 15k.
-
How on earth did our wage bill rise that much!
I don't understand that at all, and it is a damning stat given our performance.
-
As others have said, turnover all round is down slightly at £115m compared to £116m last year. Gate receipts and sponsorship were slightly up, TV and commercial down, with the commercial bit showing the biggest drop by £3m.
Operating expenses were up by £21m, and when you add in a decrease in the profit on sale of players and interest, the loss for the year increased from £3.8m to £27.3m.
Wages went up by £14m, with £3.3m of exceptional costs, which would be Lambert's pay off, with possibly a small amount for Faulkner.
The highest paid director last year was Faulkner I assume, on £265K. This year it'll be Fox, and he got, wait for it, £1.3m. Worth every penny, I'm sure you'll agree.
Other points of interest is that Lerner has written of most of the remaining debt that's owed to the trust/him, with another £84m written off (ie converted to equity). In addition, he put another £7m in cash in, in return for shares. Whatever he has done, you can't argue that he's taken money out. We now only the trus about £10m, and we have a overdraft of £20m. The issued share capital of the company is therefore £315m, which to get to where we are now, you would have to say is a pretty dismal return.
Other than that, we spent £57.1m on new players in the summer, and recouped £40.5m.
-
I think that a few points that can be gleaned from our accounts
1. No wonder no one wants to buy us, even the Wolves announced a profit yesterday!
2. You can understand now why no money was available for transfers in January
3. When we are relegated at the end of this season, it will be a fire sale down at the Villa, virtually any offer for our players will be accepted (and other clubs will realise this)
4. The only signings this summer will be free transfers or loan deals (from Championship / foreign clubs)
5. Most importantly of all WE ARE FUCKED!
-
Was just about to ask that Mart - I saw the additional write off - that is another conversion from debt to equity isn't it?
-
The £84 million he's written off - is that in return for anything, or is it just gone forever?
-
But what does it all mean?
Any views on Lerner's potential reaction to this shambles?
Should we prepare ourselves for years of decline and further relegations?
-
The £84 million he's written off - is that in return for anything, or is it just gone forever?
Converted into shares. Assuming he isn't going to get what he's put in for the club, it's as good as gone forever.
-
Thanks for the explanation, Risso.
Do you have an idea of the average issued share capital of Premier League clubs? Or at least, could you hazard a guess?
-
The £84m is a non cash movement - it looks to me like it is represented as the issued share capital following his decision to convert debt to equity although I may have misread that....
-
I thought we had gone through the years of austerity and were now meant to be self funding!!!
-
He would probably want that £84m back I would have thought - it would represent a drop in ocean compared to overall investment. I know he has made some bad decisions but he is still looking at the thick end of a big loss isn't he.
-
Ah well at least the Out the Door protests can stop now - he has made a public announcement!
-
The £84 million he's written off - is that in return for anything, or is it just gone forever?
Converted into shares. Assuming he isn't going to get what he's put in for the club, it's as good as gone forever.
We used to dream of an owner like that...
-
The £84 million he's written off - is that in return for anything, or is it just gone forever?
Converted into shares. Assuming he isn't going to get what he's put in for the club, it's as good as gone forever.
We used to dream of an owner like that...
At this rate he is going to be like our very own Mark Goldberg, apart from Goldberg was a self made man.
-
So we have gone from throwing big money at the wrong players to the wrong executives.
-
If you believe the reports of a sale price at £150m that still represents a circa £165m loss! That price could reduce of course.
-
Is there a breakdown of what the board members are paid?
-
Thanks for the explanation, Risso.
Do you have an idea of the average issued share capital of Premier League clubs? Or at least, could you hazard a guess?
Just had a quick look, Chelsea's is only £100m but they have £660m of retained losses. Manchester City's is £1.2bn though. Stoke's is £36m, with £60m losses. Interestingly on smaller turnover (£100m) than ours for the same period to May 2015 they made a small profit, as their wages were only £66m. Obviously no accounting topic would be complete without mention of Spurs. Their 2015 accounts aen't out yet, but for 2014 their turnover was £180m, with wages of £100m. The very epitome of a well-run club, now challenging for the title.
Having a look at Leicester as well for 2015, their income went up from £31m to £104m obviously as a result of being back in the Premier League, and their wage bill was only £57m.
-
It would appear to me that our scouting system could do with a bit of an overhaul.
-
I'v heard from a couple of different sources over the years that Russell the now ex-FD was a bit rubbish at providing coherent financial information. I wonder if he's paid for this latest set of results with his job?
-
I'm afraid I don't understand any of this. I need to see it on a flip chart with someone holding a red laser pen.
-
Is there a breakdown of what the board members are paid?
Not in detail, but you can get a very good idea. Total remuneration was £1.5m, with the highest receiving £1.25m. If that's Fox, he's apparently on very good money for being an absolute disaster. He's on extremely good money if that's only half a year's salary as well.
-
I'm afraid I don't understand any of this. I need to see it on a flip chart with someone holding a red laser pen.
Your wife has just sold the house and car and replaced them with a tent and wheelbarrow. The credit card is maxed out, and you've just about to lose your job working at Barclays and will go to a part time job in Asda.
-
Thanks for the explanation, Risso.
Do you have an idea of the average issued share capital of Premier League clubs? Or at least, could you hazard a guess?
Just had a quick look, Chelsea's is only £100m but they have £660m of retained losses. Manchester City's is £1.2bn though. Stoke's is £36m, with £60m losses. Interestingly on smaller turnover (£100m) than ours for the same period to May 2015 they made a small profit, as their wages were only £66m. Obviously no accounting topic would be complete without mention of Spurs. Their 2015 accounts aen't out yet, but for 2014 their turnover was £180m, with wages of £100m. The very epitome of a well-run club, now challenging for the title.
Having a look at Leicester as well for 2015, their income went up from £31m to £104m obviously as a result of being back in the Premier League, and their wage bill was only £57m.
Thanks, Risso.
Congratulations, by the way. Your summary of the annual accounts has now achieved that rare feat of being the most interesting moment of the season.
-
Is there a breakdown of what the board members are paid?
Not in detail, but you can get a very good idea. Total remuneration was £1.5m, with the highest receiving £1.25m. If that's Fox, he's apparently on very good money for being an absolute disaster. He's on extremely good money if that's only half a year's salary as well.
The rest will presumably be Russell, with Krulak (if he's still on the board) and Lerner not being paid.
-
Indeed, although the analysis of the accounts is as scary as watching us defend a corner.
-
I'm afraid I don't understand any of this. I need to see it on a flip chart with someone holding a red laser pen.
Your wife has just sold the house and car and replaced them with a tent and wheelbarrow. The credit card is maxed out, and you've just about to lose your job working at Barclays and will go to a part time job in Asda.
Thats better.
We're fucked.
-
Thanks for the explanation, Risso.
Do you have an idea of the average issued share capital of Premier League clubs? Or at least, could you hazard a guess?
Just had a quick look, Chelsea's is only £100m but they have £660m of retained losses. Manchester City's is £1.2bn though. Stoke's is £36m, with £60m losses. Interestingly on smaller turnover (£100m) than ours for the same period to May 2015 they made a small profit, as their wages were only £66m. Obviously no accounting topic would be complete without mention of Spurs. Their 2015 accounts aen't out yet, but for 2014 their turnover was £180m, with wages of £100m. The very epitome of a well-run club, now challenging for the title.
Having a look at Leicester as well for 2015, their income went up from £31m to £104m obviously as a result of being back in the Premier League, and their wage bill was only £57m.
Thanks, Risso.
Congratulations, by the way. Your summary of the annual accounts has now achieved that rare feat of being the most interesting moment of the season.
To be fair it's probably on a par with Gabbys house sale
-
Oh and the 'SAVE IT' signs have been put back on the light switches and radiators and training ground.
-
Seems the simple summary is that we pay out far too much money:-
On fees for shit players.
On salaries for shit players.
On salaries for shit mangers.
On pay offs for shit managers.
On salaries for shit executives.
In the meantime we don't bring in enough money when:-
The PL is a cash cow.
We have a world wide brand.
We have world class facilities in Villa Park and B.Heath.
It seems to me that the decision making and business acumen at the very top is abysmal.
If you are only running a club to survive, as Villa has been run over the last few years then you must be a special kind of fucking twat to run a business and football club in the Peremier League and not be able to turn a profit.
-
Thanks for the explanation, Risso.
Do you have an idea of the average issued share capital of Premier League clubs? Or at least, could you hazard a guess?
Just had a quick look, Chelsea's is only £100m but they have £660m of retained losses. Manchester City's is £1.2bn though. Stoke's is £36m, with £60m losses. Interestingly on smaller turnover (£100m) than ours for the same period to May 2015 they made a small profit, as their wages were only £66m. Obviously no accounting topic would be complete without mention of Spurs. Their 2015 accounts aen't out yet, but for 2014 their turnover was £180m, with wages of £100m. The very epitome of a well-run club, now challenging for the title.
Having a look at Leicester as well for 2015, their income went up from £31m to £104m obviously as a result of being back in the Premier League, and their wage bill was only £57m.
Thanks, Risso.
Congratulations, by the way. Your summary of the annual accounts has now achieved that rare feat of being the most interesting moment of the season.
To be fair it's probably on a par with Gabbys house sale
I think you are under-valuing Risso by some margin there.
-
Is there a breakdown of what the board members are paid?
Not in detail, but you can get a very good idea. Total remuneration was £1.5m, with the highest receiving £1.25m. If that's Fox, he's apparently on very good money for being an absolute disaster. He's on extremely good money if that's only half a year's salary as well.
The rest will presumably be Russell, with Krulak (if he's still on the board) and Lerner not being paid.
Thanks guys.
-
So going down will leave us in a very poor position then.Surely we will have to asset strip the squad and try get up on the cheap.
We are everybit as QPR
Fox on 1.3mil for overseeing the summer recruitment and managers has to go or though i guess they would involve a pay off too ..
Seems Hollis was brought it once Randy say what a fuck up Fox and his staff have done.
-
I'm afraid I don't understand any of this. I need to see it on a flip chart with someone holding a red laser pen.
Your wife has just sold the house and car and replaced them with a tent and wheelbarrow. The credit card is maxed out, and you've just about to lose your job working at Barclays and will go to a part time job in Asda.
Fucking hell what a disaster.
-
I'm afraid I don't understand any of this. I need to see it on a flip chart with someone holding a red laser pen.
Your wife has just sold the house and car and replaced them with a tent and wheelbarrow. The credit card is maxed out, and you've just about to lose your job working at Barclays and will go to a part time job in Asda.
Not all bad news then.
-
So what's the short to mid term prognosis?
-
Why is Lerner waiting? Fox should go now along with the other idiots. You can see Lerner is still trying to do the right thing and writing off debt but when as an owner you keep repeating the same mistakes over a six year period then you should just admit to yourself that you are no good at running a business.
-
We will have to right size the business as they say for the Championship.
Means all the high earners will need to go this summer otherwise the parachute money will quickly get drained.
And I'd say we will go for low earners but up and coming stars to try and get us out of it. The need to come back up within two seasons is of critical importance I would suggest.
-
Explains Robin Russell leaving...
-
So what's the short to mid term prognosis?
You would have to think that it's not very healthy. Looking at the possible financial result for this season, obviously we lost the wages of Benteke and Snaketwat, but then added the likes of Ayew, Veretout and Gana etc, who even though they came from abroad, you would think they'd still be on a decent salary. We might make a paper profit this season with some hefty profits on disposal on the registrations of Benteke and the other one, but obviously all of the cash from that was pumped into the purchases of this summer. I would think that the wages would be higher again, with so many new faces coming in, and the likes of Richards and Lescott will be on a pretty penny.
Obviously the car crash coming our way is the impending relegation. Just about the one positive is the parachute payments will be higher as a result of the new TV deal, and if we've been sensible with contracts, hopefully the wage bill will be reduced as well. But basically we'll be reliant on Lerner propping up the club for the foreseeable future until he can find a buyer.
-
Why is Lerner waiting? Fox should go now along with the other idiots. You can see Lerner is still trying to do the right thing and writing off debt but when as an owner you keep repeating the same mistakes over a six year period then you should just admit to yourself that you are no good at running a business.
I think that is exactly what he did do when he appointed Hollis. Lerner is clearly inept, but he certainly isn't milking the club, he has had his fingers badly burned financially.
-
If you are a normal employee of the football club (ticket office etc...)these results mean you must be waiting for the tap on the shoulder by HR, to take you into a meeting about your redundancy
If you are a supposed footballer at Aston Villa, you probably could not careless
It is a shambles
-
Why is Lerner waiting? Fox should go now along with the other idiots. You can see Lerner is still trying to do the right thing and writing off debt but when as an owner you keep repeating the same mistakes over a six year period then you should just admit to yourself that you are no good at running a business.
If Risso is correct and Fox earned over £1m for a part year of employment, then that might well explain it. Would you want to write a cheque for £2m+ to the moron for him to leave? Maybe he will be sidelined and kept on for negotiating shirt deals etc (which by all accounts he is pretty good at) and that way we lose the money on the drip then don't offer him a new contract.
Hope he is booted out though.
-
Why is Lerner waiting? Fox should go now along with the other idiots. You can see Lerner is still trying to do the right thing and writing off debt but when as an owner you keep repeating the same mistakes over a six year period then you should just admit to yourself that you are no good at running a business.
If Risso is correct and Fox earned over £1m for a part year of employment, then that might well explain it. Would you want to write a cheque for £2m+ to the moron for him to leave? Maybe he will be sidelined and kept on for negotiating shirt deals etc (which by all accounts he is pretty good at) and that way we lose the money on the drip then don't offer him a new contract.
Hope he is booted out though.
As a director, rather than a player or manager I would assume he's not on a fixed term contract, and could therefore be got rid of within the first two years without the possibility of a wrongful dismissal claim.
-
If you are a normal employee of the football club (ticket office etc...)these results mean you must be waiting for the tap on the shoulder by HR, to take you into a meeting about your redundancy
If you are a supposed footballer at Aston Villa, you probably could not careless
It is a shambles
For those people it's more than a shambles. It's that over-used and in football usually inappropriate word 'tragedy'.
-
This is bad news. How could the wages go up? Directors pay is £1m higher. We also paid £3.3m severance - Lambert?
We also have a hut every year as transfer fees are written off £19m last year, probably less this year but £30m in total to go.
Randy has had to convert £85m debt to shares to maintain the balance sheet.
In short I doubt he could give Villa away at the moment so we are likely stuck with him or, dare I say it he pulls the plug and its administration. If that is even on the cards do it now rather than taking the 10 points next year.
The problem with a fire sale for next season is that the better p,avers will go and we will be stuck with the expensive under achievers (Gabby I'm looking at you).
I fear the new finance guys brought in are there to prepare us for a tough few years not to bring us straight back.
-
Can someone explain the £27m loss for Reform Acquisitions compared to the £57m loss for Aston Villa FC?
-
Can someone explain the £27m loss for Reform Acquisitions compared to the £57m loss for Aston Villa FC?
Reform is the topco, ie holding company. All of the subsidiary companies have various bits of the income and expenses between them, which when consolidated produce the Reform accounts.
Edit. Just checked the Aston Villa Football Club Limited accounts, and there's been an accounting cock up regarding intercompany loans of £38m. This has been corrected, hence the loss. It wouldn't affect the consolidated position. Not very impressive though!
-
As others have said, turnover all round is down slightly at £115m compared to £116m last year. Gate receipts and sponsorship were slightly up, TV and commercial down, with the commercial bit showing the biggest drop by £3m.
Operating expenses were up by £21m, and when you add in a decrease in the profit on sale of players and interest, the loss for the year increased from £3.8m to £27.3m.
Wages went up by £14m, with £3.3m of exceptional costs, which would be Lambert's pay off, with possibly a small amount for Faulkner.
The highest paid director last year was Faulkner I assume, on £265K. This year it'll be Fox, and he got, wait for it, £1.3m. Worth every penny, I'm sure you'll agree.
Other points of interest is that Lerner has written of most of the remaining debt that's owed to the trust/him, with another £84m written off (ie converted to equity). In addition, he put another £7m in cash in, in return for shares. Whatever he has done, you can't argue that he's taken money out. We now only the trus about £10m, and we have a overdraft of £20m. The issued share capital of the company is therefore £315m, which to get to where we are now, you would have to say is a pretty dismal return.
Other than that, we spent £57.1m on new players in the summer, and recouped £40.5m.
Assuming the majority of the £3.3 million for 'exceptional costs' is for Lamberts pay off, then Fox should be sacked for that. Lambert signed a new deal and was sacked within a few months, that was a hugely unneccessary expense. It also suggests that there's no chance Garde will be sacked, which to be honest I'm happy enough with.
-
Can someone explain the £27m loss for Reform Acquisitions compared to the £57m loss for Aston Villa FC?
Reform is the topco, ie holding company. All of the subsidiary companies have various bits of the income and expenses between them, which when consolidated produce the Reform accounts.
Which is already being misinterpreted by the media as a bigger overall loss than it is.
-
Would I be right in saying this conversion of debt to equity is simply not allowed in the Football League? I know QPR have bent the rules and are fighting sanctions but essentially you can't simply hide debts behind a benefactor.
I fear we are in for a massive shock this Summer. The club seems to be in a desperate state all round.
-
Revenue slightly down due to lower TV revenue, gate receipts were up. £115.7m.
Pre tax loss £27.8m increased from £3.9m previous year.
Net debt reduced to £30m from £102m.
Club remains for sale but no active discussions with potential buyer.
Oh and commercial revenue was actually down £2.6m to £19m.
They suggestion that Tom Fox is some sort of commercial genius blown out of the water with those figures.
-
Revenue slightly down due to lower TV revenue, gate receipts were up. £115.7m.
Pre tax loss £27.8m increased from £3.9m previous year.
Net debt reduced to £30m from £102m.
Club remains for sale but no active discussions with potential buyer.
Oh and commercial revenue was actually down £2.6m to £19m.
They suggestion that Tom Fox is some sort of commercial genius blown out of the water with those figures.
To be fair, he joined mid-season and probably didn't have much opportunity to influence commercial deals that were already in place.
-
Revenue slightly down due to lower TV revenue, gate receipts were up. £115.7m.
Pre tax loss £27.8m increased from £3.9m previous year.
Net debt reduced to £30m from £102m.
Club remains for sale but no active discussions with potential buyer.
Oh and commercial revenue was actually down £2.6m to £19m.
They suggestion that Tom Fox is some sort of commercial genius blown out of the water with those figures.
To be fair, he joined mid-season and probably didn't have much opportunity to influence commercial deals that were already in place.
So we'll all have to wait until this time next year to evaluate him?
That seems such an alien thing to a football fan, used to being able to look at a current league table to know how things are going.
-
I think by most criteria he's doing a shit job as CEO.
-
Are there any criteria by which he isn't?
-
Are there any criteria by which he isn't?
His own?
-
Thanks. So it should really be: Don't worry, it's "only" a £27m loss. It's an accounting cock-up from last year that makes it look worse... The club is really safe in their hands!
-
Are there any criteria by which he isn't?
His own?
Hah, that made me laugh out loud
-
Why is Lerner waiting? Fox should go now along with the other idiots. You can see Lerner is still trying to do the right thing and writing off debt but when as an owner you keep repeating the same mistakes over a six year period then you should just admit to yourself that you are no good at running a business.
If Risso is correct and Fox earned over £1m for a part year of employment, then that might well explain it. Would you want to write a cheque for £2m+ to the moron for him to leave? Maybe he will be sidelined and kept on for negotiating shirt deals etc (which by all accounts he is pretty good at) and that way we lose the money on the drip then don't offer him a new contract.
Hope he is booted out though.
'A million pounds, to send us down'
I'm sure there's a chant in there somewhere.
-
Am i right in saying Mr Lerner has invested more of his own money than any other chairman in our history? I suspect Mr Hollis is there to advise him how best to get out and reduce any potential loss he will incur?
-
The one ray of hope throughout that the last few seasons palatable is that the club would be in a better place financially and we wouldn't be doing a Leeds or Portsmouth. To now see that the clowns running the club have not only made a terrible mess of things on the pitch, but apparently off it as well staggers belief.
-
I feel "a bit" sorry for Faulkner in all this. He was mostly hopeless, but didn't earn that much. He then sees his replacement earn 10 times as much while buggering things up on a scale previously only dreamed of.
-
Am i right in saying Mr Lerner has invested more of his own money than any other chairman in our history?
Happy to be corrected on this, but presumably he went through that particular milestone on the day that he took possession of the club?
-
I feel "a bit" sorry for Faulkner in all this. He was mostly hopeless, but didn't earn that much. He then sees his replacement earn 10 times as much while buggering things up on a scale previously only dreamed of.
The worry here is that Lerner does not seem able to appoint a decent manager for the club. Be it on the pitch or off it.
-
Am i right in saying Mr Lerner has invested more of his own money than any other chairman in our history?
Happy to be corrected on this, but presumably he went through that particular milestone on the day that he took possession of the club?
I meant since he took ownership.
-
Considering the money involved in football these days, I'd wager by a country mile.
-
Am i right in saying Mr Lerner has invested more of his own money than any other chairman in our history?
Happy to be corrected on this, but presumably he went through that particular milestone on the day that he took possession of the club?
I meant since he took ownership.
Even so, given that he underwrote £6m for the Petrov signing straight away - has any other chairman put even £6m of their own cash into the club?
-
On the positive - net debt is now only £30m. However, a wages to turnover ratio of 72% is too too high for us - given that the vast majority of our high operating expenses were staff costs, as they always will be.
Also given that 62% of our revenue is TV money, the wage bill will have to be drastically trimmed in the summer with the impending relegation. Player sales needed and I hope there are some sizeable relegation wage drop clauses in contracts of those who stay.
-
Revenue slightly down due to lower TV revenue, gate receipts were up. £115.7m.
Pre tax loss £27.8m increased from £3.9m previous year.
Net debt reduced to £30m from £102m.
Club remains for sale but no active discussions with potential buyer.
Oh and commercial revenue was actually down £2.6m to £19m.
They suggestion that Tom Fox is some sort of commercial genius blown out of the water with those figures.
As I said a few posts after this, and as since backed up by Mr Risso, to suggest he is responsible for that drop is a false narrative, seeing as he would have been in the post for 6 months to the 2015 financial year end. And as I also said, I assume his boasting about increased shirt sales means he is confident commercial revenue will be higher than the £19m quoted here when the 2016 numbers are produced.
-
Is it possible to forecast what the accounts might look like next year in the Championship, or am I asking too much, with there being too many variables at stake re: players, pay offs etc?
-
I would have thought anyone on any sort of wedge is going to be out the door at the merest hint of a buyer - the prospect of Adama playing Chumps league football on 45k a week is surely a pipedream. Things look very bleak and whoever is manager next season is going to be under immense pressure to get promoted at the first time of asking before our financial situation starts to flatline.
-
Is it possible to forecast what the accounts might look like next year in the Championship, or am I asking too much, with there being too many variables at stake re: players, pay offs etc?
Not difficult if you can fill the blanks.
What is the TV Revenue in the Championship?
What is the parachute payment?
What level do the current wages drop to when the release clauses activate?
Plus guess what incoming transfer fees may occur.
I haven't the info to fill the blanks, but it wont be pretty.
-
Are there any criteria by which he isn't?
His own?
Hah, that made me laugh out loud
Me too and i have to agree with this as well. I feel "a bit" sorry for Faulkner in all this. He was mostly hopeless, but didn't earn that much. He then sees his replacement earn 10 times as much while buggering things up on a scale previously only dreamed of.
-
I'm just amazed.
How can we be so poorly run? How did last seasons business, terrible business at that put £14m on the wage bill? It beggars belief. What are they paying these players?
Gabby must have got a rise, Hutton? It's just a fucking shambles. The season before we lost £3m and said it was almost self sufficient. We then must have given more massive contracts out to old, past it donkeys, which has again pushed it over the edge.
And as for the commercial side being millions down, well that's what happens when your product is appallingly bad.
Dickheads the lot of them.
Fox on £20 something thousand a week... are they all stupid?
-
I'm just amazed.
How can we be so poorly run? How did last seasons business, terrible business at that put £14m on the wage bill? It beggars belief. What are they paying these players?
Gabby must have got a rise, Hutton? It's just a fucking shambles. The season before we lost £3m and said it was almost self sufficient. We then must have given more massive contracts out to old, past it donkeys, which has again pushed it over the edge.
And as for the commercial side being millions down, well that's what happens when your product is appallingly bad.
Dickheads the lot of them.
Fox on £20 something thousand a week... are they all stupid?
Lambert got a new four year deal - that would have increased the wage bill I would have thought.
-
and he then got it paid off a few months later.
-
lambert's pay off was supposedly £2 million therefore if the cost is £3 million as reported in the accounts this would mean that his pay was grossed up and this meant that he received £2 million net!
When you consider that the next set of accounts will probably show a similar figure for Sherwood and there could also be the cost of getting rid of Garde and his crew!
If that is the case you can bet that the next Manager of our club will be currently out of work, as we wont want to be paying any compensation for him to his current employer.
No wonder we are in such a mess
-
Is it possible to forecast what the accounts might look like next year in the Championship, or am I asking too much, with there being too many variables at stake re: players, pay offs etc?
Not difficult if you can fill the blanks.
What is the TV Revenue in the Championship?
What is the parachute payment?
What level do the current wages drop to when the release clauses activate?
Plus guess what incoming transfer fees may occur.
I haven't the info to fill the blanks, but it wont be pretty.
Interesting article showing Championship clubs' revenue: http://www.insidermedia.com/insider/national/146216-championship-club-club
With our massive drop in TV money, inevitable drop in match day revenue and other income, we'll need the hefty parachute payments to give us a big advantage over 21 other clubs. With the new TV deal coming in, it's estimated that parachute payments could be as much as 86m over the next 3 years, if they were we'd get £47.3m (55%) next season. With drops in other areas I'd estimate our total revenue in the Championship to be between £70-80m.
-
The only option with these accounts is to appoint Harry Redknapp. It makes sense.
-
Why is Lerner waiting? Fox should go now along with the other idiots. You can see Lerner is still trying to do the right thing and writing off debt but when as an owner you keep repeating the same mistakes over a six year period then you should just admit to yourself that you are no good at running a business.
If Risso is correct and Fox earned over £1m for a part year of employment, then that might well explain it. Would you want to write a cheque for £2m+ to the moron for him to leave? Maybe he will be sidelined and kept on for negotiating shirt deals etc (which by all accounts he is pretty good at) and that way we lose the money on the drip then don't offer him a new contract.
Hope he is booted out though.
'A million pounds, to send us down'
I'm sure there's a chant in there somewhere.
Tommy Fox are ya listening
To the song we are singing
You get a million pounds
And you sent us down...
(Sorry, but I couldn't do the last line without a volley o' horrible personal abuse)
-
Extraordinary world of football again - £3m in your sky rocket for being sacked on the grounds of woeful performance and then you have a few months off, feel refreshed, go round Germany, come back boast about it, have a few sly digs in the press about your former employers, just about keeping within the bounds of the confidentiality clauses, then rock up get another job at a Championship club and the wheel starts turning again.
-
And then said person wonders why we get angry about him saying things like us having unrealistic expectations.
-
I feel "a bit" sorry for Faulkner in all this. He was mostly hopeless, but didn't earn that much. He then sees his replacement earn 10 times as much while buggering things up on a scale previously only dreamed of.
(http://i2.wp.com/www.myoldmansaid.com/wp-content/uploads/TOM-FOX-6TH-CEO.jpg?w=306)
Fucking hell, as the kids say
-
Sounds frightening. Is this all a strong argument that 'austerity' doesn't work?
-
When I grow up I want to be a CEO.
-
So, in proper footballing terms, we're paying Tom Fox £25k per week? I'll bet that's more than we're receiving in the shirt deal he keeps wanking on about. Is there any other industry where such a lack of talent is so well rewarded?
-
This "Unspecified Director" character is raking it in. And does he/she not have a conflict of interest working for all of these different clubs?
-
Is there any other industry where such a lack of talent is so well rewarded?
Boy bands.
-
On the positive side we could have had two Bradys for the cost of one Fox.
-
This "Unspecified Director" character is raking it in. And does he/she not have a conflict of interest working for all of these different clubs?
We need to hire him because he's doing a pretty solid job, with the exception of the 'codes.
-
I feel "a bit" sorry for Faulkner in all this. He was mostly hopeless, but didn't earn that much. He then sees his replacement earn 10 times as much while buggering things up on a scale previously only dreamed of.
(http://i2.wp.com/www.myoldmansaid.com/wp-content/uploads/TOM-FOX-6TH-CEO.jpg?w=306)
Fucking hell, as the kids say
Top 6 money again being paid out for a complete twat. On the pitch, off the pitch, everywhere. Is there anywhere Lerner doesn't throw money away with over priced, stupid decisions? A fool and his money indeed.
We are in a right old mess. There's going to be a huge fire sale and cheapo replacement plan this summer isn't there.
-
At least it should put paid to the idea that lerner is somehow bleeding the club dry. He's merely killing the club through incompetence.
-
At least it should put paid to the idea that lerner is somehow bleeding the club dry. He's merely killing the club through incompetence.
He hasn't learnt a single lesson in nearly 10 years.
-
At least it should put paid to the idea that lerner is somehow bleeding the club dry. He's merely killing the club through incompetence.
He hasn't learnt a single lesson in nearly 10 years.
Don't forget his Browns disasters prior to that.
-
He's paying for being a terrible businessman.
-
Is there any other industry where such a lack of talent is so well rewarded?
Boy bands.
Law firms 😉
-
Is there any other industry where such a lack of talent is so well rewarded?
Boy bands.
Law firms 😉
Politics
-
Is there any other industry where such a lack of talent is so well rewarded?
Boy bands.
Law firms 😉
London Stock Exchange/Wall Street
-
Is there any other industry where such a lack of talent is so well rewarded?
Boy bands.
Law firms 😉
I must be in the "talented but underpaid" sector of the market.
