Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: ChicagoLion on March 19, 2018, 08:12:17 PM
-
No parachute payments after this year, no PL TV revenue.
The potential impact of not going up and then having to budget based on Championship revenue is going to be a huge task because FFP.
Any organisation that has to operate on revenues reducing by +60% over a 3 year period would find it difficult.
-
Yep. Like it or not the club have bet the house on Bruce's promotion or bust hand, and come May they're either going to be planning how to spend the money or trying to hock any player that is worth selling.
-
Hard to think of another business where the wealthy owner is not permitted to invest in something they own. While FFP was probably set up with good intentions, the reality is that it ensures the likes of Man City, Chelsea et all are now secured from anyone else doing what they have done. To make it worse, it appears they are excluded from the consequences of their actions when they bend the rules re FFP. ( Man City and their ground naming funding comes to mind)
-
Hard to think of another business where the wealthy owner is not permitted to invest in something they own. While FFP was probably set up with good intentions, the reality is that it ensures the likes of Man City, Chelsea et all are now secured from anyone else doing what they have done. To make it worse, it appears they are excluded from the consequences of their actions when they bend the rules re FFP. ( Man City and their ground naming funding comes to mind)
Nope. That’s exactly why FFP was introduced. To keep the closed shop closed.
-
£13m is it we get next season for parachutes? Plus £6m Championship money.
-
We could always rename one of the stands or the ground to raise hookie money like Man City did?
-
If a premier league club is fucking stupid enough to spend £75m on a bang average centre half from Southampton, then we may have to cash in on Jack.
£125m should start the ball rolling, and that will have to bank roll a 3rd season in this bloody division.
-
Hard to think of another business where the wealthy owner is not permitted to invest in something they own. While FFP was probably set up with good intentions, the reality is that it ensures the likes of Man City, Chelsea et all are now secured from anyone else doing what they have done. To make it worse, it appears they are excluded from the consequences of their actions when they bend the rules re FFP. ( Man City and their ground naming funding comes to mind)
Nope. That’s exactly why FFP was introduced. To keep the closed shop closed.
Indeed. In any other industry I'd guess you'd go to court over it - restraint of trade, unfair competition, cartels, or whatever. Maybe that's what it needs.
-
What's the ffp situation if we do go up?
Presumably differs due to higher income.
I going to look into this ffp thing it's both fascinating and baffling.
-
FFP is likely to be relaxed isn't it?
If it is, then suns out guns out and flex them muscles further and take whatever fine comes our way. FFP is anti-competitive garbage.
-
The problem is points deductions.
I am sure some one will eventually legally challenge FFP, “no one wants to be a test case”.
-
We could always rename one of the stands or the ground to raise hookie money like Man City did?
He can rename Doug Ellis stand as Dr Super Tone stand for £200million
-
FFP is likely to be relaxed isn't it?
If it is, then suns out guns out and flex them muscles further and take whatever fine comes our way. FFP is anti-competitive garbage.
I'm surprised there hasn't been the equivalent of a Bosman case in respect of it. It almost certainly breaks EU rules. In what other industry are you prevented from investing/wasting your own money as you see fit?
-
We could always rename one of the stands or the ground to raise hookie money like Man City did?
He can rename Doug Ellis stand as Dr Super Tone stand for £200million
This is a very, very good idea.
I approve.
If it falls through I am willing to contribute my pension increase for a Berneboy Stand - Doug Ellis only as the Trinity is reserved for Sir Brian Little, the Holte can't change and I don't want the North Stand.
-
FFP is likely to be relaxed isn't it?
If it is, then suns out guns out and flex them muscles further and take whatever fine comes our way. FFP is anti-competitive garbage.
I'm surprised there hasn't been the equivalent of a Bosman case in respect of it. It almost certainly breaks EU rules. In what other industry are you prevented from investing/wasting your own money as you see fit?
