FFP

[Toronto Villa]

I hear what you’re saying Pablo. I’m much the same way. I don’t have the time to really watch a lot of games outside of ours. The international tournaments are always fun. But I genuinely think (and I could be wrong and naive) that our owners just want to invest as they see fit within reasonable rules. The Mail suggesting we “sympathized” with Man City I think is bollocks. But I can see where aspects of what they are saying are perfectly fair. What I am sure we didn’t say is “drop everything against them because we want to do the same”.

[chrisw1]

https://www.givemesport.com/chelsea-aston-villa-newcastle-must-sell-before-july/

IF this is true, and I take it with a massive pinch of salt, buying clubs will try to exploit the position and drive down the price.  It would make sense if we buy from each other at 'market' prices.  They're bound to be scrutinised, but could the PL argue if we bought Gallager for £55m (£11m pa over 5 years) and Chelsea bought Duran for £35m (for example)?  Both prices seem toppish to me, but not so much that it could be proven so.

[pablo_picasso]

I hear what you’re saying Pablo. I’m much the same way. I don’t have the time to really watch a lot of games outside of ours. The international tournaments are always fun. But I genuinely think (and I could be wrong and naive) that our owners just want to invest as they see fit within reasonable rules. The Mail suggesting we “sympathized” with Man City I think is bollocks. But I can see where aspects of what they are saying are perfectly fair. What I am sure we didn’t say is “drop everything against them because we want to do the same”.

Maybe the "sympathisers" article is wrong, most probably.

Hopefully.

I do understand the frustrations of the owners regarding spending restrictions. I have made my feelings clear on here in detail about FFP or whatever the fuck its called this week, especially the fact that ManU can spend five times what we can, despite having nearly a billion pounds of debt, (and then their c*** owner begging for a new stadium?!?), etc, I don't know, Im just fed up of having to learn how to be an accountant (joke) just to be able to partially understand an element of modern day football that I fucking despise with a passion, only to read that we might be "sympathisers" with a side that has basically become Harold Shipmans corpse climbing out of its grave & suing the NHS.

Hopefully it's wrong, & it probably is, for the reasons you stated, but if we start heading that way with our actions, not just by some journalist stirring the pot, then that last single thread of love I have left will break & I don't think I will be able to bring it back.

[lovejoy]

Juve got deducted 10 points for that, the old Pjanic/Melo swap.

https://www.givemesport.com/chelsea-aston-villa-newcastle-must-sell-before-july/

IF this is true, and I take it with a massive pinch of salt, buying clubs will try to exploit the position and drive down the price.  It would make sense if we buy from each other at 'market' prices.  They're bound to be scrutinised, but could the PL argue if we bought Gallager for £55m (£11m pa over 5 years) and Chelsea bought Duran for £35m (for example)?  Both prices seem toppish to me, but not so much that it could be proven so.

Juve got deducted 10 points for that, the old Pjanic/Melo swap.

[PaulWinch again]

They did, but they he notional fees above are perfectly plausible for both of those players.

[astonvilla82]

They did, but they he notional fees above are perfectly plausible for both of those players.

If  Manchester City are going to court for restrictions of trade, put our name down as well, this seems like it to keep the Manchester United and Liverpool etc in a closed shop

[ozzjim]

Juve got deducted 10 points for that, the old Pjanic/Melo swap.

https://www.givemesport.com/chelsea-aston-villa-newcastle-must-sell-before-july/

IF this is true, and I take it with a massive pinch of salt, buying clubs will try to exploit the position and drive down the price.  It would make sense if we buy from each other at 'market' prices.  They're bound to be scrutinised, but could the PL argue if we bought Gallager for £55m (£11m pa over 5 years) and Chelsea bought Duran for £35m (for example)?  Both prices seem toppish to me, but not so much that it could be proven so.

Juve got deducted 10 points for that, the old Pjanic/Melo swap.

Wasn't that simply for over inflation of the fees rather than the deal itself?

