Jump to content
IGNORED

Villa's finances and FFP


harvey54

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, Red Army 75 said:

I actually have some sympathy for villa . Grealish is already playing for United.  :yes:

He wouldn’t get in man u’s midfield atm 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TomF said:

He wouldn’t get in man u’s midfield atm 

He is the kid at school who is technically good with the ball but cannot see a team mate (not looking up) and plays for himself I wouldn't have him at city on a free

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, reddoh said:

He is the kid at school who is technically good with the ball but cannot see a team mate (not looking up) and plays for himself I wouldn't have him at city on a free

Sourness laid into him the other night.  Basically said he gets fouled so much because he holds onto the ball too long...because he doesn’t see the bigger picture.

I like Souness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Sourness laid into him the other night.  Basically said he gets fouled so much because he holds onto the ball too long...because he doesn’t see the bigger picture.

I like Souness.

What I wouldn't give to have seen prime Souness up against Grealish - he's not fit to lace GS' boots

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Ronnie Sinclair said:

What I wouldn't give to have seen prime Souness up against Grealish - he's not fit to lace GS' boots

He might not be fit to lace Souness’s boots, but bet he’d be on the end of them a fair bit.

You can be sure he’d get rid of the ball a hell of a lot quicker if they were both on the same pitch!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, reddoh said:

He is the kid at school who is technically good with the ball but cannot see a team mate (not looking up) and plays for himself I wouldn't have him at city on a free

That would be very bold, not taking the second best player in the prem regarding chances created this season on a free. And who was also statistically the third best player in the Championship last season!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to play Devil's Advocate here. Bit of counterfactual history too!

Had Shaun Harvey and the Football League stood firm and looked to genuinely refuse QPR entry when they came back down in 2014/15, clubs would have little choice but to accept punishments surely- in particular those who came down from the PL while in dispute with the Football League!

Refuse to allocate in certain circs an offending/accused club fixtures...could this be an Football League/majority rule led bargaining chip for clubs accused I wonder? I just wonder how history of FFP may have played out had they been demoted to the Conference, refused entry to Carling Cup, LDV Vans etc post relegation of 2014/15!

Might Parry and Jevans have done a better job with this threat than Harvey...? ? Would have set one hell of a precedent...

I posted about this subject last year and I do wonder if there are ways for the EFL to explore future of a clubs golden share for particularly egregious breaches of FFP. I'm not talking about Aston Villa tbh but in general!

Don't think the concept/idea should be dismissed out of hand pesonally- Golden share, refusal to allocate fixtures, suspension/expulsion/demotion to Conference which also includes banning from EFL competitions. I'm not opposed to the exploration of such ideas!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

That's a fair and reasonable assessment by @AnAstonVillafan but not necessarily one I agree with.

*If I am Derby County and Sheffield Wednesday, let alone the many other truly compliant clubs, well there will be massive pressure to look again. Don't forget Gibson.

*Villa Park fair value measurement poses a problem. As I've stated on countless occasions, it was shown at cost under Tangible fixed Assets. Then it got seemingly changed to Investment Property.

Don't forget about the Impairment between that, then using a Triennial Review it was I think restated to Deemed Cost? This basically reset the value of it but it's hard to measure objectively! 

*Payment method. This poses a problem for me. LOANS receivable...How will these loans be paid back? In the event of them being written off, this wouldn't count as income, profit or revenue under FFP. This feels like a workaround in terms of equity limits for FFP purposes. 

*Rental arrangements. While rent of £2.6m per season on a £56.7m transaction feels fine on the face of it, a problem is posed because FRS 102 states that rent due within 1 year, more than 1 year and no later than 5 and beyond 5 years should all be disclosed under FRS 102.

This poses a problem because I'm looking at NSWE Stadium Limited accounts right now and £10.4m rental payments on a £56.7m transaction is very low.  Because an issue is that it shows one year and it shows later than one and not later than 5- so at most it is £7.8m in 3 years, may even be 4 which is a rent that is sliding downwards...point is whether it's 4 years or 5 years, the non-disclosure of rent receivable beyond this point is odd with respect to such a large transaction!

