Tammy

[Monkeh]

11 hours ago, bris red said:

But some claim on this thread that he doesn’t ever say it, laughable really.. took me about 2 minutes to find that quote im sure there are plenty of others. Not hating on SL, good guy and a better owner than many but the guy isn’t ambitious IMO. 

1982

to do what you want we'll end up like that again,

SUSTAINABLE I suggest you get a dictionary look up the meaning of this word and learn it because its pretty obvious you have no idea about the clubs finances and FFP Restrictions 

Lets look at some of the clubs who gambled last season or the season before with lavish spending 

Sheffiled Wednesday a team having to sell all their best players because the "went for it"

QPR a team no not able so sign any perm players because they went for it and fail and will likely drop down again as a result

Reading a team with no money and will struggle this season

Hull, Norwich, Sunderland, Portsmouth, Coventry

The list goes on, 

[RedM]

Reading a lot of the above we are in a sort of a stalemate position are we?

Can’t compete with the recent Ex Prem clubs because of parachute payments and they are attractive to players as they pay good money and look like they will get promoted soon again, well more likely than most others.

We are doing enough to not be a basketcase club. We haven’t got a mad owner hiring and firing every few months. We are living within our means and financially, compared to many others, look stable.

So where does that leave us. On paper treading water mid table? Not soaring or sinking ( although we managed both last season). We look attractive but we don’t. We have ambition, but we don’t. We have the ground and facilities that many Championship clubs would envy, and a decent amount of fans (ST holders) too.

We look good on the surface but not got that real quality throughout. Even the players we have just sold were hardly household names. How many fans from other clubs could name one of our players now? It seems harsh to label ourselves mediocre, but to many we are. A team out on a limb in the South West that no body knows or cares too much about. We have no local derbies, we are just ‘there’. We had a bit of publicity last season, but now that’s forgotten. We have no real identity, no real famous past players etc. 

Yes we are happy to bank money from selling, but now we have to produce more with players we paid less for than our outgoing ones, so lesser players or players with potential? LJ and staff have to get the players he now has, battle with injuries, and improve on what we did last season. Probably knowing at the end of the season ( or January) we are likely to be selling any player who emerges with quality, and then he will have to start again and keep the owner, other players and fans happy at the same time. I wouldn’t want his job. 

 

[The Batman]

1 hour ago, Spoons said:

Spurs bid £25 million for Tammy on the last day of transfer window apparently.

Source is ( source) it's on football gossip on BbC website.

Shows how people's expectations arbour club ( fans) are unrealistic.

yeah I saw that.

and the one underneath that one was

Aston Villa will look to finalise a loan deal for Abraham when they have concluded the signing of 29-year-old DR Congo winger Yannick Bolasie from Everton

 

https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/revealed-aston-villas-transfer-plans-15064481

[The Coach]

FFP didn't seem to matter when we were prepared to sign Dwight Gayle for £9mil 

[AshtonGreat]

14 hours ago, chinapig said:

I saw a report a few weeks ago suggesting the loan fee was £10m. No idea if that is accurate but it would certainly be very substantial.

It was reported that Swansea paid a £5m fee for him last season, so that is likely the minimum benchmark.

That's a lot of money considering he was awful for them

[Davefevs]

Looking at Villa I think they are taking the right route with Bolassie and Abraham loans.  Loans in the short term, unless they have a whopping loan fee are a sensible way forward.  

So you go out and loan the best 5 players (you can only play 5) you can, those players might cost £12m each to buy.  A £1m loan fee is better financially than £3m per year over a 4 year contract.  You might not have to pay their full wages either.  If those players are good enough to raise the team to promotion, you then go back to looking at permanent signings.

[Monkeh]

21 minutes ago, Red_Wizard said:

FFP didn't seem to matter when we were prepared to sign Dwight Gayle for £9mil 

yes it did, had we signed gale, we'd never of signed fammy or Kodja unless we sold gale

[chinapig]

52 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Looking at Villa I think they are taking the right route with Bolassie and Abraham loans.  Loans in the short term, unless they have a whopping loan fee are a sensible way forward.  

So you go out and loan the best 5 players (you can only play 5) you can, those players might cost £12m each to buy.  A £1m loan fee is better financially than £3m per year over a 4 year contract.  You might not have to pay their full wages either.  If those players are good enough to raise the team to promotion, you then go back to looking at permanent signings.

Can't comment on Everton's policy but the fee for Tammy is likely to be substantial, let's say £5m minimum.

