Villa's finances and FFP

[Mr Popodopolous]

11 minutes ago, Delta said:

All EFL sanctions ultimately mean the penalty is financial.

If FFP want to split hairs over a perfectly legitimate transaction then people will simply carry out the transaction accordingly.  All you are really doing is inconveniencing individuals, not the clubs with your witch hunt.  I fail to see how any changes in this area help FFP because as I said, people will just ensure the transactions conform to whatever is prescribed.

I'm possibly coming at the financial vs wider range of sanctions from a different angle to you.

A fine can be possible for clubs  but so too can points deductions, embargoes etc. If by any and all sanctions being financial you mean it'll affect a club financially then yeah, fair chance that's the case.

UEFA simply exclude the profit on eg a stadium or training ground sale and leaseback- they're the two most common fixed assets that might turn a tidy profit- from the FFP calculations.

It's automatically excluded as a matter of course. Club could have a £10m profit on stadium sale and leaseback, or a £200m profit- it's simply excluded from the calculation/relevant income. 

Might be different in the EFL, I'm just offering a comparison. All I'm saying is it might be worthy of further investigation.

Unsure it's fair to class it as  a witch hunt, I've been strongly critical of other clubs too. Two of whom have been charged (Derby and Sheffield Wednesday). 

[Delta]

As you've said many times: "Villa are the ones I really want".  Coupled with your repeated clutching at straws as far as Villa are concerned, I consider it to be a witch hunt.

UEFA rules are irrelevant and currently, at least 18 EFL clubs don't want to use their rules.  

Changing will of course disadvantage those EFL clubs who are on the brink but have not yet cashed in on their major asset.  Therefore, changing the rules now will give an unfair sporting advantage to those who have benefited from a ground sale.  It;s worth noting that your own club cannot benefit, which may well be influencing your thoughts.  I for one would also like to see what you pay in rent investigated as I'm fairly sure it will be under fair market value.

As the rules stand, Villa's accounts have passed - There is nothing to investigate.  Moving forward, how difficult do you think it would be to just complete the transaction as you are suggesting?

[slartibartfast]

55 minutes ago, Delta said:

  Moving forward, how difficult do you think it would be to just complete the transaction as you are suggesting?

Moving forward, we''l see you next season !

[havanatopia]

Mr Popodopolous, Delta says you have reached 'a witch hunt' status. That is praise indeed. Take a bow for all your research. Truly a marathon.

[Delta]

1 hour ago, havanatopia said:

Mr Popodopolous, Delta says you have reached 'a witch hunt' status. That is praise indeed. Take a bow for all your research. Truly a marathon.

I didn't mention any research (of which there has been little).  I was more covering his desperate "That could be examined/re-examined by the EFL" every time Villa announce something.

I don't think Pops has any real sense of what is worthwhile pursuit and what is pointless pursuit - Especially given that anything considered is by a 3rd party in any case.  I dare say he wouldn't be as keen if it was his own money that would fund these futile re-examinations but yes - Take a bow as it's been extremely entertaining watching that penny slowly drop.

[Mr Popodopolous]

40 minutes ago, Delta said:

I didn't mention any research (of which there has been little).  I was more covering his desperate "That could be examined/re-examined by the EFL" every time Villa announce something.

I don't think Pops has any real sense of what is worthwhile pursuit and what is pointless pursuit - Especially given that anything considered is by a 3rd party in any case.  I dare say he wouldn't be as keen if it was his own money that would fund these futile re-examinations but yes - Take a bow as it's been extremely entertaining watching that penny slowly drop.

You drunk or something?

Err, plenty of research actually- plenty. 

3rd party claim is questionable here- technically one could argue that Gellaw Newco 202 buying Pride Park is a 3rd party- couldn't we argue that Sheffield 3 Limited is a 3rd party, especially given that it is/was controlled by Sheffield 5 Limited (and before that Sheffield 4 Limited), which in turn was controlled by Chansiri. Where does third party begin and related Party end? Gellaw Newco 201 was the controlling party at the time and when that was wound up, Gellaw Newco 204 was the new controlling party. Was ultimately controlled by Morris and Chansiri respectively so it's a related party so I struggle so see what you are getting at. If it was truly a 3rd party, could the EFL have brought charges? Not sure.

Which employee are you at Villa Delta...declare your interest. Would be a good story!