Your neighbours however have disclosed quite well! £22.76m stadium sale and leaseback, £1.25m rent per season! That's more like it commercially speaking. Your transaction doesn't look as commercial as it should. 

*That's another thing too. How is Villa Park basically worth 2.5 x St Andrews! Or not at all far off it.

*HS2. Problem again. In year one that's fine, it was classed as "Exceptional Operating Income" and explained further down. Problem is, that exceptional operating income tends to be non-recurring...exceptional Income often is,  the clue is in the name! 

One more issue with PL. They don't even have a points tariff sanction for FFP breaches yet apparently. I think the EFL are further along that road in some ways.

PPS (not Pride Park Stadium as this thread is about Aston Villa ;) )

Here's another oddity too- I found this a while ago and @YorkshireAVFC was a good Twitter account, on FFP. Good read. He laid out this stuff...

img_20190601_174147.jpg

img_20190601_174152.jpg

Was a dormant shell company- yet controlled ultimately by NSWE SCS which is registered in in Luxembourg- much like Aston Villa Limited and NSWE UK Limited are. However a greater puzzle is the name switches- just look at that! I'm sure I could take that and build on it over the entire 3 year period...it shouldn't really matter as the company name is irrelevant in a way and the number is the one to look for but this seems curious...maybe he has laid it out over the entire 3 years!

I also forgot to add, do not underestimate a) The Bury factor- this puts some pressure on the EFL to go harder on FFP and b) The change in head. Rick Parry apparently on taking the job described it as a new regime...or words to that effect. What was acceptable to Shaun Harvey I suspect, well Rick Parry I believe has significantly different standards.


*Villa Park fair value measurement poses a problem. 
As I've stated on countless occasions,
it was shown at cost under.....

Different owners, different CEOs a change in the reporting.

This poses a problem for me. LOANS receivable...How will these loans be paid back? 

You may never know. Could be paid tomorrow or next year. When the club is sold. Or never. 

Randy Lerner kept loans receivable on the books for years, then wrote them off.

*Rental arrangements. While rent of £2.6m . . . 
I have no idea but I do feel like your are clutching at straws here Mr Popodopolous.
Rents on a sliding scale are nothing unusual. This may pose a problem for you but with respect,
your opinion is not important. There is a lot you do not know. I have been going through Aston Villa's
accounts for 13 years and there are things even in 2008 I could not understand. Could be one of Christian Purslow's accounting tricks. 

That's another thing too. How is Villa Park basically worth 2.5 x St Andrews! Or not at all far off it.

Are you seriously suggesting Birmingham did this right and we did not ? 
Having knowledge of the Small Heath and Birmingham areas and Villa Park's facilities,  Villa Park & St. Andrews

are not similar in any way possible. The difference in valuation is perfectly reasonable. The Sty is three quarters of a stadium.

Sanctions

The PL don't have a points tariff sanction. Fine. We were 
not convicted. But there are sanctions available. Leicester & Bournemouth will tell you that. 
The PL are self serving and protect themselves before anyone else.

Was a dormant shell company

I see no problem with these background holding companies
and the switching of them. We have been doing that for at least 30
years. Most football teams do, Arsenal, Man U, Bolton, Birmingham, etc

The Bury factor

The EFL can go harder on FFP but I think we are in good shape going forward especially with the easing
due to Covid and the resale value of our recent signings.

We can try to hold on to new players or cash in.  The past however is a can of worms. Opening it sets a
vindictive vengeful precedent.  

Reminds of me Wolves. Agents advising the board, Portugal Internationals arriving but when Zenga and Lambert were struggling no one said anything. When Nuno arrived and they started winning, many had a problem with it - even now some people think they have an FFP case to answer. 

I do understand your frustration with competing against parachute payments and big spenders.

Especially as Bristol is one of the better run clubs in the world.

Fulham, Middlesbrough, Sheffield Wednesday spent big too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AnAstonVillafan said:

What is so bad about us ? 

