Jump to content
IGNORED

Villa's finances and FFP


harvey54
 Share

Recommended Posts

34 minutes ago, AnAstonVillafan said:

Everyone goes on about that goal vs Sheff Utd, but we had three big decisions given us against us during that season which cost us points as well. The worst case being the legitimate equaliser which was disallowed vs Crystal Palace.

Our FFP is fine, the EFL aspect behind us now. We don't do dodgy deals, and we didn't use luck to beat Arsenal, Everton and draw West Ham

OK.
The goal is not a decision that went against anyone, it was a clear goal that the Tech missed and for some reason VAR were off having a coffee. Even the most biased fan would have to hold their hands up and concede that.  

As for FFP, I would hope it was ok, getting £100m a year is bound to take the edge off. But the point was mentioned where would you have been with out that promotion, or if you would have, deservedly, been relegated? You're fine now, and I think you will be for the foreseeable. But what I don't like is that the Prem seems to be some sort of shield . Bournemouth were probably the same when they went up, they threw loads of money at it and managed to hide in the Prem. A few years with the money that comes with it should sort things out a bit. 

 

Edited by 1960maaan
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

OK.
The goal is not a decision that went against anyone, it was a clear goal that the Tech missed and for some reason VAR were off having a coffee. Even the most biased fan would have to hold their hands up and concede that.  

As for FFP, I would hope it was ok, getting £100m a year is bound to take the edge off. But the point was mentioned where would you have been with out that promotion, or if you would have, deservedly, been relegated? You're fine now, and I think you will be for the foreseeable. But what I don't like is that the Prem seems to be some sort of shield . Bournemouth were probably the same when they went up, they threw loads of money at it and managed to hide in the Prem. A few years with the money that comes with it should sort things out a bit. 

 

As I said we took advantage of a poor call. But we had been on the wrong end of a few that year. Maybe it evens out ? Unless you really wanted to see us come straight back down as many on this forum wished for.

NSWE and Christian Purslow had planned on promotion a year later than it was achieved. Yes, had we failed we would have had to cut costs and Grealish would have gone then. But don't think that a club like Villa or even West Brom or say West Ham would be happy going down and then shedding their best players and not replacing them.

Some of them are going to challenge. That includes squad strengthening.  There seems to be a narrative here that clubs shouldn't sign players when relegated and simply sell, sell, sell.

You say the Premier League is some sort of shield ? Against what ? Ambition ?

One of our owners said "the sky is the limit"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, AnAstonVillafan said:

As I said we took advantage of a poor call. But we had been on the wrong end of a few that year. Maybe it evens out ? Unless you really wanted to see us come straight back down as many on this forum wished for.

NSWE and Christian Purslow had planned on promotion a year later than it was achieved. Yes, had we failed we would have had to cut costs and Grealish would have gone then. But don't think that a club like Villa or even West Brom or say West Ham would be happy going down and then shedding their best players and not replacing them.

Some of them are going to challenge. That includes squad strengthening.  There seems to be a narrative here that clubs shouldn't sign players when relegated and simply sell, sell, sell.

You say the Premier League is some sort of shield ? Against what ? Ambition ?

One of our owners said "the sky is the limit"

I'm interested in this bit in particular- it depends what you mean or what someone means by replace I suppose.

If you mean replace to a lesser but still nonetheless decent standard then very much so, if you mean replace like for like then financial levels don't necessarily permit it for clubs- see Bournemouth, they made a lot more cuts than input.

My estimate is that 2019/20 relegation would have seen a £52.5m Upper Loss Limit on return following roll-ups etc...sure that could've got very interesting even with Parachute Payments. The Upper Loss Limit being the sum total of Championship x 3 and PL x 1, added up, /4 and then x3.

EFL behind you? I mean £72m to 2021 and £88.5m to 2021/22- clearly if Grealish goes that's that FFP discussion wise. If he doesn't then that Upper Loss Limit is inclusive of time in the EFL, which is why it isn't yet £105m.

