FFP

[Drummond]

UEFA release TV money numbers.

This is why Champions League is so necessary to be able to compete.

[Smithy]

UEFA release TV money numbers.

This is why Champions League is so necessary to be able to compete.

Am I reading that correctly? The English teams in the champions league last year received a combined total of €381m in broadcasting revenue? And actual prize money would be on top of that?

And that West Ham got €22m in broadcast revenue from their run to the Europa Conference title? (they were the only English team in the competition, so I assume all 22m went to them?)

[AV82EC]

That seems to be the jist of it and why qualifying for Europe is lucrative in FFP terms, even in the conference League.

[Villan82]

Qualifying for Europe has always been lucrative and so it should be really if we want the sport to be based on merit. But broadcasting has sort of come in an altogether other plane in recent decades to skew things

As a caveat, the problem is that certain clubs have been able to cheat to get themselves into the top echelons - not looking at any two in particular - locking out other club and creating a cartel over the past 20 years or so.

[Smithy]

It will be interesting to see how the club structures it's finances if we DO qualify for the Champions League.  I mean, that extra potential £100m would be great, and I'd love to see us invest it in the team, but obviously you can't rely on it definitely being there every year.  The key appears to be building a commercial bohemoth off the pitch, so that if you don't qualify in any given year, it's not immediately panic stations.

[AV82EC]

It will be interesting to see how the club structures it's finances if we DO qualify for the Champions League.  I mean, that extra potential £100m would be great, and I'd love to see us invest it in the team, but obviously you can't rely on it definitely being there every year.  The key appears to be building a commercial bohemoth off the pitch, so that if you don't qualify in any given year, it's not immediately panic stations.

I suppose it’s a bit chicken and egg though as you can’t get the Commercial behemoth bit without the champions League bit.

[SoccerHQ]

If these rumours are even close to being true, it would make no sense us spending £12m or so on Nedeljkovic and Rogers, neither of which were essential in January.

I think it's more they're young and relatively small fees so wouldn't make a huge dent to FFP and obvious aim is they both progress and become first team regulars in next 18 months.

If they do then Cash will be sold eventually and one of the midfielders to balance things out.

I'd say it's more interesting we gave Bailey a new deal when given his productive 2023 he might've been sold in the summer instead.

Think what's certain here is if we finish 6th then one of Luiz or Ramsey will 100% be sold this summer.

Digne will go aswell as that seemed to be the plan last August but was correct to stop in the end with the injury issues Moreno had up to December.

[Smithy]

It will be interesting to see how the club structures it's finances if we DO qualify for the Champions League.  I mean, that extra potential £100m would be great, and I'd love to see us invest it in the team, but obviously you can't rely on it definitely being there every year.  The key appears to be building a commercial bohemoth off the pitch, so that if you don't qualify in any given year, it's not immediately panic stations.

I suppose it’s a bit chicken and egg though as you can’t get the Commercial behemoth bit without the champions League bit.

Sorry, yes, that's what I meant.  I mean, rather than blowing the anticipated £100m on a couple of new players in the summer (which would be amazing), do we play it a bit more reserved and focus on building a commercial operation to maximise the benefits of any participation in the champions league.

I'm also acutely aware the two are not mutually exclusive. We can do both.  But I look at someone like Leicester, who went from a Champions League QF to relegation in just 6 years, after losing a wealthy owner, all because their commercial operation wasn't sufficient to sustain a competitive team.

I look at the premier league in the late 90s, and commercially we weren't far behind the likes of Arsenal, Liverpool and Chelsea, and yes, the game has changed massively in the last 25 years, but they're not ahead of us now because of Champions League money or Premier League money - they're ahead of us because they've absolutely maximised the money they make away from the pitch. That's the bit that will determine whether we can stay at the top table for the long term.  Because if we can't make a serious dent in their commercial advantage, we'll always be susceptible to losing our best players to them time and again.  A new shirt deal and a new main sponsor would be a good step in the right direction.

An extra £100m from the Champions league would be a amazing, but our long-term success relies much more heavily on whether we can find a way to make an extra £100m a year away from the pitch.

The romantic in me doesn't care about the finances, and just wants to see us playing Champions league football at VP under the lights, but the realist in me knows so much else has to happen in the background to make such a thing a regular occurrence.  Merely qualifying once doesn't create sufficient momentum on it's own.  As Newcastle have proven this season.