EFL can fund any notional inquiry, as they funded the last set- by which I mean the independent valuations into Hillsborough, the Madjeski Pride Park. Or the hiring of QC's at Blackstone Chambers last October so I don't see what point you are trying to make here at all. I dare say club owners who are strongly opposed to this practice would provide money/lawyers/valuers/accountants to the EFL to help with their Inquiry- after all I think most clubs want it.

In terms of the other points raised in past posts, if it was simply excluded from calculations we'd all know where we are- I'm not fully sure that you grasp the UEFA concept of relevant income or the difference of FFP related calculations and accounting ones. They have it right anyway, UEFA. The method of offsetting loans due or debt or such like vs an asset is questionable under P&S regulations in the EFL.

In layman's terms, relevant income means income/profit relevant for FFP. They couldn't stop this type of transaction, they simply wouldn't include it in the calculations for relevant income- it would appear on your accounts, just would be excluded for FFP purposes.

Oh and on your other point. Punish those who have done it where questionable practices can be found then exclude it from calculations moving forward. 

Big difference, in terms of us paying rent- we did not benefit from a major asset sale. We did not bank any profit,. but it would nonetheless be interesting to see.

How difficult moving forward- are we talking UEFA or EFL regs?

[Delta]

Pops - All EFL charges are heard by independent 3rd parties, that is what I meant.  Do you think the EFL would be stupid enough to take a claim to a 3rd party on the basis that a loan was offset against income from the sale of an asset?  So what is the point of looking at it?

I am not connected to or employed by AVFC.  This is just one more ridiculous assumption in a long line of ridiculous assumptions.

I have no desire to grasp the (utterly pointless for this debate) UEFA concept.  It is of no interest to me.  However, you underestimate me if you think I've missed the point you're trying to ram home given that you make it in almost every single post.  Don't mistake lack of interest for lack of understanding. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Yep, Independent Disciplinary Commission- now I get your angle on that one.

Who can say. Anyone can say anything on a forum, the joys of the Internet- whether you are or aren't isn't all that relevant anyway.

Loan offset against income from asset sale is a new one in the context of FFP regs.  Who loaned the money for a start- club or owners? How can a business that had cash pouring out (exceptional costs I know) make a substantial loan like that- unless it was stuck in by the owners. Which opens up questions from an FFP angle again- there's an equity limit of £8m per season last time I looked- but there are two different types of losses under P&S- at least. There's the P&S figures and there's cash losses. No case to argue that the ground sale but especially method of payment benefits the cash losses but not the P&S? May not be covered though. Cash losses can have unlimited equity but require equity at least equal to the losses, but these limits do exist in FFP terms.

The EFL definition of cash losses is as follows:

Quote

1.1.4 Cash Losses means aggregate Adjusted Earnings Before Tax after:

(a) write back of:

(i) amortisation and/or impairment of Players’ registrations; and

(ii) profit or loss on the transfer of Players’ registrations; and

(b) inclusion of net cash flow in respect of transfers of Players’ registrations.

For 2018/19 therefore, your cash losses would've been- as it's a pretty narrow remit:

From your NSWE UK Accounts.

LOSS- £68,884,000

Quote

ELIMINATE:

AMORTISATION OF PLAYER REGISTRATIONS- £25,513,000

Quote

ALSO ELIMINATE:

PROFIT ON PLAYER DISPOSALS- £10,598,000.

Quote

NET CASH FLOW for PLAYER REGISTRATIONS- ADD BACK THE NET

PURCHASE-  £24,567,000

PROCEEDS FROM DISPOSAL- £9,417,000

Cash flow. Cash losses, equity limits for P&S but not Cash. Quite different from P&S losses.

Seems to balance itself out within £1-2m too but as non cash items you can eliminate these from the Cash Losses, but some of them get included in the P&S- ie Profit on Disposal, Amortisation of Player Registrations. Net Cash Flow we disregard.

Regards UEFA and their regs, well had you won the Carabao Cup this would have been a pretty relevant factor- as the ground sale undoubtedly wouldn't have counted towards Relevant Income, which would've made it interesting for that competition in terms of compliance.

As for the EFL, they have the right to investigate. They may well choose to investigate in depth...and decide there is no case to answer.

[GreedyHarry]

On 05/03/2020 at 13:43, Delta said:

And I have (in recent times) developed an increasing dislike of Bristol City due to their fans pedantic, monotonous  "it's not fair" bleating 24/7 and their downright stupidity.  You have fueled the flames somewhat by posting nonsense/incorrect guesswork and most on here seem to hang onto your every word.