[Smithy]

Juve got deducted 10 points for that, the old Pjanic/Melo swap.

https://www.givemesport.com/chelsea-aston-villa-newcastle-must-sell-before-july/

IF this is true, and I take it with a massive pinch of salt, buying clubs will try to exploit the position and drive down the price.  It would make sense if we buy from each other at 'market' prices.  They're bound to be scrutinised, but could the PL argue if we bought Gallager for £55m (£11m pa over 5 years) and Chelsea bought Duran for £35m (for example)?  Both prices seem toppish to me, but not so much that it could be proven so.

Juve got deducted 10 points for that, the old Pjanic/Melo swap.

Wasn't that simply for over inflation of the fees rather than the deal itself?

It was.  €12m actually swapped hands, but they valued the players at about £80m and £70m respectively.  The reality is they were worth about £30m less than that.  But Gallagher for £55-60m and Duran for £35-40m would unlikely raise too many eyebrows, as both prices probably feel about right.

I asked a few days ago about something like this, and someone pointed to this deal as an example of how the authorities are on to this type of scam to get around FFP.

[ozzjim]

But... It's not a scam if both clubs are actually targeting said players. We could probably produce chapter and verse on scouting Gallagher, and Chelsea were interested in Duran before we bought him in. As such, if we bought Gallagher for £50, they bought Duran for £40, everyone wins

[Smithy]

But... It's not a scam if both clubs are actually targeting said players. We could probably produce chapter and verse on scouting Gallagher, and Chelsea were interested in Duran before we bought him in. As such, if we bought Gallagher for £50, they bought Duran for £40, everyone wins

yes, sorry, I meant 'scam' as in valuing Gallagher at £90m and Duran at £70m to help us both in the short term for FFP purposes.  Not that the deal couldn't get done with a £20m differential. I would guess the 'true market values' might be in the 55m and 35m range.

[OCD]

With Chelsea paying £100m+ for Caicedo, £50m for Gallagher and £40m for Duran would seem reasonable.

[Percy McCarthy]

Talking of Chelsea, it’s interesting that we voted against closing the loophole that clubs can sell tangible assets (hotels, training grounds etc) to record as income on their accounts. Oh, and our side (us, Chelsea, seven others) won enough votes to stop it going through.

I was half-joking a few weeks ago when I asked ‘can’t we just sell Bodymoor Heath to ourselves?

[adrenachrome]

Talking of Chelsea, it’s interesting that we voted against closing the loophole that clubs can sell tangible assets (hotels, training grounds etc) to record as income on their accounts. Oh, and our side (us, Chelsea, seven others) won enough votes to stop it going through.

I was half-joking a few weeks ago when I asked ‘can’t we just sell Bodymoor Heath to ourselves?

Something of this nature will happen.

Most likely is the naming rights of Villa Park.

[sid1964]

Interesting that on the BBC sport website that we are 1 of 6 clubs who have to sell a player before 30th June to comply with profit and sustainability rules, however further down the article Chelsea who are another club who have the same issue are according to the "Standard" prepared to pay £60m for Olise from Palace.

It is such a shame that after so many seasons of being shite, we now have this fantastic opportunity with Champions League football etc.. that we may have to sell 1 of our better players to comply with the rules.

Be prepared for the Spurs bid for Watkins of £20 million!

You can see why Villa tried to get the rules about spending changed yesterday - although it did fail.

[SaddVillan]

An attempt by the Premier League to close a loophole that lets clubs use one-off profits from the sale of hotels, training grounds or other tangible assets in their financial fair play submissions has failed.

The league made the proposal at its annual general meeting in Harrogate, North Yorkshire on Thursday but only 11 of the 20 clubs backed it, significantly short of the two-third majority required for a change in English top flight’s profitability and sustainability rules (PSR).

This will allow us to do  some "jiggery-pokery" with either Bodymoor Heath, or the new Brookvale Academy site to get around FFP.