It’s really quite bizarre. The idea was to make it a more even playing field in terms of investent/expense relative to revenue. That clubs could not just want only spend what they wanted to create that separation from the rest and in many cases put themselves in long term financial jeopardy. Yet what it has ultimately done is to ensure that most clubs can never again spend to the levels, of but a few who have found loopholes and ways to circumvent the spirit and intent of the rule.
And then as you point goes to the broader point, why shouldn’t someone like a Dr Xia who might want to legitimately invest in a business he was legally acquired not be allowed to do so? If Dr Xia has resources, personal or through other sources to make Villa as big as he is capable why is he restricted from doing so?
-
We havent spent any money this season really so what's the difference?
-
We havent spent any money this season really so what's the difference?
Isn’t that point that’s being made? It’s not about what we could spend it’s about what the rules allowed us to spend.
-
We have but not much, problem is that we couldn't spend much this season and next season we're going to be £20m down before we kick a ball. 10 first team squad players leave this summer, while some don't need replacing (i'm looking at you Gabby) a lot of them do. As it stands our only keepers will be Steer, Sarkic and any other youngsters. Our only CB will be Chester and Richards.
-
We have but not much, problem is that we couldn't spend much this season and next season we're going to be £20m down before we kick a ball. 10 first team squad players leave this summer, while some don't need replacing (i'm looking at you Gabby) a lot of them do. As it stands our only keepers will be Steer, Sarkic and any other youngsters. Our only CB will be Chester and Richards.
It would have to be run in a completely different way and I think we would be looking at a fairly lengthy stay in the division. The emphasis would have to be on promoting young players from the academy and the U23 side and it would have to be viewed as a long term project.
-
Gabby going gets rid of around £3m doesn't it? Plus all the medical, flights to Dubai, shisha costs?
-
Actually let's look at who we could offload without affecting us too much on the playing side.
Gabby - £3m wages.
Hutton - £1.5m (reluctantly)
Samba - £1m?
Onomah - £500k
Terry - £3m? (reluctantly)
Richards - £1.8m (if only)
Jedinak - £2m
Total £12.8m
-
I intend to push Wyness about the realities of FFP next season at the Trust AGM tonight.
-
The money that will be available to the three sides relegated from the premier league this year automatically gives them a huge financial advantage over the rest of the Championship teams. (There again it hasn't done Sunderland and Hull much good this year ! 😀)
-
The money that will be available to the three sides relegated from the premier league this year automatically gives them a huge financial advantage over the rest of the Championship teams. (There again it hasn't done Sunderland and Hull much good this year ! 😀)
It didn't do much for us either. It's not just about what you have. It's more about how you spend it, and Cardiff are doing a really fine job showing everyone how it can be done on next to no budget.
-
I intend to push Wyness about the realities of FFP next season at the Trust AGM tonight.
Be interesting to hear what response you get Chelts.
-
It’s also that fact you get relegated with some shite players on fat contracts that prevent the parachutes from being used to speculate.
-
In fairness if FFP stops another Portsmouth I'm all for it.
What happened at that club from 2009-15 was criminal, succession of owners who couldn't care less and they were relegated from premier league with 95& wage to turnover ratio which is ridiculous and with their ongoing problems they fell through the divisions and are only just recovering now.
Shame is happening to Sunderland. They'll always be poorly run clubs but imo there is no excuse to see your wage bil massively spiral out of control especially if you don't have a huge amount of matchday income as Pompey with a 20k crowd didn't.
FFP is decent from that respect imo.
I think the bigger problem here is that because we've spent stupid amounts last 18 months and still aren't a cert to go up people think that's the only way to get promoted. It's not.
If this forces us to start scouting properly and sign and develop players in the long term that could well be better for us than just buying stop gaps and then having to replace most of them when we're promoted as we would have to do if it happens next season.
It's clear we'd have to sell a major player or two. If we say had to sell Chester to sign Grabban and Snodgrass I'll do it tbh.