-
Lerner just seems to be total numbskull who surrounds himself with total fuckwits who systematically bleed him dry. How the hell he has any money left is beyond me.
-
It would be nice to have a full day of uninterrupted good news at Aston Villa. The last time was probably the FA Cup semi-final.
-
Lerner just seems to be total numbskull who surrounds himself with total fuckwits who systematically bleed him dry. How the hell he has any money left is beyond me.
He hasn't a clue how to run a football club, he probably buys all the smooth talk and jargon spouted by people who sound like they know what they're on about, because he doesn't know what he's on about.
-
Is there any other industry where such a lack of talent is so well rewarded?
Boy bands.
Law firms 😉
Politics
Oi ! I'm worth every penny of that £3400/year !
-
Is there any other industry where such a lack of talent is so well rewarded?
Boy bands.
Law firms 😉
Politics
Accountants.
-
As others have said, turnover all round is down slightly at £115m compared to £116m last year. Gate receipts and sponsorship were slightly up, TV and commercial down, with the commercial bit showing the biggest drop by £3m.
Operating expenses were up by £21m, and when you add in a decrease in the profit on sale of players and interest, the loss for the year increased from £3.8m to £27.3m.
Wages went up by £14m, with £3.3m of exceptional costs, which would be Lambert's pay off, with possibly a small amount for Faulkner.
The highest paid director last year was Faulkner I assume, on £265K. This year it'll be Fox, and he got, wait for it, £1.3m. Worth every penny, I'm sure you'll agree.
Other points of interest is that Lerner has written of most of the remaining debt that's owed to the trust/him, with another £84m written off (ie converted to equity). In addition, he put another £7m in cash in, in return for shares. Whatever he has done, you can't argue that he's taken money out. We now only the trus about £10m, and we have a overdraft of £20m. The issued share capital of the company is therefore £315m, which to get to where we are now, you would have to say is a pretty dismal return.
Other than that, we spent £57.1m on new players in the summer, and recouped £40.5m.
Assuming the majority of the £3.3 million for 'exceptional costs' is for Lamberts pay off, then Fox should be sacked for that. Lambert signed a new deal and was sacked within a few months, that was a hugely unneccessary expense. It also suggests that there's no chance Garde will be sacked, which to be honest I'm happy enough with.
Depends when Fox was appointed though, those records show it as 5th November 2014 even though numerous press reports had us appointing him in August 2014.
-
Life style trainers.
-
Fox wasn't responsible for the Lambert contract. That one is all on Lerner.
Interesting that we have reserved £3m to dish out to the board in the event of a sale.
And the disparity on transfers this summer should also prove that we aren't refusing to spend.
-
It would be nice to have a full day of uninterrupted good news at Aston Villa. The last time was probably the FA Cup semi-final.
In 1957!
-
At least it should put paid to the idea that lerner is somehow bleeding the club dry. He's merely killing the club through incompetence.
Maybe a question for Risso this, and I'm getting second hand information a bit, so apologies in advance if this is nonsense.
Reform Acquisitions Ltd is our uk holding company if I'm not mistaken, and their accounts are on Companies house.
However, Reform Acquisitions LLC is Randy's American business, which is the holding company of Reform Acquisitions Ltd, and as such is not viewable on companies house as it isn't UK registered.
I guess what I'm saying is, do we know for sure Randy isn't taking money through that?
-
At least it should put paid to the idea that lerner is somehow bleeding the club dry. He's merely killing the club through incompetence.
Maybe a question for Risso this, and I'm getting second hand information a bit, so apologies in advance if this is nonsense.
Reform Acquisitions Ltd is our uk holding company if I'm not mistaken, and their accounts are on Companies house.
However, Reform Acquisitions LLC is Randy's American business, which is the holding company of Reform Acquisitions Ltd, and as such is not viewable on companies house as it isn't UK registered.
I guess what I'm saying is, do we know for sure Randy isn't taking money through that?
No he isn't. All of the turnover and expenses of the underlying companues are in the Reform UK accounts. Any money distributed to the US would be recorded. The simple fact is that there simply hasn't been the money to take. He did charge a 7 million management fee early on, but nothing since.
-
Bloody hell. Well thats those ground for optimism gone then. More cuts ahead. I have this feeling of sympathy for Lerner. Thats a lot of money he has lost.
-
Fox is the 6th highest paid Director in the Premier League, the mind boggles.
-
A million and a quarter , to send us to the slaughter.
(Am I doing it right?)
-
Bloody hell. Well thats those ground for optimism gone then. More cuts ahead. I have this feeling of sympathy for Lerner. Thats a lot of money he has lost.
God bless him. He loses money and we lose our Premier League status. He's fuckin useless.
-
I've read every word of this thread and bow to the expertise of the accountants and business analysts amongst you. However, as a football fan, it all makes me yearn for a simpler time when the only figures that mattered were 2 points for a win, we've won in 7 times, Co. Durham, 5' 7".
-
Cheers for clarifying risso. Not seen the accounts myself as yet, and this year is probably the first that I'd actually understand them better (studying accountancy).
The thing that's abundantly clear then, is that there has always been money, and Randy happily props us up regularly, it's just has been let down by not putting a strong structure in place within the club to succeed. As each year passes, the argument that MON spent all the money becomes weaker too.
-
Bloody hell. Well thats those ground for optimism gone then. More cuts ahead. I have this feeling of sympathy for Lerner. Thats a lot of money he has lost.
I have no sympathy whatsoever. He's a mug with a lot of inheritance money.
-
I've read every word of this thread and bow to the expertise of the accountants and business analysts amongst you. However, as a football fan, it all makes me yearn for a simpler time when the only figures that mattered were 2 points for a win, we've won in 7 times, Co. Durham, 5' 7".
Me too, it's all a bit over my head.
One thing though it's very clear Randy has spent money but has made a complete mess of the running of the club. If only from day one he had some advice and put in place a decent team to run things from the top and a structure if a manager doesn't quite work out.
I don't feel sorry for him and I don't hate him. He hasn't done it on purpose but you have to question his leadership skills.
-
Bloody hell. Well thats those ground for optimism gone then. More cuts ahead. I have this feeling of sympathy for Lerner. Thats a lot of money he has lost.
I have no sympathy whatsoever. He's a mug with a lot of inheritance money.
He's an incompetent wanker and I rue the day I heard the ****** name...
-
Far too much has been spent for far too long on parasites like N'Zogbia, Agbonlahor et al. We've got such little value for money.
-
Thanks Risso!
Does any one still think that the Championship will be a walk in the park next season?
I think we are in a terrible mess financially and these results will make the squad re-build very difficult if not impossible.
We could be gone for a very long time.
-
Half a billion dollars he's effectively paid for a Championship club.
-
A lot of underperforming people, managment and players, have made a lot of money.
-
Confirmation that we really are rotten from top to bottom. Fox out!
-
Half a billion dollars he's effectively paid for a Championship club.
What do you reckon this does to the valuation?
-
Confirmation that we really are rotten from top to bottom. Fox out!
Indeed. Lerner out!
-
What I don't understand and can someone explain how this has happened but the wage bill rose £14m which is what, £280,000 per week?
How with the players we signed and the players we released or let on loan have we ended up paying an extra £280k per week?
-
What I don't understand and can someone explain how this has happened but the wage bill rose £14m which is what, £280,000 per week?
How with the players we signed and the players we released or let on loan have we ended up paying an extra £280k per week?
The accounts are for the year ending May 2014, last summers comings and goings are not included.
-
I've read every word of this thread and bow to the expertise of the accountants and business analysts amongst you. However, as a football fan, it all makes me yearn for a simpler time when the only figures that mattered were 2 points for a win, we've won in 7 times, Co. Durham, 5' 7".
Me too, it's all a bit over my head.
One thing though it's very clear Randy has spent money but has made a complete mess of the running of the club. If only from day one he had some advice and put in place a decent team to run things from the top and a structure if a manager doesn't quite work out.
I don't feel sorry for him and I don't hate him. He hasn't done it on purpose but you have to question his leadership skills.
Having spent a lifetime working in industry, I came to understand that the worst person to have in charge of anything is a useless nice guy. They tend to hide their incompetence under a veneer of charm, good intentions and geniality. Accordingly, they get afforded much more leeway than a useless bad guy. They remain in position way after the damage is long done and can wriggle and duck their way out of all sorts of difficulties and embarrassments. The fatal flaw that useless nice guys all have though is a capacity for self delusion. Because they want something to be so, they convince themselves it is. They trust fellow fools too and are usually terrible judges of character. Gullibility is another terrible weakness too, as is a basic, inherent laziness.
Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you Randy Lerner; the ultimate useless nice guy. You can almost forgive him for he knows not what he does. Oh for a competent and effective nasty guy in the Ellis mould. Who cares if he's a ruthless old scroat like Ellis was if he delivers, which he did more times than not, a football team that was worth supporting.
Great if you can get a genius nice guy like George Martin, recently RIP, but very few exist.
-
What I don't understand and can someone explain how this has happened but the wage bill rose £14m which is what, £280,000 per week?
How with the players we signed and the players we released or let on loan have we ended up paying an extra £280k per week?
I know that.
The summer of the has beens. Senderos, Cole, Richardson et al. How on Earth did it end up costing us an extra £14m in wages?
The accounts are for the year ending May 2014, last summers comings and goings are not included.
-
Having spent a lifetime working in industry, I came to understand that the worst person to have in charge of anything is a useless nice guy. They tend to hide their incompetence under a veneer of charm, good intentions and geniality. Accordingly, they get afforded much more leeway than a useless bad guy. They remain in position way after the damage is long done and can wriggle and duck their way out of all sorts of difficulties and embarrassments. The fatal flaw that useless nice guys all have though is a capacity for self delusion. Because they want something to be so, they convince themselves it is. They trust fellow fools too and are usually terrible judges of character. Gullibility is another terrible weakness too, as is a basic, inherent laziness.
Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you Randy Lerner; the ultimate useless nice guy. You can almost forgive him for he knows not what he does. Oh for a competent and effective nasty guy in the Ellis mould. Who cares if he's a ruthless old scroat like Ellis was if he delivers, which he did more times than not, a football team that was worth supporting.
Great if you can get a genius nice guy like George Martin, recently RIP, but very few exist.
-
Well the appointments of Hollis and King make more sense in light of these results.
It would appear King's root and branch review needs to focus on the governance process for decision making. I can't help but feel that it's been all too easy for the likes of Faulkner, Fox, Russell, Almstadt et al to hide behind Lerner as the main figure of responsibility. It's probably for the best that Lerner distances himself from day to day operations, to allow Hollis the space to do what is needed. Unfortunately, that will inevitably involve austerity and tight financial control.
Has there been any word on who is replacing Russell?
-
Cissokho, Senderos, cole, Richardson, Sanchez, Gil, and sinclair are some of the additions in that period aren't they? Plus Delph, Hutton, Gabby and some others would have had rises in that period
Can't think of any significant reductions due to players leaving? Who left that would have saved us cash?
-
I thought we had shit players because they were discount solutions - how the fuck can we have wages around 80M
-
Jesus. At least when Leeds went under they had watched Viduka, Keane and Kewell in the champions league. We've had Agbonlahor Guzan and Westwood.
Hope Lerners at least had a decent fish tank for his money.
-
Half a billion dollars he's effectively paid for a Championship club.
Makes some of my shitty investments look awesome
-
Cissokho, Senderos, cole, Richardson, Sanchez, Gil, and sinclair are some of the additions in that period aren't they? Plus Delph, Hutton, Gabby and some others would have had rises in that period
Can't think of any significant reductions due to players leaving? Who left that would have saved us cash?
Gabby and Hutton surely didn't get pay rises? Hutton had played 4 games in about 3 years.
Bent was out on loan all season, El Ahamadi gone, Delfouneso gone, Albrighton gone, Ireland gone. I just dont see how it adds up to £14m over a year. I'm shocked at how bad this set of accounts are. I dread to think what the wage bill currently is again. They've gone two steps forward getting it down to £67m and then 5 backwards with it raising so much and having a much worse team for it.
We are screwed financially if we don't get promoted.
-
and he then got it paid off a few months later.
Surely that pay off is partially negates by his new job at Blackburn?
-
You'd think not, but would it surprise you? Lambert was given a new contract, possibly a rise in that too, that's the way it works in football, right? No need to have accomplished anything! It is shocking, worrying and just bonkers
-
Regarding the wages - this was up to year ended May 2015 so the dealings last summer would not have been included in respect of wage costs. This is the squad recorded as of the end of the May 2015 financial year. In addition, it was announced that Lambert and Gabby had both been rewarded with four and five year contracts respectively as early as September 2014. If you assume that Fox is on £25k per week as someone said and Gabby got say an extra £30k per week - there is the thick end of £60k per week. I don't suppose it is hard to imagine that Senderos and Cole came in for decent money. Then you have Sanchez coming in as well as Cissokho. We may still have been part paying loan wages who knows.
Squad No. Name Nationality Position Date of birth (age) Apps. Goals Notes
Goalkeepers
1 Brad Guzan United States GK September 9, 1984 (age 31) 140 0
13 Jed Steer England GK September 23, 1992 (age 23) 4 0
31 Shay Given Republic of Ireland GK April 20, 1976 (age 39) 52 0
Defenders
2 Nathan Baker England CB / LB April 23, 1991 (age 24) 86 0
3 Joe Bennett England LB March 28, 1990 (age 25) 37 0
4 Ron Vlaar Netherlands CB February 16, 1985 (age 31) 87 2
5 Jores Okore Denmark CB August 11, 1992 (age 23) 31 1
6 Ciaran Clark Republic of Ireland CB / LB September 26, 1989 (age 26) 136 8
14 Phillipe Senderos Switzerland CB February 14, 1985 (age 31) 10 0
21 Alan Hutton Scotland RB November 30, 1984 (age 31) 68 1
23 Aly Cissokho France LB September 15, 1987 (age 28) 27 0
32 Janoi Donacien Saint Lucia CB / RB November 3, 1993 (age 22) 0 0
34 Matthew Lowton England RB June 9, 1989 (age 26) 82 2
35 Enda Stevens Republic of Ireland LB July 9, 1990 (age 25) 9 0
– Antonio Luna Spain LB March 17, 1991 (age 24) 18 1 On loan at Spezia Calcio.
Midfielders
7 Leandro Bacuna Netherlands CM / RB / RWB August 21, 1991 (age 24) 63 6
8 Tom Cleverley England CM / AM August 12, 1989 (age 26) 36 3 On loan from Manchester United.
9 Scott Sinclair England LW / RW March 25, 1989 (age 26) 12 3
12 Joe Cole England AM November 8, 1981 (age 34) 15 1
15 Ashley Westwood England CM April 1, 1990 (age 25) 101 3
16 Fabian Delph (captain) England CM November 21, 1989 (age 26) 133 8
17 Chris Herd Australia CM / CB / RB April 4, 1989 (age 26) 42 2
18 Kieran Richardson England LW / LB October 21, 1984 (age 31) 25 0
22 Gary Gardner England CM June 29, 1992 (age 23) 18 0
24 Carlos Sánchez Colombia DM February 6, 1986 (age 30) 32 1
25 Carles Gil Spain AM / RW November 22, 1992 (age 23) 7 1
28 Charles N'Zogbia France LW / AM May 28, 1986 (age 29) 90 5
39 Riccardo Clader England LW January 26, 1996 (age 20) 0 0
40 Jack Grealish Republic of Ireland LW / AM September 10, 1995 (age 20) 24 0
– Yacouba Sylla Mali DM November 29, 1990 (age 25) 24 0 On loan at Kayseri Erciyesspor.
– Aleksandar Tonev Bulgaria LW / RW February 3, 1990 (age 26) 20 0 On loan at Celtic.
Forwards
10 Andreas Weimann Austria ST / LW / RW August 5, 1991 (age 24) 129 24
11 Gabriel Agbonlahor England ST / LW / RW October 13, 1986 (age 29) 352 83
19 Darren Bent England ST February 6, 1984 (age 32) 72 25
20 Christian Benteke Belgium ST December 3, 1990 (age 25) 100 49
27 Libor Kozák Czech Republic ST May 30, 1989 (age 26) 15 4
29 Rushian Hepburn-Murphy England ST September 19, 1998 (age 17) 1 0
37 Callum Robinson England ST February 2, 1995 (age 21) 5 0
38 Graham Burke Republic of Ireland ST September 21, 1993 (age 22) 2 0
– Nicklas Helenius Denmark ST / RW May 8, 1991 (age 24) 6 1
-
Regarding the wages - this was up to year ended May 2015 so the dealings last summer would not have been included in respect of wage costs. This is the squad recorded as of the end of the May 2015 financial year. In addition, it was announced that Lambert and Gabby had both been rewarded with four and five year contracts respectively as early as September 2014. If you assume that Fox is on £25k per week as someone said and Gabby got say an extra £30k per week - there is the thick end of £60k per week. I don't suppose it is hard to imagine that Senderos and Cole came in for decent money. Then you have Sanchez coming in as well as Cissokho. We may still have been part paying loan wages who knows.
Squad No. Name Nationality Position Date of birth (age) Apps. Goals Notes
Goalkeepers
1 Brad Guzan United States GK September 9, 1984 (age 31) 140 0
13 Jed Steer England GK September 23, 1992 (age 23) 4 0
31 Shay Given Republic of Ireland GK April 20, 1976 (age 39) 52 0
Defenders
2 Nathan Baker England CB / LB April 23, 1991 (age 24) 86 0
3 Joe Bennett England LB March 28, 1990 (age 25) 37 0
4 Ron Vlaar Netherlands CB February 16, 1985 (age 31) 87 2
5 Jores Okore Denmark CB August 11, 1992 (age 23) 31 1
6 Ciaran Clark Republic of Ireland CB / LB September 26, 1989 (age 26) 136 8
14 Phillipe Senderos Switzerland CB February 14, 1985 (age 31) 10 0
21 Alan Hutton Scotland RB November 30, 1984 (age 31) 68 1
23 Aly Cissokho France LB September 15, 1987 (age 28) 27 0
32 Janoi Donacien Saint Lucia CB / RB November 3, 1993 (age 22) 0 0
34 Matthew Lowton England RB June 9, 1989 (age 26) 82 2
35 Enda Stevens Republic of Ireland LB July 9, 1990 (age 25) 9 0
– Antonio Luna Spain LB March 17, 1991 (age 24) 18 1 On loan at Spezia Calcio.
Midfielders
7 Leandro Bacuna Netherlands CM / RB / RWB August 21, 1991 (age 24) 63 6
8 Tom Cleverley England CM / AM August 12, 1989 (age 26) 36 3 On loan from Manchester United.
9 Scott Sinclair England LW / RW March 25, 1989 (age 26) 12 3
12 Joe Cole England AM November 8, 1981 (age 34) 15 1
15 Ashley Westwood England CM April 1, 1990 (age 25) 101 3
16 Fabian Delph (captain) England CM November 21, 1989 (age 26) 133 8
17 Chris Herd Australia CM / CB / RB April 4, 1989 (age 26) 42 2
18 Kieran Richardson England LW / LB October 21, 1984 (age 31) 25 0
22 Gary Gardner England CM June 29, 1992 (age 23) 18 0
24 Carlos Sánchez Colombia DM February 6, 1986 (age 30) 32 1
25 Carles Gil Spain AM / RW November 22, 1992 (age 23) 7 1
28 Charles N'Zogbia France LW / AM May 28, 1986 (age 29) 90 5
39 Riccardo Clader England LW January 26, 1996 (age 20) 0 0
40 Jack Grealish Republic of Ireland LW / AM September 10, 1995 (age 20) 24 0
– Yacouba Sylla Mali DM November 29, 1990 (age 25) 24 0 On loan at Kayseri Erciyesspor.
– Aleksandar Tonev Bulgaria LW / RW February 3, 1990 (age 26) 20 0 On loan at Celtic.
Forwards
10 Andreas Weimann Austria ST / LW / RW August 5, 1991 (age 24) 129 24
11 Gabriel Agbonlahor England ST / LW / RW October 13, 1986 (age 29) 352 83
19 Darren Bent England ST February 6, 1984 (age 32) 72 25
20 Christian Benteke Belgium ST December 3, 1990 (age 25) 100 49
27 Libor Kozák Czech Republic ST May 30, 1989 (age 26) 15 4
29 Rushian Hepburn-Murphy England ST September 19, 1998 (age 17) 1 0
37 Callum Robinson England ST February 2, 1995 (age 21) 5 0
38 Graham Burke Republic of Ireland ST September 21, 1993 (age 22) 2 0
– Nicklas Helenius Denmark ST / RW May 8, 1991 (age 24) 6 1
What a list of total shite that is, only made worse by the current squad
I could cry
-
Who knows whether Christian and Snake received increases either - we were always trying to hold onto them.
-
Thanks Risso et al
Opened a beer before I sat to read this thread. Having finished reading I need a couple more beers!
Are we totally shafted?
What frightens me is the current wage bill. It must be huge
-
Benteke must have been on £50m a year because the rest of those are bobbins. Mugs and fools running the show. Throwing money around to hide the fact they haven't a clue. Current wage bill must be close to £90m......
-
Benteke must have been on £50m a year because the rest of those are bobbins. Mugs and fools running the show. Throwing money around to hide the fact they haven't a clue. Current wage bill must be close to £90m......
And £12m for Traore and supposedly £45k per week. He is pants
-
Thanks Risso et al
Opened a beer before I sat to read this thread. Having finished reading I need a couple more beers!
Are we totally shafted?
What frightens me is the current wage bill. It must be huge
I am so fucking tired that this is STILL the number 1 problem with the club even after years of what appears to be a series of cutbacks in terms of quality players.
I just want to see an end to it and be able to look forward to happier times.
But instead it appears we have yet more years of this same cycle to churn through.
-
Losing £20 odd million a year, about to have a massive drop in revenue and we've installed an accountant as Chairman. If I was dealing with Villa, I'd be demanding cash up front.
-
Did we not take any money through the tills during last seasons cup run? I hope Merv goes to town on Fox and co with a pair of pliers and a blow torch, they should be ashamed of themselves. Its going to take years to come back from this mess.
-
Well this has cheered me up.
what kind of a notice period will Fox be on - 6 months? 1m to sack him?
Hollis and king will be on decent money as well I bet.
-
Unfucking believable.
It should be but it isn't.
Wages increased by 25%.
Faulkner was rubbish but was seemingly paid the going rate. Fox is paid anything between 5 and 10 times more for talking a better game and beimg just as shit.
Thanks for the Elucidation Risso. My part qualified accountants stuff is a longtime ago.
-
And all this with a back drop of the club refusing to pay match day staff the minimum wage. Absolute fucking disgrace. These people have ripped the heart and soul out of my beloved football club.......a pox on all their houses.
-
So, we're not shit because of austerity. Who exactly do we blame then?
-
All the same with the prospect of this hamster wheel going round again in respect of the 2016 accounts you can see why Lerner has finally appointed a henchman to get a grip on what is going on in relation to the chronic misuse of the resources previously made available to the club.
He's definitely at fault for a) not doing it much sooner and b) taking his eye off it totally in the last four years.
-
The scary thing is we ditched 2 decent players at say 150k per week and replaced them with 8 or 9 mediocre ones at around 30k each so the wage bill will go up.
-
I'm still concerned that they're conducting a full review without an experienced football executive on board. Who's going to provide expert opinion that the new plan is any better than the old one ?
-
I'm still concerned that they're conducting a full review without an experienced football executive on board. Who's going to provide expert opinion that the new plan is any better than the old one ?
An accountant and the former governor of the bank of England. What could go wrong...
-
Still, we've saved a bit from win bonuses.
-
Thanks for some very good quality analysis folks.
Lerner has very sadly appointed some key figures who have not been able to deal with the situations they have found themselves in.
When the Club were signing players and indeed even paying the Tea Lady there must surely have been a Management Accountant responsible for ensuring the details of the full financial commitment we were required to adhere to and this would apply to all services and goods used by the Club other than just the pay bill (there will be huge spend on non pay (maintenance, travel etc). I am not suggesting that nobody was tracking all of this but there must surely have been a weekly projection about how things were going. It is basic accounting to record and project that data, it has to be done to comply with Vat for instance.
The club must have known the importance of recruiting the right players and Admin folks given our Financial situation and still they get it wrong (but I guess that is what the wrong people do by the very nature of their being the wrong person for the role). It seems to be a self perpetuating vortex of incompetence.
I was going to say "never have so few achieved so little with so much" but at the end of the day it must come down to the decision making and managing and Professionalism of the people concerned and as with the playing squad the folks at Board Level would appear to have been as effective as a Gabby in a Premiership game
-
Part of the problem going back a few years now is not having a continual flow of young players coming through. We have gone out and bought quite a few squad fillers (at best) that have cost us a fair bit in wages.
-
At least the relegation clauses written in to the players contracts will kick in and the wages will reduce accordingly............no I'm not holding my breath either.
-
Still, we've saved a bit from win bonuses.
Haha
-
Still, we've saved a bit from win bonuses.
Nicely done.
-
The scary thing is we ditched 2 decent players at say 150k per week and replaced them with 8 or 9 mediocre ones at around 30k each so the wage bill will go up.
Yep that's the kind of genius thinking going on at Villa Park these days.
I got told off for calling them morons earlier!!!
-
Well the appointments of Hollis and King make more sense in light of these results.
Has there been any word on who is replacing Russell?
I suppose theres an argument that a CFO isn't required given the respective backgrounds of Hollis & King.
Save the wages...
-
I'm still concerned that they're conducting a full review without an experienced football executive on board. Who's going to provide expert opinion that the new plan is any better than the old one ?
I agree. Surely this is where Lerner has fallen down ever since he first walked in the door.
-
I'm still concerned that they're conducting a full review without an experienced football executive on board. Who's going to provide expert opinion that the new plan is any better than the old one ?
I agree. Surely this is where Lerner has fallen down ever since he first walked in the door.
The cynic in me wonders if this is a deliberate ploy from all the money-men not to have an "outsider" poking around in their private domain. "You don't need some oik of a footballer who doesn't understand financial considerations ruining things Mr Lerner, goodness me they're hardly better that the fans!"
-
Heaven forbid, but a Karren Brady is what is needed at Villa. She seems to have full control over aspect of the football club and crucially, monitors the finances very closely. She would run rings around Faulkner and Fox. I'd say she takes no bullshit.
-
Who is our accountant now? Did he come with the usual letter of recommendation from Man U in the form of a hand written note from the Glazers?
-
Bloody hell. Well thats those ground for optimism gone then. More cuts ahead. I have this feeling of sympathy for Lerner. Thats a lot of money he has lost.
If he spent a bit more time running the club he owns and also put a proper structure in place things like commercial income would have risen a lot quicker than the miniscule 6% it has in the last 10 years, meaning he wouldn't be losing big sums like £27 million each year. He deserves zero sympathy.
Giving Lerner sympathy is akin to me buying a house for £150k, leaving it derelict, allowing problems such as damp to build up and then employing people with no experience in the area to fix it, then being surprised when I lose money on it.
The guy has been a disaster for this club and shows no signs of learning from his continual mistakes.
-
What about the workers?
I was speaking to a club employee during the week who told me that that at the end of the season all of them have to reapply for their jobs, with as far as he can see there being two applicants for the posts that are vacant.
That sounds like a very drastic cuts programme getting on for fifty percent.
Once again it's the people at the coal face that have to pay the cost of mismanagement at the top.
-
Well the appointments of Hollis and King make more sense in light of these results.
It would appear King's root and branch review needs to focus on the governance process for decision making. I can't help but feel that it's been all too easy for the likes of Faulkner, Fox, Russell, Almstadt et al to hide behind Lerner as the main figure of responsibility. It's probably for the best that Lerner distances himself from day to day operations, to allow Hollis the space to do what is needed. Unfortunately, that will inevitably involve austerity and tight financial control.
Has there been any word on who is replacing Russell?
Impressed by his analysis on here, the club have offered Risso the job but he's holding out for Fox's salary while the club are haggling to get him re-housed in his old Brum uni digs from the early 90's.
-
I agree. Surely this is where Lerner has fallen down ever since he first walked in the door.
Can we not afford a decent carpet fitter either?
-
Well the appointments of Hollis and King make more sense in light of these results.
It would appear King's root and branch review needs to focus on the governance process for decision making. I can't help but feel that it's been all too easy for the likes of Faulkner, Fox, Russell, Almstadt et al to hide behind Lerner as the main figure of responsibility. It's probably for the best that Lerner distances himself from day to day operations, to allow Hollis the space to do what is needed. Unfortunately, that will inevitably involve austerity and tight financial control.
Has there been any word on who is replacing Russell?
Impressed by his analysis on here, the club have offered Risso the job but he's holding out for Fox's salary while the club are haggling to get him re-housed in his old Brum uni digs from the early 90's.
Risso in the Chair and Ads as manager. Sorted.
-
Well the appointments of Hollis and King make more sense in light of these results.
It would appear King's root and branch review needs to focus on the governance process for decision making. I can't help but feel that it's been all too easy for the likes of Faulkner, Fox, Russell, Almstadt et al to hide behind Lerner as the main figure of responsibility. It's probably for the best that Lerner distances himself from day to day operations, to allow Hollis the space to do what is needed. Unfortunately, that will inevitably involve austerity and tight financial control.
Has there been any word on who is replacing Russell?
Impressed by his analysis on here, the club have offered Risso the job but he's holding out for Fox's salary while the club are haggling to get him re-housed in his old Brum uni digs from the early 90's.
Risso in the Chair and Ads as manager. Sorted.
Baggsy CEO.
-
How childish is this:-
http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/aston-villa-fans-your-say-11026782
-
How childish is this:-
http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/aston-villa-fans-your-say-11026782
Clicked on the link, saw the headline and decided not to waste time waiting for the rest of the shite to load.
