Davefevs

18 hours ago, reddogkev said:

Am I the only person who couldn't give a crap about the virus?  Honestly, people live and die, what's the big deal?

Saw a guy today wearing a face mask at school to collect his kids, almost laughed my socks off!!

Each to their own I guess, but I hope that if you do get it, or cone into contact with someone who does have it, you do the right thing!

As a parent of a vulnerable child, I’m taking advice and precautions.

My Programme Manager returned from Italy (skiing) on Friday, was check going in and out of Italy, and HR advice was to stay at home for 2 days isolating.  He messaged the team on Sunday saying he was taking our concerns seriously and not gonna come in for 2 weeks (we are able to work remotely).  So, with him not being in, i went to the office yesterday.  Then yesterday, he said he was coming in today, so I told him I would work at home today and rest of week.  We need to test our ability to have large scale remote working, so I was helping that anyway.

Today new HR advice is he needs to stay at home for 2 weeks.

2 minutes ago, Wilf said:

I know from the references over the years that there’s a small HMHB Appreciation Society on here so thought I’d mention that Friday’s gig at  SWX opened with a name check for Trevor Tainton!

And Trescothick, who I understand was in the crowd.  Good gig.  Not as many of the old DHSS tracks as id have liked, but still good.  There’s a HMHB thread on the non-Footie forum.

4 minutes ago, CyderInACan said:

Was Patrick on the door?

Funny you ask that.  I haven’t been to “Odyssey” for who years, and as we got closer I said to my bruv “I hope he’s not on the door, he’ll ask us to walk round the block to sober up”

Bizarrely I was chatting to my bruv about going to Villa for an away game with two City fans I’d never met and his talk on the way up was a City, and talk (after defeat) on the way back was HMHB, and lo and behold @lager loud (and his mate Phil) were stood behind us.  Good to see you fellas
 

@BS4 on Tour... bumped into Wadsy....haven’t seen him to chat to for years.

Good gig, just wish I knew more of the songs.

Aiming to get to Seamus O’Donnells with my bruv and cuz for 6pm for a couple of beers and then head on over.

52 minutes ago, Bristol Rob said:

Many/any of you going?

Yep.  Never seen them, long time coming this one.  Only really listened to the DHSS albums.  Still remember a lot of the words.  Been humming stuff today, and smiling to myself.

5 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Interesting thread by Mike Thornton on the other loans stuff.

Accounting does seem to be about Interpretation and arguments as well as hard and fast regs, to a point?

That was the guy I was trying to think of the other day.

8 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Seems they didn't reduce the wage bill at all- I assumed it would've been down by £5-10m but even excluding promotion bonuses it stayed flat at best!

I also assumed- wrongly possibly- that Amortisation of Player Registrations would've come down- nope it increased!

£36.3m profit on Villa Park is curious, given we've been told that it's easily worth what it was sold for...

In the cash flow statements, there is/has been the princely sum of £10,000 received on "Proceeds from disposal of tangible fixed assets".

In fact, further digging suggests that this is all still due.

The rent might be £2.6m per year but it's not explicitly stated as such.

Now as I've mentioned before, UEFA have a rule that would negate all of this. Let's assume rent £2.6m per season?

UEFA with such transactions take 50 years of rental payment unless the ground has been disposed of truly in a genuinely arms length transaction and put that then subtract the profit for FFP purposes...profit negated at best if they eliminate loss on disposal of fixed assets, and a £90-95m loss at worst if you don't!

Seems to be though on early reading, this stadium sale, payable in the form of loans due from NSWE Stadium Limited.  Seems a bit similar to both Birmingham and Sheffield Wednesday from that respect- though I can't see anything wrong with the price or rent in Birmingham's case.

As always, very interested in your thoughts @Davefevs

Bit of a rubix cube this...will be interesting to see what everyone thinks.

Personally speaking at this time, I'm struggling to fathom how the stadium sale is right. It might be that the price is right- it might be that the Profit is right- but I don't see how both can be right.

It just feels out of kilter, one way or another as of now.

I don’t understand the property stuff in fairness.

But I really would like to see them relegated.

6 hours ago, downendcity said:

Poachers turning gamekeepers?

Not ‘arf.  We had our fun whilst we could, but now we are a bit strapped, let’s level the playing field.  I guess Mel will change his player valuation / amortisation method to fall into line at the same time too.

3 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I'd also add that as well as the points penalty if guilty, the parachute payments should also be a hot topic. 

I'd like to see it be the case that any- any- side who has overspent their way up gets stripped of parachute payments or has them excluded from the Ffp calculations. 