It's tough but that's the way the vast majority at championship level do it. They sell and then develop more players e.g. Preston and Brentford.
-
Nothing to stop us from doing a Wolves next season and gambling on promotion to balance the books. Time for Tony to roll the dice and show the money. (Unlikely I know)
-
S HQ it depends what problem they were trying to solve.
The unintended consequences ( or some believe intended) is to create an untouchable elite whilst still not protecting clubs from gross Financial Missmanagement.
There were a number of ways they could have stopped the Pompey situation and I do not think this is what they had in mind with FFP.
Just making Financial Reporting more transparent and using and monitoring Financial Covenants for example.
They have chosen a very limited and easily abused method.
-
Nothing to stop us from doing a Wolves next season and gambling on promotion to balance the books. Time for Tony to roll the dice and show the money. (Unlikely I know)
Except there is everything to stop us doing exactly this.
-
At least young players like Green, Hepburn-Murphy and O'Hare will have to be given long runs in the team next season if we don't go up.
-
S HQ it depends what problem they were trying to solve.
The unintended consequences ( or some believe intended) is to create an untouchable elite whilst still not protecting clubs from gross Financial Missmanagement.
There were a number of ways they could have stopped the Pompey situation and I do not think this is what they had in mind with FFP.
Just making Financial Reporting more transparent and using and monitoring Financial Covenants for example.
They have chosen a very limited and easily abused method.
As with anything clubs will always find ways around any rules. Manchester clubs getting their training grounds sponsored for huge amounts for example.
-
If we don't go up this season, that's a shame. But the players can honestly say they gave it a go.
In seasons to come, there will be plenty of good players who will join to promote the Club.
On wages that can be afforded. Like for instance, Cardiff.
Alun Evans. Chico Hamilton. Bruce Rioch. Ian Ross. Chris Nicholl. Andy Lochead. Geoff Vowden.
All Villa players eager to do the job.
Villa are a massive draw, regardless of wages.
We'll get there.
Hope it's this season.
-
Wyness was interesting about this tonight. It seems we are confident of forcing through a fudge allowing bigger losses so it won't be so bad if we stop down.
-
Although it is not relevant to the effect on our club, I am not convinced about the prevailing narrative that FFP in the EFL was designed to stop unfair competition. That is undoubtedly the case in EUFA/EPL regulations, but I seem to recall reading that from the EFL point of view, it was to stop clubs from spiraling into debt and going bust.
I know that Leicester and Bournemouth incurred heavy fines after getting promotion, but this does not detract from the case of when such investment goes wrong.
-
S HQ it depends what problem they were trying to solve.
The unintended consequences ( or some believe intended) is to create an untouchable elite whilst still not protecting clubs from gross Financial Missmanagement.
There were a number of ways they could have stopped the Pompey situation and I do not think this is what they had in mind with FFP.
Just making Financial Reporting more transparent and using and monitoring Financial Covenants for example.
They have chosen a very limited and easily abused method.
As with anything clubs will always find ways around any rules. Manchester clubs getting their training grounds sponsored for huge amounts for example.
Not sure I agree, It would be pretty easy to standardise Finacial reporting across the whole Football industry if there was a real intent. They do this with Sports Franchises in the USA.
The only reason they get away with it is because the power is with the clubs not the Associations.
The Associations have been found to be corrupt which does not help.
-
Wyness was interesting about this tonight. It seems we are confident of forcing through a fudge allowing bigger losses so it won't be so bad if we stop down.
ah that's what i like to see. creative accounting 8)
-
Wyness was interesting about this tonight. It seems we are confident of forcing through a fudge allowing bigger losses so it won't be so bad if we stop down.
ah that's what i like to see. creative accounting 8)
He can say that of course but realistically?
-
Wyness was interesting about this tonight. It seems we are confident of forcing through a fudge allowing bigger losses so it won't be so bad if we stop down.
ah that's what i like to see. creative accounting 8)
He can say that of course but realistically?