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, AnAstonVillafan said:

As I said we took advantage of a poor call. But we had been on the wrong end of a few that year. Maybe it evens out ? Unless you really wanted to see us come straight back down as many on this forum wished for.

NSWE and Christian Purslow had planned on promotion a year later than it was achieved. Yes, had we failed we would have had to cut costs and Grealish would have gone then. But don't think that a club like Villa or even West Brom or say West Ham would be happy going down and then shedding their best players and not replacing them.

Some of them are going to challenge. That includes squad strengthening.  There seems to be a narrative here that clubs shouldn't sign players when relegated and simply sell, sell, sell.

You say the Premier League is some sort of shield ? Against what ? Ambition ?

One of our owners said "the sky is the limit"

I might be wrong , but I thought you had to put in predicted accounts and one of the things in there was selling Grealish. You didn't sell so I'm not sure what the point is. 

As for shield, what I meant is that as an EFL Club you spent massively. There were a lot of questions over FFP which disappeared with Promotion.  Because they are not the same organisation EFL rules cannot/will not be used against a Prem side. Or that's how it seems.

FFP is not fit for purpose , the game needs something but everyone has their own agenda .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

I might be wrong , but I thought you had to put in predicted accounts and one of the things in there was selling Grealish. You didn't sell so I'm not sure what the point is. 

As for shield, what I meant is that as an EFL Club you spent massively. There were a lot of questions over FFP which disappeared with Promotion.  Because they are not the same organisation EFL rules cannot/will not be used against a Prem side. Or that's how it seems.

FFP is not fit for purpose , the game needs something but everyone has their own agenda .

Was one of the theories out there but seemingly not- I would though take issue with the Stadium Sale and leaseback given the fact it was listed as a Current Asset, a Receivable- yet the Receivable in the typical timeframe of a Current Asset had not yet been paid or received.

Technically, the FFP Rules are the same, save for the differing loss limits so there's no real reason why both sides shouldn't enforce for each other.

Does it work that way in practice though? Maybe a joint Body is needed either with or above the PL and EFL to enforce it properly...a Governance body to oversee the overall Governance of issues that the two Leagues interpret differently- something like, oh I don't know- the FA.

For example, under it AVFC probably wouldn't have been able to spend quite as much as they did on promotion, or might have had a Soft Embargo applied on Promotion while proper investigation took place. The idea being the Regulations- save for the loss limits which vary in the two divisions- are identical regardless of the division, and if a Soft Embargo is applicable due to doubts, it is applied regardless of Promotion or Relegation.

In the EFL, I expect that Clubs would have to sell the player first and then sign- so far it's been Buendia, Bailey- and now from nowhere, Ings- before the sale has gone through entirely.

Their Accounting period ran until 31st May 2021, they can't backdate Grealish into there unless it was in their projections to 2021, so it'd be very interesting to know how the period to 2021 looks- unless as I say it was forecasted prior to May but taking place in August- ie a deal in place.

Sarr, Tuanzebe and Cantwell have also been linked- if Grealish goes for £100m then it all falls into place but if not...

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From memory, it was £29-30m aggregate loss in the EFL over 2017/18 and 2018/19 for Aston Villa- that'd be the FFP loss.

2019/20 saw a £99.4m loss in the PL but obviously £16-16.5m in Allowable Costs, £4.2m loss due to Covid, and £36.1m of Deferred Revenues.

Deferred Revenue is the interesting bit there, cannot be counted as a loss surely if deferred, or double counted- simplest way might be to halve for FFP purposes and stick £18.05m in 2019/20 and the same in 2020/21.

Before it's halved and averaged.

£99.4m

-£4.2m

-£16.5m

Perhaps £99.4m-£20.7m/2=£34.35m.