Well, you know that Man U penalty (that wasn't a penalty but was only awarded because officials queue up to appease the 'brand' at the expense of the so called tiny club) 

You get the picture. 

 

? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, AnAstonVillafan said:

You joke but as I work in Stroud and sometimes drink with Bristol fans, for me it really is. 

Coventry, Oxford, The Scum, Preston and Derby will be great away days too. New lands. 

Far more fun than the Prem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, B1ackbird said:

Well, you know that Man U penalty (that wasn't a penalty but was only awarded because officials queue up to appease the 'brand' at the expense of the so called tiny club) 

You get the picture. 

 

? 

I still remember the Weimann disallowed goal and terrible penalty last season...both at Villa Park last season, both same game! 

Get one against you, at Villa Park, it's football human error. Both however is an absolute nonsense. Both at 0-0, one first half and one second. Changed dynamic of the game, second one in particular terrible!

The Weimann disallowed goal was perhaps hard to call, last season didn't he have at least 3 disallowed wrongly but the penalty- that was awful!! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I still remember the Weimann disallowed goal and terrible penalty last season...both at Villa Park last season, both same game! 

Get one against you, at Villa Park, it's football human error. Both however is an absolute nonsense. Both at 0-0, one first half and one second. Changed dynamic of the game, second one in particular terrible!

The Weimann disallowed goal was perhaps hard to call, last season didn't he have at least 3 disallowed wrongly but the penalty- that was awful!! 

I do remember how amusing Villa fans found all that. Didn’t see much laughing last night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, AnAstonVillafan said:

What is so bad about us ? 

I think it’s the fact that Villa fans came across as billy big bollocks, as they felt they were too big a club to play in the Championship. The rest of the Championship clubs weren’t worthy of playing against such giants!! 
Someone forgot to tell Villa fans that it’s 2020 now, not 1897!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, AnAstonVillafan said:


*Villa Park fair value measurement poses a problem. 
As I've stated on countless occasions,
it was shown at cost under.....

Different owners, different CEOs a change in the reporting.

This poses a problem for me. LOANS receivable...How will these loans be paid back? 

You may never know. Could be paid tomorrow or next year. When the club is sold. Or never. 

Randy Lerner kept loans receivable on the books for years, then wrote them off.

*Rental arrangements. While rent of £2.6m . . . 
I have no idea but I do feel like your are clutching at straws here Mr Popodopolous.
Rents on a sliding scale are nothing unusual. This may pose a problem for you but with respect,
your opinion is not important. There is a lot you do not know. I have been going through Aston Villa's
accounts for 13 years and there are things even in 2008 I could not understand. Could be one of Christian Purslow's accounting tricks. 

That's another thing too. How is Villa Park basically worth 2.5 x St Andrews! Or not at all far off it.

Are you seriously suggesting Birmingham did this right and we did not ? 
Having knowledge of the Small Heath and Birmingham areas and Villa Park's facilities,  Villa Park & St. Andrews

are not similar in any way possible. The difference in valuation is perfectly reasonable. The Sty is three quarters of a stadium.

Sanctions

The PL don't have a points tariff sanction. Fine. We were 
not convicted. But there are sanctions available. Leicester & Bournemouth will tell you that. 
The PL are self serving and protect themselves before anyone else.

Was a dormant shell company

I see no problem with these background holding companies
and the switching of them. We have been doing that for at least 30
years. Most football teams do, Arsenal, Man U, Bolton, Birmingham, etc

The Bury factor

The EFL can go harder on FFP but I think we are in good shape going forward especially with the easing
due to Covid and the resale value of our recent signings.

We can try to hold on to new players or cash in.  The past however is a can of worms. Opening it sets a
vindictive vengeful precedent.  

Reminds of me Wolves. Agents advising the board, Portugal Internationals arriving but when Zenga and Lambert were struggling no one said anything. When Nuno arrived and they started winning, many had a problem with it - even now some people think they have an FFP case to answer. 

I do understand your frustration with competing against parachute payments and big spenders.

Especially as Bristol is one of the better run clubs in the world.