More realistic perhaps is a formula. Quite simply  eg 

Exceed FFP by 20% and Year 1 Parachute Payments £40m. Well you only receive £40m or have £10m of that stripped out of the calcs.

Year 2 is £33m I believe. Same again, £8.25m removed or disregarded for FFP purposes. 

Any thoughts @Davefevs? 

Nah....too soft.

If deemed to be “cooking the books” and the punishment is for a retrospective season, and that season resulted in unfairly in gaining promotion, they should take the points penalty and not be able to use any of their Parachute Payments over any years they they are entitled to receive them.

Mmmmmm

2 hours ago, Big C said:

Massive win for the girls today. Now third from bottom 

Yes, saw the result and goal earlier

2 hours ago, BanburyRed said:

Precise run and finish from Ebony Salmon, got herself across the last defender from a through ball and good composure to score.

She’s got some pace....seen her a few times in highlights.

1 hour ago, chucky said:

*Me on this thread still*

Mr too for all the property stuff. Mr P had built a wealth of knowledge in this area. 

I don’t think that article explains anything. Not sure what Delta gleans from that????

21 minutes ago, Bristol Rob said:

I would guess the without a realistic reevaluation of the Mem, the equity has all been taken. Especially with interest payable on the loans. 

@Davefevs might have more of an idea.

They shelled out (if I am correct) cash to buy the club and to pay off the debts they inherited, but secured that payment against the one fixed asset.

I think if your 'classic' case of;

Risk Free Investment (we have the UWE property/stadium deal) + nuisance kid brother + letting him scratch his football itch + no real cash changing hands (it's all secured) = HOW DO WE END THIS NIGHTMARE?

Property deal gone bad or promises made that couldn't be kept?

Either way, I would imagine a fair number of Fewers are starting to doubt the next 12 months.

No idea....only ever looked at financials in the Championship.

19 minutes ago, Delta said:

Interesting

Where have you sourced the wages that we were paying him from?

Likewise, where have you sourced the "several million" that we were paying for him from?

FFS, none of us has his actual contract, but if we take Swansea’s loan, it was rumoured that a £5m loan fee, he’d just signed a £25k per week plus £25k per game (and other bonuses) contract, so Swansea had to pay him circa £50k per week because if they just paid his basic £25k, he was losing out on the opportunity to earn his bonuses.

This Forum is speculating stuff from a multitude of sources.  You don’t know unless you are at Villa, and neither do I.

But I do know that you don’t loan a multi-million pound asset out as a favour.  We’ve had enough loan business with Chelsea.

9 minutes ago, Delta said:

So you can loan Tammy but we can't?

Yep, because:

• he was 18 at the time, having made 2 senior sub appearances
• he didn’t cost us a several £million loan fee
• he didn’t cost us £50k plus in wages per week

We would love to have brought him back here last season (more so to piss you off probably), but guess what?  We accepted he was beyond our budget.  We would’ve liked him back when he was going to Swansea, but we accepted we couldn’tt afford it.

You obviously could.....

......or took the gamble you’d be promoted before the EFL would act if (if!!!) you did go over.

7 minutes ago, Delta said:

We replaced players like for like in exactly the same way that you did. You didn't replace Reid with a youngster, Bryan, Webster etc.  Why should we?

You miss the debate.....again!!!

Your argument was that if you had to sell a player because of FFP you shouldn’t have resort to playing youngsters, you should be able to bring in someone equally as good.  If you can do that for free, then great.

We don’t have FFP to worry about, because we accept that when we sell a player for £7m (Flint) we can’t then go and spend another £7m on his replacement.  We go and buy Webster for £3.5m.  When we sell him for £20m (so glad it was Brighton rather than you!!), we can spend £7m on Kalas.  When we sell Reid for £9m, we buy Andi Weimann for £2m and Mo Eisa for £800k.  You see that when your costs outweighs your income, you have to make that money up somewhere.  And then we also rely on bringing Kelly (An 18 year old in) through because we sell a Joe Bryan....and sell him for £15m ahead of the end of our accounting period, and we report a profit.  You see, we are forced into bringing youngsters in.  Some will come through our academy like Reid, Bryan and Kelly.  Others like Flint we bought for 300k as a 22 year old late developer, Brownhill for youth development compensation.  We then develop them.  We accept that.  You see bitter that Grealish might have had to be sold.  But you’re a huge club, so that’s ok.

When we see your 18/19 accounts and they’ve been analysed by more (much more) experts than me in Kieran and Swiss, we’ll see what’s really happened.  Might all be fine, in which case you can sit their smugly.  But it does make you wonder why so many people have questioned your FFP position..

12 minutes ago, Delta said:

"failed to grasp"????????

That's ripe from the bloke who thinks the EFL are too scared to challenge us.