Maybe, but it's my straw and i'm clutching it 8). The whole FFP thing seems to be about slamming the door on the likes of Man City joining the elite , 10 minutes after they're already sitting at the trough, so i'm not a fan especially as we could have been there instead of them.. As others have mentioned, no-one wants a club going out of business, but if you're well run, have the money to run at a loss and make a SERIOUS attempt to cut debt as we have then i don't see the fair play aspect. Some clubs have always been richer than others since the year dot and it was never always about how many people came through the turnstile.
-
Wyness was interesting about this tonight. It seems we are confident of forcing through a fudge allowing bigger losses so it won't be so bad if we stop down.
ah that's what i like to see. creative accounting 8)
He can say that of course but realistically?
Maybe, but it's my straw and i'm clutching it 8). The whole FFP thing seems to be about slamming the door on the likes of Man City joining the elite , 10 minutes after they're already sitting at the trough, so i'm not a fan especially as we could have been there instead of them.. As others have mentioned, no-one wants a club going out of business, but if you're well run, have the money to run at a loss and make a SERIOUS attempt to cut debt as we have then i don't see the fair play aspect. Some clubs have always been richer than others since the year dot and it was never always about how many people came through the turnstile.
its based on a formula, not a subjective idea or aspiration.
We are either in breach of FFP or not.
-
Keep saying I am not sure it will be the apocalypse people think it will. There will be a small amount of money and loans to supplement the squad and it will easily be top 6. Get a decent target man, replace Snoddy intelligently and find a couple of centre halves. Keeper is a worry but there will be plenty of decent keepers on frees around Europe this summer.
-
Wyness was interesting about this tonight. It seems we are confident of forcing through a fudge allowing bigger losses so it won't be so bad if we stop down.
Can you expand on this?
-
He said as much when he was on the WM phone in a couple of months ago.
-
Are we going to ask doug for 25 years back payment of naming rights?
-
I intend to push Wyness about the realities of FFP next season at the Trust AGM tonight.
Be interesting to hear what response you get Chelts.
I seem to recall in the last one he said that FFP wasn't a problem this season, but would be next.
-
Financial constraints will be a big problem but don't we need someone with vision, drive, determination and a plan to get Villa back to the Premier league? I still don't see that at Villa....
-
It will be a blow if we don't go up but not a disaster. For every Pompey or Leeds there is a Fulham, Cardiff and Derby who have a few years out and can still mount a challenge. If premier league money was needed to get promoted, then you would never get a Burnley, Watford, Bournemouth, Huddersfield or Brighton.
-
I seem to recall in the last one he said that FFP wasn't a problem this season, but would be next.
Once you account for everything the prediction is that our turnover for next season will drop by something like £15-20m (about £10m in parachute payments and the rest in commerical revenue, ticket sales, etc). The drop in wages from contracts ending and loans returning is probably 50-60% of that but at least some of those players will need to be replaced and not just with loans so we need to generate enough on top to make up the offset and give us a transfer pot. Amavi's move being made permanent helps a little but we need to sell at least a couple more to get to a point where we can do everything we need to. The problem is that the players we'd be happy to sell won't make us a profit.
McCormack, for example, would need to go for £6m for us to break even on his book value and no one will give us anything like that, so we either have to keep hold of him or sell him at a loss to free up wages. The players we could make a decent profit on are Hourihane, Adomah, Chester and Grealish (and possibly Green and Davis) I don't really want to sell any of them but I'm not sure we'll have any other choice, unless we can get bits and pieces for people like Gardner, Lansbury and Bjarnason.
Of course, if the rules change, or we decide to ignore them like teams have in the past, then it might be a different story.