Fulham, Middlesbrough, Sheffield Wednesday spent big too. 

This is a fair post, once more- you are much better and a better addition to the forum than Delta was IMO but anyway...I'd actually written out a response earlier but then on my phone, it logged me out by the time I'd finished and it had all gone! :doh:

Quote

*Villa Park fair value measurement poses a problem. 
As I've stated on countless occasions,
it was shown at cost under.....

Quote

Different owners, different CEOs a change in the reporting.

Indeed, but the swings in value are hard to believe! Investment Property, vs Cost, vs Fair Value...what you state while true, makes it rather hard to measure objectively. Which causes questions in terms of accounting...

Quote

This poses a problem for me. LOANS receivable...How will these loans be paid back? 

Quote

 

You may never know. Could be paid tomorrow or next year. When the club is sold. Or never. 

Randy Lerner kept loans receivable on the books for years, then wrote them off.

 

Some of these pose issues under FFP. 100% they do...if not payable within a year or under then it is not a current asset is it. If never, that raises further FFP questions- as a way to circumvent equity limits, which do exist under FFP it would seem.

Debt or Loan write off does not count as revenue or under the P&L for FFP. I mean it would show as reducing losses but is automatically excluded from FFP- if that is the case or is to be the case, then it calls the whole transaction into question, the viability of it. Nothing wrong with it from an accounting POV I reckon but from an FFP perspective...

Quote
Quote

*Rental arrangements. While rent of £2.6m . . . 

I have no idea but I do feel like your are clutching at straws here Mr Popodopolous.
Rents on a sliding scale are nothing unusual. This may pose a problem for you but with respect,
your opinion is not important. There is a lot you do not know. I have been going through Aston Villa's
accounts for 13 years and there are things even in 2008 I could not understand. Could be one of Christian Purslow's accounting tricks.

Oddly enough, I've not looked at 2008 accounts all that recently- one thing that stood out to me was that when the takeover showed in (I think) the 2007 accounts showed Fair Value Adjustments- the fact is there was not one. The lack of adjustment seemed interesting but may in fact be an irrelevance- but I do remember it.

The fact is, that if the transaction is with a related party it has to be at or as if at arms length. It has to look commercially viable, for FFP if noting else. £10.4m or £13m rental return on a £56.7m transaction is laughable I'd have thought.

I am happy to state the FRS 102 regulation on leasing with respect to rent:

Quote

A lessee shall make the following disclosures for operating leases:

(a) the total of future minimum lease payments under non-cancellable operating leases for each of the following periods:

(i) not later than one year;

(ii) later than one year and not later than five years; and

(iii) later than five years.

(b) lease payments recognised as an expense.

(FRS 102 paragraph 20.16)

Villa Park is leased under an operating lease- this isn't an accounting trick by Purslow on the face of it but under FRS 102 it is a REQUIRED DISCLOSURE if beyond 5 years!!

REQUIRED DISCLOSURE UNDER UK ACCOUNTING REGULATIONS!!

The bit in bold shows that there is nothing beyond 5 years and should this be the case, then this is a pisspoor return on investment for a company. I checked both NSWE Stadium Limited and NSWE UK and the two stacked up. This calls into question the commercial viability in that respect. The EFL would have to substitute in a market rent but if it's a 4-5 year lease then it poses problems...

Let us compare it to:

Reading 2018/19 accounts:

Shows rent for within one year, between two and five years and In iver five years. The length of the lease itself is disclosed, £1.5m per season until June 2043.

The prior season, they showed it for one year, between two and five and in over five. Lease was again disclosed length and fee wise- £750,000 until June 2043. They sold the stadium twice but enough about that...the disclosures were correct.

Renhe appears to also show transparent or at least some technically correct disclosures in this respect.

Derby's is more opaque (a club in the dock) but it does at least state Operating Leases. One year, Two to five and over five- rent possibly £1.1m per season. Laughably low but they at least disclosed with some degree of transparency.

Quote

That's another thing too. How is Villa Park basically worth 2.5 x St Andrews! Or not at all far off it.

