Financial fair play

[Gareth]

I still think the basic idea of FFP is sound, stopping clubs spending money they don't have isn't a bad thing. But what about clubs/owners that do have the money, there has to be a way for them to invest the money. Whether it involves money going into escrow or what i'm not sure but stopping people spending their own money seems as bonkers as letting clubs spend money they didn't have.

Didn’t it all come from Man City buying their way into the elite group & those clubs saying it wouldn’t happen again....was always about big clubs protecting their place in the league rather than for the good of the game as a whole.

[phantom limb]

According to The Times: Everton are set to announce record losses in the region of £110million — but have not flouted Premier League profit and sustainability rules.

[sickbeggar]

I still think the basic idea of FFP is sound, stopping clubs spending money they don't have isn't a bad thing. But what about clubs/owners that do have the money, there has to be a way for them to invest the money. Whether it involves money going into escrow or what i'm not sure but stopping people spending their own money seems as bonkers as letting clubs spend money they didn't have.

Didn’t it all come from Man City buying their way into the elite group & those clubs saying it wouldn’t happen again....was always about big clubs protecting their place in the league rather than for the good of the game as a whole.

That's it in a nutshell. People forget that since the league began we've always had "Bank of England" clubs trying to buy success with rich owners and no-one batted an eyelid. Never had a problem with rich owners buying a club and investing for success if it didn't put the club in jeopardy.  I really don't see why a club like that is seen as wrong, while the likes of Man United can be millions of pound in debt with loans but as long as they can pay the interest payments its okay.

[LeeB]

I still think the basic idea of FFP is sound, stopping clubs spending money they don't have isn't a bad thing. But what about clubs/owners that do have the money, there has to be a way for them to invest the money. Whether it involves money going into escrow or what i'm not sure but stopping people spending their own money seems as bonkers as letting clubs spend money they didn't have.

Didn’t it all come from Man City buying their way into the elite group & those clubs saying it wouldn’t happen again....was always about big clubs protecting their place in the league rather than for the good of the game as a whole.

That's it in a nutshell. People forget that since the league began we've always had "Bank of England" clubs trying to buy success with rich owners and no-one batted an eyelid. Never had a problem with rich owners buying a club and investing for success if it didn't put the club in jeopardy.  I really don't see why a club like that is seen as wrong, while the likes of Man United can be millions of pound in debt with loans but as long as they can pay the interest payments its okay.

In fairness to Man Utd, (*spits, flays self several times*) they're only in debt because of the way they've been purchased, not the way they've been run.

[Exeter 77]

Derby have been charged for over-spending.

Derby County: Championship club charged for breach of spending rules - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/51142719

[Dazvillain]

 Ow we used a system something very similar to them about ground naming or buying . Should we be more concerned now ?

[Ads]

We've not been charged and if we were to be relegated, it's a clean slate with higher permitted losses.

[Dave P]

Ow we used a system something very similar to them about ground naming or buying . Should we be more concerned now ?

It would have been more concerning if we’d have lost the play off final

[AsTallAsLions]

The EFL appears to be far more enamoured with the workings of FFP than the Premier League. Which is yet another reason why we should desperately be doing everything we can to avoid the drop this season. I don't want us having to deal with that regime and the constant threat of penalty again.

[sickbeggar]

I still think the basic idea of FFP is sound, stopping clubs spending money they don't have isn't a bad thing. But what about clubs/owners that do have the money, there has to be a way for them to invest the money. Whether it involves money going into escrow or what i'm not sure but stopping people spending their own money seems as bonkers as letting clubs spend money they didn't have.

Didn’t it all come from Man City buying their way into the elite group & those clubs saying it wouldn’t happen again....was always about big clubs protecting their place in the league rather than for the good of the game as a whole.

That's it in a nutshell. People forget that since the league began we've always had "Bank of England" clubs trying to buy success with rich owners and no-one batted an eyelid. Never had a problem with rich owners buying a club and investing for success if it didn't put the club in jeopardy.  I really don't see why a club like that is seen as wrong, while the likes of Man United can be millions of pound in debt with loans but as long as they can pay the interest payments its okay.