It's been a while since I delved into it in detail, but deferred revenue- it'll be benefited from in 2020/21 or just halve it for FFP purposes...can't write it off as a cost to be excluded in Year 1 and benefit in Year 2. Fairest solution is to halve and allocate it equally for FFP purposes, or the simplest anyway- all the Revenue and Costs would be added and halved anyway.

Would mean that an FFP loss exceeding perhaps £16m in 2020/21 would mean excess Losses- subject to the year of the Grealish transaction of course. Swiss Ramble had their 3 year loss fwiw to 2020 before obviously the rollup etc as £64-65m, or £3-4m over limits.

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

I might be wrong , but I thought you had to put in predicted accounts and one of the things in there was selling Grealish. You didn't sell so I'm not sure what the point is. 

As for shield, what I meant is that as an EFL Club you spent massively. There were a lot of questions over FFP which disappeared with Promotion.  Because they are not the same organisation EFL rules cannot/will not be used against a Prem side. Or that's how it seems.

FFP is not fit for purpose , the game needs something but everyone has their own agenda .

You are right that it is not fit for purpose. Prem and Champions League clubs can not be governed in the same way as EFL clubs.

The gap between the revenues is far too high. We did spend too much, but selfishly I'm happy we're back up. The football club still bears damage from the relegation and the time away from the gravy train.

2 minutes ago, formerly known as ivan said:

£100m for a player of Grealish’s standard. Anyone care to even explain this?

 

Release clause. He signed a new contract in September. Without it we would have held out for more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, AnAstonVillafan said:

You are right that it is not fit for purpose. Prem and Champions League clubs can not be governed in the same way as EFL clubs.

The gap between the revenues is far too high. We did spend too much, but selfishly I'm happy we're back up. The football club still bears damage from the relegation and the time away from the gravy train.

Release clause. He signed a new contract in September. Without it we would have held out for more.

Indeed they can't- if you think EFL are restrictive, in some ways you ain't seen nothing yet- when you qualify for either competition, UEFA FFP is 30m euros (plus allowable costs) over 3 seasons...no Fixed Asset Profits for FFP either. :whistle2: Just ask Wolves- they breached it partly due to EFL season ands have to achieve a strict 3-year breakeven as part of their Settlement Agreement.

Could change of course, but as it stands that one is even more restrictive by certain metrics than even the EFL one.

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AnAstonVillafan said:

You are right that it is not fit for purpose. Prem and Champions League clubs can not be governed in the same way as EFL clubs.

The gap between the revenues is far too high. We did spend too much, but selfishly I'm happy we're back up. The football club still bears damage from the relegation and the time away from the gravy train.

Release clause. He signed a new contract in September. Without it we would have held out for more.

Sod the release clause! He isn’t a £30m player let alone £100m! He will chip in with the occasional assist but more than likely will be back at Villa on loan within two seasons

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, formerly known as ivan said:

£100m for a player of Grealish’s standard. Anyone care to even explain this?

When Pogba’s agent received a bigger fee for the player’s transfer to Man U than we received from Brighton for Webster, you knew the inmates had taken over the asylum.

Financial common sense has long since stopped being applied in the world of major players’ salaries and transfer fees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, 1960maaan said:

OK.
The goal is not a decision that went against anyone, it was a clear goal that the Tech missed and for some reason VAR were off having a coffee. Even the most biased fan would have to hold their hands up and concede that.  

 

 

Because it wasn't a VAR decision to make. Goal line technology is different and the decision wasn't made due to the positioning of all the players between the cameras and the line. The game went on and at the time although it looked over the line there was no other decision to make for VAR. It may be different now but frankly not bothered. 