[Mister E]

It will be interesting to see how the club structures it's finances if we DO qualify for the Champions League.  I mean, that extra potential £100m would be great, and I'd love to see us invest it in the team, but obviously you can't rely on it definitely being there every year.  The key appears to be building a commercial bohemoth off the pitch, so that if you don't qualify in any given year, it's not immediately panic stations.

I suppose it’s a bit chicken and egg though as you can’t get the Commercial behemoth bit without the champions League bit.

Sorry, yes, that's what I meant.  I mean, rather than blowing the anticipated £100m on a couple of new players in the summer (which would be amazing), do we play it a bit more reserved and focus on building a commercial operation to maximise the benefits of any participation in the champions league.

I'm also acutely aware the two are not mutually exclusive. We can do both.  But I look at someone like Leicester, who went from a Champions League QF to relegation in just 6 years, after losing a wealthy owner, all because their commercial operation wasn't sufficient to sustain a competitive team.

I look at the premier league in the late 90s, and commercially we weren't far behind the likes of Arsenal, Liverpool and Chelsea, and yes, the game has changed massively in the last 25 years, but they're not ahead of us now because of Champions League money or Premier League money - they're ahead of us because they've absolutely maximised the money they make away from the pitch. That's the bit that will determine whether we can stay at the top table for the long term.  Because if we can't make a serious dent in their commercial advantage, we'll always be susceptible to losing our best players to them time and again.  A new shirt deal and a new main sponsor would be a good step in the right direction.

An extra £100m from the Champions league would be a amazing, but our long-term success relies much more heavily on whether we can find a way to make an extra £100m a year away from the pitch.

The romantic in me doesn't care about the finances, and just wants to see us playing Champions league football at VP under the lights, but the realist in me knows so much else has to happen in the background to make such a thing a regular occurrence.  Merely qualifying once doesn't create sufficient momentum on it's own.  As Newcastle have proven this season.

P61 of the UEFA report shows the club sales of shirts / kit - we're nowhere near being on the list, I'm guessing (even though Dirty Leeds are, with €34m of shirt sales in 2021-22).
An earlier graphic showed the revenue from matchday activities and, again, we were nowhere near being competitive.
I see this is a microcosm of our commercial problem: we're just not leveraging the revenue streams, which is why we're struggling on the FFP front.

[rob_bridge]

Yes off field revenue is most important for us if we want to be always with the Big Boys here an in Europe.

Easier said than done mind. Hard to extend the ground without hitting current day to day revenue. Building a new ground even if we could find a location would cause an awful lot of uproar with the current match day punters.

[Risso]

It comes back to the debate about the stadium. A new North Stand may not put a massive dent in the income gap, but if we don't do it, how do we compete consistently if the plan is to build a new ground, as that's going to mean an 8-10 year wait with a bottom half sized stadium, with severely outdated facilities.

[Villan82]

It comes back to the debate about the stadium. A new North Stand may not put a massive dent in the income gap, but if we don't do it, how do we compete consistently if the plan is to build a new ground, as that's going to mean an 8-10 year wait with a bottom half sized stadium, with severely outdated facilities.

The new stand, and the original villa live, seemed to be about creating a venue that would bring in revenue on a scale we haven't seen before. It seemed like the perfect plan

[aev]

It comes back to the debate about the stadium. A new North Stand may not put a massive dent in the income gap, but if we don't do it, how do we compete consistently if the plan is to build a new ground, as that's going to mean an 8-10 year wait with a bottom half sized stadium, with severely outdated facilities.

Absolutely. And what about the role of our new investors?

[Beard82]

Im pretty sure the board know what they're doing one way or another.  We may have to sell at some point - but I don't see us mindlessly walking into a huge issue. 

We either think that were ok, or that any sanctions will be worth our actions, or we have plans to put it right.

At the end of the day - the club is well run enough not to spend 20m we didn't have to spend in the most recent window if we're already in the mess.  Likewise, we have assets that we can sell for big, big money that people will buy we would have shifted one if we had to.

I think part of the strategy is we will see 1 or 2 of them move on this summer, particularly if no CL, but we would have done it by now if it meant we were really in the shit. 

[VillaTim]

It comes back to the debate about the stadium. A new North Stand may not put a massive dent in the income gap, but if we don't do it, how do we compete consistently if the plan is to build a new ground, as that's going to mean an 8-10 year wait with a bottom half sized stadium, with severely outdated facilities.

Our ground is better than Chelsea's and they did ok