Let's be generous and assume they only pay half the wages for him and Bolasie. On the basis of their reported wages that would amount to £65k a week added to an already enormous wage bill.

I find it hard to see how they can comply with FFP unless they sell Grealish in January or, for instance, the EFL let them get away with bogus sponsorship deals.

Not that they give a toss about FFP, that is for the little people.

[Sturny]

Mad to think we had Tammy, Bobby and Kodjia at the club the same time once. 

[Davefevs]

10 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Can't comment on Everton's policy but the fee for Tammy is likely to be substantial, let's say £5m minimum.

Let's be generous and assume they only pay half the wages for him and Bolasie. On the basis of their reported wages that would amount to £65k a week added to an already enormous wage bill.

I find it hard to see how they can comply with FFP unless they sell Grealish in January or, for instance, the EFL let them get away with bogus sponsorship deals.

Not that they give a toss about FFP, that is for the little people.

Yep, a loan of Tammy, blows the loan model to pieces.  As the owning club, Chelsea are sat on a player worth, say, £25m on a 5 year deal.  Not selling him is losing an opportunity to receive that £25m.  So you’re right, they are gonna come to some loan arrangement that is either pay his wages in full and a small loan fee, or pay a bigger loan fee and a percentage of his wages.

In fairness Tammy shouldnt be contemplating a loan move to the Champ.  He’s now played for England.

re Grealish, they are playing a dangerous game waiting til January.  As a buying club, knowing full well Villa’s financial position, you’d go as low as possible.

[phantom]

4 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

In fairness Tammy shouldnt be contemplating a loan move to the Champ.  He’s now played for England.

re Grealish, they are playing a dangerous game waiting til January.  As a buying club, knowing full well Villa’s financial position, you’d go as low as possible.

I'm not sure after last season how he would fair in the Prem though?

Maybe a top end Champ club is his level - unless things dramatically improve he won't be near the England squad again soon

 

After their recent investment Villa don't need to sell Grealish

[chinapig]

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

Yep, a loan of Tammy, blows the loan model to pieces.  As the owning club, Chelsea are sat on a player worth, say, £25m on a 5 year deal.  Not selling him is losing an opportunity to receive that £25m.  So you’re right, they are gonna come to some loan arrangement that is either pay his wages in full and a small loan fee, or pay a bigger loan fee and a percentage of his wages.

In fairness Tammy shouldnt be contemplating a loan move to the Champ.  He’s now played for England.

It has been reported that he would prefer to go to Holland or Italy but I doubt he gets much say in it.

The loan to Swansea, a defensive side and a shambolic club at the time, was a big mistake and he is now in danger of regressing.

I suspect Chelsea want him to score lots of goals in the Championship so they can sell at maximum price next summer. That's what their player farm is for.

[Leveller]

2 minutes ago, phantom said:

I'm not sure after last season how he would fair in the Prem though?

Maybe a top end Champ club is his level - unless things dramatically improve he won't be near the England squad again soon

 

After their recent investment Villa don't need to sell Grealish

I think his point is that they will need to sell Grealish to comply with FFP by limiting their trading losses - we know the new owners have money.

[Mr Popodopolous]

6 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Yep, a loan of Tammy, blows the loan model to pieces.  As the owning club, Chelsea are sat on a player worth, say, £25m on a 5 year deal.  Not selling him is losing an opportunity to receive that £25m.  So you’re right, they are gonna come to some loan arrangement that is either pay his wages in full and a small loan fee, or pay a bigger loan fee and a percentage of his wages.

In fairness Tammy shouldnt be contemplating a loan move to the Champ.  He’s now played for England.

re Grealish, they are playing a dangerous game waiting til January.  As a buying club, knowing full well Villa’s financial position, you’d go as low as possible.

To me, their strategy appears to be something like- assuming they wish to try to comply that is:

• Keep all key assets and strengthen in August window.
• Try to get say 10 points clear in January- like a Wolves type position maybe.
• Flog Grealish especially maybe try for £30m, plus perhaps some other saleable assets in January- say Kodjia, Chester, Adomah maybe. A dangerous game though, for clubs trying to low ball. Plus- a bad injury and their strategy could be in ruins.
• Any players on big wages they can shift on loan- like the potential Hogan to Sheffield United, all helps.

As you say a dangerous game.

[Monkeh]

19 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Can't comment on Everton's policy but the fee for Tammy is likely to be substantial, let's say £5m minimum.