-
The ironic thing is that, on just ability and not attitude, McCormack and Richards would walk into most Championship teams. Allowing for loans not being renewed and salable assets going (i.e. absolute worse case), our team for next season could be:-
Steer
Bree Elphick Samba/Suliman Taylor
Green Lansbury O'Hare Thor
Hogan RHM
Not bad but a million miles from this season. This also assumes that Chester, Grealish, Adomah, Hourihane, Kodjia and Elmo all go and this could raise £40m - £50m in any case (plus Wages inc Terry).
-
I can't see Elmo or Kodjia going, I don't think the former will generate enough money to be worth it and the latter has barely played for a year, I can't imagine anyone taking the risk unless he scores 4-5 goals in the last month/play offs and if that happens we'll probably be promoted.
-
As much as I like Hogan I'd sell him and I'd loan out Hepburn Murphy for the season, as well as giving Onomah back. Is Gabby ready for release yet? If we could get Grabban and Snodgrass permanently we would have an 'offensive team' of Kodjia, Grabban, Grealish, Davis, O Hare, Green, Snodgrass, Adomah. That should surely be enough.
Midfield i would sell Hourahane if we can get a reasonable amount for him and keep him if not. I'd get a loan player in if we sell him and we'd have the new player and Whelan, Thor and Jedi to pick from for 2 places. Defence wise I'd try to get Hutton back in, and I'd loan in a centre back and buy a centre back. I'd offload Samba. GK wise I'd hope to get Johnstone permanently or another season loan but if not we'd need to do a similar deal for someone else.
Oh, and sell Lansbury.
-
The ironic thing is that, on just ability and not attitude, McCormack and Richards would walk into most Championship teams. Allowing for loans not being renewed and salable assets going (i.e. absolute worse case), our team for next season could be:-
Steer
Bree Elphick Samba/Suliman Taylor
Green Lansbury O'Hare Thor
Hogan RHM
Not bad but a million miles from this season. This also assumes that Chester, Grealish, Adomah, Hourihane, Kodjia and Elmo all go and this could raise £40m - £50m in any case (plus Wages inc Terry).
A decent enough team there Dave but the biggest problem I see is that on past experiences, a good few of these would spend more time on the treatment table than on the pitch.
-
Wyness was interesting about this tonight. It seems we are confident of forcing through a fudge allowing bigger losses so it won't be so bad if we stop down.
Can you expand on this?
Essentially, the initial loss calculations that were acceptable were based on an old TV deal where parachute payments were circa £10m. The idea being that losses were reflective of the massive overstretch you have on finance between the Premier League and The Championship.
Whilst the parachute payments might have gone up, so has the price of everything in football. So if you are subject to dropping under a different TV deal then it takes longer to stabilise and is it fair to make the same calculation? We say not.
To change it then 18 out of 24 in the league need to agree it (we have been leading the campaign). Apparently 17 agree it at the moment but they are back for another round of talks in a couple of weeks.
That is the gist of it anyway.
-
Not trying to shoot the messenger but I am a bit confused, the suggestion is that an individual league can over turn the UEFA FFP regulations?
-
Not trying to shoot the messenger but I am a bit confused, the suggestion is that an individual league can over turn the UEFA FFP regulations?
I was confused as well.
-
Is there just one form of FFP?
No. The Premier League has brought in its own form of financial regulation which is not as stringent as Uefa's FFP.
Clubs cannot make a loss in excess of £105m across the 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16 seasons (as with FFP, investment in infrastructure and youth development is exempt).
Any club that posts losses in excess of that figure could face severe penalties, including a points deduction.
A loss between £15m and £105m has to be guaranteed by club owners.
The league has also introduced a short-term cost control measure in which clubs are restricted in the amount of increased PL central funds that can be used to improve player wages.
The increase in wages from the fund was limited to £4m in 2013-14, £8m in 2014-15 and £12m in 2015-16 (wages can be increased from clubs' own commercial revenue).
Tony Fernandes, QPR owner
QPR owner Tony Fernandes says he will appeal against any FFP punishment imposed by the Football League
The measure applies only to clubs with a player wage bill in excess of £52m in 2013-14, £56m in 2014-15 and £60m in 2015-16.