All hail the saving grace though - Mr P has 2 Villa mates who he has time for. 

Again if you read, I gave the rationale.

Why so defensive?

Why so worried?

And in contrast....why so confident that you are fully compliant?  Do you go on a charm offensive with all these too?

Thats all we are asking.

When you come up with bollocks like you should be entitled to replace players like for like (and how unfair it would be to have to play “youngsters”) you sound like one of your fellow “entitled” fans.

@Delta - you have again failed to grasp all we are doing is putting forward views / opinions on a forum from stuff we’ve read, etc.  Much of it from respected people like Kieran Maguire, Swiss Ramble, etc.  When any club accounts come out or PL investigation is completed we’ll have our views again.

Why are you so worried about what little old Bristol City fans on a forum think?  

Are you involved at Villa, as another club’s fan seemed suspiciously “in the know” (or at least adamant of done nothing wrong) when he / she posted on here.

2 minutes ago, Delta said:

I don't think Mr P is in a position to answer - He thought we were claiming £200m for VP, he thought we we claiming respite for a pending SJG sale, he thought Birmingham could go to the CAS.

He was wrong.

When I post on other club’s forums I show a bit of respect.  

28 minutes ago, Delta said:

I think you are being extremely naive, possibly influenced by the previous nonsense posted on this thread.

Why would the EFL bottle it? Because of Prince William? Because the PL want us back up there?

If Villa are found to have breached P&S rules, we will be brought to account just like any other club would. 

If we are deemed to have breached the rules, I will be prepared to take any sanction imposed.  However, if it transpires that we have legitimately worked within the constraints of FFP, albeit with the aid of a ground sale, then that should be the end of the matter and all these reprehensible references to cheats should stop immediately (not that they should ever have been posted in the absence of any evidence).

The problem is, if you have breached for the three year period, the horse has bolted.  Until you publish your accounts we don’t know.

You don’t seem to get that we are speculating and therefore discussing on a forum stuff that has been put out in the media.

If this thread is nonsense, why not scroll past it?

We’ve had some good debate on this thread with fans of other clubs, and we’ve had some who seem to be worried by it.  It’s a forum, it’s not a court.

7 minutes ago, Delta said:

You are so wrong.

The EFL went after Birmingham because they were £9.7 million over the permitted threshold (of £39 million) over a 3 year monitoring period.  Currently, Villa have not breached P&S rules and that is why the EFL have not "gone after" us.

After admitting the breach of EFL rules, Birmingham were then placed on a soft embargo.  However, despite this, Birmingham still signed another player.  This was ultimately held not to be an aggravating factor, however, it was noted that Birmingham had not fully embraced the objectives of P&S rules.

Birmingham escaped punishment for breaching the soft embargo but were deducted 9 points for the initial breach of P&S rules.

So in a nutshell, Birmingham were not unlucky - They admitted the breach and were dealt with accordingly.  No such accusation has been put to Villa so there is no case to answer.  The EFL cannot act before accounts have been submitted so that is why they are always a year behind.

You misunderstood me. When I say unlucky I meant that had it been Villa In exactly the same scenario, I think they’d (EFL) have bottled it. Not saying Villa have broken the rules. If you actually read what I’ve said I’ve been pretty clear that we don’t know what is really going on there. If all “ifs”. 

4 minutes ago, Delta said:

Because it is getting silly - You want blood.  We stop spending big on players and start loaning them (as per every other Championship side) and that still isn't good enough - We should then start playing our youngsters, regardless of whether they can compete or not.

I want fair play.

FWIW I think Brum we’re unlucky.  I think the EFL went after them rather than say Villa, so they could get a precedent set without too much fight.  Had they (Shaun and his cronies) not taken so long to sort it, then I think Villa would’ve come under earlier scrutiny.  Who knows they may have still passed FFP, we don’t know.  Until we see May 31st 2019’s Account’s we won’t know.  If those show failure to meet the FFP limits then you’ve got away with blue (claret and blue) murder, and the EFL failed to act on their own rules.  If you pass, then that’s fair enough.  Much of our info has come from a Villa guy well informed on the financials.  Can’t recall his name.

As for playing youngsters.  Yes, why not.  They are pros.  We played 9 kids in 1982 to fulfil a fixture.

5 minutes ago, Delta said:

In this country, one is innocent until proven guilty.  You yourself were urging Birmingham to go to arbitration via some sports body in the early days.  Now you are claiming they are bang to rights (good job they didn't follow your earlier advice) and that arbitration is a non-starter.

Your opinions are just that - You know no more and no less than the rest of us

Yes, they are our opinions, often caveated by only knowing as much has been published.  Why so salty?