Quote

Are you seriously suggesting Birmingham did this right and we did not ? 
Having knowledge of the Small Heath and Birmingham areas and Villa Park's facilities,  Villa Park & St. Andrews

are not similar in any way possible. The difference in valuation is perfectly reasonable. The Sty is three quarters of a stadium.

It's amazing given the mess they've made in general, but your neighbours, at least from a technical rent x years and required disclosures stacks up perfectly! Gives a tidy profit too, looks nice and commercial.

£1.25m per season for 25 seasons rent. Paid £22.76m- that is £8.49m more in rent than price 'paid'. About 5.49% of price 'paid' as the annual rent. For 25 years that's a reasonable or at least acceptable looking return. Your one is 4.59% and is only for 4 or at most 5 years...that's a huge difference! Their one looks a lot more acceptable for FFP, in terms of commercial dealings, arms length that's for sure.

It certainly lists 1 year, 2-5 years...and beyond!

Your one is missing a key disclosure, looks uncommercial, total disclosed rent waaaay below price paid- Reading's first one of £750,000 per season x 25 on a £26.5m transaction looked suspect but they have rectified a bit by matching up rent to sale price near enough with £1.5m x 24 years for a £37.5m sale price. Your one looks...well! Only worse one is Sheffield Wednesday and they currently are in an EFL hearing. Derby's stated today, Reading are under investigation too!

With respect to Birmingham, their valuation remains to be seen but the disclosures, rental return and the like all stack up. It also looks a bit curious that two areas of the same city should have such large differences in land valuation...but that only of course forms a certain part of valuation methods so may be nothing.

Quote

Sanctions

Quote

The PL don't have a points tariff sanction. Fine. We were 
not convicted. But there are sanctions available. Leicester & Bournemouth will tell you that. 
The PL are self serving and protect themselves before anyone else.

I've done a bit of reading into the Leicester case. Less so the Bournemouth one but one thing that was notable was that the PL were most unhelpful. There was eventually a settlement as both were untouchable in the PL in terms of an EFL imposed punishment, the PL were pretty reticent to even enforce fines and never did! The EFL pursued Leicester for 3 to 3 and a half years after the alleged breach, Bournemouth this was not settled for 3 years but the EFL kept going and QPR 4 years in and out of arbitration etc when back under the EFL umbrella.

This was under an incompetent CEO in Shaun Harvey- Rick Parry is much different! Lack of a points tariff in the PL means that perhaps it's best for the EFL to look at if and when you return. :)

Quote

Was a dormant shell company

Quote

I see no problem with these background holding companies
and the switching of them. We have been doing that for at least 30
years. Most football teams do, Arsenal, Man U, Bolton, Birmingham, et

Come on. Look at the names and switching! If you can provide another comparable example I'd love to see it...it's unusual in the extreme and quite a bit happened under Xia I think, but I'm unsure what he hoped to gain out of it. as it is all about the company number not name.

The question is where does a dormant shell company get £56.7m from...well the obvious answer is the owners but this is clearly an effort to circumvent Owner Investment limits under FFP, as there are equity limits, debt write offs not allowed etc...When I say limits what I mean is not that the EFL or whoever can stop owners investing in the club, more that after a certain limit, the rest is excluded for FFP purposes.

Aston Villa Limited or NSWE UK were loaned an amount about in line with their turnover that season by a hitherto dormant shell company in exchange for Villa Park to be leased back!? Come off it! It's blatantly an attempt to circumvent equity limits, debt write off rules etc etc.

From a commercial arms length POV, it feels suspect like I say. Suppose you went to a bank or a mortgage or I don't know a commercial property company and asked for that and that rate of return (a truly third party one). A party proposing that would surely be laughed out the room! Imagine how ridiculous some of these transactions sound...

Quote

Aston Villa: "Hello, yes can I have a loan and it be put through the accounts at fair value please in exchange for Villa Park"?

