FFP

[wolfman999]

Maybe I've got my dates wrong but as we have only had two seasons of European football to date, does the rolling three year period include losses incurred before we were even subject to UEFA rules because we weren't taking part in their competitions. If so, surely that's bollocks.

[paul_e]

Maybe I've got my dates wrong but as we have only had two seasons of European football to date, does the rolling three year period include losses incurred before we were even subject to UEFA rules because we weren't taking part in their competitions. If so, surely that's bollocks.

There's a few things here.

It's covered by Articles 93-95 here - https://documents.uefa.com/r/UEFA-Club-Licensing-and-Financial-Sustainability-Regulations-2024/Cost-control-requirements-Online
93.04 confirms it's calendar year not season.
Nothing in there mentions a rolling period, it's entirely based on the year of the failure, it's also means that it's really messy to try to work it out just using the club accounts, even when they're available.
Our punishment is for 2024 so half the season in the conference league and half the season in the champions league, but with no CL prize money to offset the extra costs.

For me that feels pretty punishing for teams that, like us, go from bottom-half, to Europe, to CL in the space of 18months. The rules seem to be setup in a way that makes it very difficult to strengthen the squad in a way that helps a club cope with the extra games, especially if they sneak in unexpectedly. A bit of leeway to have a season or 2 to meet the requirements feels like it should be included.

[AV82EC]

Well one of the heavy loss years drops out of the calculations.  Just depends on what this year looks like.

£120m loss just dropped out, £80m loss drops out next season.

Percy, I know its a liberty but do you have the PSR adjusted loss for the last 4 or 5 seasons as per your Turnover figure above.

I don’t mate, sorry. There was a fair bit of difference between the headline loss figures and the adjusted figures after academy, infrastructure and women’s team spending was taken off though. That will of course continue to be the case with the new North stand and Warehouse.

Thanks Percy, realise it may have been a stretch. I did a bit of digging last year into the losses and then the PSR adjusted losses but just couldn’t get the figures to add up as I was looking to keep track. Ultimately though the move to SCR which UEFA have initiated and the PL following suit it seems as though PSR may not be as much of a  key issue going forwards.

[Percy McCarthy]

Just saw something called Sub Prime Goals (maybe on X, can’t find it again now) saying we still need to raise £50m to comply with UEFA rules. It said read more in the app, which I got, but then it wanted me to subscribe, at which point I was out.

Edit: found the tweet:

https://x.com/thepos_007/status/1960026889180839976?s=46&t=GdM6cpVxe5IloByNCRheWA

[PaulWinch again]

Just saw something called Sub Prime Goals (maybe on X, can’t find it again now) saying we still need to raise £50m to comply with UEFA rules. It said read more in the app, which I got, but then it wanted me to subscribe, at which point I was out.

Edit: found the tweet:

https://x.com/thepos_007/status/1960026889180839976?s=46&t=GdM6cpVxe5IloByNCRheWA

I don’t see how that can be true, but if it is we’re fucked.

[Percy McCarthy]

Just saw something called Sub Prime Goals (maybe on X, can’t find it again now) saying we still need to raise £50m to comply with UEFA rules. It said read more in the app, which I got, but then it wanted me to subscribe, at which point I was out.

Edit: found the tweet:

https://x.com/thepos_007/status/1960026889180839976?s=46&t=GdM6cpVxe5IloByNCRheWA

I don’t see how that can be true, but if it is we’re fucked.

I don’t think it is either. He says in the article that he expects revenue to ‘breach £300m’ for 24/25, while we know that Heck estimates it will be £360/370m.

[ozzjim]

It doesn't seem to do the maths very well on the SCR issue it is basing a further £50m needed on. There's a baseline point where our income Vs expenditure will reach that 70% point. Our wages were widely reported around £255m last season, but judged against the turnover from the previous accounts. I reckon for us to grow sustainably we need our wage bill to constantly be £200m give or take and our revenue to keep increasing. So far we've shed conservatively £600k a week this summer, or the best part of £35M, so are probably around £220m ish. With our squad now if we any higher than that then Monchi should be seeking pastures new. Our income will be up around £340-50m too, so I would think for SCR even with a couple of late additions, we're ok this season.