Couple of other points (which ho ho ho, Bournemouth would have relegated us with, but...) the incident happened with 10 games to go. 10! Not the last game, not even in the run in as there was a quarter of the season to run. As mentioned by the other Villa fan earlier we could point to horrendous decisions that should have gone our way. Okay, none so much as the ball being over the line but Lansbury putting the ball in the net at Palace in the last minute, only for kevin Friend to disallow it for what he said was a Grealish dive. (Grealish passed the ball to Lansbury he shot and scored. Even if he did dive there was no advantage and lansbury scored, the person who he 'dived' over was gary Cahill who went off injured because of the contact he made with his lunge into grealish). The decision was roundly condemned at the time but VAR couldn't get involved. We just had to wear it.

The other thing was the Sheff U 'goal' was in the first half. Not at the end of the game. So, nothing to suggest we wouldn't have equalised, gone on to have won the game. The re-writing of history is pointless.

Final thing to point out is that this is not particularly unique. west brom had a goal chalked off last season because of the amount of legs in the way (either chalked off or should have been chalked off at the other end, forget which way) meant VAR couldn't see the final frame that would be needed to confirm one way or t'other. They were apologised to as another camera angle later showed it should have gone their way. 

Technology fails, and it is rare nowadays, but it is what it is. But to think that we stayed up because of it is nonsense. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Not having a dig at anyone on here but the irony of some Villa fans complaining a) About others and their spending b) FFP c) Claiming it's no longer a thing...

https://www.villatalk.com/search/?q=ffp&updated_after=any&sortby=newest

I like how you've gone on to Villa Talk and searched "FFP" 🤣

Most Premier League fans do not understand FFP/ S&S.
When we were relegated no Villa fan had a clue. When I went onto our social pages, and warned that it could hold back our ambitions of promotion I was shot down in flames. Although a couple of years later some of my fellow fans started to listen.

Most Premer League clubs fans seem to not worry about these things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, peter w said:

Because it wasn't a VAR decision to make.

Why not ? It is there to correct wrong decisions or to spot things the Ref hasn't

Goal line technology is different and the decision wasn't made due to the positioning of all the players between the cameras and the line. The game went on and at the time although it looked over the line there was no other decision to make for VAR.

7 cameras missed it , I'd like to know how. Not as though there were crowds of players around, or not as though the keeper didn't hold the ball behind the post. Just watched this, over a minute to make that decision right.

1740050187_Screenshot2021-08-05at07_47_37.png.4e104bbee95e9e112254797228389771.png

It may be different now but frankly not bothered. 

Of course you're not. In the same position I would take it, laugh and move on. 

Couple of other points (which ho ho ho, Bournemouth would have relegated us with, but...) the incident happened with 10 games to go. 10! Not the last game,

Just as goals change games, momentum counts for a lot. Seff U were in 6th may have made Europe and their season changes. You were 19th

not even in the run in as there was a quarter of the season to run. As mentioned by the other Villa fan earlier we could point to horrendous decisions that should have gone our way. Okay, none so much as the ball being over the line but Lansbury putting the ball in the net at Palace in the last minute, only for kevin Friend to disallow it for what he said was a Grealish dive. (Grealish passed the ball to Lansbury he shot and scored. Even if he did dive there was no advantage and lansbury scored, the person who he 'dived' over was gary Cahill who went off injured because of the contact he made with his lunge into grealish). The decision was roundly condemned at the time but VAR couldn't get involved. We just had to wear it.

Again, decisions. Freekicks , fouls, dives and even Offsides are subject to interpretation. Where as the ball is either over the line or not, it is not a discussion.

The other thing was the Sheff U 'goal' was in the first half. Not at the end of the game. So, nothing to suggest we wouldn't have equalised, gone on to have won the game. The re-writing of history is pointless.

You may have equalised, Sheff may have scored again. With them pushing for possible Euro football and you looking over your shoulder at the Championship , which is more likely ?

Final thing to point out is that this is not particularly unique. west brom had a goal chalked off last season because of the amount of legs in the way (either chalked off or should have been chalked off at the other end, forget which way) meant VAR couldn't see the final frame that would be needed to confirm one way or t'other. They were apologised to as another camera angle later showed it should have gone their way. 