Quote

Bank/Property Management Company/Whoever: "Sure and what terms are you offering

Quote

Aston Villa: "Well! We fancy releasing the capital on our asset. £56.7m minus net book value should just about cover it. In return you will get rent at £2.6m per season"

Quote

Bank/Property Management Company/Whoever "Perhaps...20-25 years? That's good! Cash cow and all that, the latter will yield a modest profit %.

Quote

Aston Villa:  "Err....we were kind of thinking 4-5 seasons should cover it. We have some issues you see but these will be long gone when we are in Europe!"

Quote

Bank/Property Management Company/Whoever: "Eh?? We get £10.4m or at best £13m rent for a £56.7m transaction! What's in it for us?? Do you have any other reasons for this loan...and time frames perhaps".

Now that's a bit fanciful but you see, the commercial pressures, the pull and the push of two willing and arms length parties. Also worth considering that Aston Villa would be having to do this transaction in a hurry to get it into the correct accounts for FFP purposes. A Bank/Property Management Company/Whoever would play on this and look to drive as hard a bargain as possible for both price and rent. Knowing that Aston Villa have few places to go...that deal on the face of it falls a long way below commercial scrutiny to me!! Awful ROI- not even factored inflation and the like into the reducing value of that annual rent unless it is inflation adjusted. The rent return, let alone the price- the bargaining, haggling factor- this just seems all wrong!

Quote

The Bury factor

Quote

The EFL can go harder on FFP but I think we are in good shape going forward especially with the easing
due to Covid and the resale value of our recent signings.

We can try to hold on to new players or cash in.  The past however is a can of worms. Opening it sets a
vindictive vengeful precedent.  

Reminds of me Wolves. Agents advising the board, Portugal Internationals arriving but when Zenga and Lambert were struggling no one said anything. When Nuno arrived and they started winning, many had a problem with it - even now some people think they have an FFP case to answer. 

I do understand your frustration with competing against parachute payments and big spenders.

Especially as Bristol is one of the better run clubs in the world.

Fulham, Middlesbrough, Sheffield Wednesday spent big too. 

I think they should in the current climate both ease but go harder. It'll be eased and yes moving forward I see good grounds for optimism for you...

Sorry doesn't wash. Is the past a can of worms? Already mentioned, the EFL pursued QPR, Leicester and Bournemouth for 4 years, 3 to 3 and a half years and 3 years respectively. Not sure that washes sorry! EFL need to do right by all 24 member clubs. If opening the past is a can of worms and vindictive, vengeful precedent then ask the EFL why Derby and Sheffield Wednesday are under investigation and were charged? They were charged for 3 year period running from 2015/16-2017/18 yet because the stadium sales happened i 2017/18, that still covers a period ie 2019/20, the season they were charged in. I'd suggest your case has similar timescales, except one year on if and when you return.

Dunno. Different cases IMO. For a start after allowable costs and promotion bonuses their FFP was shown to be £3-4m within range or estimated- they made a profit a legit profit in 2015/16 too and did this without recourse to twice 'exceptional' items or questionable stadia sale arrangements! The Mendes case is very interesting, they may well have a case to answer- Neves to Wolves in particular was rather astonishing, why Wolves...why Nuno in fact, given his prior two jobs were Valencia and Porto! I suppose a counterargument is fringe players at Porto/Benfica (do not include Neves in that but Boly, Cavaleiro etc), Monaco B and Atletico/Atletico B may not have the high wages people assume! Lot still unclear about that.

Parachute Payments are quite difficult granted. I have mixed views on these...on one hand clubs may go into admin as the TV gap is so great but they surely do distort competition too! Big spending is acceptable, provided that it is a) Within FFP b) Affordable for a club or maybe c) Funded by player sales.

Fulham I think are fine atm, Middlesbrough- well they downsized massively. Hence why Gibson is so angry about things...they did things bang right- so have we actually.

Sheffield Wednesday are in a hearing. I'd watch this case with interest were I an Aston Villa fan, Derby's starts on Monday- IF the EFL were to win these cases, that gives some cover for action vs you and looking at their accounts and many exceptional items, I'd likely put Reading in the dock too. Sets a precedent...if a precedent is set that forms a basis!