In fairness to Man Utd, (*spits, flays self several times*) they're only in debt because of the way they've been purchased, not the way they've been run.

yeah but they got into debt because their new owners didn't have the money to buy the club outright which is sort of the point of FFP really if you believe its all about protecting clubs from getting into trouble (which it isn't). Its a daft system. I could have a million in the bank but i'm not allowed to invest in a business i've bought because its losing a grand a month, but a guy down the road who's paying a grand a week on loan interest can because he can just about cover it from his income from the business. I know which situation i'd consider  more financially secure.

[dave.woodhall]

The EFL appears to be far more enamoured with the workings of FFP than the Premier League. Which is yet another reason why we should desperately be doing everything we can to avoid the drop this season. I don't want us having to deal with that regime and the constant threat of penalty again.

As someone who knows about these things told me regarding Wolves - everyone knew their situation was dodgy but the Football League don't have the time and money to handle such complex enquires and the Premier League don't care.

[kippaxvilla2]

Premier League probe Aston Villa's £56million stadium sale

By Matt Hughes For The Daily Mail 22:30, 22 Jan 2020 , updated 22:30, 22 Jan 2020

’s sale of their ground to a company controlled by the club’s owners has yet to be signed off by the , raising the prospect that they could follow Derby and Sheffield Wednesday in being charged as a result of the controversial accounting practice.

Sportsmail has learned that the Premier League are still seeking independent valuations for Villa Park, which was sold for £56.7million last May to NSWE Stadium Limited — a contentious deal which, if approved, should enable them to comply with the EFL’s profit and sustainability (P&S) rules.

Villa were in the Championship for the three-year accounting period in question between 2016 and 2019, but the matter was passed on to the Premier League after they were promoted last May.

 
Aston Villa could face a points deduction if they are found guilty by the Premier League
Aston Villa could face a points deduction if they are found guilty by the Premier League
Villa are being investigated over the sale of Villa Park to a company controlled by club owners
Villa are being investigated over the sale of Villa Park to a company controlled by club owners

It is understood that the Premier League have yet to authorise the sale eight months on, and are still investigating the valuation and the terms of the lease-back deal between NSWE Stadium Limited, owned by Nassef Sawiris and Wes Edens, and the club. Sawiris and Edens bought a majority stake in Villa in 2018.

The Premier League’s P&S regulations are loosely aligned with the EFL’s, which prevent clubs from recording losses of more than £39m over a three-year period. Premier League Rule E.54 states that any commercial deal ‘arising from a related party transaction’ must be ‘recorded in the club’s annual accounts at a fair market value’.

Villa narrowly avoided breaching the EFL's profit and sustainability rules last season
Villa narrowly avoided breaching the EFL's profit and sustainability rules last season
Villa are confident that the stadium sale will be signed off and are baffled as to why the inquiries are still ongoing. If charged and found guilty Villa could be hit with a points deduction, although the Premier League have not brought in the fixed tariff for overspending that is in operation in the EFL, who can dock clubs up to 12 points plus a further nine if a breach is deemed to be aggravated. Villa Park was sold for £56.7m, much less than the £80m Derby banked for the sale of Pride Park, valued by the EFL at around £49m. Reading are also being investigated by the EFL after selling the Madejski Stadium to the Renhe Sports Management Company for £26.5m this year.


The Premier League’s investigation is due to be completed before the end of the season, with the authorities anxious to ensure it does not impact on the relegation battle. Villa are also in danger of breaching the Premier League’s more liberal spending limits, and as Sportsmail revealed last month they may have to sell players in the summer. The Premier League and EFL declined to comment.

[Lastfootstamper]

Nothing, absolutely nothing. What is it about papers with 'Mail' in their name? No official comment. 'May' have to sell players? I won't be losing any sleep.

[old man villa fan]

So, what is market value?  For a Club that is a going concern, isn't the market value what it would cost to replace it on a like-for-like basis.  In any other business than 'controlled' football, it would be what somebody will pay for it.

[kippaxvilla2]

I would imagine the value for development would be huge.