Personally, it's kept my interest in the Championship alive because it's always nice to see you lose.

*fuelled

[Mr Popodopolous]

On a general note I'm a little confused at some of the stadium valuations given that Elland Road sold for £20m in 2017.

Unique assets I know, and Leeds didn't benefit as such, more that their owner brought it off the landlord they were renting it from- unless there was some kind of clause that's a bit on the low side? High 30's capacity wise so less but not wildly so than Aston Villa, land value in the area of Elland Road vs Aston? Hillsborough might be a good comparable though, ie Hillsborough vs Elland Road.

Yorkshire is often seen as not the best economically and that may factor into thinking here, but Leeds has a big financial and legal centre so doesn't fall into that category. Birmingham is the 2nd city but capacity, land prices and such huge differentials?

Edit- there was a buyback clause but I am assuming that it still had some grounding in commercial reality- perhaps it increased with inflation.

[BCFC Rich]

On 06/03/2020 at 06:38, Delta said:

Why is it touche?

He's a Wednesday fan - That's the team whose old and decrepit ground I criticised - It's had no improvements done to it since Queen Victoria was on the throne baring a roof on the Kop (the same Kop Villa took over in the 70s)  Furthermore, they are almost as bitter and twisted as you lot are because we dared to ask them to pay the full wages of a player they wanted to loan from us.

 

On 06/03/2020 at 10:27, Delta said:

There's more chance of us buying St Andrews as well.  Be nice to do something with that trophy cabinet room - It's had such little use over the past 100 odd years.

 

 

On 06/03/2020 at 10:50, Delta said:

I'm not wholly sure that the decrepit old dump is worth £60,000

If ever a ground needed bulldozing, it's Hillsborough.

I think the above show you are really the one who is bitter. We have fans from all sorts of clubs come on our forum and join the debate and we welcome it, including regular poster from rival clubs (even Rovers). This is the only time I have felt compelled to have a go at one of them. You are the epitome of the cliche Villa fan. Thinking everyone is against you, acting bitterly when you're critisised at all, and getting defensive and acting surprised when anyone dares to you to question the club and its ethics when its clear that at least you haven't followed the spirit of FFP. Fair play for having successfully taken advantage of a loophole - it looks for now at least that it is working out for you but don't be surprised that clubs who have followed the spirit of the rules are annoyed about it! Just like big corps not paying tax without breaking the law etc people have every right to express anger and annoyance. 

48 minutes ago, Delta said:

 

I have no desire to grasp the (utterly pointless for this debate) UEFA concept.  It is of no interest to me.  However, you underestimate me if you think I've missed the point you're trying to ram home given that you make it in almost every single post.  Don't mistake lack of interest for lack of understanding. 

Then with the best will in the world why don't you just f*#k off back to your forum and not post on here you're not really adding anything to the debate and I'm pretty sure no one would miss you. 

[BCFC11]

On 05/03/2020 at 12:38, Delta said:

Big clubs are always branded as arrogant by tin pot clubs - It's the way of the world.

In the reverse, big clubs also view the fans of tin pot clubs as petty, small minded and irrelevant.

Villa fans in a nutshell.

Believe me it’s not just smaller clubs like ourselves who view Villa fans as arrogant to$$pots who still seem to think how every other clubs fans see them as a big club, 20  odd years ago maybe not anymore, living off past glories, even singing to Spurs fans a couple of weeks ago ‘champions of Europe, you’ll never sing that’. Embarrassing.

Will be delighted when this such HUGE club of yours gets relegated again this season.

[Mr Popodopolous]

6 minutes ago, BCFC11 said:

Villa fans in a nutshell.

Believe me it’s not just smaller clubs like ourselves who view Villa fans as arrogant to$$pots who still seem to think how every other clubs fans see them as a big club, 20  odd years ago maybe not anymore, living off past glories, even singing to Spurs fans a couple of weeks ago ‘champions of Europe, you’ll never sing that’. Embarrassing.

Will be delighted when this such HUGE club of yours gets relegated again this season.

I won't tar all with the same brush, but certainly it seems that there is a strong arrogant streak among sections of their fanbase- perhaps the Internet amplifies but the Tottenham chant didn't hear that one but nearly 40 years!

Seems to me that even when (likely the minority of sections, granted) are trying not to be arrogant, it's despite themselves. Having to hold in their views a bit.