-
What I cannot understand in any way is why Randy could possibly think that replacing Paul Faulkner with someone who had previously worked on the commercial side could make any sense at all. Even more ridiculous is the fact that he decided to pay the new fellow in excess of one million pounds more than the previous fellow which doesn't make sense on any level. He must be very very gullible man who listens constantly to the wrong people and doesn't seem capable at all of getting things right.
Steve Hollis has got a hell of a job on his hands!
-
What I cannot understand in any way is why Randy could possibly think that replacing Paul Faulkner with someone who had previously worked on the commercial side could make any sense at all. Even more ridiculous is the fact that he decided to pay the new fellow in excess of one million pounds more than the previous fellow which doesn't make sense on any level. He must be very very gullible man who listens constantly to the wrong people and doesn't seem capable at all of getting things right.
Steve Hollis has got a hell of a job on his hands!
He thought Arsenal were the model to follow, which is understandable if you get it right.
-
Well the appointments of Hollis and King make more sense in light of these results.
It would appear King's root and branch review needs to focus on the governance process for decision making. I can't help but feel that it's been all too easy for the likes of Faulkner, Fox, Russell, Almstadt et al to hide behind Lerner as the main figure of responsibility. It's probably for the best that Lerner distances himself from day to day operations, to allow Hollis the space to do what is needed. Unfortunately, that will inevitably involve austerity and tight financial control.
Has there been any word on who is replacing Russell?
Impressed by his analysis on here, the club have offered Risso the job but he's holding out for Fox's salary while the club are haggling to get him re-housed in his old Brum uni digs from the early 90's.
Risso in the Chair and Ads as manager. Sorted.
Baggsy CEO.
I wouldn't have minded being the Financial Controller or his tea maker in other words.
-
As long as I get an Exec Director position I am fine with it.
-
I'll be tea lady.
-
I'll be Elaine, whatever she did.
-
I'll be Elaine, whatever she did.
The Receptionist who welcomes everyone except to snarl at Tom Fox.
-
£27m when we got go to cup final . And a valuation of £150m and CFO resigns , .
I hate to see financial projections for when we go down , massive job to restructure club with income levels plummeting .
Lerner going to struggle to get any where near £60m he paid , if he did , he take £250m personal loss.
I do fear adminstration if he do not bounce back immediately
-
£27m when we got go to cup final . And a valuation of £150m and CFO resigns , .
I hate to see financial projections for when we go down , massive job to restructure club with income levels plummeting .
Lerner going to struggle to get any where near £60m he paid , if he did , he take £250m personal loss.
I do fear adminstration if he do not bounce back immediately
Cup finals aren't particularly lucrative - you'll earn more by finishing two places higher in the league and Robin Russell wasn't a particularly important figure on the board. He got offered another job and took it.
-
I'm part of an impressive list of managers including Baron (what a quality away day that was by the way) and Marshall to have never lost a game. You humans are safe in my hands.
-
I agree. Surely this is where Lerner has fallen down ever since he first walked in the door.
Can we not afford a decent carpet fitter either?
Well I laughed at least.
-
I agree. Surely this is where Lerner has fallen down ever since he first walked in the door.
Can we not afford a decent carpet fitter either?
Well I laughed at least.
I've only just seen this. Made me laugh as well.
-
http://swissramble.blogspot.ie/2016/03/aston-villa-this-house-is-circus.html?m=1
As posted on another thread - an interesting read
-
http://swissramble.blogspot.ie/2016/03/aston-villa-this-house-is-circus.html?m=1
As posted on another thread - an interesting read
some staggering stats on there. 7th highest wage bill in the prem, biggest loss of all the prem clubs from those released to date. Even behind chelsea. I was surprised to see only a small number of clubs made a loss last year.
you can see why Hollis put a block on the spending
-
That said, Villa’s recent net spend still lags behind other clubs, e.g. only four Premier League clubs had a lower net outlay than their £33 million over the last three seasons: Stoke City, Southampton, Swansea City and Tottenham (due to Gareth Bale’s huge sale to Real Madrid).
Spending 10m a season net gets you relegated unless you're lucky enough to have a good manager, good scouts or players to sell for stupid money
-
BUMP
any news on the 2015/16 accounts?
-
BUMP
any news on the 2015/16 accounts?
Don't overly worry yourself with them, they will be atrocious.
-
End of February is the deadline for filing.
-
Just type some random numbers into a word processor then change the font colour to red , type "Millions" at the end and you will have a reasonable approximation.
-
New post on AVFC...
Aston Villa’s accounts for the year ended May 31, 2016 show turnover of £108.8m, a fall of £6.9m compared to the year ended May 31, 2015.
The fall can be primarily attributed to a reduction in the Club’s share of revenue from the FA Premier League’s broadcasting agreements as a result of the final league standings.
The accounts show an operating loss before exceptional items of £1.6m.
Exceptional items amounted to £79.6m, consisting of charges for the impairment of tangible fixed assets and intangible assets of £44.8m and £34.8m respectively.
The impairment charges increased the operating loss before interest and tax to £81.3m.
The takeover of the club by Dr Tony Xia was completed on June 14, 2016.
What are impairment charges ?
-
New post on AVFC...
Aston Villa’s accounts for the year ended May 31, 2016 show turnover of £108.8m, a fall of £6.9m compared to the year ended May 31, 2015.
The fall can be primarily attributed to a reduction in the Club’s share of revenue from the FA Premier League’s broadcasting agreements as a result of the final league standings.
The accounts show an operating loss before exceptional items of £1.6m.
Exceptional items amounted to £79.6m, consisting of charges for the impairment of tangible fixed assets and intangible assets of £44.8m and £34.8m respectively.
The impairment charges increased the operating loss before interest and tax to £81.3m.
The takeover of the club by Dr Tony Xia was completed on June 14, 2016.
What are impairment charges ?
Writing off goodwill, or what seems to be flogging players at a loss.
-
£80m fucking hell.
-
I was going to ask if an 81 million loss was bad
-
Glad it isn't my money.
-
So is it a case of we've got to go up next season or we're seriously in the shit?
I do not understand all this financial waffle - maybe that's a good thing.
-
So is it a case of we've got to go up next season or we're seriously in the shit?
I do not understand all this financial waffle - maybe that's a good thing.
I can't help but think we already are.
-
So is it a case of we've got to go up next season or we're seriously in the shit?
I do not understand all this financial waffle - maybe that's a good thing.
I can't help but think we already are.
I thought the parachute payments increase in year 2?
Even so £81 million, bravo Randy, bravo.
-
Am I understanding that right, we managed to lose £80m in a single year despite being in the Premier League?
-
Am I understanding that right, we managed to lose £80m in a single year despite being in the Premier League?
And how does that square with Steve Wyness saying there was £30m of debt that needed to be wiped when Tony Xia took over?
-
Ouch. Think we can now see why RDM was ditched so quickly and the 'promotion specialist' brought in. We've gambled massively with managerial changes and splashing the cash but will have to cut our cloth accordingly next year.
-
So we're fucked then?...
-
BBC Sport (http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/39108015)
Aston Villa: £81m loss recorded for 2015-16 Premier League relegation season
Aston Villa have reported an £81m loss for the financial year 2015-16, the season in which they were relegated from the Premier League, prior to Dr Tony Xia's summer takeover.
According to a club statement, Villa's operating loss trebled from £26.6m in 2014-15, while turnover fell from £115.7m to £108.8m.
Villa's average home gates were hardly affected despite such a poor season.
The drop in revenue is attributed to a smaller share of Premier League money.
Villa's average home league attendance in 2015-16 was 33,690, a fall of only 1.33 % on the previous campaign, when they averaged 34,133 at their 42,660-capacity Birmingham home.
But finishing bottom last season, compared to 17th the year before, that meant a smaller share of the pay-out from the Premier League's broadcasting agreements.
What exactly are Villa's assets?
The club put £79.6m of the £81m loss down to "exceptional items" including the "impairment of tangible fixed assets and intangible assets".
Intangible assets, which include the value of its players' registrations, dropped by £34.8m.
Tangible assets include property and equipment the club owns.
The impact of Dr Tony Xia's takeover of the club for £76m will not show until the 2016-17 accounts are published next year.
The new Villa owner completed his takeover on 14 June 2016, two months after the Football League and Premier League co-founders' first relegation in 30 years.
-
so unless we have any reserves to fall back on we're bankrupt?
-
So is it a case of we've got to go up next season or we're seriously in the shit?
I do not understand all this financial waffle - maybe that's a good thing.
I can't help but think we already are.
I thought the parachute payments increase in year 2?
Even so £81 million, bravo Randy, bravo.
From memory our parachute money was 40 odd million this season, 38 next season and 13 in season 3
Dr tony has stated on twitter that the parachute money this season didnt cover wages and he was funding out of his own pocket
Next season will see less less matchday, sponsorship and commercial revenue so yes if we dont go up we are royally fucked
-
Next season will see less less matchday, sponsorship and commercial revenue so yes if we dont go up we are royally fucked
As those figures are based on PL income, wouldn't they also suggest that if we do go up and finish near the bottom of the table, we are also fucked?
Still, worse things happen at sea....
-
Next season will see less less matchday, sponsorship and commercial revenue so yes if we dont go up we are royally fucked
As those figures are based on PL income, wouldn't they also suggest that if we do go up and finish near the bottom of the table, we are also fucked?
Still, worse things happen at sea....
If we go up then sky money is at least 100 million which is the get out of jail card
I think last year year turnover was 115 and of that 65 million was from sky which shows how fucked you are when it gets taken away
-
If it gets too bad will it be like RBS where the government take us over and pump billions into us and from then on in we can comfortably loose £7 billion a year without anyone saying anything. Randy Lerner businessman. ...yeah right
-
so unless we have any reserves to fall back on we're bankrupt?
No.
-
As long as the company continues to meet its liabilities as and when they fall due we are fine, if however the good Doctor decided not to support us financially, we are then fucked.
This is the case with many clubs that are loss making.
-
Am I understanding that right, we managed to lose £80m in a single year despite being in the Premier League?
And how does that square with Steve Wyness saying there was £30m of debt that needed to be wiped when Tony Xia took over?
I think that means there were some immediate payments that needed to be made.
I think there was an overdraft.
-
From memory of what was said, there's a standard £5 million overdraft facility.
-
First things first, what this announcement tells us is that for the year before we got relegated we finally got a handle on the wages - ie the operating loss had been eliminated. Assuming the figure the club are quoting is before player trading in 2015 this figure was a £6.5m loss.
Of the exceptional items, the £35m attributed to 'intangible items' is the amount of transfer fees the club considered we'd never get back, taking in to account the length of the contract left for the players. It's best explained with an example - if we signed a player for £10m on a four year contract, at the point we signed him he'd be shown as a £10m intangible asset, after 1 year a £7.5m intangible asset, after 2 years a £5m intangible asset, etc until he was valued at zero when his contract ran out.
It's hard to say what the specifics are in here as the full accounts haven't appeared on Companies House yet but even when they do there's no guarantee we'll get any more clarity. It's unusual though to see this level of impairment as it's difficult to say with certainty (unless it's Gabby) that a player is truly worthless!
The tangible write off is even more unusual and a bit more concerning. This is bricks and mortar largely. How we determined that the value of these had fell by £45m is pretty worrying - given how unusual that is we should get more detail in the accounts.
-
First things first, what this announcement tells us is that for the year before we got relegated we finally got a handle on the wages - ie the operating loss had been eliminated. Assuming the figure the club are quoting is before player trading in 2015 this figure was a £6.5m loss.
Of the exceptional items, the £35m attributed to 'intangible items' is the amount of transfer fees the club considered we'd never get back, taking in to account the length of the contract left for the players. It's best explained with an example - if we signed a player for £10m on a four year contract, at the point we signed him he'd be shown as a £10m intangible asset, after 1 year a £7.5m intangible asset, after 2 years a £5m intangible asset, etc until he was valued at zero when his contract ran out.
It's hard to say what the specifics are in here as the full accounts haven't appeared on Companies House yet but even when they do there's no guarantee we'll get any more clarity. It's unusual though to see this level of impairment as it's difficult to say with certainty (unless it's Gabby) that a player is truly worthless!
The tangible write off is even more unusual and a bit more concerning. This is bricks and mortar largely. How we determined that the value of these had fell by £45m is pretty worrying - given how unusual that is we should get more detail in the accounts.
So, it doesn't mean we're £80 million in debt? Seriously worrying anyhow.
-
Key thing to bear in mind - a loss in the accounts does not mean we're in financial trouble.
Without having seen any of the detail... the huge loss of £80-odd million seems largely to do with accounting adjustments - impairments to the value of assets in the books. These are not cash losses. Actually, from a cash point of view the accounts aren't that bad - £1m operating loss.
I think the headlines numbers perhaps create a sense of financial panic that isn't justified. As noted above, so long as we have the cash to pay our debts and liabilities, there is no problem really. It just underlines how overvalued our 'assets' were in the books initially.
-
Could the £45m in tangible assets be due to a revaluing of the facilities as part of the sale? That bit does seem really odd otherwise. The 'extras' in the intangibles are probably due to the triggering of relegation release clauses and the general lowering of value due to relegation.
-
The economics of football is baffling. If I read that correctly (big if) we made a single year loss bigger than our market cap and its not even a big deal.
-
Of the exceptional items, the £35m attributed to 'intangible items' is the amount of transfer fees the club considered we'd never get back, taking in to account the length of the contract left for the players. It's best explained with an example - if we signed a player for £10m on a four year contract, at the point we signed him he'd be shown as a £10m intangible asset, after 1 year a £7.5m intangible asset, after 2 years a £5m intangible asset, etc until he was valued at zero when his contract ran out.
Is that amortisation as applied to players? I've never really understood that. Does it mean it's assumed players have no value at the end of their contract? If so, accurate in the case of our players.
-
Of the exceptional items, the £35m attributed to 'intangible items' is the amount of transfer fees the club considered we'd never get back, taking in to account the length of the contract left for the players. It's best explained with an example - if we signed a player for £10m on a four year contract, at the point we signed him he'd be shown as a £10m intangible asset, after 1 year a £7.5m intangible asset, after 2 years a £5m intangible asset, etc until he was valued at zero when his contract ran out.
Is that amortisation as applied to players? I've never really understood that. Does it mean it's assumed players have no value at the end of their contract? If so, accurate in the case of our players.
All players have no value at the end of their contract as they can then leave on a free.
-
The economics of football is baffling. If I read that correctly (big if) we made a single year loss bigger than our market cap and its not even a big deal.
The impairment is an adjustment to the value of the assets at the time of the accounts - either the assets were overvalued in prior years, or, more likely the case, a change in circumstances, accounting methodology or a change in the accounting rules outside of the control or influence of the club meant that the value of the assets was overstated at that time.
Market caps are based on loads of different things, sometimes asset values, but in football it's more likely to be income streams. This loss has little effect, I think, on the value of the club. Of course, that depends on what caused the impairment.
-
Of the exceptional items, the £35m attributed to 'intangible items' is the amount of transfer fees the club considered we'd never get back, taking in to account the length of the contract left for the players. It's best explained with an example - if we signed a player for £10m on a four year contract, at the point we signed him he'd be shown as a £10m intangible asset, after 1 year a £7.5m intangible asset, after 2 years a £5m intangible asset, etc until he was valued at zero when his contract ran out.
Is that amortisation as applied to players? I've never really understood that. Does it mean it's assumed players have no value at the end of their contract? If so, accurate in the case of our players.
And how do they account for players signing new contracts when there was no transfer fee paid, i.e. Jack Grealish ?
-
Of the exceptional items, the £35m attributed to 'intangible items' is the amount of transfer fees the club considered we'd never get back, taking in to account the length of the contract left for the players. It's best explained with an example - if we signed a player for £10m on a four year contract, at the point we signed him he'd be shown as a £10m intangible asset, after 1 year a £7.5m intangible asset, after 2 years a £5m intangible asset, etc until he was valued at zero when his contract ran out.
Is that amortisation as applied to players? I've never really understood that. Does it mean it's assumed players have no value at the end of their contract? If so, accurate in the case of our players.
All players have no value at the end of their contract as they can then leave on a free.
No FINANCIAL value. Not valueless in terms of humanity. Although in some cases.....
-
Yes true. Maybe more accurate to say our players should be amortised to zero on the day they are unveiled then. Basically I'm trying to say our players are shit whilst effecting some knowledge of the world of accounting.
-
Is that amortisation as applied to players? I've never really understood that. Does it mean it's assumed players have no value at the end of their contract? If so, accurate in the case of our players.
Isn't it just a form of depreciation that allows a business to right off the cost of the player over the lifetime of the contract rather taking a big hit all in one go at the time of purchase.
-
How about a player that's bought on a free? Do they have any value in the accounts?
-
How about a player that's bought on a free? Do they have any value in the accounts?
I think they get assessed at market value. We got £1 million insurance for Luc Nilis although he was signed on a free.
-
Surely (and I write in total blind ignorance) the readjustment in tangible assets is explained by the figure Lerner thought he'd get for the club if he sold it Vs the amount Dr X actually paid?
-
How about a player that's bought on a free? Do they have any value in the accounts?
I would think that at the very least their contract would have a value, not to mention signing on fees, agents fees, etc. For example even if they cost nought, we may be paying them 2 million upfront plus 6 million over a 4 year contract, ie. 8 million minimum.
-
Surely (and I write in total blind ignorance) the readjustment in tangible assets is explained by the figure Lerner thought he'd get for the club if he sold it Vs the amount Dr X actually paid?
No, don't think so. The tangible assets have to be material (i.e. bricks and mortar).
My guess is that it is either a shift in accounting practice (so a question would be: have other clubs been forced to re-value their tangible assets?) or Dr Tony (i.e. his advisors) has deemed it useful to reduce the overall value of the club's assets. Don't know why he would want to do it other than to be able to show a growth in asset value in the future.
-
Surely (and I write in total blind ignorance) the readjustment in tangible assets is explained by the figure Lerner thought he'd get for the club if he sold it Vs the amount Dr X actually paid?
No, don't think so. The tangible assets have to be material (i.e. bricks and mortar).
My guess is that it is either a shift in accounting practice (so a question would be: have other clubs been forced to re-value their tangible assets?) or Dr Tony (i.e. his advisors) has deemed it useful to reduce the overall value of the club's assets. Don't know why he would want to do it other than to be able to show a growth in asset value in the future.
But if the bricks & mortar assets were valued at £X, but then Xia ended up buying them for £Y, which was £Z less than £X, then those things would have to be revalued, no?
As I said, I have no idea but it seems to follow some sort of logic.
-
How about a player that's bought on a free? Do they have any value in the accounts?
I think they get assessed at market value. We got £1 million insurance for Luc Nilis although he was signed on a free.
Sorry, that's not right. If you sign a player on a free, then the value on the balance sheet is £nil. Same with kids that come through the academy. Whatever you get in insurance has nothing to do with their value in the accounts.
-
Sorry, that's not right. If you sign a player on a free, then the value on the balance sheet is £nil. Same with kids that come through the academy. Whatever you get in insurance has nothing to do with their value in the accounts.
So what would be asset on the balance sheet to offset the player's liabilities, ie. contract, signing-on fee, etc
-
Surely (and I write in total blind ignorance) the readjustment in tangible assets is explained by the figure Lerner thought he'd get for the club if he sold it Vs the amount Dr X actually paid?
No, don't think so. The tangible assets have to be material (i.e. bricks and mortar).
My guess is that it is either a shift in accounting practice (so a question would be: have other clubs been forced to re-value their tangible assets?) or Dr Tony (i.e. his advisors) has deemed it useful to reduce the overall value of the club's assets. Don't know why he would want to do it other than to be able to show a growth in asset value in the future.
But if the bricks & mortar assets were valued at £X, but then Xia ended up buying them for £Y, which was £Z less than £X, then those things would have to be revalued, no?
As I said, I have no idea but it seems to follow some sort of logic.
Numberwang!
-
Surely (and I write in total blind ignorance) the readjustment in tangible assets is explained by the figure Lerner thought he'd get for the club if he sold it Vs the amount Dr X actually paid?
No, don't think so. The tangible assets have to be material (i.e. bricks and mortar).
My guess is that it is either a shift in accounting practice (so a question would be: have other clubs been forced to re-value their tangible assets?) or Dr Tony (i.e. his advisors) has deemed it useful to reduce the overall value of the club's assets. Don't know why he would want to do it other than to be able to show a growth in asset value in the future.
But if the bricks & mortar assets were valued at £X, but then Xia ended up buying them for £Y, which was £Z less than £X, then those things would have to be revalued, no?
As I said, I have no idea but it seems to follow some sort of logic.
Numberwang!
Ha!
Risso, am I to assume that your silence on this issue means I'm 100% correct and you're now scraping the bottom of the warchest to make a big money move and take me to the IOM?
Thought so. I'm flattered but I have a great relationship with the fans here in W13.
-
Sorry, that's not right. If you sign a player on a free, then the value on the balance sheet is £nil. Same with kids that come through the academy. Whatever you get in insurance has nothing to do with their value in the accounts.
So what would be asset on the balance sheet to offset the player's liabilities, ie. contract, signing-on fee, etc
Nothing. Signing on fees are a P&L expense.
-
*Winds down Range Rover driver's window*
I've always liked Sexy Ealin', been tryin to do summink there, but fink e's on a bit too much to be honest wiv yer.
-
I'm unsettled and not in the right frame of mind to go to work tomorrow.
-
Sorry, that's not right. If you sign a player on a free, then the value on the balance sheet is £nil. Same with kids that come through the academy. Whatever you get in insurance has nothing to do with their value in the accounts.
So what would be asset on the balance sheet to offset the player's liabilities, ie. contract, signing-on fee, etc
Nothing. Signing on fees are a P&L expense.
Not so.
Per the 2015 accounts 'the costs associated with the acquisition of players' registrations are capitalised as an intangible fixed asset at the date of acquisition'. Whilst it's not explicit I think it's safe to say this would include all incremental costs associated with the acquisition of player registrations, including signing on fees.
-
How about a player that's bought on a free? Do they have any value in the accounts?
I think they get assessed at market value. We got £1 million insurance for Luc Nilis although he was signed on a free.
To answer this and similar questions you need to get a bit technical.
From an accounting perspective it's not actually the player that's being valued. It's not even the contract. It's all driven by the accruals or "matching" concept, ie that for a set of accounts to make sense you need to show the expenses associated with the income generated in a particular year.
The logic on football players is that in signing a contract with a player you earn the right to generate income through their involvement in the club. So if they sign a four year contract you can theoretically earn four years worth of income from them. So any costs associated with signing that contract (eg the transfer fee, signing on fees, legal fees, etc) should be spread over the time the club is generating income. It's therefore all about spreading the cost. It's nothing about valuation.
So if we buy a player on a free or someone comes through the academy, there's little if any cost. So there's nothing to spread. Hence nothing in intangible assets.
-
Surely (and I write in total blind ignorance) the readjustment in tangible assets is explained by the figure Lerner thought he'd get for the club if he sold it Vs the amount Dr X actually paid?
No, don't think so. The tangible assets have to be material (i.e. bricks and mortar).
My guess is that it is either a shift in accounting practice (so a question would be: have other clubs been forced to re-value their tangible assets?) or Dr Tony (i.e. his advisors) has deemed it useful to reduce the overall value of the club's assets. Don't know why he would want to do it other than to be able to show a growth in asset value in the future.
But if the bricks & mortar assets were valued at £X, but then Xia ended up buying them for £Y, which was £Z less than £X, then those things would have to be revalued, no?
As I said, I have no idea but it seems to follow some sort of logic.
You're basically right.
To get a bit techie again, the sale of the club to Dr Tone is a 'post balance sheet event' and can only affect the numbers drawn up to 31 May if what happened two weeks afterwards shows that the values in the books were overstated at the 31 May. To say it another way you need to show that it's not something that happened in those two weeks in between that caused the reduction in value shown by the sale price.
Given the season had finished and I'm not aware Bodymoor Heath was blown away (physical damage is a pretty good indicator of impairment!) then you start to run out of reasons for why the assets weren't overvalued. But until we see the accounts we're guessing.
-
Purely in laymans terms, what if Tone pulled the plug?
-
Big trouble in little China.
-
Surely (and I write in total blind ignorance) the readjustment in tangible assets is explained by the figure Lerner thought he'd get for the club if he sold it Vs the amount Dr X actually paid?
No, don't think so. The tangible assets have to be material (i.e. bricks and mortar).
My guess is that it is either a shift in accounting practice (so a question would be: have other clubs been forced to re-value their tangible assets?) or Dr Tony (i.e. his advisors) has deemed it useful to reduce the overall value of the club's assets. Don't know why he would want to do it other than to be able to show a growth in asset value in the future.
But if the bricks & mortar assets were valued at £X, but then Xia ended up buying them for £Y, which was £Z less than £X, then those things would have to be revalued, no?
As I said, I have no idea but it seems to follow some sort of logic.
You're basically right.
YESSSSSSSSSSSS! I'm going to buy a green viser and some of those elbow shirt clips. I've instructed my agent to get me a move to Guernsey. I appreciate your interest, Risso, and good luck for the rest of the season.
-
All I'm thinking from looking at that financial car crash is good job we got taken over quickly.
Lerner really was driving us to the wall...incredible to think given the position of strength we had around 2009/10.
-
All I'm thinking from looking at that financial car crash is good job we got taken over quickly.
Lerner really was driving us to the wall...incredible to think given the position of strength we had around 2009/10.
This isn't really my bag but didn't we lose money hand over fist throughout the Lerner years? I seem to remember a lot of our financial boffins, soon to include Sexual Ealing, expressing concern about the figures and being told not to worry their pretty little heads about it.
-
Sexy do you mean you are going to get a vizeer (as in grand) or a visor as in eye shade? Either would boost your image.
-
Sorry, that's not right. If you sign a player on a free, then the value on the balance sheet is £nil. Same with kids that come through the academy. Whatever you get in insurance has nothing to do with their value in the accounts.
So what would be asset on the balance sheet to offset the player's liabilities, ie. contract, signing-on fee, etc
Nothing. Signing on fees are a P&L expense.
Not so.
Per the 2015 accounts 'the costs associated with the acquisition of players' registrations are capitalised as an intangible fixed asset at the date of acquisition'. Whilst it's not explicit I think it's safe to say this would include all incremental costs associated with the acquisition of player registrations, including signing on fees.
Indeed so. That's the actual cost of the player that gets capitalised. The note about players' signing on fees and loyalty fees gives a bit of a clue as how they're accounted for, if you're struggling, i.e. "Signing on fees payable to players.....are recognised in operating expenses as incurred."
-
All I'm thinking from looking at that financial car crash is good job we got taken over quickly.
Lerner really was driving us to the wall...incredible to think given the position of strength we had around 2009/10.
Assuming the theory of Dr Tone's acquisition being the triggering event for the impairment, the slight technical irony is that had Randy not sold us the accounts would probably have looked a lot better!
-
Sexy do you mean you are going to get a vizeer (as in grand) or a visor as in eye shade? Either would boost your image.
My apologies, Mr Green. I meant a visor. I'm new to all this.
Also, don't think I'm not on to you. Calling me sexy now that I'm a big shot. Join the queue, Brian!
-
Comrade Sexual, have you considered the acquisition of a glorious cape or, dare I suggest it, a poncho to celebrate you new status?
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/a8/e5/b1/a8e5b1b2cf63f6d3679570785b93de38.jpg)Save
-
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/32/01/eb/3201eb6a9d23ffd6088306dd78407ece.jpg)
-
When you move to Ely dear boy, you will be Sexual Ely. I do hope you come, the Fens do so need men in green visors.
-
I like the way this thread is going.
-
Sorry, that's not right. If you sign a player on a free, then the value on the balance sheet is £nil. Same with kids that come through the academy. Whatever you get in insurance has nothing to do with their value in the accounts.
So what would be asset on the balance sheet to offset the player's liabilities, ie. contract, signing-on fee, etc
Nothing. Signing on fees are a P&L expense.
Not so.
Per the 2015 accounts 'the costs associated with the acquisition of players' registrations are capitalised as an intangible fixed asset at the date of acquisition'. Whilst it's not explicit I think it's safe to say this would include all incremental costs associated with the acquisition of player registrations, including signing on fees.
Indeed so. That's the actual cost of the player that gets capitalised. The note about players' signing on fees and loyalty fees gives a bit of a clue as how they're accounted for, if you're struggling, i.e. "Signing on fees payable to players.....are recognised in operating expenses as incurred."
Deary me, with comments like that it's no wonder you make friends so well around here.
The bit you conveniently missed out of that section relates to loyalty fees and what happens when players are sold midway through a contract. If you read the whole note it's pretty clear signing on fees aren't always "incurred" at the start of the contract.
-
I like the way this thread is going.
Two accountants fighting. It's even more fascinating than the Newcastle pre-match thread.
-
Sorry, that's not right. If you sign a player on a free, then the value on the balance sheet is £nil. Same with kids that come through the academy. Whatever you get in insurance has nothing to do with their value in the accounts.
So what would be asset on the balance sheet to offset the player's liabilities, ie. contract, signing-on fee, etc
Nothing. Signing on fees are a P&L expense.
Not so.
Per the 2015 accounts 'the costs associated with the acquisition of players' registrations are capitalised as an intangible fixed asset at the date of acquisition'. Whilst it's not explicit I think it's safe to say this would include all incremental costs associated with the acquisition of player registrations, including signing on fees.
Indeed so. That's the actual cost of the player that gets capitalised. The note about players' signing on fees and loyalty fees gives a bit of a clue as how they're accounted for, if you're struggling, i.e. "Signing on fees payable to players.....are recognised in operating expenses as incurred."
Deary me, with comments like that it's no wonder you make friends so well around here.
The bit you conveniently missed out of that section relates to loyalty fees and what happens when players are sold midway through a contract. If you read the whole note it's pretty clear signing on fees aren't always "incurred" at the start of the contract.
Good lord. Signing-on fees aren't incurred when a player signs on? I haven't seen such an inept display from a so called accountant since the Oscars ceremony last night.
-
I like the way this thread is going.
Two accountants fighting. It's even more fascinating than the Newcastle pre-match thread.