Technology fails, and it is rare nowadays, but it is what it is. But to think that we stayed up because of it is nonsense. 

Tech fais, fair enough. But there is a "failsafe" in place with VAR. This just proves it is next to unless. As for the WBA goal/no goal, I can't comment as I haven't seen it. The goal that wasn't given would annoy me whoever it was for or against, there are supposed to be a team of people watching the screens to prevent big errors, this was THE single biggest one. They could have stepped in and a lot of people would have changed their minds towards VAR, as it is it just proved that it's not good enough. While we're there, the European Championships underlined that. Pretty much every game with the British in charge felt slow and clunky, the games covered by the rest felt much sleeker and quicker.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Phileas Fogg said:

This thread is a bit strange - I have no idea why we have a thread dedicated to your FFP situation. 

 

 

3 hours ago, Super said:

19 pages....

1) They effectively spent more than they were entitled to given the methods that were used. This gave them a competitive advantage, whereas had the EFL acted correctly in Summer 2018, both Aston Villa and Derby and maybe more- while not docked points at that stage, would have been more restricted in the market for 2018/19.

2) Sheffield Wednesday or more likely Chansiri and his mates, got their comeuppance in the end, sure we were all happy to see them drop. 

3) Who feels sympathy for Derby right now? Signings reportedly restricted to free agents on £4,500 per week, 1 year deal, 6 month loan restrictions to name a few.

I believe it's great and a sign of the EFL doing things better.

They could technically within restrictions have had they so chose within the Regulations, restricted various clubs better in Summer 2018 IMO. This would have reduced their competitive advantage

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

 

1) They effectively spent more than they were entitled to given the methods that were used. This gave them a competitive advantage, whereas had the EFL acted correctly in Summer 2018, both Aston Villa and Derby and maybe more- while not docked points at that stage, would have been more restricted in the market for 2018/19.

2) Sheffield Wednesday or more likely Chansiri and his mates, got their comeuppance in the end, sure we were all happy to see them drop. 

3) Who feels sympathy for Derby right now? Signings reportedly restricted to free agents on £4,500 per week, 1 year deal, 6 month loan restrictions to name a few.

I believe it's great and a sign of the EFL doing things better.

They could technically within restrictions have had they so chose within the Regulations, restricted various clubs better in Summer 2018 IMO. This would have reduced their competitive advantage

I genuinely don't think anyone is that bothered. I appreciate football finances and balance sheets are something you look into in depth, but in the scheme of things (especially when you factor in the last 18 months) I don't think it's that important. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Phileas Fogg said:

This thread is a bit strange - I have no idea why we have a thread dedicated to your FFP situation. 

 

It’s very weird and a little embarrassing tbh. Let’s concentrate on our own finances before casting aspersions elsewhere. Our cupboards are now pretty much bare because of how MA was allowed to waste our cash over the last few years so we’re in no position to question any other teams.  Imho. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

I genuinely don't think anyone is that bothered. I appreciate football finances and balance sheets are something you look into in depth, but in the scheme of things (especially when you factor in the last 18 months) I don't think it's that important. 

Hmm, Derby e.g. are serial cheats, so they deserve all they get- we're nothing like them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Phileas Fogg said:

This thread is a bit strange - I have no idea why we have a thread dedicated to your FFP situation. 

 

Completely agree. I noticed a lot of City fans on Twitter yesterday commenting on the Grealish situation and how Villa fans were all "crying".

 

Couldn't care less myself. It's an embarrassing obsession some City fans seem to have...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, PhilC said:

Completely agree. I noticed a lot of City fans on Twitter yesterday commenting on the Grealish situation and how Villa fans were all "crying".

 

Couldn't care less myself. It's an embarrassing obsession some City fans seem to have...

I was rejected by Villa as a schoolboy in the 70s and still don't like them :laugh:, but I couldn't care less about their financial affairs and don't understand our fans obsession with them, they're a way bigger club than us, always have been 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...