FFP

[Villafirst]

We do have two bites of the cherry this season at CL places, by finishing top 5 or winning the Europa Cup. We might well do both!

[Chris Harte]

The system's rigged.

UEFA fined us about £10m for "transgressing" their wank rules, yet the tossers at the Prem/FA have only hit Cheatski with a £10.75m fine for blowing £47m on secret payments cheating their way to eight trophies.

So, we're playing against a loaded deck.

Can we cheat our way to eight trophies? It won't cost much more than the fine we've already had.

[Dante Lavelli]

Possibly an impossible question, but how many more seasons do we face this kerfuffle until our income naturally balances with costs. 

I reckon our wages should remain stable (currently 6th) so how much more income do we need to generate, assuming regular Europa level income, to hit the various % etc?

If we were 71% based on a £390m turnover then, in dirty maths, we need £395m to hit 70%.

Of the £390m there’s a +£50m from the CL that isn’t guaranteed. Therefore we have a £55m hole that needs filling. £10m from the increased capacity and £45m from elsewhere.

Is that about right?

[Villafirst]

Apparently Man City get £15m to £20m for naming rights as the Etihad. Is it worth Villa doing similar with another sponsor which could also include the shirt? I know this is controversial, but it could help with revenue.

[andyh]

I’m guessing there is no issue with naming the stadium and picking up filthy lucre for it. We’d all get used to it being named something.

Much like finding a very lucrative shirt sponsor though, you have to find a business willing to pay the sort of money that makes it worthwhile.

[Villafirst]

What about the ADIDAS STADIUM? Nassef could sort it!

[AV82EC]

Apparently Man City get £15m to £20m for naming rights as the Etihad. Is it worth Villa doing similar with another sponsor which could also include the shirt? I know this is controversial, but it could help with revenue.

Is that per annum or was it a one off when they renamed it? Or is it just tied in with the shirt sponsorship?

[Mister E]

The rules are crap but this is what happens when we overpay players
We just cannot continually give players contracts of over £100k a week , when they are just sitting on the subs bench

It's the game we're in: either compete or accept midtable mediocrity.
OR, find the players that Brighton, Bournemouth and Brentford seem to find and embed them into the core of the current squad - but bear in mind, even with this approach none of the three B clubs have broken into the European comps, where the money is.
The system is rigged as a drawbridge for those established clubs with the pre-existing revenue base - Scab6 by any other name.


From the Athletic Article above, the critical factor is to get our core commercial, matchday and EPL TV revenue to a scale where we're not reliant on the Chumps League / Euro-revenue to get us above the various financial thresholds. Hence, bigger / better sponsorships, increased seat-capacity, more aggressive pricing and a player-recruitment policy that prioritises the balance between proven and potential.
No wonder Emery is rumoured to be getting tired of all this shite.

[lovejoy]

The players Brighton Bournemouth and the like find re only good enough to get them 8-12 th, we need better players than that.

[Mister E]

The players Brighton Bournemouth and the like find re only good enough to get them 8-12 th, we need better players than that.

Yeah, I think I said that.

[Dante Lavelli]

The players Brighton Bournemouth and the like find re only good enough to get them 8-12 th, we need better players than that.

Yeah, I think I said that.

Not sure about that.  3/4 of Bournemouth’s back 4 from last season are at Madrid, PSG and Liverpool.  Their struggle is they must sell them to re-feed the model.  You’d hope our stature and organic income would mean we could hold onto them for longer.

Until our turnover is £400-450m without CL income then it makes sense to develop some players with an eye on selling them.  Duran, Luiz and Diaby have all been sold for a profit without jeopardising the mission.  Complemented by a supply chain of youth players coming through being the optimum cheat code.

[Mister E]

The players Brighton Bournemouth and the like find re only good enough to get them 8-12 th, we need better players than that.

Yeah, I think I said that.

Not sure about that.  3/4 of Bournemouth’s back 4 from last season are at Madrid, PSG and Liverpool.  Their struggle is they must sell them to re-feed the model.  You’d hope our stature and organic income would mean we could hold onto them for longer.

Until our turnover is £400-450m without CL income then it makes sense to develop some players with an eye on selling them.  Duran, Luiz and Diaby have all been sold for a profit without jeopardising the mission.  Complemented by a supply chain of youth players coming through being the optimum cheat code.

Don't disagree but the youth supply chain has to feed the first team squad as well as the sales pipeline: at the moment we're seeing the latter but not so much the former.
You say we haven't jeopardised the mission - true, but that may change now with the age profile of the current first-choice players. FER is coming at us at a time least favourable to us.

[Dante Lavelli]

I’m less worried about the age profile because we are not going full MON and signing 29 year olds on big money.  The main reason we have an old squad is because we have a core of players that have been with us a long time and are arguably integral to our identity.

Our aim should be to target young players (like the B teams above) and slowly transition from the old to the new.  I reckon we have two more seasons before their legs go.  The new players might prolong the life of SJM/Cash/Mings too.

[Percy McCarthy]

The players Brighton Bournemouth and the like find re only good enough to get them 8-12 th, we need better players than that.

Yeah, I think I said that.

Has anybody said ‘it ay fair’ lately?