I like to think it's two accountants fighting over me. A tug of love, in every way.
-
When you move to Ely dear boy, you will be Sexual Ely. I do hope you come, the Fens do so need men in green visors.
I'm very keen on the idea of Ely, Brian. I'd love a return to EA. Sadly, Mrs E has her heart set on Worthing and I don't have the stomach for the battle.
-
And I thought buying a car was the worst investment you could make.
-
I like the way this thread is going.
Two accountants fighting. It's even more fascinating than the Newcastle pre-match thread.
An Internet slanging match is a bit unedifying though, I'd think pistols at dawn would be more appropriate for the professions?
-
This is actually pretty interesting. I feel like I've learned something today. However, I still can't think of a way to say our players are shit by reference to the accruals concept. Can we just agree the players are shit and move on?
-
I like the way this thread is going.
Two accountants fighting. It's even more fascinating than the Newcastle pre-match thread.
An Internet slanging match is a bit unedifying though, I'd think pistols at dawn would be more appropriate for the professions?
That or an exchange of tersely worded emails.
-
Yes, ideally involving the words 'I shall revert in due course'. Or is it just you solicitors that are allowed to use that?
-
Yes, ideally involving the words 'I shall revert in due course'. Or is it just you solicitors that are allowed to use that?
Yes. And things like 'Thank you for your letter of 15th ultimo.'
-
I like the way this thread is going.
Two accountants fighting. It's even more fascinating than the Newcastle pre-match thread.
An Internet slanging match is a bit unedifying though, I'd think pistols at dawn would be more appropriate for the professions?
That or an exchange of tersely worded emails.
Calculators at dawn. First one to type "BOOBLESS" wins.
-
Don't Accountants ( including Chartered ) communicate in Excel spreadsheets ? ( Or - given our current sponsors - Quick Books )
-
YESSSSSSSSSSSS! I'm going to buy a green viser and some of those elbow shirt clips. I've instructed my agent to get me a move to Guernsey. I appreciate your interest, Risso, and good luck for the rest of the season.
SE before you disappear to shores richer can you use your new found expertise to help me understand Anglian Windows discount policy?
-
Don't Accountants ( including Chartered ) communicate in Excel spreadsheets ? ( Or - given our current sponsors - Quick Books )
Bob why are you making negative comments?
-
YESSSSSSSSSSSS! I'm going to buy a green viser and some of those elbow shirt clips. I've instructed my agent to get me a move to Guernsey. I appreciate your interest, Risso, and good luck for the rest of the season.
SE before you disappear to shores richer can you use your new found expertise to help me understand Anglian Windows discount policy?
Multiply the number of windows needed by the temperature when each of them is open. Add on Christmas tax and multiply by pi2. You'll get a fiver off per window, assuming that there's been no weather for 3 consecutive weeks in any 8 week period. More if you want glass.
-
That's a more realistic sales pitch than we got from a window bloke a few years ago.
-
We had an Angian windows guy round a few years ago. Threw a sample on the floor and jumped on it to show how strong it was. Scared the life out of the Mrs. I had to escort him out. In hindsight I don't think he was a well man.
-
Two accountants fighting.
"Whoever wins....We lose"
-
An old boss of mine used to tell a story about selling vacuum cleaners door to door, one of the demonstrations was to edge past the lady of the house on the doorstep and throw soot on the floor, then use the new fangled vacuum cleaner to get it all up.
Reckons he did it once to a battle axe in Aston only to find out she didn't have any electricity. I never did believe him. He told a more convincing one about getting dog shit on the sleeve of his new suit from the arm of a chair in a Chelmsley flat.
Anyroad, we digress.
-
He told a more convincing one about getting dog shit on the sleeve of his new suit from the arm of a chair in a Chelmsley flat.
That made me chuckle more than it should ;D
-
I like the way this thread is going.
Downhill faster than an Eel down Everest?
-
Who's players' values would we have written down so quickly? And this was the year the Benteke proceeds would've been recognised and Delphs? Looks like they've just piled every bit of bad news into Lerners last hurrah before takeover.
-
I hope Dr Xia has deep pockets. Lansbury reputed to be on 40k p/w, Hourihane 28k p/w and Hogan 30k p/w, plus others on big wages. Relegation would be disastrous. A worrying situation. The downward spiral started with that imbecile Lerner...
-
When I was renovating 21 Rue de La Cite in St Malo (known as the Worthing of Brittany), I got a quote for double glazed windows from a local Scaramouche with a hand written addendum that I got translated as "does not include glass".
-
We had an Angian windows guy round a few years ago. Threw a sample on the floor and jumped on it to show how strong it was. Scared the life out of the Mrs. I had to escort him out. In hindsight I don't think he was a well man.
Bugger i was after a new well to replace my bore hole
-
An old boss of mine used to tell a story about selling vacuum cleaners door to door, one of the demonstrations was to edge past the lady of the house on the doorstep and throw soot on the floor, then use the new fangled vacuum cleaner to get it all up.
Reckons he did it once to a battle axe in Aston only to find out she didn't have any electricity. I never did believe him. He told a more convincing one about getting dog shit on the sleeve of his new suit from the arm of a chair in a Chelmsley flat.
Anyroad, we digress.
Playing up to your rampant prejudice no doubt.
-
I know these are not Doctor Tony's accounts but maybe one of his tweets with some reassurance about the clubs financial future would be helpful.
-
I know these are not Doctor Tony's accounts but maybe one of his tweets with some reassurance about the clubs financial future would be helpful.
Not sure that would be required to be honest. He obviously bought the club and based his due diligence on all of the available information, so none of this should be a surprise to him. You'd hope at least.
When I've got a minute I'll sit down and work out how much Lerner's utter failure has cost him in total. Must be a truly eye-watering sum, and I doubt the sales proceeeds even touched the sides.
-
I know these are not Doctor Tony's accounts but maybe one of his tweets with some reassurance about the clubs financial future would be helpful.
Not sure that would be required to be honest. He obviously bought the club and based his due diligence on all of the available information, so none of this should be a surprise to him. You'd hope at least.
When I've got a minute I'll sit down and work out how much Lerner's utter failure has cost him in total. Must be a truly eye-watering sum, and I doubt the sales proceeeds even touched the sides.
Someone I know and who I found out much later had been approached to be part of a consortium last summer told me that the figures he saw put it at a bit over £150 million.
-
An old boss of mine used to tell a story about selling vacuum cleaners door to door, one of the demonstrations was to edge past the lady of the house on the doorstep and throw soot on the floor, then use the new fangled vacuum cleaner to get it all up.
Reckons he did it once to a battle axe in Aston only to find out she didn't have any electricity. I never did believe him. He told a more convincing one about getting dog shit on the sleeve of his new suit from the arm of a chair in a Chelmsley flat.
Anyroad, we digress.
Playing up to your rampant prejudice no doubt.
I'm not sure that 'rampant prejudice' against the general population of Chemsley would have been good for either my family relations or my wallet, more that the family the story was about were well know in the office as being utter tramps.
-
I don't understand how the tangible assets are now worth c.£40m less than before.
Assuming these include VP and BMH, what has changed?
I'm guessing there must be some clever accounting reason why you would say these are worth less than previously estimated.
Unless that shop in New Street was more valuable than we thought.
-
I don't understand how the tangible assets are now worth c.£40m less than before.
Assuming these include VP and BMH, what has changed?
I'm guessing there must be some clever accounting reason why you would say these are worth less than previously estimated.
Unless that shop in New Street was more valuable than we thought.
It is a bit odd, to say the least. Land and buildings were in the accounts at £88m, so it's nearly half the value they've written off. Guessing slightly here, but it may have something to do with the fact that as we're now in a division lower, the stadium is generating less income. Generally commercial property is valued based on the income it generates, so if you have an office block with a blue chip tenant on a ten year lease, it'll be worth more than the same building with a BHS in it.
-
Would it have anything to do with HS2 slicing through the staff canteen at BH?
-
I don't understand how the tangible assets are now worth c.£40m less than before.
Assuming these include VP and BMH, what has changed?
I'm guessing there must be some clever accounting reason why you would say these are worth less than previously estimated.
Unless that shop in New Street was more valuable than we thought.
It is a bit odd, to say the least. Land and buildings were in the accounts at £88m, so it's nearly half the value they've written off. Guessing slightly here, but it may have something to do with the fact that as we're now in a division lower, the stadium is generating less income. Generally commercial property is valued based on the income it generates, so if you have an office block with a blue chip tenant on a ten year lease, it'll be worth more than the same building with a BHS in it.
Would it be right to assume there'd be scope for the value of those assets to double or at least increase substantially again if we were promoted at the end of next season?
-
I don't understand how the tangible assets are now worth c.£40m less than before.
Assuming these include VP and BMH, what has changed?
I'm guessing there must be some clever accounting reason why you would say these are worth less than previously estimated.
Unless that shop in New Street was more valuable than we thought.
It is a bit odd, to say the least. Land and buildings were in the accounts at £88m, so it's nearly half the value they've written off. Guessing slightly here, but it may have something to do with the fact that as we're now in a division lower, the stadium is generating less income. Generally commercial property is valued based on the income it generates, so if you have an office block with a blue chip tenant on a ten year lease, it'll be worth more than the same building with a BHS in it.
Would it be right to assume there'd be scope for the value of those assets to double or at least increase substantially again if we were promoted at the end of next season?
Assuming that is part of the reason, then yes. Or it could just be that the sales price has been apportioned over the cost of assets, and so they all had to be written down accordingly.
-
Look on the bright side - it's £79 million we're not paying tax on. #dougonomics.
-
I just read that Wolves made a £5 million profit, how can they do that and we cant?, to me we are massively over paying our players
We need to reduce the size of squad in the summer quite drastically and then have a 1st team squad of no more than 22 players, and we can then call upon the reserve team lads to make up the numbers as and when necessary.
-
I don't understand how the tangible assets are now worth c.£40m less than before.
Assuming these include VP and BMH, what has changed?
I'm guessing there must be some clever accounting reason why you would say these are worth less than previously estimated.
Unless that shop in New Street was more valuable than we thought.
It is a bit odd, to say the least. Land and buildings were in the accounts at £88m, so it's nearly half the value they've written off. Guessing slightly here, but it may have something to do with the fact that as we're now in a division lower, the stadium is generating less income. Generally commercial property is valued based on the income it generates, so if you have an office block with a blue chip tenant on a ten year lease, it'll be worth more than the same building with a BHS in it.
Would it be right to assume there'd be scope for the value of those assets to double or at least increase substantially again if we were promoted at the end of next season?
Assuming that is part of the reason, then yes. Or it could just be that the sales price has been apportioned over the cost of assets, and so they all had to be written down accordingly.
I'd assumed the latter given the sheer amount they've been reduced by, writing off over £70m at virtually same time you agree to sell the club for a little over £70m less than your previous valuation just seems too much of a coincidence for there to not be at least some correlation between the 2.
-
1 The adjustment is based on a new and accurate valuation of the asset.
2. It represents some potential future tax planning.
3 it sets up a sweetheart deal.
Take your pick.
-
Heading off FFP issues?
-
1 The adjustment is based on a new and accurate valuation of the asset.
2. It represents some potential future tax planning.
3 it sets up a sweetheart deal.
Take your pick.
As Dave says, tax isn't really going to be an issue for a long time.
-
An old boss of mine used to tell a story about selling vacuum cleaners door to door, one of the demonstrations was to edge past the lady of the house on the doorstep and throw soot on the floor, then use the new fangled vacuum cleaner to get it all up.
Reckons he did it once to a battle axe in Aston only to find out she didn't have any electricity. I never did believe him. He told a more convincing one about getting dog shit on the sleeve of his new suit from the arm of a chair in a Chelmsley flat.
Anyroad, we digress.
Playing up to your rampant prejudice no doubt.
I'm not sure that 'rampant prejudice' against the general population of Chemsley would have been good for either my family relations or my wallet, more that the family the story was about were well know in the office as being utter tramps.
I think you knew, but just in case you didn't, I was only joking.
-
Fox.
-
Fox.
Sake.
-
Now on Companies House (https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/document-api-images-prod/docs/vH-DAUfUdbpR8AwUDW9mpn66iSsF3Yicgn766sKzJKo/application-pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=ASIAIP4ARVIYWL44ASIA&Expires=1488912989&Signature=hzqvnk8o%2F7YEharFtmRUznCWHvo%3D&x-amz-security-token=FQoDYXdzEBkaDMv529STYMUcXUxcKSKcA%2B2eGWZhXzOZXvmrnN%2F2LuRx03T6sd%2FMzGYC%2FNJpxVDmevrW7ZVD7dI7plfPeev1vbf0MVdPKe4g2rCRP7Z8F3do9X9PE8HhY7yI3Vsd1hEZ9NF6N8PZT8AT1p6zfVE7vMGZLWgw3amwm3tCzgcOVAdpcsjcpyN6ymLllGNGELZQZJllIeXLgSONSW%2FNQ1YmkaArfVqnk8hpOiNOd0gbsMzB%2Bxq4tuHhf5Zs%2Frfxzk3%2Fj84O%2FVwFrbrxq0RcV8d9%2BlKAHaFVPQARaM5XtZbPuCNSi4mJDoeQRcSZq%2FI5Aw6aPV%2BK%2BEgg2XlIDia6IIr3vYwD5eN%2BEXWbzTXy5OJDMiU6kpKCGVy6h06el1IG2pEFnoMecR1hyyyV7%2FAFXRTMMTDTaoBS8CKuHtObcRCZYQuapvjChPejEoNyoVwWfaxHNki1cBxP9Txr4dQ9DDr7Rb1IiQEjgFUfx%2B2zBo73Lbgqb8L5ZhUb3xl07eRonDY0I4lGvWvCxGBGbKmfFFmZbl2lNAoVVjGWUE6c24kMlG5rkS%2Fl7yPIHcLW7w8on7T7xQU%3D)
It's not pretty.
-
Now on Companies House (https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/document-api-images-prod/docs/vH-DAUfUdbpR8AwUDW9mpn66iSsF3Yicgn766sKzJKo/application-pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=ASIAIP4ARVIYWL44ASIA&Expires=1488912989&Signature=hzqvnk8o%2F7YEharFtmRUznCWHvo%3D&x-amz-security-token=FQoDYXdzEBkaDMv529STYMUcXUxcKSKcA%2B2eGWZhXzOZXvmrnN%2F2LuRx03T6sd%2FMzGYC%2FNJpxVDmevrW7ZVD7dI7plfPeev1vbf0MVdPKe4g2rCRP7Z8F3do9X9PE8HhY7yI3Vsd1hEZ9NF6N8PZT8AT1p6zfVE7vMGZLWgw3amwm3tCzgcOVAdpcsjcpyN6ymLllGNGELZQZJllIeXLgSONSW%2FNQ1YmkaArfVqnk8hpOiNOd0gbsMzB%2Bxq4tuHhf5Zs%2Frfxzk3%2Fj84O%2FVwFrbrxq0RcV8d9%2BlKAHaFVPQARaM5XtZbPuCNSi4mJDoeQRcSZq%2FI5Aw6aPV%2BK%2BEgg2XlIDia6IIr3vYwD5eN%2BEXWbzTXy5OJDMiU6kpKCGVy6h06el1IG2pEFnoMecR1hyyyV7%2FAFXRTMMTDTaoBS8CKuHtObcRCZYQuapvjChPejEoNyoVwWfaxHNki1cBxP9Txr4dQ9DDr7Rb1IiQEjgFUfx%2B2zBo73Lbgqb8L5ZhUb3xl07eRonDY0I4lGvWvCxGBGbKmfFFmZbl2lNAoVVjGWUE6c24kMlG5rkS%2Fl7yPIHcLW7w8on7T7xQU%3D)
It's not pretty.
Whats the synopsis? Save me prentding i know what im looking at
-
So we rewarded Foxy with over 2.5million for 18 months of incompetence, failure and a false narrative leading to Huddersfield Away on a Tuesday evening
Nice work if you're in the loop
-
So we rewarded Foxy with over 2.5million for 18 months of incompetence, failure and a false narrative leading to Huddersfield Away on a Tuesday evening
Nice work if you're in the loop
That's football, whatever your job title is.
-
So we rewarded Foxy with over 2.5million for 18 months of incompetence, failure and a false narrative leading to Huddersfield Away on a Tuesday evening
Nice work if you're in the loop
I'm sure the report I read, it stated Fox was paid much more than that.
Not that it makes a difference.
-
So we rewarded Foxy with over 2.5million for 18 months of incompetence, failure and a false narrative leading to Huddersfield Away on a Tuesday evening
Nice work if you're in the loop
Paul Faulkner was main hopeless and out of his depth, but at least he only earned a 10th of what Fox did.
That's football, whatever your job title is.
-
The £44.8m impairment is on tangible fixed assets - so bricks and mortar? What could that be?
There is a £34m loan note on the balance sheet - as this predates Mr Xia not sure this is. I thought originally it was money owed to him. £45m of this and bank loan monies are repayable within 12 months. Is it money still owed to Randy then.
-
The impairments are the writing down of assets to their recoverable value. When you've just sold the club hard for a certain amount it's hard to argue that they're worth more.
-
The £44.8m impairment is on tangible fixed assets - so bricks and mortar? What could that be?
There is a £34m loan note on the balance sheet - as this predates Mr Xia not sure this is. I thought originally it was money owed to him. £45m of this and bank loan monies are repayable within 12 months. Is it money still owed to Randy then.
Could this £45m be a provision that Xia has to pay Lerner if we get promoted, as that figure seems to ring a bell from when Xia bought the club?
-
The impairments are the writing down of assets to their recoverable value. When you've just sold the club hard for a certain amount it's hard to argue that they're worth more.
So I WAS right?!
-
The impairments are the writing down of assets to their recoverable value. When you've just sold the club hard for a certain amount it's hard to argue that they're worth more.
So I WAS right?!
The boy's got natural ledger awareness. You can't teach that
-
The impairments are the writing down of assets to their recoverable value. When you've just sold the club hard for a certain amount it's hard to argue that they're worth more.
So I WAS right?!
You sure love to ball. What's the matter with you? Ego tripping out?
-
Keith Wyness sat down for an exclusive chat with the Birmingham Mail
On Accounts
The accounts released on Monday were for the year before we took over the club.
In layman’s, because unless you’re an accountant this gets quite technical because it’s all around this issue called compartment and it is more of an accounting term that’s used.
What is basically means is that once the club was sold at the price Tony bought it for then the value that the club was already at carried over, which was higher than what the club was bought for, meant it had to be adjusted down to a realistic market price.
So, what we actually did was, although we had a notion able value of what the club was worth, with what it was actually sold at it created a real crystallised market value.
Then you have to cut down the money you’re carrying on the books. So, it’s an accounting treatment more than anything else.
Crystal clear, KW.
-
I wonder what Fox was on at Arsenal.
Can't be that many chief execs on 3m a year in the prem unless Football really has gone bonkers.
-
Keith Wyness sat down for an exclusive chat with the Birmingham Mail
On Accounts
The accounts released on Monday were for the year before we took over the club.
In layman’s, because unless you’re an accountant this gets quite technical because it’s all around this issue called compartment and it is more of an accounting term that’s used.
What is basically means is that once the club was sold at the price Tony bought it for then the value that the club was already at carried over, which was higher than what the club was bought for, meant it had to be adjusted down to a realistic market price.
So, what we actually did was, although we had a notion able value of what the club was worth, with what it was actually sold at it created a real crystallised market value.
Then you have to cut down the money you’re carrying on the books. So, it’s an accounting treatment more than anything else.
Crystal clear, KW.
I think Sexual Ealing explained it better.
-
The impairments are the writing down of assets to their recoverable value. When you've just sold the club hard for a certain amount it's hard to argue that they're worth more.
So I WAS right?!
You sure love to ball. What's the matter with you? Ego tripping out?
Only joking, fella.
-
Keith Wyness sat down for an exclusive chat with the Birmingham Mail
On Accounts
The accounts released on Monday were for the year before we took over the club.
In layman’s, because unless you’re an accountant this gets quite technical because it’s all around this issue called compartment and it is more of an accounting term that’s used.
What is basically means is that once the club was sold at the price Tony bought it for then the value that the club was already at carried over, which was higher than what the club was bought for, meant it had to be adjusted down to a realistic market price.
So, what we actually did was, although we had a notion able value of what the club was worth, with what it was actually sold at it created a real crystallised market value.
Then you have to cut down the money you’re carrying on the books. So, it’s an accounting treatment more than anything else.
Crystal clear, KW.
What was that middle bit again Keith?
-
The impairments are the writing down of assets to their recoverable value. When you've just sold the club hard for a certain amount it's hard to argue that they're worth more.
So I WAS right?!
The boy's got natural ledger awareness. You can't teach that
Thanks mate. Getting that tattooed on my neck in Cyrillic script. I'll obviously credit you somewhere towards the clavicle in Sanskrit.
-
The impairments are the writing down of assets to their recoverable value. When you've just sold the club hard for a certain amount it's hard to argue that they're worth more.
So I WAS right?!
The boy's got natural ledger awareness. You can't teach that
Thanks mate. Getting that tattooed on my neck in Cyrillic script. I'll obviously credit you somewhere towards the clavicle in Sanskrit.
And to think that if it had been spotted earlier it could have been you flogging the broken backs of Britain's entrepreneurial heroes, and not Phillip Hammond.
-
The impairments are the writing down of assets to their recoverable value. When you've just sold the club hard for a certain amount it's hard to argue that they're worth more.
So I WAS right?!
The boy's got natural ledger awareness. You can't teach that
Thanks mate. Getting that tattooed on my neck in Cyrillic script. I'll obviously credit you somewhere towards the clavicle in Sanskrit.
And to think that if it had been spotted earlier it could have been you flogging the broken backs of Britain's entrepreneurial heroes, and not Phillip Hammond.
We're both good in our own fields, Lee. He couldn't do what I do and...actually I could do what he does, and I think he knows that. Probably what spurred him on.
-
The impairments are the writing down of assets to their recoverable value. When you've just sold the club hard for a certain amount it's hard to argue that they're worth more.
So I WAS right?!
The boy's got natural ledger awareness. You can't teach that
Thanks mate. Getting that tattooed on my neck in Cyrillic script. I'll obviously credit you somewhere towards the clavicle in Sanskrit.
And to think that if it had been spotted earlier it could have been you flogging the broken backs of Britain's entrepreneurial heroes, and not Phillip Hammond.
We're both good in our own fields, Lee. He couldn't do what I do and...actually I could do what he does, and I think he knows that. Probably what spurred him on.
Be that as it may, have you yet procured a mighty flowing cape, or a poncho?
-
I miss getting the Annual Report in the post when you could still buy a share. Trying to work out what terms like `amortisation` meant at 14 years of age was very educational. `Amortisation` seemed to be plastered all over the report and accounts. At AGMs there would long winded discussions about `amortisation. These discussions would generally send shareholders to sleep and give Doug a break from fans shouting insults at him.
-
Keith Wyness sat down for an exclusive chat with the Birmingham Mail
On Accounts
The accounts released on Monday were for the year before we took over the club.
In layman’s, because unless you’re an accountant this gets quite technical because it’s all around this issue called compartment and it is more of an accounting term that’s used.
What is basically means is that once the club was sold at the price Tony bought it for then the value that the club was already at carried over, which was higher than what the club was bought for, meant it had to be adjusted down to a realistic market price.
So, what we actually did was, although we had a notion able value of what the club was worth, with what it was actually sold at it created a real crystallised market value.
Then you have to cut down the money you’re carrying on the books. So, it’s an accounting treatment more than anything else.
Crystal clear, KW.
What was that middle bit again Keith?
I think a bit like if you own a house on a street; and everyone values there house at 200k on thy street (let's assume they are all the same new build types) then it's valued at 200k on paper.
If you sell that house to someonefor 100k; it's hard for the buyer to then start bragging his house is worth 200k given he just paid half of that.
So the actual value of the club and its assets could be higher but of a more illiquid nature, since Lerner wanted out for cash that is very liquid in its nature he accepted less of one for more of the other.
I'm no accountant mind.
-
Be that as it may, have you yet procured a mighty flowing cape, or a poncho?
Got myself a ceremonial tunic that has 'Superdry' written on it.
-
Keith Wyness sat down for an exclusive chat with the Birmingham Mail
On Accounts
The accounts released on Monday were for the year before we took over the club.
In layman’s, because unless you’re an accountant this gets quite technical because it’s all around this issue called compartment and it is more of an accounting term that’s used.
What is basically means is that once the club was sold at the price Tony bought it for then the value that the club was already at carried over, which was higher than what the club was bought for, meant it had to be adjusted down to a realistic market price.
So, what we actually did was, although we had a notion able value of what the club was worth, with what it was actually sold at it created a real crystallised market value.
Then you have to cut down the money you’re carrying on the books. So, it’s an accounting treatment more than anything else.
Crystal clear, KW.
What was that middle bit again Keith?
I think a bit like if you own a house on a street; and everyone values there house at 200k on thy street (let's assume they are all the same new build types) then it's valued at 200k on paper.
If you sell that house to someonefor 100k; it's hard for the buyer to then start bragging his house is worth 200k given he just paid half of that.
So the actual value of the club and its assets could be higher but of a more illiquid nature, since Lerner wanted out for cash that is very liquid in its nature he accepted less of one for more of the other.
I'm no accountant mind.
Nailed it. You should come to my lodge where we just have a good time and nothing weird happens.
-
The impairments are the writing down of assets to their recoverable value. When you've just sold the club hard for a certain amount it's hard to argue that they're worth more.
So I WAS right?!
You sure love to ball. What's the matter with you? Ego tripping out?
Only joking, fella.
Mercy mercy me. ;)
-
these accounts are from the end of Lerners reign
the losses are irrelevant now we have a new owner buying up the worlds sport and entertainment industries
-
Does this mean that Lerner has carried the loss away with him as far as the accounts are concerned, in other words, the Club has not lost money and we are starting again at a new point. Would this sidestep FFP and mean if we sell a player above the reduced valuation we would show a profit in the accounts this year.
-
these accounts are from the end of Lerners reign
the losses are irrelevant now we have a new owner buying up the worlds sport and entertainment industries
Bit of an exaggeration, mind.
-
The club's assets were effectively revalued to their true worth at the time of sale - or when we went down or both. So effectively a clean slate in terms of the actual worth of the club. Now we just have to make money day to day.....
-
these accounts are from the end of Lerners reign
the losses are irrelevant now we have a new owner buying up the worlds sport and entertainment industries
Bit of an exaggeration, mind.
According to the latest news article on the Recon website, they have nearly "80 billion US dollars of total assets". They seem to have the scope/potential to do such things.
-
Swiss Ramble on twitter today has done a few bits on the 2015/16 season.
As to be expected, its not good to look at. However, its in the past now and we've moved on.
https://twitter.com/SwissRamble?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor (https://twitter.com/SwissRamble?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor)
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C8tvmAvXUAAmJ0h.jpg)
We are top of the league, said we are top of the league
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C8tw_5vXoAA7CG7.jpg)
-
Keith Wyness sat down for an exclusive chat with the Birmingham Mail
On Accounts
The accounts released on Monday were for the year before we took over the club.
In layman’s, because unless you’re an accountant this gets quite technical because it’s all around this issue called compartment and it is more of an accounting term that’s used.
What is basically means is that once the club was sold at the price Tony bought it for then the value that the club was already at carried over, which was higher than what the club was bought for, meant it had to be adjusted down to a realistic market price.
So, what we actually did was, although we had a notion able value of what the club was worth, with what it was actually sold at it created a real crystallised market value.
Then you have to cut down the money you’re carrying on the books. So, it’s an accounting treatment more than anything else.
Crystal clear, KW.
What was that middle bit again Keith?
I think a bit like if you own a house on a street; and everyone values there house at 200k on thy street (let's assume they are all the same new build types) then it's valued at 200k on paper.
If you sell that house to someonefor 100k; it's hard for the buyer to then start bragging his house is worth 200k given he just paid half of that.
So the actual value of the club and its assets could be higher but of a more illiquid nature, since Lerner wanted out for cash that is very liquid in its nature he accepted less of one for more of the other.
I'm no accountant mind.
Nailed it. You should come to my lodge where we just have a good time and nothing weird happens.
I will preface this by stating that I know nothing of economics...but isn't it the other way round? If a house is valued at £200 000 and you over pay by £100 000 the house is still only worth £200 000 on the open market? if for the same house you pay under pay £100 000 and then sell it it will still be worth £200 000? Given that you look at the market, prices for similar sized and priced goods, and location then just under paying doesn't mean that you bring the whole market down and the commodity 9house, Villa) suddenly loses it's value. There are many reasons for a cheap sale - to get rid being one - so I'm not sure that would affect the long time value.
-
I will preface this by stating that I know nothing of economics...but isn't it the other way round? If a house is valued at £200 000 and you over pay by £100 000 the house is still only worth £200 000 on the open market? if for the same house you pay under pay £100 000 and then sell it it will still be worth £200 000? Given that you look at the market, prices for similar sized and priced goods, and location then just under paying doesn't mean that you bring the whole market down and the commodity 9house, Villa) suddenly loses it's value. There are many reasons for a cheap sale - to get rid being one - so I'm not sure that would affect the long time value.
What something is worth is an art, not a science. But accounting tries to put some science to it.
That science involves defining a number of acceptable ways of valuing something, with a recent sales price being one of the best indicators of what something is worth. After all, in a purely financial sense, what something is worth is essentially what someone else is willing to pay for it. There are exceptions to this (distressed sales like you say) but none of these apply in Randy's case. He sold because he wanted to, not because he was forced to.
And to pick up on your final point, the accounts make no attempt to show a "long term value". The balance sheet is a view of the position of the group at a point in time, and accounting standards demand that for those assets we impaired they must be shown at the lower of cost or net realisable value. So long term value doesn't really come in to it.