Let's be generous and assume they only pay half the wages for him and Bolasie. On the basis of their reported wages that would amount to £65k a week added to an already enormous wage bill.

I find it hard to see how they can comply with FFP unless they sell Grealish in January or, for instance, the EFL let them get away with bogus sponsorship deals.

Not that they give a toss about FFP, that is for the little people.

if they don't go up this season then they are in serious trouble and if they breach FFP this season they could be denied promotion to the prem

[Sturny]

2 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

if they don't go up this season then they are in serious trouble and if they breach FFP this season they could be denied promotion to the prem

People say that every season since they've been down here 

[Monkeh]

Just now, Sturny said:

People say that every season since they've been down here 

no they haven't they said it last season and it was true they were about 3 days away from Administration until new investors came in 

[Mr Popodopolous]

10 minutes ago, Sturny said:

People say that every season since they've been down here 

Ah, however there would be no more parachute payments...

Lop a third off their income roughly. That would change the equation significantly IMO.

[Sturny]

Just now, Monkeh said:

no they haven't they said it last season and it was true they were about 3 days away from Administration until new investors came in 

I've heard it quite frequently. Whether its true or not I wouldn't know. 

[chinapig]

10 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

if they don't go up this season then they are in serious trouble and if they breach FFP this season they could be denied promotion to the prem

They could indeed but will they be?

I don't have much faith that the EFL will come down hard on a big club but I hope to be proved wrong.

[Monkeh]

2 minutes ago, chinapig said:

They could indeed but will they be?

I don't have much faith that the EFL will come down hard on a big club but I hope to be proved wrong.

well they've set precedence with QPR, and they've came down hard on leeds in the past (deducting them 15 points for coming out of Admin without a CVA)

[Davefevs]

@Monkeh, @chinapig, @Mr Popodopolous, @Leveller You’ve just saved me a lot of typing....great replies.

[chinapig]

Just now, Monkeh said:

well they've set precidence with QPR, and they've came down hard on leeds in the past (deducting them 15 points for coming out of Admin without a CVA)

Sure, though whether QPR have the stature of Villa is debatable.

The real crunch will be whether they will actually deny them promotion. More likely they will agree a derisory fine with Villa and announce it as a triumph for FFP, while Villa go on to trouser £100m a season in the Premier League.

[Sturny]

21 minutes ago, chinapig said:

They could indeed but will they be?

I don't have much faith that the EFL will come down hard on a big club but I hope to be proved wrong.

A lot of speculation going on with what will happen to them, I'll it believe when it see it. Whether they go up or stay put I think they'll be fine. 

Think some people are rather wishful than realistic over Villa. 

[JoeAman08]

If TA is training with the first team he will get more from that than another season in the champ imo. 

[Davefevs]

5 minutes ago, Sturny said:

A lot of speculation going on with what will happen to them, I'll it believe when it see it. Whether they go up or stay put I think they'll be fine. 

Think some people are rather wishful than realistic over Villa. 

At some point they are going to make a real example of a big club.  Their revenues without parachute payments won’t justify their wage bill.  When you look at the loan signings from last season that all went back, and then start to see the loans this season if they complete them, their wage bill isn’t gonna be much different and that’s with only £15m parachute this season instead of £34m last.

Loaning out Hogan is a start.

[Mr Popodopolous]

11 minutes ago, Sturny said:

A lot of speculation going on with what will happen to them, I'll it believe when it see it. Whether they go up or stay put I think they'll be fine. 

Think some people are rather wishful than realistic over Villa. 

Depends on the will to punish IMO- their accounts surely don't stack up.

[Red Army 87]

Just now, Mr Popodopolous said:

Depends on the will to punish IMO- their accounts surely don't stack up.

Based on the need for bail out at the end of last season and the sudden spending spree, I would have thought they will be in a lot of trouble if they don’t sell Grealish or get promoted.

[Bristol Rob]

47 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Ah, however there would be no more parachute payments...

Lop a third off their income roughly. That would change the equation significantly IMO.

Pretty sure it was revealed before the new injection of cash that Villa had already borrowed against all future parachute payments, so they won't make any difference now.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Just now, Bristol Rob said:

Pretty sure it was revealed before the new injection of cash that Villa had already borrowed against all future parachute payments, so they won't make any difference now.

Hmm- must have missed it. More trouble than I thought then?

@Red Army 87 

Yeah, would have thought so. From an FFP position definitely. From a solvency position, probably not (depending on their new owners reliability/commitment and true wealth etc of course).