[BCFC11]

2 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I won't tar all with the same brush, but certainly it seems that there is a strong arrogant streak among sections of their fanbase- perhaps the Internet amplifies but the Tottenham chant didn't hear that one but nearly 40 years!

Seems to me that even  when (the minority, granted) are trying not to be arrogant, it's despite themselves.

I could be wrong myself may of even been aimed at Man City fans in the EFL Cup final, another game they lost.

[cider-manc]

2 hours ago, Delta said:

Pops - All EFL charges are heard by independent 3rd parties, that is what I meant.  Do you think the EFL would be stupid enough to take a claim to a 3rd party on the basis that a loan was offset against income from the sale of an asset?  So what is the point of looking at it?

I am not connected to or employed by AVFC.  This is just one more ridiculous assumption in a long line of ridiculous assumptions.

I have no desire to grasp the (utterly pointless for this debate) UEFA concept.  It is of no interest to me.  However, you underestimate me if you think I've missed the point you're trying to ram home given that you make it in almost every single post.  Don't mistake lack of interest for lack of understanding. 

[havanatopia]

2 hours ago, Delta said:

I didn't mention any research (of which there has been little).  I was more covering his desperate "That could be examined/re-examined by the EFL" every time Villa announce something.

I don't think Pops has any real sense of what is worthwhile pursuit and what is pointless pursuit - Especially given that anything considered is by a 3rd party in any case.  I dare say he wouldn't be as keen if it was his own money that would fund these futile re-examinations but yes - Take a bow as it's been extremely entertaining watching that penny slowly drop.

We shall just have to wait and see how this all plays out. If there is wrong doing a club needs to take its punishment if not we all move on. 

Pops, on the Leeds sale. I recalled Elland Road was council owned so likely the sale value was under market value. Rebuild cost would be well over double that sum. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

7 minutes ago, havanatopia said:

We shall just have to wait and see how this all plays out. If there is wrong doing a club needs to take its punishment if not we all move on. 

Pops, on the Leeds sale. I recalled Elland Road was council owned so likely the sale value was under market value. Rebuild cost would be well over double that sum. 

Agreed- think the EFL need to investigate though- if it's a robust and fair investigation, it will be accepted- whether it's punishment or innocence.

Council owned? They sold it to Jacob Adler too though I think, maybe it changed ownership a few times- still £20m is certainly cheap! Football stadia are valued in a pretty speciic- not always but often like this- method though. Cost of rebuild but then how we calculate the depreciation- Depreciated Replacement Cost.

My main point with that is that it's a genuine arms-length transaction, if it's the Adler/Property guy one. However Elland Road is certainly above £20m, I'm sure.

Ouch- one article said they were paying £1.7m in rent on an £8m sale...well above market rate or is it? Commercial rent can often be 5% but that's well above. They were in dire straits though so had to take what deal they could.

[BCFC11]

@Delta hope you are enjoying the game as much as I am this evening 

[The Original OTIB]

Getting stuffed, only going one way, down.

[bcfc01]

3 minutes ago, The Original OTIB said:

Getting stuffed, only going one way, down.

Look forward to it next season - unless we change places of course 

C'Mon Leicester, 2 more would be good.

[sephjnr]

That wasn't a pen, at all, but all the other goals are Villa's own making.

[Kid in the Riot]

This is fantastic. Please let them be relegated. 

[77 punk]

look at villa's fixture list ha ha !

[bcfc01]

4-0.

Would have preferred the cheats to get hammered 6-0 but hey-ho.

They're crap 

-22 goal difference !

 

[BRISTOL86]

Haha **** off Villa

[Kid in the Riot]

23 minutes ago, 77 punk said:

look at villa's fixture list ha ha !

Sue Perb.

Looking at that, they're down. 

[Ronnie Sinclair]

Whatever our thoughts on Aston Villa's book keeping (I've no opinion at all on the financial affairs of other clubs, that's their business, if they've done something wrong it will come out, if not it won't), I've read this sad news about their legendary player Gordon Cowans Alzheimers Disease diagnosis - allegiances aside this is bad news

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2020/03/09/former-aston-villa-player-gordon-cowans-diagnosed-alzheimers/

[Lew-T]

Lovely stuff. However, the thought of having to go back to the area of Aston so soon though is depressing.

[lenred]

Lovely hearing the Leicester faithful constantly serenading Villa tonight with that old favourite ‘going down’. Can’t see them winning another game based on that performance! 

[BanburyRed]

Tyrone Mings!