-
I will preface this by stating that I know nothing of economics...but isn't it the other way round? If a house is valued at £200 000 and you over pay by £100 000 the house is still only worth £200 000 on the open market? if for the same house you pay under pay £100 000 and then sell it it will still be worth £200 000? Given that you look at the market, prices for similar sized and priced goods, and location then just under paying doesn't mean that you bring the whole market down and the commodity 9house, Villa) suddenly loses it's value. There are many reasons for a cheap sale - to get rid being one - so I'm not sure that would affect the long time value.
What something is worth is an art, not a science. But accounting tries to put some science to it.
That science involves defining a number of acceptable ways of valuing something, with a recent sales price being one of the best indicators of what something is worth. After all, in a purely financial sense, what something is worth is essentially what someone else is willing to pay for it. There are exceptions to this (distressed sales like you say) but none of these apply in Randy's case. He sold because he wanted to, not because he was forced to.
And to pick up on your final point, the accounts make no attempt to show a "long term value". The balance sheet is a view of the position of the group at a point in time, and accounting standards demand that for those assets we impaired they must be shown at the lower of cost or net realisable value. So long term value doesn't really come in to it.
Indeed. There also isn't really a readily identifiable market price for football clubs, like there is houses. It would be pretty easy to have an accurate stab at say, a price for a three bed semi in Edbagston, but it would be difficult to value Walsall FC for example, based on the price that other Midlands clubs have gone for. There are just so many variables.
-
Seems this years Recon Group ones are out.
Not got a clue if they are good, bad or indifferent but I’m sure the good folk that understand accounts will tell us
-
A quick glance, and we’ve made a profit of £1.7m, which is pretty decent, though it says we lost £197m last year, which is a bit of a shock as I thought it was “only” £80m ish. No wonder they’re shitting themselves over FFP.
-
Just had a quick 5 min peek before a meeting - there's been a group reorg so Recon Group UK Limited are the accounts you want to go look at if you're so inclined.
Highlights:
- Revenue down £35m to £74m - mainly down to Broadcasting revenue reduction but also big drops in sponsorship and commercial revenue
- Operating loss before player disposals of £41m, increased from a loss of £36m last year
- Balance sheet position improved though due to a £57m capital contribution by the parent company
I'll do a more detailed review later when I've got more time.
-
A quick glance, and we’ve made a profit of £1.7m, which is pretty decent, though it says we lost £197m last year, which is a bit of a shock as I thought it was “only” £80m ish. No wonder they’re shitting themselves over FFP.
You're looking at the wrong company Woofles - see my post above.
-
Balance sheet position improved though due to a £57m capital contribution by the parent company[/li][/list]
Presumably that's a pretty positive thing isn't it? Suggests that fears that everything is being funded by loading up liabilities on the club aren't the case.
Or not?
-
Balance sheet position improved though due to a £57m capital contribution by the parent company[/li][/list]
Presumably that's a pretty positive thing isn't it? Suggests that fears that everything is being funded by loading up liabilities on the club aren't the case.
Or not?
Correct, there's no bank debt to speak of. The loan with the charge over the statement is to the parent company for £49m. No different really to what Lerner was doing.
-
In laymans terms have they put £49m into the business as a cash injection?
-
Here's the link: Recon Group accounts (https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/document-api-images-prod/docs/UUSwaXDNik7sdqk9qjqG0TLh1ojR6Wg0EhkIvtPr-dM/application-pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=ASIAIEYJQHIWW54FD6GQ&Expires=1518711404&Signature=c9nD9uSFKbRibwcYHdyJOFheSCc%3D&x-amz-security-token=FQoDYXdzEIz%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2FwEaDJylVrKGx64z8v77yyK3Ax87kIyZ1NiDJqnXfWJ8MCTRjwO9KQnRaM50RDZ%2F5KkoKCoJKvFzspdrqrYq94a7y8EbHkDCEf6ErS1YPx4q8zuXPSkfZ8vxbY4Eol1JnGzWOVMTZVdBkD1vnG0cr18dvlJwZmeGjCW%2FFq2LxUufyR%2Ftc6fa67ZPnMHLGFXH101A%2FQ6VCRaPI0BhxgflSP0i4z7awlcViOwf04m5px4UGM6GbAH7k7QO4jkM4LHUt9ZG5rQReOYymP7l74TQGpxB0L7LRIJ1ccOGj0dCi4tJb5hQcifkAQyGDNtuXX5KAJksfGTSMgC7KLfQmrGF2kDIh7gh7ovdB1YlThaDGv%2FeRVCvZiThzro1lY4uUDx267yTENMGSuXvbily9bXhvmP%2FEzy1IGDc1a3iQr%2BO9QgXBuHG7RnBqs51UzztVILzYxRum6cyYmEEpoRMXr8LOO2Hu65YUxPJ2yrOciWLlNzEDJFAyRGnPuLH5b9Anh%2BLWMs7YVO0JpfV4o3wxrSDMaunadhTxQGbQIcyJL8GXvQLibiYGPrp%2Fu%2FDs8grTUqyPDY%2BAmItOHqXgcj%2FSDy1Pp%2FDBM%2BjmV3Na%2B4oyM6V1AU%3D)
Turnover £74m, costs £115m, profit on player sales of £27m, so overall loss of £14m.
Cash injection of £49m from a loan from the parent company in China.
Since the balance sheet date, further player sales of £22m and purchases of £3m.
-
Bit more colour on the accounts:
- Revenue down to £74m from £109m last year - decreases in broadcasting (£17m), sponsorship (£9m), and commercial (£7m). Sponsorship has gone from £12m last year to £3m this year - shows what a difference a Premier League profile makes!
- Operating expenses before player transactions of £91m this year vs £129m last year. Almost all of the reduction is in wages, which have gone from £93m last year to £61m this year. FTE staffing has reduced to 1,064 from 1,623 last year. Most of the reduction is in part time staff on matchdays, etc but back-office full time staff were cut from c.350 in the Prem to c.230 in the Championship.
- Net spend on players was £14m vs £12m the year before.
- Net loss of £14m this year vs £81m last year but last year included £80m of exceptional (paper) write offs so in effect, the loss has increased year-on-year by £13m
- As well as having a capital contributinon of £57m in to the club loan notes of £15m have been issued. Both of these have come from Recon. Loan notes are debt, capital contribution is equity (ie there's no obligation to pay back equity, unlike debt).
- Dr Tone took a salary of £357,795 out of the club.
- The Strategic Report describes FFP as presenting 'a significant challenge' and the Directors Report confirms that we're getting 'a reduced level of broadcasting revenue for the 2017/18 season'. It then goes on to say that the cash flow forecasts for this season showed we needed further investments of cash from the parent co (ie 2017/18 will show a loss too) but that the parent company has confirmed it'll be provided.
-
The loan notes are £49m. I think it was accruals that are £15m.
-
The loan notes are £49m. I think it was accruals that are £15m.
And they were £34m last year, so an increase of £15m.
-
The loan notes are £49m. I think it was accruals that are £15m.
And they were £34m last year, so an increase of £15m.
They actually issued £49m this year though, as that's the actual cash amount listed in the cash flow statement. I think the £34m would have been owed to Lerner at the end of May last year, as the purchase went through in June, and would have been taken care of in the sale. So yes you're right in that the loan notes have increased £15m, but Dr T has actually injected £49m in the year. Or rather, the parent company has, which I imagine is the same thing.
-
So where do the accounts stand on the good/okay/bad/terrible/desperate/absolutely buggered scale?
-
So is the HSBC loan not mentioned, or is that the way that Recon have loaned us the money?
Not confused at all, nosireebob.
-
So Risso and Ad@m speaking for us not so accounting/financially minded types in terms of trajectory how would you assess the current position of the club relative to where it was and where you thought it might be? Does it allay any of concerns you might have had about Xia/Recon and their investment capabilities or intent?
-
Better than last year but still losing about a million quid a week is how I read it. No bother if we go up. A real FFP issue if we don't with likes of McCormack and Lansbury on fat contracts nobody will want to take over.
-
So where do the accounts stand on the good/okay/bad/terrible/desperate/absolutely buggered scale?
Not as good as Man City, but nowhere near as bad as the Blues!
They're as you'd expect. We've got a load of Premier League players and a Premier League infrastructure on (largely) Championship revenue. So it's unsustainable if we don't go back up soon.
-
So where do the accounts stand on the good/okay/bad/terrible/desperate/absolutely buggered scale?
Not as good as Man City, but nowhere near as bad as the Blues!
They're as you'd expect. We've got a load of Premier League players and a Premier League infrastructure on (largely) Championship revenue. So it's unsustainable if we don't go back up soon.
Basically this. The sales since these accounts will have helped slightly, but then income will be down again due us spending a second year in Division 2, so would imagine that roughly cancels out. If we don’t go up soon then we’ll be pretty well forced into selling our better players. We really need to go up this season.
-
Profit on transfers healthier than was thought, I think? Most fees are undisclosed these days at the point of transfer but I guess with these details, it would be possible to ascertain more or less the correct amounts on each transfer.
-
So is the HSBC loan not mentioned, or is that the way that Recon have loaned us the money?
Not confused at all, nosireebob.
Actually, I think it is just a continuation of the overdraft facility HSBC previously gave the club under Lerner. It looks like it’s just a renewal of the fact that it’s secured on the stadium as before. Obviously it’s a new company now so presumably they just redid the paperwork.
-
Cheers Martin. That’s a relief.
-
As with everything there's two ways of looking at this.
The glass half full version is that as long as we go up this year it's not a problem and is completely manageable.
The glass half empty version is that's essentially what the General was telling us when we were trying to get in to the Champions League...
-
Thanks Risso and Ad@m. I have no idea why but I absolutely love having the accounts explained. I couldn't be less interested in any other accounts, even those of the company I work for. I'm fucking odd.
-
Chaps not read the detail but does it say how much of a further capital injection is required in the next 12 months?
-
Genuinely surprised we've reduced the wage bill a lot given our squad still has many players in the 28-30 bracket who'll be on pretty good money although I assume most of them had a reduction after relegation.
Just shows you how stupid the premier league is getting with wage bills so look forward to that fun starting again in four months time.
-
Chaps not read the detail but does it say how much of a further capital injection is required in the next 12 months?
Going back up would surely solve that as it really is night and day what you get in TV revenue between the two leagues and then as others have said you can get better sponsorship aswell.
I look forward to Xia's plans when we do make it, he's obviously got the money to back it up.
-
As with everything there's two ways of looking at this.
The glass half full version is that as long as we go up this year it's not a problem and is completely manageable.
The glass half empty version is that's essentially what the General was telling us when we were trying to get in to the Champions League...
At least we have the likes of Wyness who knows what he’s doing, rather than Randy’s yes men. If we go up and they approach things sensibly we should be fine. There’s a big job to do, but hopefully expensive lessons of the past have been learned.
-
It must be possible to take these figures and make an assessment of how ffp will affect us if we don’t go up?
Eg:
- assume commercial income remains the same, minus a reduction in parachute payments
- apply constraints of FFP (which I think is still applied over three years?)
- equals income we need to generate through transfers or reduced wages
I’m hoping some journo or blogger will do this?
-
People getting financial years mixed up. We made a smaller loss in dropping to the Championship than we did in our last season in the Premier League. The stripping back at the end of the old regime helped, as did the player wage reduction clauses.
In summary, we took a hit but not that bad, and it's astonishing how much we were losing in the Premier League with the silly wage ratio/income we were running.
We don't have to sell all our players, but we can't afford to pay 12-15 million for new ones either , should we not go up.
-
People getting financial years mixed up. We made a smaller loss in dropping to the Championship than we did in our last season in the Premier League. The stripping back at the end of the old regime helped, as did the player wage reduction clauses.
In summary, we took a hit but not that bad, and it's astonishing how much we were losing in the Premier League with the silly wage ratio/income we were running.
We don't have to sell all our players, but we can't afford to pay 12-15 million for new ones either , should we not go up.
The bottom line loss in our final year in the Prem was made much worse by impairment (is one-off paper) losses. The underlying loss increased in the Championship as you'd expect.
As for the wage ratio, it went up from 82% to 83% in our first year in the Championship. Given the loss of revenue it's incredible we managed to keep it so low.
-
The Mail had a tibbet about Wyness being in £370k p/a as opposed to Tom Fox, who was being paid £2.9 million for his efforts.
-
Just how did that happen?
-
Just how did that happen?
See Lerner R.
-
The Mail had a tibbet about Wyness being in £370k p/a as opposed to Tom Fox, who was being paid £2.9 million for his efforts.
Be interesting to know where they got that from.
The accounts disclose the remuneration of the highest paid director as £358k but the accounts don't name the recipient. However, for the vast, vast majority of the year the only director of this company was Dr Tone so I'm 99% certain this was paid to him.
Wyness is a director of a number of subsidiary companies but the most obvious one he'd get paid out of (Recon Football Limited) doesn't disclose any remuneration. It does cross-ref to Recon Sports Limited but those accounts haven't been filed yet.
So is the Mail genuinely in the know or are they just making stuff up?
-
Making stuff up I think Adam. As you say, the £350K is likely to be for Xia himself as he was the only director in Recon Group for the vast majority of the year. If it was Wyness, he's on a bloody fortune as he was only a director of that company for a few days. The accounts do say that the other directors are remunerated in subsidiary companies. I had a quick look, but the accounts for Recon Sports haven't been put online yet.
-
Does anything in the accounts present concern as to the legitimacy of Recon or Xia’s financial acumen? Or is that not possible to ascertain?
-
Does anything in the accounts present concern as to the legitimacy of Recon or Xia’s financial acumen? Or is that not possible to ascertain?
Very hard to ascertain. The ultimate company is Chinese, so next to impossible to get anything meaningful there. They obviously have though:
A) bought the club
B) injected tens of millions in capital and loans, and
C) convinced the auditors that they have the wherewithal to support the club as a going concern.
Biggest concern for me would be FFP if we don’t go up, not whether Xia is the real deal or not.
-
BBC Summary.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/43088167
-
BBC Summary.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/43088167
So they've misrepresented the year-on-year movement in losses (by ignoring the impairment losses last year), they've got the wage bill wrong by excluding national insurance and pension costs, and they've come up with some very spurious player transaction figures which I can't for the life of me figure out how they've got to.
Apart from that it's a pretty accurate analysis...
-
What's wrong with the transfer figures? They seem close to what they were reported at the time.
-
It's almost that special time of year again!! ;)
Thought I'd bump this thread as I'm sure it's at the front of everyone's mind.
Should we have a poll on just how bad the finances looked just before our new overlords took over (as these accounts will be drawn up as of 31 May 2018)...?
-
I will start with Fukien Abysmal.
-
It's almost that special time of year again!! ;)
Thought I'd bump this thread as I'm sure it's at the front of everyone's mind.
Should we have a poll on just how bad the finances looked just before our new overlords took over (as these accounts will be drawn up as of 31 May 2018)...?
That sense of disappointment you get when you can see that they've been uploaded but are going to take 5 days to appear on the Companies House website. A sense of disappointment only matched by a glance at the Championship league table.
-
Got a feeling this isn't going to end well.
-
you mean as in a fines/points deductions/transfer embargo type of not ending well?
-
I will start with Fukien Abysmal.
Didn't we sign him on a four year £50k deal?
-
Can he play right back?
Hey Ads! 2009 called and it wants it overused attempt at humour back.
-
Got a feeling this isn't going to end well.
Its the lack of clarity that is a little unnerving. Villa might tell us everything is fine but the numbers need to reflect that.
-
Mad to look at the last page and a few casting doubts on Recon/Xia and then everyone thinking surely Wyness and co have a plan for this if we don't go up....
I would imagine this year's finances don't look pretty but all I ask is the owners and Purslow have a sustainable plan for not getting promoted.
-
Mad to look at the last page and a few casting doubts on Recon/Xia and then everyone thinking surely Wyness and co have a plan for this if we don't go up....
I would imagine this year's finances don't look pretty but all I ask is the owners and Purslow have a sustainable plan for not getting promoted.
Selling Jack...
-
I would imagine we're being heavily subsidised at present, like most clubs.
-
It's almost that special time of year again!! ;)
Thought I'd bump this thread as I'm sure it's at the front of everyone's mind.
Should we have a poll on just how bad the finances looked just before our new overlords took over (as these accounts will be drawn up as of 31 May 2018)...?
That sense of disappointment you get when you can see that they've been uploaded but are going to take 5 days to appear on the Companies House website. A sense of disappointment only matched by a glance at the Championship league table.
Let's hope that disappointment doesn't grow when they do appear.
-
Have they been released fully? There's an article on the Brum Mail online today about the owners ploughing in £13m in January to fund our transfer window "spree" but nothing about the bottom line to the 12 months ending May last year.
-
Have they been released fully? There's an article on the Brum Mail online today about the owners ploughing in £13m in January to fund our transfer window "spree" but nothing about the bottom line to the 12 months ending May last year.
Not yet no. They've got that from a resolution that was submitted a little while ago. Accounts are due to be filed today but usually take a few days to appear on Companies House.
-
Have they been released fully? There's an article on the Brum Mail online today about the owners ploughing in £13m in January to fund our transfer window "spree" but nothing about the bottom line to the 12 months ending May last year.
Not yet no. They've got that from a resolution that was submitted a little while ago. Accounts are due to be filed today but usually take a few days to appear on Companies House.
I don't* know whether it's because we've been so hideous on the pitch for so long that I view your annual analysis of the accounts as one of the genuine landmarks of the Villa year for me, but it is. I used to hate it that we'd pore over the wage bill etc when all seemed well under MON. Now it's kind of box office for Villa nerds.
*I do know that it's because we've been so hideous on the pitch.
-
Come on round, we can Netflix and chill and analyse the accounts. x
-
No matter what the accounts say ,we will still be playing in the championship next season.
-
Come on round, we can Netflix and chill and analyse the accounts. x
Get a room!
-
Come on round, we can Netflix and chill and analyse the accounts. x
Get a room!
If you commit to getting a room Risso, then I'd be way too awkward to refuse you.
-
Come on round, we can Netflix and chill and analyse the accounts. x
Get a room!
If you commit to getting a room Risso, then I'd be way too awkward to refuse you.
Game on!
-
Come on round, we can Netflix and chill and analyse the accounts. x
Get a room!
If you commit to getting a room Risso, then I'd be way too awkward to refuse you.
Game on!
Grab me by the pussy.
-
Hate to think that an innocent moggy might be confronted with a calculator.
-
They don’t make good reading. And don’t include the Recon accounts which will be even more frightening.
£38million loss from non football operations.
Overall accumulated losses of £265 million for all years of trading.
£32 million loss for 17/18
TV money down £7m an likely to fall c£20million 18/19.
Controlling company now in Luxembourg.
-
The way the summary of the accounts is presented, it has ourbyesr end as being linked to season end?
We've lost £39 million over the first two seasons, so whatever we've lost for this season is what we're over FFP by.
-
The way the summary of the accounts is presented, it has ourbyesr end as being linked to season end?
We've lost £39 million over the first two seasons, so whatever we've lost for this season is what we're over FFP by.
Purslow and NSWE agreed a 3 year plan with the EFL due to these inherited losses. Coming in at £39m level would make it nigh on impossible to fix quickly. New 3 year rolling cycle a system far as I’m aware and plan in place
-
So new owners coming in wipes the slate clean? Nice one!
I wonder if other clubs know of this get out clause?
-
Once Recon accounts are released which contain our wage bill, this is going to get a whole lot worse. Wage bill could be anywhere between £40-50m by my estimates, so when you add that on to the £32m loss, 2017/18 is looking a disaster. I fear an embargo.
-
Once Recon accounts are released which contain our wage bill, this is going to get a whole lot worse. Wage bill could be anywhere between £40-50m by my estimates, so when you add that on to the £32m loss, 2017/18 is looking a disaster. I fear an embargo.
You can tell that the wages have massively increased, as I think the football side get recharged to Group from Aston Villa Football Club Limited. In these accounts, admin expenses have increased by £20m, the vast bulk of which will be wages, which has led to the £32.5m loss.
On top of this, Recon Football Limited, the immediate parent of Aston Villa Football Club Limited have released their accounts, and in those there's £29m of exceptional costs, which is the impairment in value of all the investments. If those are added to the football trading losses, then we could be looking at c.£60m os losses in the consolidated accounts in Recon Group UK Limited. Those accounts haven't surfaced yet, and it's possible that there might be some double counting in there.
In any case though, it's not looking very pretty.
-
Purslow and NSWE agreed a 3 year plan with the EFL due to these inherited losses. Coming in at £39m level would make it nigh on impossible to fix quickly. New 3 year rolling cycle a system far as I’m aware and plan in place
You do realise that is really going to piss off Small Heath especially as they'll spend all day celebrating our accounts.
-
Once Recon accounts are released which contain our wage bill, this is going to get a whole lot worse. Wage bill could be anywhere between £40-50m by my estimates, so when you add that on to the £32m loss, 2017/18 is looking a disaster. I fear an embargo.
Higher. £61m is well reported.
-
How on earth do you lose £38 million on non football activities?
-
So to the non accountants on here how do the future funds for team strengthening look like ? On a scale of 1-10 with 1 being (No problems we can spend) and 10 being (we can afford to buy a paddle to get us out of shit creek)....where do you think we stand ?
-
Whole thing sounds like a Paul Franks wet-dream! :'(
-
There’s having money and there’s being able to spend it.
-
Purslow has inferred he's been primed for this, I hope that's still the case.
Smith mentioning getting players value up a few times in recent weeks suggests a blood-to-sell policy. Maybe we've agreed to sell Grealish in the event of non-promotion to stave-off an embargo.
-
Purslow has inferred he's been primed for this, I hope that's still the case.
Smith mentioning getting players value up a few times in recent weeks suggests a blood-to-sell policy. Maybe we've agreed to sell Grealish in the event of non-promotion to stave-off an embargo.
Looks like Grealish would need to be sold 3 times over but even that wouldn’t help - it’s the ongoing wage bill which has to be slashed
-
Purslow has inferred he's been primed for this, I hope that's still the case.
Smith mentioning getting players value up a few times in recent weeks suggests a blood-to-sell policy. Maybe we've agreed to sell Grealish in the event of non-promotion to stave-off an embargo.
This belief that Purslow has “done a deal” just doesn’t stack up. Every other club would contest such a deal as they’ve complied with the rules. Clubs have been relegated or have not been promoted due to complying with the rules while we’ve recklessly ignored them. Any “deal” struck by Purslow is likely to be deemed invalid.
If Purslow has “done a deal” then it would been based on an undertaking to sell players and slash the wage bill, which hasn’t happened. Signing Abrahams on high wages rather flies in the face of that.
I can see a big points deduction and a lengthy transfer embargo.
-
How on earth do you lose £38 million on non football activities?
Catering bill for Wyness.
Thank God those clowns got out the club.
-
Like a fair few before them they were lucky to escape having their collars felt for such financial goings on. Allegedly.
-
The way the summary of the accounts is presented, it has ourbyesr end as being linked to season end?
We've lost £39 million over the first two seasons, so whatever we've lost for this season is what we're over FFP by.
Purslow and NSWE agreed a 3 year plan with the EFL due to these inherited losses. Coming in at £39m level would make it nigh on impossible to fix quickly. New 3 year rolling cycle a system far as I’m aware and plan in place
Is this just wishful thinking, or based on some evidence? If it is true we wouldn't be eligible for any FFP penalties until the end of the 2021-22 season at the earliest?
So, spend, spend, spend and make sure we are out of this league by then?
-
The way the summary of the accounts is presented, it has ourbyesr end as being linked to season end?
We've lost £39 million over the first two seasons, so whatever we've lost for this season is what we're over FFP by.
Purslow and NSWE agreed a 3 year plan with the EFL due to these inherited losses. Coming in at £39m level would make it nigh on impossible to fix quickly. New 3 year rolling cycle a system far as I’m aware and plan in place
Is this just wishful thinking, or based on some evidence? If it is true we wouldn't be eligible for any FFP penalties until the end of the 2021-22 season at the earliest?
So, spend, spend, spend and make sure we are out of this league by then?
No, it’s a 3-year cycle so the cycle would already have started.
-
There's a strong smell of stripes on here.
-
Gets twatted 4-0 and first thought the next day is come onto a Villa site. Bless, they really are special.
-
How on earth do you lose £38 million on non football activities?
Hourihane’s right boots probably count as a non-football expense ?
-
The way the summary of the accounts is presented, it has ourbyesr end as being linked to season end?
We've lost £39 million over the first two seasons, so whatever we've lost for this season is what we're over FFP by.
Purslow and NSWE agreed a 3 year plan with the EFL due to these inherited losses. Coming in at £39m level would make it nigh on impossible to fix quickly. New 3 year rolling cycle a system far as I’m aware and plan in place
Is this just wishful thinking, or based on some evidence? If it is true we wouldn't be eligible for any FFP penalties until the end of the 2021-22 season at the earliest?
So, spend, spend, spend and make sure we are out of this league by then?
No, it’s a 3-year cycle so the cycle would already have started.
If it's a three year cycle which started at the beginning of this season, as VinnieChase suggested, it would end at the conclusion of the 2021-22 season. Hence my question.
-
You could maybe just about understand if he came on to gloat, sad but maybe understandable, but to pretend to be a fan of another club is impressively obsessive.
-
Purslow has inferred he's been primed for this, I hope that's still the case.
Smith mentioning getting players value up a few times in recent weeks suggests a blood-to-sell policy. Maybe we've agreed to sell Grealish in the event of non-promotion to stave-off an embargo.
This belief that Purslow has “done a deal” just doesn’t stack up. Every other club would contest such a deal as they’ve complied with the rules. Clubs have been relegated or have not been promoted due to complying with the rules while we’ve recklessly ignored them. Any “deal” struck by Purslow is likely to be deemed invalid.
If Purslow has “done a deal” then it would been based on an undertaking to sell players and slash the wage bill, which hasn’t happened. Signing Abrahams on high wages rather flies in the face of that.
I can see a big points deduction and a lengthy transfer embargo.
Either/or - not both
-
Or neither
-
Albion are going to get Pulised in the play offs, it will be hillarious, stripey twats. They'll want the manager out again then.
-
Basically this says the ownership they have in the club is worth c £30m, they've pumped in c£60m in the year and written half of it off.
How do make a millionaire football club owner? Start as a billionaire.
-
Purslow has inferred he's been primed for this, I hope that's still the case.
Smith mentioning getting players value up a few times in recent weeks suggests a blood-to-sell policy. Maybe we've agreed to sell Grealish in the event of non-promotion to stave-off an embargo.
Looks like Grealish would need to be sold 3 times over but even that wouldn’t help - it’s the ongoing wage bill which has to be slashed
Most of our high earners will go in the summer though. Richards contract finally up and he must be on 40k. Whelan and Jedinak will also be in 30-40k range. Maybe someone will finally take McCormak off our hands given he has 1 year left.
Think Kodjia will also be sold aswell. We signed him for 12m so he will have a weekly wage to reflect a 12m player and they don't come cheap.
That will help a little bit surely?
Our strategy for last few years has been all wrong. Just signing senior players in their 30s who are on high wages at prem or top end prem clubs.
We need to find value so I'd say our January window is first example of that.
-
Like a fair few before them they were lucky to escape having their collars felt for such financial goings on. Allegedly.
If this is even part-true it may explain how Purslow may have reached some sort of deal with the EFL. He has remained very upbeat throughout about the non-risk of FFP to the club.
-
Purslow has inferred he's been primed for this, I hope that's still the case.
Smith mentioning getting players value up a few times in recent weeks suggests a blood-to-sell policy. Maybe we've agreed to sell Grealish in the event of non-promotion to stave-off an embargo.
Looks like Grealish would need to be sold 3 times over but even that wouldn’t help - it’s the ongoing wage bill which has to be slashed
Most of our high earners will go in the summer though. Richards contract finally up and he must be on 40k. Whelan and Jedinak will also be in 30-40k range. Maybe someone will finally take McCormak off our hands given he has 1 year left.
Think Kodjia will also be sold aswell. We signed him for 12m so he will have a weekly wage to reflect a 12m player and they don't come cheap.
That will help a little bit surely?
Our strategy for last few years has been all wrong. Just signing senior players in their 30s who are on high wages at prem or top end prem clubs.
We need to find value so I'd say our January window is first example of that.
I saw somewhere that had worked it out, based on the wages listed in football manager (which are probably about 90% accurate) we'll save somewhere around £15-20m on wages in the summer, and about 2/3rds of that is players who rarely play or who will be on the verge of retiring. I think they included selling Kodjia, Bjarnason and Lansbury and maybe Taylor as well.
-
We really have to cull our senior players. No more thinking Lansbury might come good if we give him another season (which he spends most of injured again). Of course we need to find buyers but contracts are running down at least. Lansbury and Taylor have been here for 2 and a half years now after all.
-
We really have to cull our senior players. No more thinking Lansbury might come good if we give him another season (which he spends most of injured again). Of course we need to find buyers but contracts are running down at least. Lansbury and Taylor have been here for 2 and a half years now after all.
any Bruce players on high wages apart from McGinn we won’t be able to sell
good job we have a lot of oldies out of contract at the end of the season
-
So basically we're looking at probably a 60m loss?Only Villa could spend 8 years reducing costs and getting high earners off the book and still be this much in the shit. We should have cancelled players contracts and took a massive hit the season we went down.
-
RECON accounts are out. Looks like new owners pumped in £68m to basically keep us afloat.
-
RECON accounts are out. Looks like new owners pumped in £68m to basically keep us afloat.
Any other bits? Are the wages in RECON accounts?
-
We've used excluded losses in You Devlopment to drop by £11m the overall loss.
It's all a bit Byzantine for me. Accounts are a department I moan about, not something I know a great deal of. Not with my shoes and socks on anyway.
-
The accounts say in the Directors statement that we're FFP compliant for 2018/19.
-
A quick potted review of the full accounts to 31 May 2018:
Turnover down from £74m to £69m
Operating expenses up from £115m to £122m
Operating loss before player trading up to £54m from £41m
Profit on player trading down from £27m to £16m
Overall operating loss up from £14m to £38m
On taking over the club, the new owners injected £30m, followed by a further £38m. They've injected more since as well.
