FFP

[olaftab]

Brighton are 'monitoring' Bogarde, according to the Beeb rumours.

That’s great and we will no doubt be grateful for any tips they can give us to improve him.

[LeeB]

Brighton are 'monitoring' Bogarde, according to the Beeb rumours.

That’s great and we will no doubt be grateful for any tips they can give us to improve him.

Ha!

[German James]

Can anyone give a quick precis of where we are with FFP; what we're allowed to do at the moment and how what we have to do to make things easier? Please!

[Sexual Ealing]

Quick? Ha!

[German James]

Quick? Ha!

Yeah, I guessed that might be a sticking point.

[Percy McCarthy]

Can anyone give a quick precis of where we are with FFP; what we're allowed to do at the moment and how what we have to do to make things easier? Please!

Not a précis (I don’t think anyone outside the club and UEFA can speak with much certainty) but some positive thoughts.

Enzo Barrenechea is a fixture in the Benfica team (26 appearances), so that clause should have been triggered. €12m on top of a €3m loan fee.

Ramsey’s £39m fee has to be spread over three years under UEFA SCR, so £13m onto the accounts for the next financial year. (SCR is calculated on calendar years).

Whatever we had allowed/booked for the deal, we save by not buying Elliott.

Roma agreed to a loan fee AND a year’s amortisation cost for Bailey, even if they end up not signing him.

Amortisation costs must be relatively low considering how many of the players’ transfer fees have already been amortised. Mings, McGinn, Cash, Konsa, Watkins, Bizot, Barkley, Buendia, Digne, Garcia, Rogers and Barrenechea have minimal amortisation costs, Tielemans, Kamara, Lindelof, Sancho, Elliott and Bogarde none at all, and Onana, Torres and Maatsen are increasingly looking like value for money.

We shed a lot of costs and made big money from transfers last January and in the summer.

Under UEFA SCR rules, only the cost of players, agents and the head coach count. Which is surely a blessing to a club like us with 26 coaches.

[Dante Lavelli]

Under UEFA SCR rules, only the cost of players, agents and the head coach count. Which is a blessing to a club like us with 26 coaches.

Interesting.  as were are cash rich, but cannot spend, its vital the club harvest any angle they can.  Better coaches and better training grounds are both areas where we can spend which will have incremental benefits for the players.

[Percy McCarthy]

Under UEFA SCR rules, only the cost of players, agents and the head coach count. Which is a blessing to a club like us with 26 coaches.

Interesting.  as were are cash rich, but cannot spend, its vital the club harvest any angle they can.  Better coaches and better training grounds are both areas where we can spend which will have incremental benefits for the players.

Indeed. Also, we can spend whatever we want on marketing, which you would hope would increase revenue.

[Dante Lavelli]

Amortisation costs must be relatively low considering how many of the players’ transfer fees have already been amortised. Mings, McGinn, Cash, Konsa, Watkins, Bizot, Barkley, Buendia, Digne, Garcia, Rogers and Barrenechea have minimal amortisation costs, Tielemans, Kamara, Lindelof, Sancho, Elliott and Bogarde none at all, and Onana, Torres and Maatsen are increasingly looking like value for money.

Is amortisation of previous signings a line item in the accounts? 

As you say, we must be washing our hands of most big fees so this figure should not be a burden in the near future.  Add the increased ‘day one’ revenue from better gate receipts and sponsorship and the gap should grow in our favour.

[Percy McCarthy]

Amortisation costs must be relatively low considering how many of the players’ transfer fees have already been amortised. Mings, McGinn, Cash, Konsa, Watkins, Bizot, Barkley, Buendia, Digne, Garcia, Rogers and Barrenechea have minimal amortisation costs, Tielemans, Kamara, Lindelof, Sancho, Elliott and Bogarde none at all, and Onana, Torres and Maatsen are increasingly looking like value for money.

Is amortisation of previous signings a line item in the accounts? 

As you say, we must be washing our hands of most big fees so this figure should not be a burden in the near future.  Add the increased ‘day one’ revenue from better gate receipts and sponsorship and the gap should grow in our favour.

I dunno about ‘line items’. I got an ‘O’ level in accounts but sadly it was a long, loooong time ago.

[eye digress]

Depends what you mean by "previous signings". Do you mean players that we have since sold (Couts, Diaby, Duran)?

[Rudy Can't Fail]

Couldn't find the Corrupt As Fcuk thread..

Our Champions League payment has been confirmed as €83.7 million the lowest of all the teams who made it to the quarter finals.

'Aston Villa were the only quarterfinalist last season to get less than €100 million, earning a UEFA payment of €83.7 million ($97.5 million). That was partly explained by Villa's lower UEFA ranking returning to the competition after a 41-year gap.'

'Real Madrid's quarterfinal loss to Arsenal meant they earned  €102 million ($119 million) from UEFA in the Champions League..'

'Manchester City were the lowest earner of the four English clubs. The 2022-23 Champions League winners got €76 million ($88.5 million) after being eliminated in the knockout playoffs round in February by Real Madrid.'

'Europa League winners Tottenham received €41 million.'

[PaulWinch again]

Nothing like rules to keep you down. It would matter less if they didn’t then overlay rules that restrict you based on your income. It’s like a double penalty.

[Chris Harte]

Couldn't find the Corrupt As Fcuk thread..

Our Champions League payment has been confirmed as €83.7 million the lowest of all the teams who made it to the quarter finals.

'Aston Villa were the only quarterfinalist last season to get less than €100 million, earning a UEFA payment of €83.7 million ($97.5 million). That was partly explained by Villa's lower UEFA ranking returning to the competition after a 41-year gap.'

That will be due to the 'Value Pillar', a payment based on the club coefficient over five and ten years. This is why it is important for Villa to qualify for European competition and get out of the league stages consistently.

Villa earned £16.6m from the Value Pillar last season, whereas from memory the likes of Liverpool, Citeh and the likes were getting high-30 million/£40m+ from the same source. So this is fixable with consistency.

[eye digress]

Couldn't find the Corrupt As Fcuk thread..

Our Champions League payment has been confirmed as €83.7 million the lowest of all the teams who made it to the quarter finals.

'Aston Villa were the only quarterfinalist last season to get less than €100 million, earning a UEFA payment of €83.7 million ($97.5 million). That was partly explained by Villa's lower UEFA ranking returning to the competition after a 41-year gap.'

'Real Madrid's quarterfinal loss to Arsenal meant they earned  €102 million ($119 million) from UEFA in the Champions League..'

'Manchester City were the lowest earner of the four English clubs. The 2022-23 Champions League winners got €76 million ($88.5 million) after being eliminated in the knockout playoffs round in February by Real Madrid.'

'Europa League winners Tottenham received €41 million.'

What’s the source for these figures?