Summer Transfer Thread and Gustavo Cisneros Type Rumours.

[LeonW]

As a extremely cynical person, getting the books in a good state of being has been a precursor for trying to sell a club in the past.

[sickbeggar]

As a extremely cynical person, getting the books in a good state of being has been a precursor for trying to sell a club in the past.

I don't think its that. Just a desire to run a club reasonably within means which after all is what the Sky4 do most of the time. If you haven't got the commercial and CL revenue coming in then maybe it makes sense to spread the grealish transfer money over a few years and people forget we haven't even got the 100m. Its being paid in instalments.

[algy]

I assume we have an FFP problem with no more incomings and a yawning chasm in defensive midfield. The squad is good enough for 12-9th midtable, which isn't bad. However, it's not capable of the apparent stated aim of European qualification.

It's disappointing that the impetus isn't there this season to try and push on.

I just can't see FFP being the issue. We've got a huge boost to profit from the fact that all of Greasy's transfer fee is pure profit, whereas the players we've bought will all be amortised over the coming years. Then we were supposedly offering him a huge new deal, which you would think wouldn't be a million miles from what we're paying his replacements.

I think dipstick's transfer fee is distorting things here. We've spent near enough £300m in 3 seasons. If we carry on at that rate with no incomings, then FFP or whatever replaces it will catch up with us.

We can also only buy the players that are available, at the price they're available at. If we think the only way of bringing in (say) JWP would be to pay massively over the odds for him, it's absolutely right that we've pulled back from that. Because once we start doing that, everyone's going to be adding £5m or £10m to the transfer fee, and bumping up the players wages to match.

[LeonW]

As a extremely cynical person, getting the books in a good state of being has been a precursor for trying to sell a club in the past.

I don't think its that. Just a desire to run a club reasonably within means which after all is what the Sky4 do most of the time. If you haven't got the commercial and CL revenue coming in then maybe it makes sense to spread the grealish transfer money over a few years and people forget we haven't even got the 100m. Its being paid in instalments.

That’s what i’m hoping is the case. Looking at what Arsenal have been saddled with, I’m grateful we don’t have those guys and we have NSWE. They’ve been great for us. I just hope they don’t see a ceiling for Villa and keep believing in us and push us through.

[Mister E]

I assume we have an FFP problem with no more incomings and a yawning chasm in defensive midfield. The squad is good enough for 12-9th midtable, which isn't bad. However, it's not capable of the apparent stated aim of European qualification.
It's disappointing that the impetus isn't there this season to try and push on.

I just can't see FFP being the issue. We've got a huge boost to profit from the fact that all of Greasy's transfer fee is pure profit, whereas the players we've bought will all be amortised over the coming years. Then we were supposedly offering him a huge new deal, which you would think wouldn't be a million miles from what we're paying his replacements.

I'm not inclined to think that FFP is a blocker to any further dealings.
I'm concluding that DS does not see the DMF role as necessary. He seems to want to play three interchangeable midfielders who can all do the passing, pressing, scoring and backtracking role. His use of Nakamba has been reasonably sparing, bringing him into the side only when others are not available and using him as a subb to see out a game.
It's not necessarily how I'd do it but that's what I'm seeing.
Of course, there maybe someone about to join that will blow my comments out of the water ...

[Risso]

As a extremely cynical person, getting the books in a good state of being has been a precursor for trying to sell a club in the past.

I don't think its that. Just a desire to run a club reasonably within means which after all is what the Sky4 do most of the time. If you haven't got the commercial and CL revenue coming in then maybe it makes sense to spread the grealish transfer money over a few years and people forget we haven't even got the 100m. Its being paid in instalments.

The instalments thing is irrelevant, surely? We know it's coming in, and it's not like our owners are cash poor until it does. Also, we'll be paying the selling clubs for Greasy's replacements in installments too, so whichever wau you look at, it's net spend and cash neutral.