Gate receipts were up from £10.7m to £11.8m, but broadcasting was down from £48m to £40m. Sponsorship nd commercial were largely unchanged.
The £48m loan to whichever of Xia's companies provided it has been paid back.
The directors had this to say about FFP:
(https://i.ibb.co/rM4D01y/Screenshot-2019-03-06-at-10-42-37.png) (https://ibb.co/rM4D01y)
-
60 minutes from oblivion, that's how close we came. Fucking scandalous.
-
It still doesn't sound good. They have said we are compliant for 2018-19 for a while. What about beyond that? Do we face the possibility of a points deduction next season? If, as VinnieChase suggested, the new owners have wiped the slate clean, why don't they say so to allay concerns?
-
This is exactly why we've brought in a manger that's shown he can build a team without needing to splash millions in fees and wages
It could take another five years to get promoted, and we've got to accept this and just get on with supporting the team on the pitch whoever that may be come August and for the foreseeable future
There's no way out of this financial position other than through hard work on and off the pitch
-
How on earth do you lose £38 million on non football activities?
Being married.
-
I wonder if the outgoing regime left a note to the new owners saying ‘there’s no money left’ on the desk
-
It really was a total mess, how on earth did we manage to get ourselves into this position (Paying premier league wages to Championship players), I am amazed that the 2 guys who took us on, were willing to pump so much money into the club, they must surely have a good plan going forward?
-
As far as shit or bust goes we very nearly went bust because we were shit.
-
It’s all about the risk to reward though isn’t it? Our previous owner lost by one goal and a non awarded red card for that stamp on Jack.
In the same season Wolves gambled £52 million and won.
I personally enjoyed the season for the £500 I fronted.
-
It still doesn't sound good. They have said we are compliant for 2018-19 for a while. What about beyond that? Do we face the possibility of a points deduction next season? If, as VinnieChase suggested, the new owners have wiped the slate clean, why don't they say so to allay concerns?
Its not a literal clean slate, just more that weve not breached FFP as things stand and have a plan.From this Purslow/NSWE have inherited this to date, and now have a 3 year plan on ways not to breach FFP (which league are happy with).
It's worth noting that the EFL look at current seasons finances with regards any penalties etc. The league would have been fully aware of all these figures published last season. If any sanctions would be followed then we would have known in the summer.
We have recently re-valued some assets (land would be my guess, training ground) - Any sale of these by June 19 would fall into this years accounts.
-
It’s all about the risk to reward though isn’t it? Our previous owner lost by one goal and a non awarded red card for that stamp on Jack.
In the same season Wolves gambled £52 million and won.
I personally enjoyed the season for the £500 I fronted.
I don't disagree with that, the reason it was shit or bust though is that when we missed out we were instantly in a position of not only having no money but also having half the team leave and being forced into a rebuild. If you're going to spend money like we have you want to look at the squad 2 years later and see where the money went, with us you just can't do that, our best players are a bargain signing from the summer, a couple of loans and an academy product. We've pissed away £100m in fees alone since we were relegated and got nothing like value from it.
-
How on earth do you lose £38 million on non football activities?
Being married.
Haha! With kids
-
I think Xia and Wyness went for an innovative 'shit and bust' approach.
-
Does Xia still have a minority stake?
-
Does Xia still have a minority stake?
“I went to Birmingham, bought a football club and all I have left is these crepe shoes”
-
Does Xia still have a minority stake?
“I went to Birmingham, bought a football club and all I have left is these crepe shoes”
Crepe or crap?
-
Both.
-
Does Xia still have a minority stake?
“I went to Birmingham, bought a football club and all I have left is these crepe shoes”
Shrove Tuesday was yesterday...
-
How on earth do you lose £38 million on non football activities?
Being married.
Bravo, Sir!
-
If we don't offer contracts to Bunn, Hutton, Elphick, Jedinak, Richards, De Laet, and Whelan, we'll save approx. £ 225 thousand per week. Add the money for the loanees El Ghazi etc ( £124 thousand per week). That's a total of £ 349 thousand per week. That's just over £ 18 million pound per year in wages alone being saved. Absolutely fecking crazy amounts!!!!!! And that's just 7 out of the 18 players who are out of contract at the end of the season, and doesn't take into account any academy players who may be out of contract.
Is it any wonder the club was close to admin, before our new owners came in???
Let's hope, that the last transfer window was a sign of how the club will perform in the future........buy a player who is needed, is young, is cheap and is potentially an improvement in the position he's been bought for than what we've already got and on a much lower contract!!!
-
All this stuff about all the wages we'll be saving, do people realise we'll need to sign new players and pay them too??
-
All this stuff about all the wages we'll be saving, do people realise we'll need to sign new players and pay them too??
at least they might play unlike Richards
-
All this stuff about all the wages we'll be saving, do people realise we'll need to sign new players and pay them too??
We don't need to replace them all...Whelan and Jedinak only needs one player signed to cover them, Bunn is number 4 keeper, Richards dosen't need words.
-
Is the Club FFP compliant for the time being ?
Is it correct that a £13 million per season deficit is allowable ?
If so, it's an on going problem ?
-
All this stuff about all the wages we'll be saving, do people realise we'll need to sign new players and pay them too??
Bunn, Jedinak, Richards, De Laet, Gardner have played how many games between them this season to need replacing?
We've already brought in a right back to replace Hutton and have Bree as well at the club (and AEH at present). Contrary to what Steve Bruce thought, you really don't need to have 5 right backs at any given time.
So straight away that's probably £150k per week or nearly £8 million a year saved without needing any further replacement.
That's before you go into the probability that anyone brought in to replace Hogan, Taylor, Kodija, McCormack and the like will almost certainly be on lower wages.
-
The players that the Club sign for the foreseeable future, won't be joining for ridiculous wages.
They'll be joining for the Glory of playing for Aston Villa.
I'm looking forward to it all.
-
A good thread explaining the findings:
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1103428294291189761.html
-
As per the above analisys we look destined to contravene FFP.
-
Reading that thread, firstly it is mind blowing the money we spend on paying our players, how did it increase so drastically? and it looks as though we can expect to fail FFP, i assume that if we do this then a points deduction / fine could hit us 2020/2021 season (we have to get promoted next season!)
-
It increased as Bruce stated players need to be paid more to deal with the pressure of playing for Aston Villa.
We've spent a fortune on fees and wages and how many have contributed this season?
-
It still doesn't sound good. They have said we are compliant for 2018-19 for a while. What about beyond that? Do we face the possibility of a points deduction next season? If, as VinnieChase suggested, the new owners have wiped the slate clean, why don't they say so to allay concerns?
Its not a literal clean slate, just more that weve not breached FFP as things stand and have a plan.From this Purslow/NSWE have inherited this to date, and now have a 3 year plan on ways not to breach FFP (which league are happy with).
It's worth noting that the EFL look at current seasons finances with regards any penalties etc. The league would have been fully aware of all these figures published last season. If any sanctions would be followed then we would have known in the summer.
We have recently re-valued some assets (land would be my guess, training ground) - Any sale of these by June 19 would fall into this years accounts.
So if we have agreed a three year plan, does this mean we are exempt from punishment for the first three years of them being in charge (ie until the end of 2020/21 season)?
-
All off these frighteningly excessive numbers are what drive so many of us to demand that our own produced young players must be given full and proper opportunities to develop. The simple choice is between economic ruin and player in house development. It should be a no brainer.
If the counter to that is that our young players are not good enough the answer is not to throw money at old journeyman players, it is to make your youth system better.
-
It's journeyman players on Prem wages too.
-
So I pulled myself together and ask, with all the dignity I could must, "Is this any way to run a fucking football club?"
We should be massively thankful to our new owners for bailing us out but they can't be expected to keep doing this forever.
Grealish is going in the summer - its the right thing to do for all parties.
-
We should be massively thankful to our new owners for bailing us out but they can't be expected to keep doing this forever.
I'm sure they didn't take us on out of the goodness of their hearts, they did it because they, maybe misguidedly, smelt money or prestige. And they should be massively thankful that they chose a football club that can pull in 35,000 loyal fans every week.
-
Even when we had our first benevolent billionaire owner, we had one who did not seem to understand the importance of employing the right people to look after your investment.
Look at how many players from that era we managed to actually sell - hardly any. The number who would just sit out their contracts and leave for nothing, having hoovered up shit loads of money, is staggering.
Someone like Habib Beye, whose presence at the club was pointless. 40k a week for two or three years (cant be arsed to google how long) is a fucking ton of money.
Then think back to how many underused players we acquired in that period.
Lerner rolled up with his dad's best mate and someone whose main qualification seemed to be that he worked for him already and was English, and trusted them to look after his football club.
Nice enough people, but totally inadequate when it came to running a modern football club.
-
So I pulled myself together and ask, with all the dignity I could must, "Is this any way to run a fucking football club?"
We should be massively thankful to our new owners for bailing us out but they can't be expected to keep doing this forever.
Grealish is going in the summer - its the right thing to do for all parties.
It's the wrong thing to do for us. We need him to help us get promoted. That'll make a far greater contribution to our finances than his sale would.
As for him, he's signed a new contract so he's here unless someone meets his release clause, which I guess they won't given his injury record.
-
The thing I can't wrap my head around, is buying championship players as opposed to premier league ones and the wage bill going up!
I do shudder at the amount of player turnover we've had in the last ten years. Too often with no resale value.
-
The thing I can't wrap my head around, is buying championship players as opposed to premier league ones and the wage bill going up!
I do shudder at the amount of player turnover we've had in the last ten years. Too often with no resale value.
It’s what happens when you keep changing managers. They want their own players, they change the style, etc.
The damning thing is this is all so predictable. Brian has got it spot on - we need to offload the journeymen, stop throwing money after anyone in the hope of promotion, and rebuild the academy and youth system - will improve our finances and in the long run, improve the clubs fortunes on the pitch.
Of course, the long run doesn’t really exist in the game anymore. So I’m not hopeful and see further trouble ahead
-
The players that the Club sign for the foreseeable future, won't be joining for ridiculous wages.
They'll be joining for the Glory of playing for Aston Villa.
I'm looking forward to it all.
That's a very romantic view but it's also a load of bollocks. As if any player gives a crap about the glory of playing for Aston Villa, they're not fans.
Generally speaking the more you spend on wages the higher you finish in the league. Just because we've wasted a load of cash on useless players doesn't mean that by spending less we'll end up with better players. It doesn't work that way.
-
The thing I can't wrap my head around, is buying championship players as opposed to premier league ones and the wage bill going up!
I believe it's called shit or bust. RDM and then Bruce were quite clearly told by Xia that they had to get promoted ASAP so they went around the Championship buying every else's best players, mid-contract and just chucked money at them to make it work.
As we found out, it went to shit and we were very nearly bust!
The real frightener for me is the fact that the above strategy has resulted in Scott Hogan being paid £40k per week (if those numbers are to be believed) whilst Tyrone Mings, whose contract was negotiated by Bournemouth, is on £15k.
That shows the art of the possible and I'm getting closer to the realisation that you literally have to get rid of pretty much everyone and start from scratch on the playing side in order to fix the problem. As it stands, anyone new coming in just uses the already inflated salaries we currently pay as the benchmark and the cycle continues ad infinitum.
-
I’m a little confused with the FFP rules. Are they only applicable to EFL teams or are PL teams also subject to the same restrictions?
-
It's journeyman players on Prem wages too.
Shows how many money has flooded down to this level now from premier league when what we did not just in summer 2016 but window 2017 has pretty much knackered us.
In 2017 one we signed mostly championship players but lansbury and Hourihane were captains at their clubs so inevitably highest earners and so coming here would be double your money no problem (particularly as both were out of contract in six months so strong bargaining positions).
We have too many mediocre players in 30-40k range. Richards, Lansbury, Hourihane, Taylor, Jedinak, Whelan, Adomah, Kodjia and ones still contracted to us like Hogan and McCormack.
Not easy but we simply need shot of majority of then and then go for younger players from yes maybe leagues below who won't be demanding that sort of money.
Then maybe we have a chance of building something sustainable long term. If we want to get big name or two in then loans continue to make sense I think (as long as we don't pay all their wages like se seemingly did with Bolasie).
-
How was broadcasting down £8m when we were on Sky more than any other Championship team last season?
-
It's journeyman players on Prem wages too.
Shows how many money has flooded down to this level now from premier league when what we did not just in summer 2016 but window 2017 has pretty much knackered us.
In 2017 one we signed mostly championship players but lansbury and Hourihane were captains at their clubs so inevitably highest earners and so coming here would be double your money no problem (particularly as both were out of contract in six months so strong bargaining positions).
We have too many mediocre players in 30-40k range. Richards, Lansbury, Hourihane, Taylor, Jedinak, Whelan, Adomah, Kodjia and ones still contracted to us like Hogan and McCormack.
Not easy but we simply need shot of majority of then and then go for younger players from yes maybe leagues below who won't be demanding that sort of money.
Then maybe we have a chance of building something sustainable long term. If we want to get big name or two in then loans continue to make sense I think (as long as we don't pay all their wages like se seemingly did with Bolasie).
The biggest problem in all this is that we have a lot of players who were worth (that's subjective I know) big wages when they signed but because of their age were only going to get worse so they might be of only half the value at the end of their contract but we've still got to pay in full but get very little benefit in return.
If we aim to sign players in their early 20s most of the time they'll be on comparatively lower wages that, within a year or so, will be less than their value (McGinn is a great example here), that's a much healthier position to be in because if you don't want to give them a pay rise you can sell them (usually at a profit) and you'll get plenty of offers because their paid less than their worth. If you're paying more than anyone else will offer then a lot of players will see out the contract (or negotiate a pay off).
I agree with Brian that we need to focus on improving the academy production line and bringing players through but you still do need to make signings, the key thing is that we should be very wary of signing people the wrong side of 25 and the ones we do sign should be used to fill gaps as first team players, not as backup. This is where the words and actions of Bruce were are odds with each other, he spoke, in his first summer, about making a smaller squad but then he added 4-5 more players to the squad without moving anyone on. With the set of 19-22 year olds we have in the U23s we should be looking at a first team squad of about 18-20. That would mean that the like of O'Hare, Doyle-Hayes, Clarke, Clark, Davis, RHM, Ramsey, Sarkic, Revan, etc are going to be needed on the bench fairly regularly but that's ok, if we don't trust them to even come on for 10-20 minutes here and there then we should be looking to move them on but the issue we've had for years seems to have been that if we don't think a player can be a regular starter then we sign someone to sit on bench instead of them. In the premier league you can get away with that more but in the championship you just can't have players like Thor and Lansbury earning a fortune to watch the games.
-
Every club has the same idea regarding developing youth, unfortunately it is a lot easier said than done.
-
It's journeyman players on Prem wages too.
Cold Sore Steve’s speciality.
-
I’m a little confused with the FFP rules. Are they only applicable to EFL teams or are PL teams also subject to the same restrictions?
The Premier League doesn't have a rule, but UEFA do. So clubs will generally try to adhere to UEFA's rules in case they qualify.
-
So there's a big FFP hole between playing in the Championship and qualifying for a UEFA tournament?
This does explain why Man City are now being investigated even if it's been months since the allegations first came to light, however any club in the PL not in a UEFA tournament could literally spend way beyond their means (even with the very high Sky income) to ensure they stay in the PL indefinitely?
-
So there's a big FFP hole between playing in the Championship and qualifying for a UEFA tournament?
This does explain why Man City are now being investigated even if it's been months since the allegations first came to light, however any club in the PL not in a UEFA tournament could literally spend way beyond their means (even with the very high Sky income) to ensure they stay in the PL indefinitely?
Well, they could, assuming someone is prepared to pump in hundreds of millions of pounds into ensuring that a club does no more than perpetually hover between 7th and 17th, and don't bother with the Cups.
-
Sounds like the kind of clusterfuck that Lerner or Xia could have achieved, however this really does emphasise why it's so important to get promoted from the Championship as soon as possible as it would bide time for the new owners to sort the financial mess out (including player contracts) once and for all without any FFP pressure before making any concerted effort towards the possibility of qualifying for a UEFA tournament.
-
Rongtian He is off the wage bill, left yesterday apparently.
-
Who he? You mean Ho.
-
Hope none of ffp issues will be solved by taking villa away from park and replacing with naming rights.... wondered if inked to the pride of the park scenario ?
-
Hope none of ffp issues will be solved by taking villa away from park and replacing with naming rights.... wondered if inked to the pride of the park scenario ?
I don’t see how moving can solve the problem,but selling naming rights will bring in extra revenue but no where near enough to make that much of a difference.
-
They’re out. £68.3m loss but we were fully compliant with EFL FFP. We received £36.4m
For the sale of the ground and £14m HS2 compensation.
-
They’re out. £68.3m loss but we were fully compliant with EFL FFP. We received £36.4m
For the sale of the ground and £14m HS2 compensation.
You see I told you all HS2 was a good idea.
-
Fuck me, £54m turnover and £95m wages + £25m transfer fees amortisation + £15m promotion bonus. Madness.
Signed on 2 August interestingly.
-
Fuck me, £54m turnover and £95m wages + £25m transfer fees amortisation + £15m promotion bonus. Madness.
Signed on 2 August interestingly.
The £95m wages included the promotion bonus. And there's not much you can do about amortisation other than not buying players.
-
Like Hogan and McCormack
-
So how far under the permitted level were we? Should we be worried in the event of relegation?
-
It’s pretty dispiriting losing so much money and still being uncompetitive
-
Well, those accounts covered last season when we came up, so I guess you could argue it worked. This current year's accounts are going to make pretty grim reading though.
-
I would have thought they would not be as bad proportionately.
And that revenue would out accelerate wage growth.
-
Wonder what our transfer strategy will be if we go down. I assume it will be to go for reasonably proven but still young championship players like Joe Lolley and Eze of QPR who reminds me a bit of Grealish way he plays.
Players who can get us promoted and also have potential to play in premier league like Jarred Bowen.
-
Plus O’Hare, Ramsey and Green. I don’t want it to happen for all the reasons we’ve mentioned a million times but should the worst happen we’d be in a way better position than we were last time.
-
The cumulative losses for the past 5 years must be eye watering.
-
Plus O’Hare, Ramsey and Green. I don’t want it to happen for all the reasons we’ve mentioned a million times but should the worst happen we’d be in a way better position than we were last time.
O'Hare should certainly get a chance. He's been talked about long enough and done fine at Coventry. Not sure on Green, think we'll sell him.
Louie Barry aswell will probably get chances in the early rounds of league cup so could well force his way into the 18 during the season.
-
How can a medium sized company keep making these losses year after year, we must have a very understanding bank
Over a million pound per week loss, that is staggering - and yet we continue to pay over the top wages and bonus's - Other clubs seem to make a profit - when was the last time we did?
No other business would continue to make losses and keep going.
-
How can a medium sized company keep making these losses year after year, we must have a very understanding bank
We have very rich owners, why would we need an understanding bank?
-
It’s pretty dispiriting losing so much money and still being uncompetitive
We were promoted last season and fighting to stay in the PL this season. We’re very much where a lot of people expected us to be really. Stay up then become more competitive hopefully.
-
If our owners are pouring the amount of money into us to keep us compliant with FFP with the premier league - then if we are relegated we will be in real trouble.
They must be mad, because there is no way they will get there investment back if they decided to sell.
-
There's a thread on a Bristol City forum that I glance at everytime a financial statement comes out about us. Looks like its attracted a couple of Villa fans too (anybody off here?).
It's basically the internet equivalent of a child jumping up and down saying it's not fair!!!
A site called OTIB and in the FPP thread.
-
There's a thread on a Bristol City forum that I glance at everytime a financial statement comes out about us. Looks like its attracted a couple of Villa fans too (anybody off here?).
It's basically the internet equivalent of a child jumping up and down saying it's not fair!!!
A site called OTIB and in the FPP thread.
Jesus, what a bellend that Pompousopolous is.
-
Those few years in the Championship were odd, there are some weird as fuck clubs down there, Bristol City and Sheffield Wednesday developed gigantic hard ons over us.
-
If our owners are pouring the amount of money into us to keep us compliant with FFP with the premier league - then if we are relegated we will be in real trouble.
They must be mad, because there is no way they will get there investment back if they decided to sell.
That’s probably why they won’t sell then, unless they take advice from that idiot Lerner.
-
There's a thread on a Bristol City forum that I glance at everytime a financial statement comes out about us. Looks like its attracted a couple of Villa fans too (anybody off here?).
It's basically the internet equivalent of a child jumping up and down saying it's not fair!!!
A site called OTIB and in the FPP thread.
Jesus, what a bellend that Pompousopolous is.
He's certainly keeping up the BCFC tradition. We've got our own thread on there now.
-
If our owners are pouring the amount of money into us to keep us compliant with FFP with the premier league - then if we are relegated we will be in real trouble.
They must be mad, because there is no way they will get there investment back if they decided to sell.
The loss apart I was pleased to see that Villa were quite open with the EFL in the valuation and sale of Villa Park,so adressing a possible FFP could be solved by the sale of Grealish worth £60m plus.
-
If our owners are pouring the amount of money into us to keep us compliant with FFP with the premier league - then if we are relegated we will be in real trouble.
They must be mad, because there is no way they will get there investment back if they decided to sell.
The loss apart I was pleased to see that Villa were quite open with the EFL in the valuation and sale of Villa Park,so adressing a possible FFP could be solved by the sale of Grealish worth £60m plus.
Open with EFL, how could they have been otherwise?
-
There's a thread on a Bristol City forum that I glance at everytime a financial statement comes out about us. Looks like its attracted a couple of Villa fans too (anybody off here?).
It's basically the internet equivalent of a child jumping up and down saying it's not fair!!!
A site called OTIB and in the FPP thread.
Jesus, what a bellend that Pompousopolous is.
He's certainly keeping up the BCFC tradition. We've got our own thread on there now.
Their fans are absolute fucking nutters, living in a dream world. Like a less significant Norwich.
Their manager is a ******, too. Remember him moaning about our 'disrespectful chanting' - after they'd been chanting 'you're not famous anymore' at us during that match.
Obviously, that stopped after we stuck 5 past them.
-
Wonder what our transfer strategy will be if we go down. I assume it will be to go for reasonably proven but still young championship players like Joe Lolley and Eze of QPR who reminds me a bit of Grealish way he plays.
Players who can get us promoted and also have potential to play in premier league like Jarred Bowen.
Not sure we would be investing too much if we were to go down. Would expect Grealish, Mings and McGinn would be gone, but not many others really.
Could probably be looking at a starting line up of something like:
Nyland
Guilbert Engels Hause Targett
Konsa Nakamba
Hourihane
El Ghazi Samatta Trezeguet
Bit of quality added in the positions where I've got Hourihane and Trezeguet and it looks OK. Still think it would be a massive struggle again if we went down and every effort needs to be put in for the remainder of the season to avoid that happening.
-
There's a thread on a Bristol City forum that I glance at everytime a financial statement comes out about us. Looks like its attracted a couple of Villa fans too (anybody off here?).
It's basically the internet equivalent of a child jumping up and down saying it's not fair!!!
A site called OTIB and in the FPP thread.
Guilty as charged sir.
-
Ha good drills.
They're a bizarre non-entity really, I'm not quite sure why they're so hung up on us.
-
The accounts will almost certainly be discussed on the next episode of The Price of Football podcast which is being recorded tomorrow.
Available on Apple and Android and via Spotify, Kieran MacGuire (who lectures on football finance at Liverpool University) and stand up comedian and sports presenter Kevin Day discuss finance and the beautiful game.
They've already discussed such topics as:
stadium sales, football agents, Chumps League, FFP, ManU and the Glasyers, Toon and Ashley, Scouting, Bet365.
-
Wonder what our transfer strategy will be if we go down. I assume it will be to go for reasonably proven but still young championship players like Joe Lolley and Eze of QPR who reminds me a bit of Grealish way he plays.
Players who can get us promoted and also have potential to play in premier league like Jarred Bowen.
Not sure we would be investing too much if we were to go down. Would expect Grealish, Mings and McGinn would be gone, but not many others really.
Could probably be looking at a starting line up of something like:
Nyland
Guilbert Engels Hause Targett
Konsa Nakamba
Hourihane
El Ghazi Samatta Trezeguet
Bit of quality added in the positions where I've got Hourihane and Trezeguet and it looks OK. Still think it would be a massive struggle again if we went down and every effort needs to be put in for the remainder of the season to avoid that happening.
A shit team that is, with no backbone, leaders or attachment to the club. It would struggle.
-
Wonder what our transfer strategy will be if we go down. I assume it will be to go for reasonably proven but still young championship players like Joe Lolley and Eze of QPR who reminds me a bit of Grealish way he plays.
Players who can get us promoted and also have potential to play in premier league like Jarred Bowen.
Not sure we would be investing too much if we were to go down. Would expect Grealish, Mings and McGinn would be gone, but not many others really.
Could probably be looking at a starting line up of something like:
Nyland
Guilbert Engels Hause Targett
Konsa Nakamba
Hourihane
El Ghazi Samatta Trezeguet
Bit of quality added in the positions where I've got Hourihane and Trezeguet and it looks OK. Still think it would be a massive struggle again if we went down and every effort needs to be put in for the remainder of the season to avoid that happening.
A shit team that is, with no backbone, leaders or attachment to the club. It would struggle.
It might struggle to get 100 points but it would piss over anything in that league now.
-
Only on a Villa fan forum you would see a thread about accounts turn into a team selection issue😀
However we a blessed that it hasn’t degenerated into a punathon so far.
-
Wonder what our transfer strategy will be if we go down. I assume it will be to go for reasonably proven but still young championship players like Joe Lolley and Eze of QPR who reminds me a bit of Grealish way he plays.
Players who can get us promoted and also have potential to play in premier league like Jarred Bowen.
Not sure we would be investing too much if we were to go down. Would expect Grealish, Mings and McGinn would be gone, but not many others really.
Could probably be looking at a starting line up of something like:
Nyland
Guilbert Engels Hause Targett
Konsa Nakamba
Hourihane
El Ghazi Samatta Trezeguet
Bit of quality added in the positions where I've got Hourihane and Trezeguet and it looks OK. Still think it would be a massive struggle again if we went down and every effort needs to be put in for the remainder of the season to avoid that happening.
A shit team that is, with no backbone, leaders or attachment to the club. It would struggle.
It might struggle to get 100 points but it would piss over anything in that league now.
A Villa team with Grealish, Mings, Abraham and McGinn only finished 5th, so I’m nor sure I’d be that confident.
-
Add Wesley, Ramsey, O'Hare, Davis, Green and the kids and I reckon the attacking players alone would net 60-70 goals across the season in that league.
You'd probably want to add a couple of players (and the money from sales would easily cover us, even after the reduced income) to give a bit more depth in places but the big difference this season to last time we went down is that I don't think we'd be a club in a tailspin like we were then.
-
If our owners are pouring the amount of money into us to keep us compliant with FFP with the premier league - then if we are relegated we will be in real trouble.
They must be mad, because there is no way they will get there investment back if they decided to sell.
Sell Jack, Tyrone and SJM and they will be well on the way!
-
A Villa team with Grealish, Mings, Abraham and McGinn only finished 5th, so I’m nor sure I’d be that confident.
A team with all those smashed pretty much everyone tey played in that division. We finished 5th because of the drag factor of the first part of the season and things like playing Jedi and/or a crocked Chester at CB.
-
There's no leader at the back.
No pace in the team.
No leadership.
No guile or creativity.
No height.
The midfield 3 are all pretty poor on the ball.
There's very little chance that team would be top 6.
-
There's no leader at the back.
No pace in the team.
No leadership.
No guile or creativity.
No height.
The midfield 3 are all pretty poor on the ball.
There's very little chance that team would be top 6.
It would piss top 6, look at the Albion squad, it's shit and yet they are strolling that division.
-
It also assumes we wouldn't add 3 or 4 players.
-
There's no leader at the back.
No pace in the team.
No leadership.
No guile or creativity.
No height.
The midfield 3 are all pretty poor on the ball.
There's very little chance that team would be top 6.
It would piss top 6, look at the Albion squad, it's shit and yet they are strolling that division.
Heard the exact same thing last time and look at how that worked out.
-
There's no leader at the back.
No pace in the team.
No leadership.
No guile or creativity.
No height.
The midfield 3 are all pretty poor on the ball.
There's very little chance that team would be top 6.
It would piss top 6, look at the Albion squad, it's shit and yet they are strolling that division.
Heard the exact same thing last time and look at how that worked out.
We got promoted.
-
Who of the current Championship sides is fielding a better 11 than that? And as Ads says, that's before we add anyone else.
-
Heaton, Guilbert, Targett will be absolutely fine in the Championship, Hause, Engells and Konsa too. Luiz, Nakamba, Hourihane and Hopefully SJM will be a decent midfield. Samatta and Wesley will be fine. We know El Ghazi is better in the Championship, Trezeguet probably. Two or three new signings or loans and we should be top 6. Fortunately, we ain't there yet and have a fighting chance of staying up.
-
There's no leader at the back.
No pace in the team.
No leadership.
No guile or creativity.
No height.
The midfield 3 are all pretty poor on the ball.
There's very little chance that team would be top 6.
It would piss top 6, look at the Albion squad, it's shit and yet they are strolling that division.
Heard the exact same thing last time and look at how that worked out.
We got promoted.
After three years...
-
As I've said before the problem last time was that we went down with a whimper (thanks to black) and then we ripped the squad and coaching teams to bits and suffered exactly as we have this year by looking an incoherent mess for a long time because we had no team spirit or understanding of how to play together.
That's why keeping as much of the dsquad as we can and just making a couple of key additions would be the right thing to do (and will also be the right thing to do when we stay up and this conversation becomes irrelevant).
-
There's no leader at the back.
No pace in the team.
No leadership.
No guile or creativity.
No height.
The midfield 3 are all pretty poor on the ball.