I would hope. The wages some of them are on is mind boggling though, and makes me look at other clubs and think how the fuck are we paying such massively high wages. We've also got practically nil net transfer spend over 4 years now which is madness. We're hemorrhaging money somewhere.

[JJ-AV]

Where did the Heck estimation come from?

Also, I see two percentages being banded around - is it definitely 70% for European compliance? I see 85% mentioned sometimes.

I suppose the biggest issue is our revenue is unlikely to be recurrent

[Villatillidie25]

Where did the Heck estimation come from?

Also, I see two percentages being banded around - is it definitely 70% for European compliance? I see 85% mentioned sometimes.

I suppose the biggest issue is our revenue is unlikely to be recurrent

It’s 70% for those in Europe. I think the 85% is the PL SCR for those not playing in Europe (it was basically a concession to get agreement on the 70% and align to UEFA).

[Percy McCarthy]

It doesn't seem to do the maths very well on the SCR issue it is basing a further £50m needed on. There's a baseline point where our income Vs expenditure will reach that 70% point. Our wages were widely reported around £255m last season, but judged against the turnover from the previous accounts. I reckon for us to grow sustainably we need our wage bill to constantly be £200m give or take and our revenue to keep increasing. So far we've shed conservatively £600k a week this summer, or the best part of £35M, so are probably around £220m ish. With our squad now if we any higher than that then Monchi should be seeking pastures new. Our income will be up around £340-50m too, so I would think for SCR even with a couple of late additions, we're ok this season.

I would hope. The wages some of them are on is mind boggling though, and makes me look at other clubs and think how the fuck are we paying such massively high wages. We've also got practically nil net transfer spend over 4 years now which is madness. We're hemorrhaging money somewhere.

Wages for 23/24 were £252m over a 13-month year, so about £230m pro-rata. Turnover (according to Heck) for 24/25 is between £360m and £370m.

[Percy McCarthy]

Where did the Heck estimation come from?

https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/aston-villa-chris-heck-revenue-31128746.amp

[LeeS]

I’ve been reflecting on the financial constraints. I’m of the opinion that operating within your means is, on balance, the right approach.

We’ve had two recent owners who demonstrate why that is. Lerner got bored and ran out of cash and Xia wasn’t anywhere near as rich as he made out. In May 2018 we came within a gnat’s whisker of disappearing completely.

If we knew for certain that NSWE were never going to get bored or have a financial calamity then let them spend spend spend. But that’s not realistic. I want success on the pitch and I hate that Man City and Chelsea pulled up the ladder, but I don’t want us to be an unsustainable, unviable club. In 2018 we were precisely that. Never again.

If they want to build us a 70,000 seater stadium (and that’s what it will take to enter the big league) then let them. But I have no wish to put the club in a situation where we cannot cover our outgoings.

[Dave]

Where did the Heck estimation come from?

Also, I see two percentages being banded around - is it definitely 70% for European compliance? I see 85% mentioned sometimes.

I suppose the biggest issue is our revenue is unlikely to be recurrent

It’s 70% for those in Europe. I think the 85% is the PL SCR for those not playing in Europe (it was basically a concession to get agreement on the 70% and align to UEFA).

A bit of back-of-a-fag-packet maths, but I reckon if you had a Premier League side at 85%, if they unexpectedly qualified then the extra revenues/ prize money from doing better than they had been expected to would likely get them to 70%.

Unless they celebrated by splurging it all on Malen and Asensio of course.

[Sexual Ealing]

Just saw something called Sub Prime Goals (maybe on X, can’t find it again now) saying we still need to raise £50m to comply with UEFA rules. It said read more in the app, which I got, but then it wanted me to subscribe, at which point I was out.

Edit: found the tweet:

https://x.com/thepos_007/status/1960026889180839976?s=46&t=GdM6cpVxe5IloByNCRheWA

I don’t see how that can be true, but if it is we’re fucked.

I don’t think it is either. He says in the article that he expects revenue to ‘breach £300m’ for 24/25, while we know that Heck estimates it will be £360/370m.

I only half-follow this stuff, but is it slightly worrying that Stefan Borson, who I think knows his onions on this stuff, appears to endorse the analysis of the original tweeter?

[Drummond]

Maybe we'll sell a bigger chunk of the women's team. Or Fortress Villa Park will become name as well as nature.