[cdbearsfan]

The fact that Edens and associates have trademarked the name "Las Vegas Villains" with a view to adding them to the MLS makes it very unlikely that he's planning to sell, IMO. Why would he want to spend hundreds of millions buying a team and giving them a Villa-themed name if he had no long-term interest in Villa?

[Drummond]

They aren't selling.

We've no idea whether or not we'll buy more players. We'd like more but we don't know.

I've no doubt the recruitment team are having conversations all over the place, some with a view to next summer, or January and there may be an opportunity for now too. As an example, Sanson was available early and we got him.

[sickbeggar]

As a extremely cynical person, getting the books in a good state of being has been a precursor for trying to sell a club in the past.

I don't think its that. Just a desire to run a club reasonably within means which after all is what the Sky4 do most of the time. If you haven't got the commercial and CL revenue coming in then maybe it makes sense to spread the grealish transfer money over a few years and people forget we haven't even got the 100m. Its being paid in instalments.

The instalments thing is irrelevant, surely? We know it's coming in, and it's not like our owners are cash poor until it does. Also, we'll be paying the selling clubs for Greasy's replacements in installments too, so whichever wau you look at, it's net spend and cash neutral.

I think you know more about that side of things than I do. I'm just going by what's been said. i.e. we're getting the ratboy money over two years so some now, some next summer and some the summer after. What form that takes (50% now, 50% down the line?) I don't know, but it could have played some part in the payment terms we offered Norwich etc..' and maybe the possibility of spending some of it in January. All I really know is we've posted two big losses, and in the last accounts some revenue will appear in the next accounts for some reason which should help the FFP if I read it right..

[algy]

As a extremely cynical person, getting the books in a good state of being has been a precursor for trying to sell a club in the past.

I don't think its that. Just a desire to run a club reasonably within means which after all is what the Sky4 do most of the time. If you haven't got the commercial and CL revenue coming in then maybe it makes sense to spread the grealish transfer money over a few years and people forget we haven't even got the 100m. Its being paid in instalments.

The instalments thing is irrelevant, surely? We know it's coming in, and it's not like our owners are cash poor until it does. Also, we'll be paying the selling clubs for Greasy's replacements in installments too, so whichever wau you look at, it's net spend and cash neutral.

I think you know more about that side of things than I do. I'm just going by what's been said. i.e. we're getting the ratboy money over two years so some now, some next summer and some the summer after. What form that takes (50% now, 50% down the line?) I don't know, but it could have played some part in the payment terms we offered Norwich etc..' and maybe the possibility of spending some of it in January. All I really know is we've posted two big losses, and in the last accounts some revenue will appear in the next accounts for some reason which should help the FFP if I read it right..

Yeah, that's how I see it. We've spent c.£300m in the last 3 seasons, I'd guess we've recouped £110m or so now (Grealish, Engels, Samatta?). So more like £65m/season net spend. Guessing we look alright in terms of FFP, or whatever replaces it.

[Monty]

If the plan is to go for some sort of 4-3-3 with a 4* and two 8s, maybe converting Buendia into one of them (which I reckon he could do once he's up to speed, he's feisty enough), then that negates the need for another DM in my view. Something like:

------------Luiz---------------
----Buendia--McGinn-------
Bailey----------------Watkins
------------Ings---------------

I think that's fluid, varied, compact when it needs to be and full of energy. Just need them all to be less bastard injured.


*Tired of this '6' business. A 6 is a centre-back. We are not in Spain.

[richtheholtender]

We must be the only club that is worrying about FFP.

[cdbearsfan]

Just us and Norwich.

[sickbeggar]

Not sure that's true. Think I mentioned it on here but chelsea have already got the Lukaku money back in outgoings and when Zouma and about 3 other players go they'll be in profit. It's all the 10m type sales that add up and unfortunately we've had 1 player that we've sold for anything.

[olaftab]

Sissoko at £2.5m is a bargain, missed out there I think

Yes he is but only if it includes his favourite easy chair in the package.