There's very little chance that team would be top 6.
It would piss top 6, look at the Albion squad, it's shit and yet they are strolling that division.
Heard the exact same thing last time and look at how that worked out.
That team was truly awful. Yes some were saying we would come straight back up but most new it would take years. I’d be far more optimistic this time if we go down.
-
There's no leader at the back.
No pace in the team.
No leadership.
No guile or creativity.
No height.
The midfield 3 are all pretty poor on the ball.
There's very little chance that team would be top 6.
Of course Tyrone at 6'5" & Engels at 6'4" are both short in height
-
Heaton, Guilbert, Targett will be absolutely fine in the Championship, Hause, Engells and Konsa too. Luiz, Nakamba, Hourihane and Hopefully SJM will be a decent midfield. Samatta and Wesley will be fine. We know El Ghazi is better in the Championship, Trezeguet probably. Two or three new signings or loans and we should be top 6. Fortunately, we ain't there yet and have a fighting chance of staying up.
And you can add the likes of O’Hare, Louie Barry, Valisev (?) Ramsey etc
-
There's no leader at the back.
No pace in the team.
No leadership.
No guile or creativity.
No height.
The midfield 3 are all pretty poor on the ball.
There's very little chance that team would be top 6.
Of course Tyrone at 6'5" & Engels at 6'4" are both short in height
Maybe just maybe you might want to scroll up.
-
Heaton, Guilbert, Targett will be absolutely fine in the Championship, Hause, Engells and Konsa too. Luiz, Nakamba, Hourihane and Hopefully SJM will be a decent midfield. Samatta and Wesley will be fine. We know El Ghazi is better in the Championship, Trezeguet probably. Two or three new signings or loans and we should be top 6. Fortunately, we ain't there yet and have a fighting chance of staying up.
And you can add the likes of O’Hare, Louie Barry, Valisev (?) Ramsey etc
Although three of those are totally unproven.
-
Heaton, Guilbert, Targett will be absolutely fine in the Championship, Hause, Engells and Konsa too. Luiz, Nakamba, Hourihane and Hopefully SJM will be a decent midfield. Samatta and Wesley will be fine. We know El Ghazi is better in the Championship, Trezeguet probably. Two or three new signings or loans and we should be top 6. Fortunately, we ain't there yet and have a fighting chance of staying up.
And you can add the likes of O’Hare, Louie Barry, Valisev (?) Ramsey etc
Although three of those are totally unproven.
Fair point, but, everyone has to start somewhere.
I think that O’Hare and Barry could actually make a breakthrough, even if we stay up, in cup games.
-
Heaton, Guilbert, Targett will be absolutely fine in the Championship, Hause, Engells and Konsa too. Luiz, Nakamba, Hourihane and Hopefully SJM will be a decent midfield. Samatta and Wesley will be fine. We know El Ghazi is better in the Championship, Trezeguet probably. Two or three new signings or loans and we should be top 6. Fortunately, we ain't there yet and have a fighting chance of staying up.
And you can add the likes of O’Hare, Louie Barry, Valisev (?) Ramsey etc
Although three of those are totally unproven.
Fair point, but, everyone has to start somewhere.
I think that O’Hare and Barry could actually make a breakthrough, even if we stay up, in cup games.
IF he keeps working I suspect Ramsey will be the best of the lot of them, I think he's going to be a bit special, again so long as he doesn't get a bit ahead of himself and think he's made it after a few games. Archer looks good as well and I think Wright might make it as well. After that I've heard really good things about Aaron Ramsey, Carney Chukwuemeka, Mungo Bridge and Kaine Kesler who are all in the next 'batch' coming through.
-
I agree they need to start somewhere, i just don't think that start should include relying on them (not fair to the players, apart from anything else).
-
There's a thread on a Bristol City forum that I glance at everytime a financial statement comes out about us. Looks like its attracted a couple of Villa fans too (anybody off here?).
It's basically the internet equivalent of a child jumping up and down saying it's not fair!!!
A site called OTIB and in the FPP thread.
In fairness, for our first two transfer windows in the championship we tried to do a Man City and blow everyone else out of the water. Some of the fees and wages we paid out were insane. Need a forward, let's buy McCormack and Kodjia while the likes of Ayew was still there.
-
There's a thread on a Bristol City forum that I glance at everytime a financial statement comes out about us. Looks like its attracted a couple of Villa fans too (anybody off here?).
It's basically the internet equivalent of a child jumping up and down saying it's not fair!!!
A site called OTIB and in the FPP thread.
In fairness, for our first two transfer windows in the championship we tried to do a Man City and blow everyone else out of the water. Some of the fees and wages we paid out were insane. Need a forward, let's buy McCormack and Kodjia while the likes of Ayew was still there.
Was only really the first window. The January window, Bruce had to wheel and deal.
Even in the first window, we sold a few players: Sinclair £4m, Gana £7.5m, Traore £7m, Clark £5.5m, In addition the likes of Gil, Sanchez, Vertout, Cissosco, N'zogbia, Richardson and Lescott all left or were loaned. We certainly needed players in.
January, we sold Gestede £6.5m, Ayew £5.5m (Taylor contributed to some of that) Westwood £5m
So the first season, we sold players for around £40m & bought players in for around £75m. The difference was made up by parachute payments.
In hindsight, the fees were a joke but the real issue has always been maintaining the wages.
-
Wonder what our transfer strategy will be if we go down. I assume it will be to go for reasonably proven but still young championship players like Joe Lolley and Eze of QPR who reminds me a bit of Grealish way he plays.
Players who can get us promoted and also have potential to play in premier league like Jarred Bowen.
Not sure we would be investing too much if we were to go down. Would expect Grealish, Mings and McGinn would be gone, but not many others really.
Could probably be looking at a starting line up of something like:
Nyland
Guilbert Engels Hause Targett
Konsa Nakamba
Hourihane
El Ghazi Samatta Trezeguet
Bit of quality added in the positions where I've got Hourihane and Trezeguet and it looks OK. Still think it would be a massive struggle again if we went down and every effort needs to be put in for the remainder of the season to avoid that happening.
I very much doubt we'd go down and not sign any major signings for the first 11. You really think we can replace Grealish (and seemingly McGinn and Mings) with what we presently have?
Given we seem to be o.k with FFP I don't see why we couldn't attract some decent season long loans like we've done in the previous two seasons with Snodgrass and Tammy.
As ever it's pointless at this stage predicting 11s for next season as we don't know which division we'll be in but as we usually see it will be much changed and I'd be expecting 4-5 decent players in just to refresh the first 11.
We of course did this straight after relegation last time with Chester, Elphick, De Laet, Jedinak, Adomah, Kodj and McCormack all coming in, the usual mixed bag of signings.
-
I read on another website that we are okay with FFP based on staying in the premier league, if we go down then that is a different matter!
I would be surprised if we could afford to pay the wages of the above players and meet our FFP obligations in the Championship - unless they all have a relegation clause in their contracts which mean a substantial reduction in pay - and if they do I cannot see the likes of Samatta and Wesley wanting to stay.
-
I read on another website that we are okay with FFP based on staying in the premier league, if we go down then that is a different matter!
I would be surprised if we could afford to pay the wages of the above players and meet our FFP obligations in the Championship - unless they all have a relegation clause in their contracts which mean a substantial reduction in pay - and if they do I cannot see the likes of Samatta and Wesley wanting to stay.
Was the website called “Small Heath Alliance” by any chance?
-
No it was a Villa website - seemed to know his stuff about FFP
-
The thing about FFP is it’s become more important in some supporter’s eyes to see other teams get punished rather than beating them on the pitch. Wherever you go now there’s always an “expert” telling you why you should be docked points or be investigated, in tedious detail.
That guy on the Bristol City forum, bloody hell. Would hate to be stuck on a long car journey with him spouting off. Half the time he’s just replying to himself.
-
Wonder what our transfer strategy will be if we go down. I assume it will be to go for reasonably proven but still young championship players like Joe Lolley and Eze of QPR who reminds me a bit of Grealish way he plays.
Players who can get us promoted and also have potential to play in premier league like Jarred Bowen.
Not sure we would be investing too much if we were to go down. Would expect Grealish, Mings and McGinn would be gone, but not many others really.
Could probably be looking at a starting line up of something like:
Nyland
Guilbert Engels Hause Targett
Konsa Nakamba
Hourihane
El Ghazi Samatta Trezeguet
Bit of quality added in the positions where I've got Hourihane and Trezeguet and it looks OK. Still think it would be a massive struggle again if we went down and every effort needs to be put in for the remainder of the season to avoid that happening.
I think, after their loans this season, that Ramsey, O'Hare and Rushian would probably be in a Championship-Villa side.
-
Wonder what our transfer strategy will be if we go down. I assume it will be to go for reasonably proven but still young championship players like Joe Lolley and Eze of QPR who reminds me a bit of Grealish way he plays.
Players who can get us promoted and also have potential to play in premier league like Jarred Bowen.
Not sure we would be investing too much if we were to go down. Would expect Grealish, Mings and McGinn would be gone, but not many others really.
Could probably be looking at a starting line up of something like:
Nyland
Guilbert Engels Hause Targett
Konsa Nakamba
Hourihane
El Ghazi Samatta Trezeguet
Bit of quality added in the positions where I've got Hourihane and Trezeguet and it looks OK. Still think it would be a massive struggle again if we went down and every effort needs to be put in for the remainder of the season to avoid that happening.
I think, after their loans this season, that Ramsey, O'Hare and Rushian would probably be in a Championship-Villa side.
If Nyland is our starting keeper then we might as well flog Heaton. He's not going to want to watch a season in the Championship from the bench.
-
There are Accounts and there are semantics.
-
There's a thread on a Bristol City forum that I glance at everytime a financial statement comes out about us. Looks like its attracted a couple of Villa fans too (anybody off here?).
It's basically the internet equivalent of a child jumping up and down saying it's not fair!!!
A site called OTIB and in the FPP thread.
In fairness, for our first two transfer windows in the championship we tried to do a Man City and blow everyone else out of the water. Some of the fees and wages we paid out were insane. Need a forward, let's buy McCormack and Kodjia while the likes of Ayew was still there.
Was only really the first window. The January window, Bruce had to wheel and deal.
Even in the first window, we sold a few players: Sinclair £4m, Gana £7.5m, Traore £7m, Clark £5.5m, In addition the likes of Gil, Sanchez, Vertout, Cissosco, N'zogbia, Richardson and Lescott all left or were loaned. We certainly needed players in.
January, we sold Gestede £6.5m, Ayew £5.5m (Taylor contributed to some of that) Westwood £5m
So the first season, we sold players for around £40m & bought players in for around £75m. The difference was made up by parachute payments.
In hindsight, the fees were a joke but the real issue has always been maintaining the wages.
Fair enough, Bruce did cut a lot of players alright but signing Hogan for crazy money in Jan was still insane. Presume that was around the time he booted McCormack out?
Hourihane and Lansbury came into the club in the space of a week but Gardner and Westwood did leave in fairness around the same time.
-
Brown envelopes
-
The thing about FFP is it’s become more important in some supporter’s eyes to see other teams get punished rather than beating them on the pitch. Wherever you go now there’s always an “expert” telling you why you should be docked points or be investigated, in tedious detail.
That guy on the Bristol City forum, bloody hell. Would hate to be stuck on a long car journey with him spouting off. Half the time he’s just replying to himself.
FFP does seem to have turned a lot of teams' supporters into the worst kind of tay fayr Stripeys.
-
Wonder what our transfer strategy will be if we go down. I assume it will be to go for reasonably proven but still young championship players like Joe Lolley and Eze of QPR who reminds me a bit of Grealish way he plays.
Players who can get us promoted and also have potential to play in premier league like Jarred Bowen.
Not sure we would be investing too much if we were to go down. Would expect Grealish, Mings and McGinn would be gone, but not many others really.
Could probably be looking at a starting line up of something like:
Nyland
Guilbert Engels Hause Targett
Konsa Nakamba
Hourihane
El Ghazi Samatta Trezeguet
Bit of quality added in the positions where I've got Hourihane and Trezeguet and it looks OK. Still think it would be a massive struggle again if we went down and every effort needs to be put in for the remainder of the season to avoid that happening.
I think, after their loans this season, that Ramsey, O'Hare and Rushian would probably be in a Championship-Villa side.
If Nyland is our starting keeper then we might as well flog Heaton. He's not going to want to watch a season in the Championship from the bench.
Heats won't be fit until September at the earliest so doubt he'll leave until January at the earliest.
I actually think we might let Nyland go. His improved games this season should raise his price a fair bit.
Still have Steer and Sarkic which on its own would be fine in the championship.
-
I would sell Heaton and keep Nyland.
-
If we go down then we will be absolutely fine and in a position to keep most the squad together.
Notable big money exits of Jack,McGinn and maybe Mings would be circa £150m.
This value on-top of our enhanced parachute payment allowance would mean we could retain rest of the squad. All new signings have wage % drop upon relegation.
If worst happened and we lost those players then one player i could see us bringing in would be Eze (to replace Jack)
-
If we go down then we will be absolutely fine and in a position to keep most the squad together.
Notable big money exits of Jack,McGinn and maybe Mings would be circa £150m.
This value on-top of our enhanced parachute payment allowance would mean we could retain rest of the squad. All new signings have wage % drop upon relegation.
If worst happened and we lost those players then one player i could see us bringing in would be Eze (to replace Jack)
My problem is that if and when we got back up, we'd be in a worse position than this time around as we'd be minus our only 3 PL quality players.
We could be in a vicious circle here.
-
If we go down then we will be absolutely fine and in a position to keep most the squad together.
Notable big money exits of Jack,McGinn and maybe Mings would be circa £150m.
This value on-top of our enhanced parachute payment allowance would mean we could retain rest of the squad. All new signings have wage % drop upon relegation.
If worst happened and we lost those players then one player i could see us bringing in would be Eze (to replace Jack)
My problem is that if and when we got back up, we'd be in a worse position than this time around as we'd be minus our only 3 PL quality players.
We could be in a vicious circle here.
We signed 2 of those mentioned when we were in the championship. No-one thought of them as PL players at the time. One was from hibs and one a bournemouth reserve. Your vicious circle would assume that no signing we made was of the same quality and no youth team player came through. Mings and McGinn are very good players but were not of a level when signed that would be impossible to imagine signing again in the championship.
-
If we go down then we will be absolutely fine and in a position to keep most the squad together.
Notable big money exits of Jack,McGinn and maybe Mings would be circa £150m.
This value on-top of our enhanced parachute payment allowance would mean we could retain rest of the squad. All new signings have wage % drop upon relegation.
If worst happened and we lost those players then one player i could see us bringing in would be Eze (to replace Jack)
My problem is that if and when we got back up, we'd be in a worse position than this time around as we'd be minus our only 3 PL quality players.
We could be in a vicious circle here.
We signed 2 of those mentioned when we were in the championship. No-one thought of them as PL players at the time. One was from hibs and one a bournemouth reserve. Your vicious circle would assume that no signing we made was of the same quality and no youth team player came through. Mings and McGinn are very good players but were not of a level when signed that would be impossible to imagine signing again in the championship.
We won’t be in the position like summer just gone of 14 out and 12 in etc regardless of what league we are in next season.
Worst case happens I truly believe Samatta, Wesley would stay. Them alongside Davis and Barry and we have a potent strike force
-
If we go down then we will be absolutely fine and in a position to keep most the squad together.
Notable big money exits of Jack,McGinn and maybe Mings would be circa £150m.
This value on-top of our enhanced parachute payment allowance would mean we could retain rest of the squad. All new signings have wage % drop upon relegation.
If worst happened and we lost those players then one player i could see us bringing in would be Eze (to replace Jack)
My problem is that if and when we got back up, we'd be in a worse position than this time around as we'd be minus our only 3 PL quality players.
We could be in a vicious circle here.
Parachute payments are a massive help to relegated sides. Also if we did go down and bounce back up you often see newly promoted sides signing players from the relegated sides they have replaced. Although I suspect Mings, SJM and Grealish would attract bigger teams than the likes of West Brom, Leeds and Fulham.
-
If we go down then we will be absolutely fine and in a position to keep most the squad together.
Notable big money exits of Jack,McGinn and maybe Mings would be circa £150m.
This value on-top of our enhanced parachute payment allowance would mean we could retain rest of the squad. All new signings have wage % drop upon relegation.
If worst happened and we lost those players then one player i could see us bringing in would be Eze (to replace Jack)
My problem is that if and when we got back up, we'd be in a worse position than this time around as we'd be minus our only 3 PL quality players.
We could be in a vicious circle here.
We signed 2 of those mentioned when we were in the championship. No-one thought of them as PL players at the time. One was from hibs and one a bournemouth reserve. Your vicious circle would assume that no signing we made was of the same quality and no youth team player came through. Mings and McGinn are very good players but were not of a level when signed that would be impossible to imagine signing again in the championship.
SJM was a one off. Mings was already a PL player, there were just questions on whether he could sustain a run of games. Look at how many we got wrong before those 2 came along.
-
If we go down then we will be absolutely fine and in a position to keep most the squad together.
Notable big money exits of Jack,McGinn and maybe Mings would be circa £150m.
This value on-top of our enhanced parachute payment allowance would mean we could retain rest of the squad. All new signings have wage % drop upon relegation.
If worst happened and we lost those players then one player i could see us bringing in would be Eze (to replace Jack)
My problem is that if and when we got back up, we'd be in a worse position than this time around as we'd be minus our only 3 PL quality players.
We could be in a vicious circle here.
We signed 2 of those mentioned when we were in the championship. No-one thought of them as PL players at the time. One was from hibs and one a bournemouth reserve. Your vicious circle would assume that no signing we made was of the same quality and no youth team player came through. Mings and McGinn are very good players but were not of a level when signed that would be impossible to imagine signing again in the championship.
SJM was a one off. Mings was already a PL player, there were just questions on whether he could sustain a run of games. Look at how many we got wrong before those 2 came along.
If it came to it, we will have the core of the squad that went down coming back up; with 2 seasons' experience and team-ness. Additionally, I'm sure the club would have learned from this season's experience and would target 3-4 experienced additions to ensure a more secure first season back in the Premier League.
-
If we go down then we will be absolutely fine and in a position to keep most the squad together.
Notable big money exits of Jack,McGinn and maybe Mings would be circa £150m.
This value on-top of our enhanced parachute payment allowance would mean we could retain rest of the squad. All new signings have wage % drop upon relegation.
If worst happened and we lost those players then one player i could see us bringing in would be Eze (to replace Jack)
My problem is that if and when we got back up, we'd be in a worse position than this time around as we'd be minus our only 3 PL quality players.
We could be in a vicious circle here.
We signed 2 of those mentioned when we were in the championship. No-one thought of them as PL players at the time. One was from hibs and one a bournemouth reserve. Your vicious circle would assume that no signing we made was of the same quality and no youth team player came through. Mings and McGinn are very good players but were not of a level when signed that would be impossible to imagine signing again in the championship.
SJM was a one off. Mings was already a PL player, there were just questions on whether he could sustain a run of games. Look at how many we got wrong before those 2 came along.
If it came to it, we will have the core of the squad that went down coming back up; with 2 seasons' experience and team-ness. Additionally, I'm sure the club would have learned from this season's experience and would target 3-4 experienced additions to ensure a more secure first season back in the Premier League.
Again, I think this forms part of the vicious circle. Whilst this seasons policy of signing young talent was brave, ultimately, we've probably missed a bit of PL experience in the side to give us steel.
I read recently that it will take us 4 PL seasons just to get on a level wages wise with the other bottom half sides. Who can we realistically sign? We will lose out to most PL sides who could probably offer more wages and a better chance of sustained PL football.
Next time around, we also have to swallow our pride and consider loans. Mooy was the obvious example this season but there were others as well - that ex Blackburn & Stoke guy for example.
-
If we go down then we will be absolutely fine and in a position to keep most the squad together.
Notable big money exits of Jack,McGinn and maybe Mings would be circa £150m.
This value on-top of our enhanced parachute payment allowance would mean we could retain rest of the squad. All new signings have wage % drop upon relegation.
If worst happened and we lost those players then one player i could see us bringing in would be Eze (to replace Jack)
My problem is that if and when we got back up, we'd be in a worse position than this time around as we'd be minus our only 3 PL quality players.
We could be in a vicious circle here.
We signed 2 of those mentioned when we were in the championship. No-one thought of them as PL players at the time. One was from hibs and one a bournemouth reserve. Your vicious circle would assume that no signing we made was of the same quality and no youth team player came through. Mings and McGinn are very good players but were not of a level when signed that would be impossible to imagine signing again in the championship.
SJM was a one off. Mings was already a PL player, there were just questions on whether he could sustain a run of games. Look at how many we got wrong before those 2 came along.
If it came to it, we will have the core of the squad that went down coming back up; with 2 seasons' experience and team-ness. Additionally, I'm sure the club would have learned from this season's experience and would target 3-4 experienced additions to ensure a more secure first season back in the Premier League.
Again, I think this forms part of the vicious circle. Whilst this seasons policy of signing young talent was brave, ultimately, we've probably missed a bit of PL experience in the side to give us steel.
I read recently that it will take us 4 PL seasons just to get on a level wages wise with the other bottom half sides. Who can we realistically sign? We will lose out to most PL sides who could probably offer more wages and a better chance of sustained PL football.
Next time around, we also have to swallow our pride and consider loans. Mooy was the obvious example this season but there were others as well - that ex Blackburn & Stoke guy for example.
If it's a loan with a chance to buy, no problem with that. Mooy would have been a good signing.
-
If we go down then we will be absolutely fine and in a position to keep most the squad together.
Notable big money exits of Jack,McGinn and maybe Mings would be circa £150m.
This value on-top of our enhanced parachute payment allowance would mean we could retain rest of the squad. All new signings have wage % drop upon relegation.
If worst happened and we lost those players then one player i could see us bringing in would be Eze (to replace Jack)
My problem is that if and when we got back up, we'd be in a worse position than this time around as we'd be minus our only 3 PL quality players.
We could be in a vicious circle here.
We signed 2 of those mentioned when we were in the championship. No-one thought of them as PL players at the time. One was from hibs and one a bournemouth reserve. Your vicious circle would assume that no signing we made was of the same quality and no youth team player came through. Mings and McGinn are very good players but were not of a level when signed that would be impossible to imagine signing again in the championship.
SJM was a one off. Mings was already a PL player, there were just questions on whether he could sustain a run of games. Look at how many we got wrong before those 2 came along.
We did get some wrong, but we did get some right too, but just didn’t give them long enough to develop. Ayew and Traore spring to mind.
-
If we go down then we will be absolutely fine and in a position to keep most the squad together.
Notable big money exits of Jack,McGinn and maybe Mings would be circa £150m.
This value on-top of our enhanced parachute payment allowance would mean we could retain rest of the squad. All new signings have wage % drop upon relegation.
If worst happened and we lost those players then one player i could see us bringing in would be Eze (to replace Jack)
My problem is that if and when we got back up, we'd be in a worse position than this time around as we'd be minus our only 3 PL quality players.
We could be in a vicious circle here.
We signed 2 of those mentioned when we were in the championship. No-one thought of them as PL players at the time. One was from hibs and one a bournemouth reserve. Your vicious circle would assume that no signing we made was of the same quality and no youth team player came through. Mings and McGinn are very good players but were not of a level when signed that would be impossible to imagine signing again in the championship.
SJM was a one off. Mings was already a PL player, there were just questions on whether he could sustain a run of games. Look at how many we got wrong before those 2 came along.
We did get some wrong, but we did get some right too, but just didn’t give them long enough to develop. Ayew and Traore spring to mind.
Agree Gana as well of course. However, I meant getting so many wrong in the Championship before landing SJM & Mings. I think it was highlighted in the Fulham play off final where hardly any of the signings made in the previous 4 windows started the game for us.
I can't say I'm over confident that Suso would fare any better.
-
Why is anyone interested in a Bristol City fans opinion of our accounting practices?
-
Nobody is, it's more their weird, angry bitterness that provides amusement.
-
9 of the starting 11 against Fulham were signed after relegation, as were the 3 subs.
-
9 of the starting 11 against Fulham were signed after relegation, as were the 3 subs.
I was excluding loans
-
9 of the starting 11 against Fulham were signed after relegation, as were the 3 subs.
I was excluding loans
And yet you were talking about how we got it wrong before SJM and loan signing Mings.
-
9 of the starting 11 against Fulham were signed after relegation, as were the 3 subs.
I was excluding loans
And yet you were talking about how we got it wrong before SJM and loan signing Mings.
What exactly is your point rain man?
Of course we got it wrong - Hence our failure to even breach top 6 for the majority of the preceding 2 years.
All those signings and we had to resort to loans plus players who were already there.
-
So loans count when it suits you. But the 4 loans against Derby don't.
-
So loans count when it suits you. But the 4 loans against Derby don't.
It's nothing to do with suiting me - I've no interest in your pedantic little squabbles.
However, I am interested in AVFC and expressed a concern that we are in a vicious circle. Somehow you've twisted that into a silly argument about whether we were good enough for the Championship - The point all along being that it is extremely difficult to sign players in the Championship that can step up to the PL when promoted - Mings & SJM being the exceptions.
-
I imagine pretty much every team that goes up has players on loan. Even looking at this season's likely promotees, WBA have five on loan and DL have seven.
While other clubs take advantage of the loan system, you'd be mad not to.
-
I imagine pretty much every team that goes up has players on loan. Even looking at this season's likely promotees, WBA have five on loan and DL have seven.
While other clubs take advantage of the loan system, you'd be mad not to.
I agree
And to take it further (at the risk of repeating myself), I'd also consider loaning players upon our return to the PL.
-
If we go down then we will be absolutely fine and in a position to keep most the squad together.
Notable big money exits of Jack,McGinn and maybe Mings would be circa £150m.
This value on-top of our enhanced parachute payment allowance would mean we could retain rest of the squad. All new signings have wage % drop upon relegation.
If worst happened and we lost those players then one player i could see us bringing in would be Eze (to replace Jack)
My problem is that if and when we got back up, we'd be in a worse position than this time around as we'd be minus our only 3 PL quality players.
We could be in a vicious circle here.
We signed 2 of those mentioned when we were in the championship. No-one thought of them as PL players at the time. One was from hibs and one a bournemouth reserve. Your vicious circle would assume that no signing we made was of the same quality and no youth team player came through. Mings and McGinn are very good players but were not of a level when signed that would be impossible to imagine signing again in the championship.
SJM was a one off. Mings was already a PL player, there were just questions on whether he could sustain a run of games. Look at how many we got wrong before those 2 came along.
We did get some wrong, but we did get some right too, but just didn’t give them long enough to develop. Ayew and Traore spring to mind.
Agree Gana as well of course. However, I meant getting so many wrong in the Championship before landing SJM & Mings. I think it was highlighted in the Fulham play off final where hardly any of the signings made in the previous 4 windows started the game for us.
I can't say I'm over confident that Suso would fare any better.
I actually only think we messed up with Hogan (not scouted properly to see if he could actually play in SB's style) McCormack (good scoring record but way overpaid for someone close to 30 with off field issues) and you can also debate Lansbury who is on too high wages for his minimal contributition.
That said Hourihane has been a good success who we signed in the same window and likes of Chester, Jedinak, Whelan, Kodj, Adomah all player supporting parts in the promotion.
Think Kodj would've done o.k in the premier league had we somehow got up in his first season but the two bad injuries did for him and he wasn't that effective in championship.
I imagine it will be the same strategy again, signing some of the better players at championship level but would make sure they're not that close to 30 so they have scope to step up to premier league.
I've been sceptical about him in the past but think time is right to sign Joe Lolley if we go down. Can take over the Grealish mantel and he's more than proven at championship level now and would chip in with double figures out wide. Eze at QPR is a very good player who I'd target if we stay up or not.
-
I imagine pretty much every team that goes up has players on loan. Even looking at this season's likely promotees, WBA have five on loan and DL have seven.
While other clubs take advantage of the loan system, you'd be mad not to.
When you look at it so much went against us in signing Tammy permanently. Chelsea actually getting a transfer ban, Juventus coming in for Sarri (I assume he would have stayed otherwise given they made the CL) and then Lampard being the first manager in the Abramovich era to be given a remit to give their academy prospects full minutes in premier league.
If say we'd signed him on loan in 17/18 and he'd got us up we'd have signed him that summer for 25m. We were just very unlucky. Would easily have another five points on the board if he'd come in instead of Wesley who was obviously the back up plan.
Seems odd the feeling from some is we shouldn't bother just because we couldn't sign Abraham permanently, that was just a rare set of events.
-
9 of the starting 11 against Fulham were signed after relegation, as were the 3 subs.
I was excluding loans
And yet you were talking about how we got it wrong before SJM and loan signing Mings.
What exactly is your point rain man?
Of course we got it wrong - Hence our failure to even breach top 6 for the majority of the preceding 2 years.
All those signings and we had to resort to loans plus players who were already there.
That's pretty fucking low and totally uncalled for in my opinion
-
9 of the starting 11 against Fulham were signed after relegation, as were the 3 subs.
I was excluding loans
And yet you were talking about how we got it wrong before SJM and loan signing Mings.
What exactly is your point rain man?
Of course we got it wrong - Hence our failure to even breach top 6 for the majority of the preceding 2 years.
All those signings and we had to resort to loans plus players who were already there.
That's pretty fucking low and totally uncalled for in my opinion
I agree. Behave.
-
It's not low, it's fucking offensive.
-
And discriminatory.
-
Yeh like being called chicken.
-
Yeh like being called chicken.
Not really comparing like with like there.
-
Yeh like being called chicken.
Not really comparing like with like there.
I guess that depends on your perspective.
-
Mocking autism and annoying Marty McFly aren't the same thing.
-
Mocking autism and annoying Marty McFly aren't the same thing.
You have lost me there.
-
Yeh like being called chicken.
yeah, that's just fowl.
-
Yeh like being called chicken.
Not really comparing like with like there.
I guess that depends on your perspective.
