FFP

[DB]

Chelsea to spend another £60m. Taking their total since 2020 to £1.7 billion. But we have to sell players.

Chelsea have sold more than they have spent, plus the money from their women’s team sale.

No they haven't. They've sold around £700m over the same period. So they've spent £1bn on transfers since 2020.

It has been explained how they are spending vs their money coming in.

[aj2k77]

Chelsea to spend another £60m. Taking their total since 2020 to £1.7 billion. But we have to sell players.

Chelsea have sold more than they have spent, plus the money from their women’s team sale.

No they haven't. They've sold around £700m over the same period. So they've spent £1bn on transfers since 2020.

It has been explained how they are spending vs their money coming in.

Yes and you said they'd had more money come in then go out on transfer fees. They haven't. They've spent £1bn net since 2020. We've spent less than £200m net.

[Crown Hill]

From Stefan Borson,

"There is NO realistic chance Villa will fail 24/25 PSR in the post Chelsea world. Either they are not at the £105m limit or they will sell a player today or transfer an asset such as the Women's team. They do not need to let the outside world know today."

This is why I no longer pay any heed to him whatsoever! A complete BS merchant with 20/20 hindsight!

[Somniloquism]

Chelsea to spend another £60m. Taking their total since 2020 to £1.7 billion. But we have to sell players.

Chelsea have sold more than they have spent, plus the money from their women’s team sale.

No they haven't. They've sold around £700m over the same period. So they've spent £1bn on transfers since 2020.

It has been explained how they are spending vs their money coming in.

Yes and you said they'd had more money come in then go out on transfer fees. They haven't. They've spent £1bn net since 2020. We've spent less than £200m net.

During that period you have quoted, they have sold their hotels and women's team for a fair whack of revenue and won both the ECL cups for various extra revenue as well. You also have to look at a player being bought and a player being sold is worth different values on FFP/PSR. A player being bought for £100mil is £25mil a year for PSR, but a player being sold for £100mil could well be £100mil directly on the books. And that doesn't include the creative accounting they were doing by offering a 9 year contract which meant the purchased players were only less then £15mil on the books instead.

[Percy McCarthy]

From Stefan Borson,

"There is NO realistic chance Villa will fail 24/25 PSR in the post Chelsea world. Either they are not at the £105m limit or they will sell a player today or transfer an asset such as the Women's team. They do not need to let the outside world know today."

This is why I no longer pay any heed to him whatsoever! A complete BS merchant with 20/20 hindsight!

Same with the podcasters. Some of them sounded suicidal a couple of weeks ago. One of them grossly exaggerated things last year or a couple of years ago and was told this week by a sycophantic co-host that it turned out he was ‘1,000% right’ after all.

All just driven by a desperate need for content.

[Crown Hill]

Here’s another classic:

https://x.com/justin_avfc_/status/1939624793084399722?

[Sexual Ealing]

Here’s another classic:

https://x.com/justin_avfc_/status/1939624793084399722?

Christ.

[ChicagoLion]

Here’s another classic:

https://x.com/justin_avfc_/status/1939624793084399722?

With insight like that.

[Toronto Villa]

Everyone is a fucking internet star and expert these days. Bloody hell.

[andyh]

They THINK they are fucking stars and experts, they are nobodies who think people give a shit about what they think.

[Tuscans]

🚨 BREAKING: Aston Villa agree deal to sell women’s team to holding company V Sports & a stake to prominent US-based investors. #AVFC say no issues regarding Premier League PSR rules + advanced talks with UEFA on resolution to FFP compliance
@TheAthleticFC

Exclusive: Aston Villa to avoid PSR breach as they close in on £55m women's team deal. Warehouse project also lined up for PSR boost and club commit to Uefa player cost cut. Story with @SamWallaceTel #AVFC

[Crown Hill]

Aston Villa close in on £55m women’s team deal to help avoid PSR breach
Exclusive: Midlands club are also eyeing similar deal for ‘The Warehouse’ – club’s new music and event space in North Stand car park

Matt Law
 Football News Correspondent.
Sam Wallace
Chief Football Writer
30 June 2025 12:59pm BST

Aston Villa’s bid to avoid breaching Premier League financial controls has seen the club hold talks over a selling a stake in their women’s team to investors that could put a value in the region of £55 million on it.

Telegraph Sport understands that Villa have been working on a deal that would involve selling as much as 10 per cent of the women’s team to investors with a view to selling the rest of it to the club’s holding company to help them comply with profit and sustainability rules (PSR).

It can also be revealed that Villa have committed to bringing down their player costs by almost 20 per cent over this summer and next, as they wait to find out whether or not they will be punished by Uefa.

Although the June 30 accounting deadline expires on Monday, it is possible for the sale of an asset, such as the women’s team, to be included in the 2024/25 accounts if the sale has been agreed in principle but the price has not been finalised.

Villa’s pricing of the women’s team could effectively be sealed by selling a stake to investors who are thought to have held talks about buying as much as 10 per cent for around £5.5 million.

That would allow Villa to sell the remaining 90 per cent to the club’s own parent company, controlled by billionaire Nassef Sawiris, potentially generating around £55 million in total as PSR compliant funds.

It is understood that a similar process has been considered for “The Warehouse”, the club’s new music and events space in the North Stand car park with a potential value of around £50 million.

The Warehouse, when completed, will be opened to fans on matchdays. It was also established as a live venue, which the club says will be run by the specialist company Oak View Group, and used on non-matchdays.

