FFP

[ADVILLAFAN]

Another club looking for sponsors:

Sources have blamed several reasons as to why the sponsor will walk away from #Tottenham at the end of the season:

❌ A 17th-placed finish in the league was deemed unacceptable.
❌ The club have failed to present a clear roadmap or reassurances of how they plan to improve domestic performances and results.
❌ Inability to sign the best players.
❌ Clients have been left unimpressed by the number of empty seats inside the Tottenham stadium for big games and the anger of fans.
❌Many sponsors have been dismayed by the lack of communication from the very top of the club since Levy’s departure, with many yet to be introduced to Vinai and the Lewis family.

The sponsors will fly back when they sign Rogers for 8M plus Josh Onomah.

[PeterWithesShin]

A quick Lougle and AIA have only have a year left.

[Chris Harte]

What are AIA? Finance?

Think so, not sure. The particular sponsor is not named though.

The link I saw was an article in The Telegraph, so behind a paywall. I didn't realise the article didn't name them and just assumed it was them.

[tomd2103]

Was reading an article on the BBC earlier about Manchester United's debt now rising to £1.3bn which linked to some other articles.  One of them broke down the Deloitte money table in to categories of match day, broadcast and commercial income.  In terms of English clubs, it was (in Euros):

Liverpool - 149,800 / 320,700 / 365,700
Man City - 89,300 / 331,500 / 408,400
Arsenal - 183,100 / 324,600 / 314,000
Man Utd - 190,700 / 205,800 / 396,600
Spurs - 150,500 / 192,400 / 329,700
Chelsea - 103,200 / 241,800 / 239,000

Aston Villa - 80,200 / 286,700 / 83,300

Newcastle - 67,600 / 191,600 / 139,200

West Ham - 47,100 / 157,500 / 71,400

Inter Milan - 108,000 / 277,000 / 152,500
Bor Dortmund - 94,900 / 227,200 / 209,200
Atl Madrid - 79,900 / 218,600 / 156,000

Some interesting comparisons there as you've got the so called 'Big Six', Newcastle who are probably about on a par with us and then West Ham who are obviously the highest of the rest of the Premier League.  The things that stand out for me when comparing us with Newcastle and West Ham is the massive difference in broadcast income that the Champions League brings.  Interesting that it also put us ahead of Man Utd, Chelsea and Spurs in that area, and that the double whammy of Premier League and Champions League put us above the 3 European sides directly above us. 

Again presuming that being in the Champions League put our matchday revenue ahead of Newcastle and West Ham, but we were considerably behind the English clubs in the top ten on the list (Man City's figures looks low though??).  It's the commercial figure that is the real eye opener and that some of the Premier League clubs earn nearly 5 times what we do in that area.  How do they manage that and that just seems a massive gap to get anywhere remotely near bridging.  The figures for Real Madrid, Barcelona, Bayern Munich and PSG are even more eye-watering.
 

[Meanwood Villa]

The Man City commercial income figure looks dodgy. Wouldn't be like them to fiddle the books though.

Joking aside, does the average global glory hunter wear a Citeh shirt now?

[ChicagoLion]

The Man City commercial income figure looks dodgy. Wouldn't be like them to fiddle the books though.

Joking aside, does the average global glory hunter wear a Citeh shirt now?

Citeh have just signed 2 new sponsorship deals which will boost it even further.

[eamonn]

What's included in Commercial & MatchDay income?

[AV82EC]

Matchday income is exactly what it says on the tin. Corp Hosp, GA+ and GA ticket income plus I’d assume all the catering and other spend on the day. We’re behind in this area but not as much due to less capacity, price increases, GA+ intro and the complete refresh of the Hospitality offer.

Commercial income is all the sponsorship stuff we get so Adidas, Betano, Xapo, El Gouna, etc etc. this is the main area we’re playing catch up in. We got left behind in the 90s on this one and have spent the best part of 30 years doing nothing about it. It’s only starting to be sorted I’d say in the last 4-5 years.

[AV82EC]

The Man City commercial income figure looks dodgy. Wouldn't be like them to fiddle the books though.

Joking aside, does the average global glory hunter wear a Citeh shirt now?

Citeh have just signed 2 new sponsorship deals which will boost it even further.

It’s the way they’re making up for the Matchday income deficit on Arsenal and ManU despite having a 60k plus stadium.

[aev]

2024-25 £82m estimated pre-tax loss.