I guess it does. One perspective being that of a decent human being. The other being ignorant and discriminatory.
-
Yeh like being called chicken.
Not really comparing like with like there.
I guess that depends on your perspective.
I guess it does. One perspective being that of a decent human being. The other being ignorant and discriminatory.
You haven’t mentioned hypocrisy.
-
Yeh like being called chicken.
Not really comparing like with like there.
I guess that depends on your perspective.
I guess it does. One perspective being that of a decent human being. The other being ignorant and discriminatory.
You haven’t mentioned hypocrisy.
No need.
-
Yeh like being called chicken.
Not really comparing like with like there.
I guess that depends on your perspective.
I guess it does. One perspective being that of a decent human being. The other being ignorant and discriminatory.
Alright - You've said your piece.
Perhaps the comment was ill judged and I apologise if anyone was offended. It was not my intention to offend anyone. However PWS is a moderator on here yet continually trolls threads looking for petty squabbles over the most pedantic of points. Perhaps he too should look in the mirror.
As for being a decent human being - You don't know me from Adam, nor do you know about any of the voluntary work that I am involved in, so I would thank you for keeping your kangaroo court comments to yourself.
-
Yeh like being called chicken.
Not really comparing like with like there.
I guess that depends on your perspective.
I guess it does. One perspective being that of a decent human being. The other being ignorant and discriminatory.
Alright - You've said your piece.
Perhaps the comment was ill judged and I apologise if anyone was offended. It was not my intention to offend anyone. However PWS is a moderator on here yet continually trolls threads looking for petty squabbles over the most pedantic of points. Perhaps he too should look in the mirror.
As for being a decent human being - You don't know me from Adam, nor do you know about any of the voluntary work that I am involved in, so I would thank you for keeping your kangaroo court comments to yourself.
Well thanks for your apology.
I'll also apologise if you felt the decent human being thing was aimed at you; it wasn't. I don't know you from Adam, though I've heard he's an alright chap. You may have made an error in judgement, someone else tried to follow up and justify it. Given my day job is supporting people with autism and learning disabilities (and some of my voluntary work is doing the same), I find casual comments that focus on people's disability difficult to read and accept.
-
Yeh like being called chicken.
Not really comparing like with like there.
I guess that depends on your perspective.
I guess it does. One perspective being that of a decent human being. The other being ignorant and discriminatory.
Alright - You've said your piece.
Perhaps the comment was ill judged and I apologise if anyone was offended. It was not my intention to offend anyone. However PWS is a moderator on here yet continually trolls threads looking for petty squabbles over the most pedantic of points. Perhaps he too should look in the mirror.
As for being a decent human being - You don't know me from Adam, nor do you know about any of the voluntary work that I am involved in, so I would thank you for keeping your kangaroo court comments to yourself.
Well said.
-
Adam WAS an alright chap, until his bloody missus told him to eat that apple on the say so of a talking snake.
-
Adam WAS an alright chap, until his bloody missus told him to eat that apple on the say so of a talking snake.
It's always the snake.
-
Yeh like being called chicken.
Not really comparing like with like there.
I guess that depends on your perspective.
I guess it does. One perspective being that of a decent human being. The other being ignorant and discriminatory.
Alright - You've said your piece.
Perhaps the comment was ill judged and I apologise if anyone was offended. It was not my intention to offend anyone. However PWS is a moderator on here yet continually trolls threads looking for petty squabbles over the most pedantic of points. Perhaps he too should look in the mirror.
As for being a decent human being - You don't know me from Adam, nor do you know about any of the voluntary work that I am involved in, so I would thank you for keeping your kangaroo court comments to yourself.
Well said.
I note you supported the comment and saw nothing wrong in it.
Brassneck at least realised the effect his post may have had. So perhaps we agree. Well said indeed. Just leaves you on your own then.
-
And I shan't comment on the effectiveness of PWS's moderation skills. Safe to say he hasn't banned me........yet. Best not tempt fate.
-
Yeh like being called chicken.
Not really comparing like with like there.
I guess that depends on your perspective.
I guess it does. One perspective being that of a decent human being. The other being ignorant and discriminatory.
Alright - You've said your piece.
Perhaps the comment was ill judged and I apologise if anyone was offended. It was not my intention to offend anyone. However PWS is a moderator on here yet continually trolls threads looking for petty squabbles over the most pedantic of points. Perhaps he too should look in the mirror.
As for being a decent human being - You don't know me from Adam, nor do you know about any of the voluntary work that I am involved in, so I would thank you for keeping your kangaroo court comments to yourself.
Well said.
I note you supported the comment and saw nothing wrong in it.
Brassneck at least realised the effect his post may have had. So perhaps we agree. Well said indeed. Just leaves you on your own then.
My daughter has been working with Severely handicapped kids and she has taken me a long and introduced me to some in her care.
I have nothing but absolute respect for people in that area of work.
I would have thought that you would be a bit more sensitive about throwing insults around.
I took his comment was about the film, not an attack on people dealing with autism.
If you want to believe something different that’s up to you.
-
Wow.
-
I suggest you follow the links below.
Some Court advice from the States (https://www.courts.ca.gov/partners/documents/7-terminology.pdf)
Some Government advice from this side of the pond. (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/inclusive-communication/inclusive-language-words-to-use-and-avoid-when-writing-about-disability)
I'm a bit confused about your view on the comment being about the film, not an attack on people 'dealing with' autism (who exactly is 'dealing with autism' anyway?) Autism is an inherent part of the story as the main character of the story has a diagnosis. There have been numerous discussions since the film was released arguing whether it helped awareness or created a myth with regards to people's ability.
Needless to say, I'd suggest doing some reading up. And no, that's not me being patronising, but trying to help you understand why your comments and use of language could be perceived as being highly discriminatory, when you clearly don't see it.
-
Wow
-
Wow
My pleasure, clearly an eye-opener. Happy to help.
-
Yeh like being called chicken.
yeah, that's just fowl.
No need to stick your beak in.
-
No. Pullet back.
-
Clucking hell.
-
Fucking hell, get a life people*. No one ‘wins’ when every comment is point scoring for/against a fellow poster rather than the topic.
*I’m drunk so am allowed to be outspoken (unless anyone threatens to ban me, in which case I apologies in advance).
-
Phew I’m genuinely pleased the puns are back.
-
Really? I'm afraid I find them utterly unpulletable.
-
Fucking hell, get a life people*. No one ‘wins’ when every comment is point scoring for/against a fellow poster rather than the topic.
*I’m drunk so am allowed to be outspoken (unless anyone threatens to ban me, in which case I apologies in advance).
I hope you feel OK this morning. 😁
-
Yeh like being called chicken.
Not really comparing like with like there.
I guess that depends on your perspective.
I guess it does. One perspective being that of a decent human being. The other being ignorant and discriminatory.
Alright - You've said your piece.
Perhaps the comment was ill judged and I apologise if anyone was offended. It was not my intention to offend anyone. However PWS is a moderator on here yet continually trolls threads looking for petty squabbles over the most pedantic of points. Perhaps he too should look in the mirror.
As for being a decent human being - You don't know me from Adam, nor do you know about any of the voluntary work that I am involved in, so I would thank you for keeping your kangaroo court comments to yourself.
Well said.
I note you supported the comment and saw nothing wrong in it.
Brassneck at least realised the effect his post may have had. So perhaps we agree. Well said indeed. Just leaves you on your own then.
I took his comment was about the film, not an attack on people dealing with autism.
If you want to believe something different that’s up to you.
Agree with that.
I think it was fairly obvious.
-
I too work with people who are autistic. I see nothing wrong with using the example of Rain Man for his mathematical ability. Am I missing something?
-
I'm missing VillaDawg and the Spurs wage bill having read all this.
-
Thanks Kippeye and Malandro
Common sense at last.
-
But how do they afford Defoe, Bent and van der Vaart for less than we are paying for our lot? Ah?! Ah?!!
-
'Rainman' has been used on here lots of times over the years, to mean somebody with an obsession with stats etc. I don't think it's intended as an insult to people with autism.
-
'Rainman' has been used on here lots of times over the years, to mean somebody with an obsession with stats etc. I don't think it's intended as an insult to people with autism.
Whether its intended to insult or not, it is one.
Would you walk up to someone with autism and call them Rainman to their face?
It may be intended as light hearted banter but there are plenty of examples of people thinking they are being funny but actually being offensive.
That the original poster of the comment apologised for causing offence and yet others are suggesting it's acceptable is odd.
-
As I said, perhaps the comment was ill judged and I sincerely hope that nobody has been upset/offended.
It was of course a reference to the film as CL kindly pointed out. It was certainly not an attack or a mocking of people with autism as others have (incorrectly) suggested. Furthermore, it most certainly wasn't discriminatory. Disability is indeed a protected characteristic. However, referencing a character in a film does not constitute discrimination.
I'm not sure there is benefit in discussing this further on a thread dedicated to Villa's finances? I've accepted my comment was ill judged and have apologised for any offence that may have been caused.
-
'Rainman' has been used on here lots of times over the years, to mean somebody with an obsession with stats etc. I don't think it's intended as an insult to people with autism.
Whether its intended to insult or not, it is one.
Would you walk up to someone with autism and call them Rainman to their face?
It may be intended as light hearted banter but there are plenty of examples of people thinking they are being funny but actually being offensive.
That the original poster of the comment apologised for causing offence and yet others are suggesting it's acceptable is odd.
I think you've already proved your almost perfect right-on credentials, no need to keep hammering the point home.
-
'Rainman' has been used on here lots of times over the years, to mean somebody with an obsession with stats etc. I don't think it's intended as an insult to people with autism.
Whether its intended to insult or not, it is one.
Would you walk up to someone with autism and call them Rainman to their face?
It may be intended as light hearted banter but there are plenty of examples of people thinking they are being funny but actually being offensive.
That the original poster of the comment apologised for causing offence and yet others are suggesting it's acceptable is odd.
I think you've already proved your almost perfect right-on credentials, no need to keep hammering the point home.
So stop giving smart arse responses then.
And its not about my credentials Risso, but about doing the right thing by people. Try it, you might like it.
-
Look, can everyone please stop going on about Brassneck's voluntary work. HE DOESN'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT.
-
Look, can everyone please stop going on about Brassneck's voluntary work. HE DOESN'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT.
And you seem to want to talk about anything other than the Villa - Another complete and utter time waster.
-
If anyone would like to be banned, just let us know and it can be arranged.
-
'Rainman' has been used on here lots of times over the years, to mean somebody with an obsession with stats etc. I don't think it's intended as an insult to people with autism.
Whether its intended to insult or not, it is one.
Would you walk up to someone with autism and call them Rainman to their face?
It may be intended as light hearted banter but there are plenty of examples of people thinking they are being funny but actually being offensive.
That the original poster of the comment apologised for causing offence and yet others are suggesting it's acceptable is odd.
Sorry. just can't agree.
-
'Rainman' has been used on here lots of times over the years, to mean somebody with an obsession with stats etc. I don't think it's intended as an insult to people with autism.
Whether its intended to insult or not, it is one.
Would you walk up to someone with autism and call them Rainman to their face?
It may be intended as light hearted banter but there are plenty of examples of people thinking they are being funny but actually being offensive.
That the original poster of the comment apologised for causing offence and yet others are suggesting it's acceptable is odd.
Sorry. just can't agree.
With what?
-
'Rainman' has been used on here lots of times over the years, to mean somebody with an obsession with stats etc. I don't think it's intended as an insult to people with autism.
Whether its intended to insult or not, it is one.
Would you walk up to someone with autism and call them Rainman to their face?
It may be intended as light hearted banter but there are plenty of examples of people thinking they are being funny but actually being offensive.
That the original poster of the comment apologised for causing offence and yet others are suggesting it's acceptable is odd.
Sorry. just can't agree.
With what?
The context of your example is entirely different. If you said someone was a Stephen Hawking because of their (pseudo) knowledge of science, you are not causing offence to people with motor neurone disease. i have 30 years experience in this field and cannot see how the Rain Man comment could be deemed offensive. i think you mean well and want to stand up for others, but think you just got the wrong end of the stick on this one.
-
'Rainman' has been used on here lots of times over the years, to mean somebody with an obsession with stats etc. I don't think it's intended as an insult to people with autism.
Whether its intended to insult or not, it is one.
Would you walk up to someone with autism and call them Rainman to their face?
It may be intended as light hearted banter but there are plenty of examples of people thinking they are being funny but actually being offensive.
That the original poster of the comment apologised for causing offence and yet others are suggesting it's acceptable is odd.
Sorry. just can't agree.
With what?
The context of your example is entirely different. If you said someone was a Stephen Hawking because of their (pseudo) knowledge of science, you are not causing offence to people with motor neurone disease. i have 30 years experience in this field and cannot see how the Rain Man comment could be deemed offensive. i think you mean well and want to stand up for others, but think you just got the wrong end of the stick on this one.
And yet with a quick Google search it's possible to find a number of people with autism explaining why they do find the term offensive.
I agree with Drummond on this. I don't think it was meant with malice but is an outdated term which is unnecessary. "It's been used lots of times on here for years" is also a poor defence of it. There are lots of examples of language which was fine in the past but not now.
-
We’re not talking about the 1970s!
-
We’re not talking about the 1970s!
What does that mean? That use or perception of language can't change within a few years? Even in the last 5-10 years, there have been huge shifts in the way autism is understood and discussed within the world. It is only natural that language and perception of language will change with it.
-
I reserve my right to be offended even if none was meant.
-
Labelling someone as autistic as an insult would be unacceptable.
That is not happening here, though. The poster is specifically comparing someone to the character in the film Rain Man who is autistic and has an incredible memory for sport statistics (this statistics thing is the context of the use of the term here).
That’s not disrespecting people with autism at all. It is comparing someone to a character in a film.
Where people are seeing an insinuation that all people with autism are like that character, I don’t know.
-
Yes, a superhuman ability in maths is very rare. As was pointed out earlier, if somebody was saying something about astrophysics, then a comparison to Stephen Hawking would be referencing that, not the fact that he was disabled as a result of MND. There are lots of insults regarding autism that would be bang out of order. I don't see this as one.
-
'Rainman' has been used on here lots of times over the years, to mean somebody with an obsession with stats etc. I don't think it's intended as an insult to people with autism.
Whether its intended to insult or not, it is one.
Would you walk up to someone with autism and call them Rainman to their face?
It may be intended as light hearted banter but there are plenty of examples of people thinking they are being funny but actually being offensive.
That the original poster of the comment apologised for causing offence and yet others are suggesting it's acceptable is odd.
I am autistic, didn't find it offensive. And even if I did so what. It's a forum people rant sometimes.
Edit. For the record, the real life character rain Man was based on did not have autism, it was a different condition. It gets a bit annoying sometimes, as do Sheldon Cooper references.
-
'Rainman' has been used on here lots of times over the years, to mean somebody with an obsession with stats etc. I don't think it's intended as an insult to people with autism.
Whether its intended to insult or not, it is one.
Would you walk up to someone with autism and call them Rainman to their face?
It may be intended as light hearted banter but there are plenty of examples of people thinking they are being funny but actually being offensive.
That the original poster of the comment apologised for causing offence and yet others are suggesting it's acceptable is odd.
I am autistic, didn't find it offensive. And even if I did so what. It's a forum people rant sometimes.
Edit. For the record, the real life character rain Man was based on did not have autism, it was a different condition. It gets a bit annoying sometimes, as do Sheldon Cooper references.
Well said AV. I applaud people sticking up for others and Drummond and the rest have my greatest respect. It can be a little complex getting it right sometimes, is all.
-
Yes well said AV.
All the best mate.
-
I know there was no offence meant by the original post.
However, this is a more complex issue than many seem to be treating it as. The National Autistic Society has a video review of the film on their website, that was made by people with a diagnosis of autism. They found a number of issues that weren't at all positive about the way the character and the film were portrayed and felt may things were very outdated (the reviewers were all born after the film was made; it's quite an interesting watch if you're interested).
The original post and reference to Rainman wasn't made in a positive way. It was made in a derogatory way about someone's obsession with stats and pulling posts apart by minute detail. Most of the time when people call someone Rainman, they are doing it in jest, joking about the person's obsession with numbers and statistics. In my view, it is a lazy and inaccurate stereotype that reinforces, to many, that being autistic and/or being a 'savant' or 'high-functioning' (both outdated terminology) is somewhat strange; the film doesn't help that. The film, the character and autism can't be separated here, as they are intrinsically linked.
People sing a song about the size of Ezri Konsa's cock, they may not mean to be offensive; they may even think they are being positive because it's so great to have a big cock (believe me, it isn't all it's cracked up to be), but they are relying on an old, outdated and racial stereotype. They are, rightly, called out on it and criticised. I believe, in time of not now, that this will be one of those things that gets called out more.
I know the original post didn't mean to be offensive, and that many of you, including Ashton Villa, weren't offended, but in my view it was because of the intention to use it in a negative way.
I'm not going to continue this because I'm clearly in a minority and haven't the time to continue responding to everyone on it. But, I will fight the corner of those more vulnerable, because that's what people in a decent society do. I'm sorry if I've offended anyone, and also for going on about it, but when I see discrimination as often as I do, I become frustrated and feel the need to stand up and be counted when I encounter it.
-
I know there was no offence meant by the original post.
However, this is a more complex issue than many seem to be treating it as. The National Autistic Society has a video review of the film on their website, that was made by people with a diagnosis of autism. They found a number of issues that weren't at all positive about the way the character and the film were portrayed and felt may things were very outdated (the reviewers were all born after the film was made; it's quite an interesting watch if you're interested).
The original post and reference to Rainman wasn't made in a positive way. It was made in a derogatory way about someone's obsession with stats and pulling posts apart by minute detail. Most of the time when people call someone Rainman, they are doing it in jest, joking about the person's obsession with numbers and statistics. In my view, it is a lazy and inaccurate stereotype that reinforces, to many, that being autistic and/or being a 'savant' or 'high-functioning' (both outdated terminology) is somewhat strange; the film doesn't help that. The film, the character and autism can't be separated here, as they are intrinsically linked.
People sing a song about the size of Ezri Konsa's cock, they may not mean to be offensive; they may even think they are being positive because it's so great to have a big cock (believe me, it isn't all it's cracked up to be), but they are relying on an old, outdated and racial stereotype. They are, rightly, called out on it and criticised. I believe, in time of not now, that this will be one of those things that gets called out more.
I know the original post didn't mean to be offensive, and that many of you, including Ashton Villa, weren't offended, but in my view it was because of the intention to use it in a negative way.
I'm not going to continue this because I'm clearly in a minority and haven't the time to continue responding to everyone on it. But, I will fight the corner of those more vulnerable, because that's what people in a decent society do. I'm sorry if I've offended anyone, and also for going on about it, but when I see discrimination as often as I do, I become frustrated and feel the need to stand up and be counted when I encounter it.
For the second time, it was not discrimination - Do you even understand what discrimination is?
And I wonder if Rainman had been a wheelchair user etc instead, would you have had the same response
-
I know there was no offence meant by the original post.
However, this is a more complex issue than many seem to be treating it as. The National Autistic Society has a video review of the film on their website, that was made by people with a diagnosis of autism. They found a number of issues that weren't at all positive about the way the character and the film were portrayed and felt may things were very outdated (the reviewers were all born after the film was made; it's quite an interesting watch if you're interested).
The original post and reference to Rainman wasn't made in a positive way. It was made in a derogatory way about someone's obsession with stats and pulling posts apart by minute detail. Most of the time when people call someone Rainman, they are doing it in jest, joking about the person's obsession with numbers and statistics. In my view, it is a lazy and inaccurate stereotype that reinforces, to many, that being autistic and/or being a 'savant' or 'high-functioning' (both outdated terminology) is somewhat strange; the film doesn't help that. The film, the character and autism can't be separated here, as they are intrinsically linked.
People sing a song about the size of Ezri Konsa's cock, they may not mean to be offensive; they may even think they are being positive because it's so great to have a big cock (believe me, it isn't all it's cracked up to be), but they are relying on an old, outdated and racial stereotype. They are, rightly, called out on it and criticised. I believe, in time of not now, that this will be one of those things that gets called out more.
I know the original post didn't mean to be offensive, and that many of you, including Ashton Villa, weren't offended, but in my view it was because of the intention to use it in a negative way.
I'm not going to continue this because I'm clearly in a minority and haven't the time to continue responding to everyone on it. But, I will fight the corner of those more vulnerable, because that's what people in a decent society do. I'm sorry if I've offended anyone, and also for going on about it, but when I see discrimination as often as I do, I become frustrated and feel the need to stand up and be counted when I encounter it.
Wow.
-
With my simple Sword of Truth and my Trusty Shield of British FairPlay, So be it.
-
It's that time of year again!
Well it's not actually. It's a different time of year due to covid delays, but the latest set of accounts are coming...
They're not yet on Companies House so we can't see the detail but Pravda has released the headlines and they don't make for pretty reading (unsurprisingly given what happened last year)!
Revenue more than double the year before at £113m but a loss of £99m (up from £69m the year before). The loss was fully funded by equity investments from the owners so we remain debt free.
Player investment was £156m (!!!!!)
Plenty of other snippets in the press release, including the status of the Bodymoor Heath development, the fact we didn't furlough anyone, and that there are "preliminary designs" to increase the capacity of Villa Park...
https://www.avfc.co.uk/news/2021/april/Aston-Villa-Publish-2019-20-Year-End-Accounts/
-
Toronto started a new thread on it, Adam.
-
I suggest you follow the links below.
Some Court advice from the States (https://www.courts.ca.gov/partners/documents/7-terminology.pdf)
Some Government advice from this side of the pond. (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/inclusive-communication/inclusive-language-words-to-use-and-avoid-when-writing-about-disability)
As someone on the spectrum (who doesn't speak for anyone else onthe spectrum), I have to say (no, I don't have to say, I'm not an auditor, this isn't about accounts, well this comment isn't at least, but I'm going to say it anyway, bloody neurotypical figures of speech, eh?) I find those lists ridiculous.
People will be perceived by the sensitive to be using the words on the right hand side in a prejudiced manner once those on the left are mostly discarded, then they will have to be discarded in turn and so on.....this questionable process reached its apogee (no, it probably didn't really, but one can only hope) with the contrast between coloured people and people of colour which literally (which is largely how I understand language no doubt as a result of my "disorder", notwithstanding my use of a possibly inappropriate figurative noun in this sentence) mean the same thing.
Of course in saying this I may be perceived to be displaying the empathy deficit commonly associated with autists and their theory of mind difficulties, etc. I guess sensitivity proponents have to deal with that lest they be accused of hypocrisy. So what happens if I call someone Rainman (despite never having seen the fillum)? Now we're going down some kind of multi-dimensional N-word hole (yes I know holes are commonly understood to have three dimensions)....
...I'll get me coat.....
-
Can anyone translate this into meaningful English?
https://twitter.com/kieranmaguire/status/1498914235983802370?s=21
-
Kieran did well, very well!
We never get this granular level of detail for the accounts usually, do we? Just, top-line, abridged numbers.
-
Can anyone translate this into meaningful English?
https://twitter.com/kieranmaguire/status/1498914235983802370?s=21
Our owners are minted, we have no debt, JG money not in the accounts yet and will keep us well clear of FFP.
-
Interesting the difference in revenue we get for an international friendly compared to a concert (almost twice as much, if i've read the lines right?).
-
Can anyone translate this into meaningful English?
https://twitter.com/kieranmaguire/status/1498914235983802370?s=21
Our owners are minted, we have no debt, JG money not in the accounts yet and will keep us well clear of FFP.
Seems to be about right from a cursory glance. Nice to see the transparency and detailed analysis wrt the impact of Covid.
This also made me smile...
"Most commentators* consider this to be best way of funding.
*except for 50% of Glasgow residents"
-
Interesting the difference in revenue we get for an international friendly compared to a concert (almost twice as much, if i've read the lines right?).
For a concert, we'd be getting a fee for hiring out the stadium and depending on the deal with the promotor, a slice of the drinks and refreshment sales. Not sure how many tickets would sell, but probably less than overall ground capacity.
Not sure how it would work with The FA in terms of splitting the income/revenue for an internationaal.
-
Interesting the difference in revenue we get for an international friendly compared to a concert (almost twice as much, if i've read the lines right?).
For a concert, we'd be getting a fee for hiring out the stadium and depending on the deal with the promotor, a slice of the drinks and refreshment sales. Not sure how many tickets would sell, but probably less than overall ground capacity.
Not sure how it would work with The FA in terms of splitting the income/revenue for an internationaal.
I would have thought if a sell out it could be more depending on staging etc. In the round for example could be all four Stadia AND pitch. Although I think any profits from Take That one several years ago was spent on clearing up the Piss and broken wine bottles / glasses if I remember Hookey's take on it.
-
Can anyone translate this into meaningful English?
https://twitter.com/kieranmaguire/status/1498914235983802370?s=21
Ask a 'nose.
-
Interesting the difference in revenue we get for an international friendly compared to a concert (almost twice as much, if i've read the lines right?).
For a concert, we'd be getting a fee for hiring out the stadium and depending on the deal with the promotor, a slice of the drinks and refreshment sales. Not sure how many tickets would sell, but probably less than overall ground capacity.
Not sure how it would work with The FA in terms of splitting the income/revenue for an internationaal.
I would have thought if a sell out it could be more depending on staging etc. In the round for example could be all four Stadia AND pitch. Although I think any profits from Take That one several years ago was spent on clearing up the Piss and broken wine bottles / glasses if I remember Hookey's take on it.
We hire out the ground for both. The promoter or FA take the gate money; we have the corporate and catering.
-
Seems a bit crass to refer to the official site as Pravda at the moment, but here is the official club comment on the release of the accounts with details on the expansion of Villa Park:
Aston Villa reports record turnover despite COVID challenges
The rebuilding of Aston Villa continued apace despite the challenging conditions posed by the pandemic, Aston Villa Group’s End of Year Accounts for the year ended May 31st 2021 confirm.
Premier League progress, with the team finishing 11th compared to 17th in the previous season, helped see turnover grow to £183.6m from £112.6m in the previous financial year.
The Club’s long-term strategic plan developed since our Owners Wes Edens and Nassef Sawiris purchased the club in 2018, is to develop, recruit and secure talented young players on long-term contracts to build asset value in our playing squad and to ensure long term sustainability. Continuing on that pathway in this financial year, an additional investment of £101.4m was made in the playing squad with players including Emi Martinez, Ollie Watkins and Matty Cash joining.
Although the impact of the COVID 19 pandemic cost the club an estimated £36.6m; primarily due to loss of matchday revenue and rebates of Premier League broadcasting funding, losses before tax were down to £37.3m from £99.5m in the previous year, a 62.5% reduction.
The impact of the COVID 19 pandemic across both this reporting year and the previous financial year had an estimated cumulative effect totalling £56m in lost revenues and other costs.
During the pandemic the unwavering financial support of our Owners, who provided further new funding into the club by way of £97m of new shareholder equity, enabled Aston Villa to be one of the first clubs in the Premier League to decide not to utilise public funds via the Coronavirus Retention Scheme and not to furlough any members of staff. The Club continued to pay all employees throughout the Coronavirus period, including all our casual and matchday employees.
On Pitch Performance
On the pitch, the first team’s 11th place finish in the Premier League was achieved with a return of 55 points. The most notable win of the season coming from a 7-2 victory over Liverpool at Villa Park in October 2020.
Although progress in both cup competitions was disappointing, the performance in the 1-4 defeat by Liverpool in the FA Cup 3rd Round was especially memorable. A COVID outbreak in the first team squad resulted in a team made up entirely of Academy players being fielded against the Premier League Champions with the Villa youngsters acquitting themselves brilliantly in a game shown on global TV.
This performance, from a team comprised of teenagers, epitomised the progress made by our Academy in the year, culminating in our Under 18s lifting the FA Youth Cup in May 2021 when they avenged the FA Cup loss at the hands of Liverpool by defeating their U18s 2-1 in the final at Villa Park.
Our Women’s team secured their top-flight status in the WSL in their debut season thanks to a strong finish to the campaign and have now created a pathway for home-produced players to make it into elite football from our Girls’ Academy.
Building a Brighter Future
We were honoured to welcome Prince William, The Duke of Cambridge, to our Bodymoor Heath Training Ground in April where his Royal Highness officially opened the new High Performance Centre. Our playing squads will derive long-term benefit from the investment in creating a world-class facility and an elite athletic working environment.
The Duke also saw the work that The Aston Villa Foundation has continued to provide to our communities in the City reaching out to some of the most vulnerable members of society. Through strong partnerships with statutory services and local voluntary and community organisations, the Foundation has focussed its efforts on addressing some of the societal issues which the covid pandemic has highlighted. The charity has significantly developed its offer providing engagement, opportunity and support for inner-city young people, further establishing a range of programmes to support mental health and wellbeing amongst children and the working age population, and several initiatives to provide training, qualifications and employment support for residents across the city.
Preliminary designs have been created to transform our iconic home at Villa Park including building a new North Stand, upgrading and expanding our hospitality facilities and creating an entirely new venue to bring our retail and merchandising activities, as well as other entertainment activities, into the 21st century. Capacity of the stadium would increase to over 50,000 upon completion of the first phase.
The plans would enable more Villa fans to enjoy a newly enhanced matchday experience as well as being a catalyst for change in our community and neighbourhood.
The Club will be embarking on a full public consultation with all stakeholders over the coming months to help shape the planning application and to ensure that the proposals fully acknowledge and incorporate the needs of the local community, the City and the wider West Midlands region.
We have appointed a full multidisciplinary design and engineering team to develop finalised designs and plans in time for a summer 2022 planning application.
Our new central Birmingham satellite academy at Brookvale, adjacent to Villa Park, has received planning permission and we are expecting construction to begin shortly.
Full consolidated Group accounts for NSWE UK Limited and NSWE Sports Limited will be published in the coming days.
-
We really are so fortunate to have been rescued, literally by Nas and Wes.
-
We really are so fortunate to have been rescued by Nas and Wes.