I also think potentially Blackburn, Stoke to name 2- these are two to watch on FFP. Sure I've forgotten some!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to add to that point, to further indicate the questions over the commercial nature or otherwise:

Required disclosures under FRS 102. On the PWC website.

Want to know why I chose that site? Well a) They are a massive and renowned company and know their stuff and there's another very specific reason...

The auditors for NSWE UK Limited therefore also Aston Villa Limited and NSWE Stadium Limited, they are...why PWC! :)

Quote

Financial statements of lessors: operating leases - Disclosures

Publication date: 28 Mar 2018

20.30 A lessor shall disclose the following for operating leases:

the future minimum lease payments under non-cancellable operating leases for each of the following periods:

not later than one year;

later than one year and not later than five years; and

later than five years;

total contingent rents recognised as income; and

a general description of the lessor’s significant leasing arrangements, including, for example, information about contingent rent, renewal or purchase options and escalation clauses, and restrictions imposed by lease arrangements.

20.31 [AMD 377] In addition, the requirements for disclosure about assets in accordance with Sections 17 and 27 apply to lessors for assets provided under operating leases. [AMD 377]

Either there have been the incorrect disclosures made in the accounts (not bloody likely) or the lease terms are very uncommercial for the price paid!

Further:

Quote

Sale and leaseback transactions - Sale and leaseback transaction results in an operating lease

Publication date: 28 Mar 2018

20.34 If a sale and leaseback transaction results in an operating lease, and it is clear that the transaction is established at fair value, the seller-lessee shall recognise any profit or loss immediately. If the sale price is below fair value, the seller-lessee shall recognise any profit or loss immediately unless the loss is compensated for by future lease payments at below market price. In that case the seller-lessee shall defer and amortise such loss in proportion to the lease payments over the period for which the asset is expected to be used. If the sale price is above fair value, the seller-lessee shall defer the excess over fair value and amortise it over the period for which the asset is expected to be used.

Sale and leaseback transactions - Disclosures

Publication date: 28 Mar 2018

20.35 Disclosure requirements for lessees and lessors apply equally to sale and leaseback transactions. The required description of significant leasing arrangements includes description of unique or unusual provisions of the agreement or terms of the sale and leaseback transactions.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, B1ackbird said:

Well, you know that Man U penalty (that wasn't a penalty but was only awarded because officials queue up to appease the 'brand' at the expense of the so called tiny club) 

You get the picture. 

 

? 

What ? You think that we get decisions unfairly because of a status you don't think we deserve ? Is that it ?
Last season we were on the end of a few poor calls. The West Brom handballed goal sticks in the memory.


In Premier League contentious calls like that are par for the course. I expect it.
In the Championship the refereeing standard is shocking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Just to add to that point, to further indicate the questions over the commercial nature or otherwise:

Required disclosures under FRS 102. On the PWC website.

Want to know why I chose that site? Well a) They are a massive and renowned company and know their stuff and there's another very specific reason...

The auditors for NSWE UK Limited therefore also Aston Villa Limited and NSWE Stadium Limited, they are...why PWC! :)

Either there have been the incorrect disclosures made in the accounts (not bloody likely) or the lease terms are very uncommercial for the price paid!

Further:

 

We will have to agree to disagree here Mr P.  Some of this stuff will never be reopened.
This is a deep dive which most don't understand I'm not sure if you're more angry at the Villa or Shaun Harvey


I get the feeling that many would like us to regress into a another Leeds United, replace quality players with kids and journeymen and then decay to a shell of our former selves. But we will fight back. And yes that must include transfer activity.

 

(What would you think of John Terry as new Bristol City Head Coach ?)


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, luke_bristol said:

I do remember how amusing Villa fans found all that. Didn’t see much laughing last night.

Sadly I barely remember it. I do recall a 5-0 victory however. At time most Villa fans wanted the manager sacked.
Some even wanted Lee Johnson as the "young and upcoming" candidate,  you guys were actually above us in the table at the time (I think).

But your club is in the ascendancy, ours is in the descendancy.  In 5 years our fortunes have been very different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...