Last year, Villa rushed through the pre-June 30 sale of midfielder Douglas Luiz to Juventus to generate the PSR funds that would avoid a points deduction and this time around have looked at different methods to raise the necessary income.

Villa, who reached the quarter-finals of the Champions League last season, reported a loss of £85.4 million for the 2023-24 campaign following a loss of £119.6 million for 2022-23.

The club turned a profit of £300,000 in 2021-22, but a combined loss of more than £105 million over three seasons would constitute a PSR breach. Spending on infrastructure, youth and women’s football is exempt.

The Premier League’s PSR rules are not the only issue for Villa, who qualified for next season’s Europa League and must comply with Uefa’s own financial controls - squad cost ratio rules (SCR). These put a limit on spending relative to revenue.

Uefa does not permit clubs to register income from assets, such as the sale of the women’s team to related parties and sister companies.

Under Uefa regulations, clubs are permitted £170 million losses over a three-year period and those in European competition were required to keep spending on player wages and fees at a maximum of 80 per cent of revenue in the 2023-24 season, when Villa reached the semi-finals of the Europa Conference League.

That dropped to 70 per cent for the most recent season and Villa have been holding talks with Uefa about committing to a spending plan that will see their squad cost ratio decrease this summer and the next.

It is understood that Villa have committed to bringing down their squad cost ratio by a percentage under 10 per cent this summer and a further percentage under 10 per cent next summer in the hope of avoiding heavy sanctions.

That is likely to involve the sale of at least one first-team player. Top earner Emi Martinez, Lucas Digne, Ollie Watkins and academy graduate Jacob Ramsey have all been linked with moves away from Villa Park, while Morgan Rogers has attracted the interest of a host of clubs.

Villa and Chelsea are expected to find out imminently their punishments for breaching Uefa’s SCR rules, with fines thought to be the most likely outcomes for both clubs.

Chelsea sold their women’s team to the club’s holding company for £198.7 million, with Reddit founder Alexis Ohanian purchasing a stake of between eight and 10 per cent for £20 million

[aj2k77]

Chelsea to spend another £60m. Taking their total since 2020 to £1.7 billion. But we have to sell players.

Chelsea have sold more than they have spent, plus the money from their women’s team sale.

No they haven't. They've sold around £700m over the same period. So they've spent £1bn on transfers since 2020.

It has been explained how they are spending vs their money coming in.

Yes and you said they'd had more money come in then go out on transfer fees. They haven't. They've spent £1bn net since 2020. We've spent less than £200m net.

During that period you have quoted, they have sold their hotels and women's team for a fair whack of revenue and won both the ECL cups for various extra revenue as well. You also have to look at a player being bought and a player being sold is worth different values on FFP/PSR. A player being bought for £100mil is £25mil a year for PSR, but a player being sold for £100mil could well be £100mil directly on the books. And that doesn't include the creative accounting they were doing by offering a 9 year contract which meant the purchased players were only less then £15mil on the books instead.

I already know this. I'm just saying what a farce the whole shebang is. The fact Chelsea can spend 1bn net and still make a pretend paper profit whilst we were forced to sell first teamers. The rules don't work and Chelsea have taken the piss and spent an absolute fortune. Chelsea and Man City have gotten away with murder.

[DB]

Chelsea to spend another £60m. Taking their total since 2020 to £1.7 billion. But we have to sell players.

Chelsea have sold more than they have spent, plus the money from their women’s team sale.

No they haven't. They've sold around £700m over the same period. So they've spent £1bn on transfers since 2020.

It has been explained how they are spending vs their money coming in.

Yes and you said they'd had more money come in then go out on transfer fees. They haven't. They've spent £1bn net since 2020. We've spent less than £200m net.

During that period you have quoted, they have sold their hotels and women's team for a fair whack of revenue and won both the ECL cups for various extra revenue as well. You also have to look at a player being bought and a player being sold is worth different values on FFP/PSR. A player being bought for £100mil is £25mil a year for PSR, but a player being sold for £100mil could well be £100mil directly on the books. And that doesn't include the creative accounting they were doing by offering a 9 year contract which meant the purchased players were only less then £15mil on the books instead.

I already know this. I'm just saying what a farce the whole shebang is. The fact Chelsea can spend 1bn net and still make a pretend paper profit whilst we were forced to sell first teamers. The rules don't work and Chelsea have taken the piss and spent an absolute fortune. Chelsea and Man City have gotten away with murder.

Is their much difference to what we have / are doing vs Chelsea?

[Bent Neilsens Screamer]

From Stefan Borson,

"There is NO realistic chance Villa will fail 24/25 PSR in the post Chelsea world. Either they are not at the £105m limit or they will sell a player today or transfer an asset such as the Women's team. They do not need to let the outside world know today."

This is why I no longer pay any heed to him whatsoever! A complete BS merchant with 20/20 hindsight!

Same with the podcasters. Some of them sounded suicidal a couple of weeks ago. One of them grossly exaggerated things last year or a couple of years ago and was told this week by a sycophantic co-host that it turned out he was ‘1,000% right’ after all.

All just driven by a desperate need for content.

Did Gregg Evans grossly exaggerate PSR, wasn’t it more that he was one of the first ones saying that we’d have to sell to meet the requirements and that came to fruition. Bardell just pointed out that he got stick for it but was correct.