I hope our benevolent owners remain patient.

[Tuscans]

Aston Villa suffered €97m loss in 2024-25 season, per UEFA report
Jacob Tanswell, Chris Weatherspoon

Aston Villa incurred an estimated pre-tax loss of £82million (€94m) in their submissions to UEFA for the 2024-25 season.

The accounts mark a third successive year Villa have lost money after posting a £120.3m pre-tax loss in the 2022-23 season and an £85.9m deficit following the 2023-24 campaign. This takes Villa’s losses across three years to nearly £290m.

According to UEFA’s latest European Club Finance and Investment Landscape report, published on Thursday, Villa have incurred losses of more than £80m in the 2024-25 season.

The report highlights an adjustment UEFA have made for an estimated €113m “non-recurring profit on sale of assets”. Last summer, in efforts to stave off the threat of the Premier League’s profitability and sustainability rules (PSR), Villa sold their women’s team to V Sports — the club’s ownership group — with a U.S.-based investor firm also acquiring a stake in the operation. Another explanation for raising profits through assets is ‘The Warehouse’, a new multi-use venue next to Villa Park that aims to be fully operational this season.

Unlike in the Premier League, UEFA rules prevent clubs recording such asset sales, as the women’s team to V Sports, within financial submissions; the bottom line figure shown in Villa’s accounts, and within their PSR calculation, will show a pre-tax figure with that £113m added back on.

In other words, after allowing for those one-off sales, Villa booked an estimated £31m profit, bringing them under their maximum loss limit for Premier League PSR purposes. The Athletic has previously estimated Villa could lose a maximum of £15m pre-tax in 2024-25 to avoid a domestic PSR breach.

The figures provided to European football’s governing body will differ from those disclosed in Villa’s end-of-year accounts, which are due to be filed by the end of March.

Staying in line with PSR has proven a consistent challenge during Unai Emery’s tenure, with further complications arising as a result of their success. Last summer, Villa endured a battle complying with UEFA Squad Cost Rules (SCR), which restricts spending on “player and coach wages and transfers and agent fees to 70 per cent of the club’s revenue” from the 2025-26 season onwards.

The Athletic reported in September that Villa were expected to incur breaches for failing to achieve the 70 per cent benchmark. Villa received a fine the year before, with UEFA imposing an unconditional €11m fine for the West Midlands club breaching financial regulations.

Villa have until March 17 to submit squad cost information for the 12 months leading up to December 31, 2025.

Additionally, this season was Villa’s third consecutive year in European competitions, meaning they had to adhere to UEFA’s Football Earnings Rule (FER).

Crucially, Villa entered into a settlement agreement with UEFA last summer following a previous breach of that rule, meaning this further huge loss will not count toward future FER submissions. Villa are instead limited to a €5m Football Earnings loss in the current 2025-26 season — a target which on its own looks difficult, given the club has no Champions League revenues to rely on while still bearing significant operating costs. Selling high-valued first-team players by June 30, the end of the reporting period, is one way Villa could look to meet that target.

Villa have enjoyed a 38.42 per cent growth in revenue since the pandemic, the most of any Premier League club, yet there is an acceptance internally that costs are higher than current revenues, which are heavily reliant on Champions League qualification and income from broadcasters.

The club acknowledge that they have had to cut their cloth accordingly recently, with Villa registering the lowest net spend (£31m) of any Premier League side last summer. Television money accounted for 63.7 per cent of total revenues in the 2024-25 season, so a sizeable fall is expected this season, due to missing out on Champions League football.

Senior figures, speaking on the condition of anonymity as they are not authorised to do so, told The Athletic last year that missing out on the Champions League caused a £70m deficit in the accounts.

Villa sit third in the Premier League and are on track to secure Champions League qualification for the second time in three seasons.

[Beard82]

Wow - so were basically selling Rogers in the summer.

[TCFKAE2]

Convoluted Word Spaghetti no doubt masking the fact "The Athletic" wanted to be "first past the post" on the story without having any succinct/clear conclusions. Glad I don't pay for their stuff. They seem to be saying a major player sale likely to be required pre-30 June to comply/taxi for Mr. Rogers?

[Baldy]

Wow - so were basically selling Rogers in the summer.

Man Utd with their 1.3 billion debt will probably be after him.

What a f*ckin joke this game is.

[aev]

Wow - so were basically selling Rogers in the summer.

Surely not Chelsea though looking at their numbers.