Meanwhile, the Football League and its clubs have agreed on a FFP framework across all three of its divisions.
Championship clubs are permitted losses of £8m (£5m funded by shareholders) in 2013-14 (accounts must be submitted by 1 December).
They have to reduce them, season-on-season, to a maximum of £5m (£3m funded by shareholders) by 2015-16.
Clubs promoted back to the Premier League who exceed those losses are subject to a fine.
-
Is there just one form of FFP?
No. The Premier League has brought in its own form of financial regulation which is not as stringent as Uefa's FFP.
Clubs cannot make a loss in excess of £105m across the 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16 seasons (as with FFP, investment in infrastructure and youth development is exempt).
Any club that posts losses in excess of that figure could face severe penalties, including a points deduction.
A loss between £15m and £105m has to be guaranteed by club owners.
The league has also introduced a short-term cost control measure in which clubs are restricted in the amount of increased PL central funds that can be used to improve player wages.
The increase in wages from the fund was limited to £4m in 2013-14, £8m in 2014-15 and £12m in 2015-16 (wages can be increased from clubs' own commercial revenue).
Tony Fernandes, QPR owner
QPR owner Tony Fernandes says he will appeal against any FFP punishment imposed by the Football League
The measure applies only to clubs with a player wage bill in excess of £52m in 2013-14, £56m in 2014-15 and £60m in 2015-16.
Meanwhile, the Football League and its clubs have agreed on a FFP framework across all three of its divisions.
Championship clubs are permitted losses of £8m (£5m funded by shareholders) in 2013-14 (accounts must be submitted by 1 December).
They have to reduce them, season-on-season, to a maximum of £5m (£3m funded by shareholders) by 2015-16.
Clubs promoted back to the Premier League who exceed those losses are subject to a fine.
Now even more confused.
-
It will be a blow if we don't go up but not a disaster. For every Pompey or Leeds there is a Fulham, Cardiff and Derby who have a few years out and can still mount a challenge. If premier league money was needed to get promoted, then you would never get a Burnley, Watford, Bournemouth, Huddersfield or Brighton.
I think you make some excellent points.
There is common factor with all of those teams you mention (except Burnley).
It begs the question do you need money to get out of this division or a ‘progressive’ manager?
But thats a whole different thread.
-
It will be a blow if we don't go up but not a disaster. For every Pompey or Leeds there is a Fulham, Cardiff and Derby who have a few years out and can still mount a challenge. If premier league money was needed to get promoted, then you would never get a Burnley, Watford, Bournemouth, Huddersfield or Brighton.
I think you make some excellent points.
There is common factor with all of those teams you mention (except Burnley).
It begs the question do you need money to get out of this division or a ‘progressive’ manager?
But thats a whole different thread.
Interesting company we're keeping though, if that's the case.
Loads of people said it at the time; FFP was, and now is, a way of pulling up the drawbridge. Where would Manchester City be without their state-oil funded empire now that FFP is in place? Not much better off than us, I'm willing to bet. Smaller clubs going out of business is always sad but has always happened, throughout the history of the professional game. It only became an issue for European football when the people that ran the very richest clubs discovered a way to protect their revenue after the TV money hove into view.
-
Just to clarify the position on parachute payments / FFP:-
Parachute payments are unique to the English game and, currently, see relegated clubs receive a percentage of their final earnings** in the Premier League in the season in which they were relegated. These drop progressively over a three year period – 55% in the first year, 45% in year two and 20% in the final year.
Given that our earnings** from the PL were about 80-90 mill - that means a parachute payment of 16-18 mill.
On the FFP point - our losses for the previous 2 seasons and the current one ( with estimated accounts for this season as at March 2018) must not exceed 61 mill. This time next year - without promotion - the limit would be 39 mill
**Earnings meaning Prize money, I believe