Financial Fair Play Explained | Page 3 | Vital Football

Financial Fair Play Explained

Should our new owners just pay the fine for FFP and get on with it?

  • Yes

    Votes: 20 55.6%

  • No

    Votes: 16 44.4%
  • Total voters
    36
Plenty of questions rattling about in my head too mike_field. These deals are not done overnight. Were these guys in the frame before either Xia or Bruce's dour statements? Like many Villa fans I am curious as to the strengthen the squad and structure before the coming season comment. Do they mean strengthen after selling some players or strengthen last year's squad.? On a slightly different note I have seen numerous comments on social media sites of people praising Dr Tony for finding this funding, which I find bemusing after recent events.
 
Windsor, you say mike-field I think I'm back at school. I answer to 'oi git' lol

I honestly don't believe they were, with everything else reported, I think they must have been Xia's preference from the get-go hence other offers declined. So they took their time BUT both sides knew there was no option but this outcome.

Bruce was too down in those interviews - he'd have been brighter if he thought an answer was on the horizon because he trusts himself, everyone in football does, if he knew ownership was on the cards he wouldn't have been able to be that depressed because he'd have been up for impressing them and proving his worth.

So it's a late deal, post interview, but finalised quickly because they were the presumed best of the bunch for me.

Strengthening came from Xia - not them - pinch of salt. The FFP hole hasn't gone anywhere, that needs to be addressed but we now have options outside of 'sell Grealish' 'sell anyone'.

Seen that, in the world of Trump where he's praised for doing nothing it's to be expected. He does deserve credit for selling quickly mind you, but the return of the love in because he knows how to use Twitter says more about those fans praising him.
 
mike_field said:
Windsor, you say mike-field I think I'm back at school. I answer to 'oi git' lol

I honestly don't believe they were, with everything else reported, I think they must have been Xia's preference from the get-go hence other offers declined. So they took their time BUT both sides knew there was no option but this outcome.

Bruce was too down in those interviews - he'd have been brighter if he thought an answer was on the horizon because he trusts himself, everyone in football does, if he knew ownership was on the cards he wouldn't have been able to be that depressed because he'd have been up for impressing them and proving his worth.

So it's a late deal, post interview, but finalised quickly because they were the presumed best of the bunch for me.

Strengthening came from Xia - not them - pinch of salt. The FFP hole hasn't gone anywhere, that needs to be addressed but we now have options outside of 'sell Grealish' 'sell anyone'.

Seen that, in the world of Trump where he's praised for doing nothing it's to be expected. He does deserve credit for selling quickly mind you, but the return of the love in because he knows how to use Twitter says more about those fans praising him.
Click to expand...
Ok Mike or oi git. Maybe your right regarding them showing interest post interviews. It's good news long term, possibly from the off if they can plug that FFP deficit via any methods you mention in various posts. Ie shirt sleeve sponsors etc. Like anything they will judged on actions not words , if falling foul of FFP was a simple fine these guys could afford to take the hit but as you know the new EFL FFP penalties are quite severe and have changed. We will have to wait and see the ins and outs player wise, and what Imput these guys have.
 
Ahhh that's better Windsor lol

It's how I break it down in my head - I could be 100% wrong - again it wouldn't be the first time, but I don't think Bruce couldn't have a twinkle in his eye if he knew this was on the cards. Plenty lambasted him for that interview, he looked broken to me knowing this is the best job he'll get - as he's said himself - and he knew the rug had come out from under him in terms of making the best of it.

We at least have hope now, we have alternative ways of chipping away that mean we still need sales BUT we can sell the fringe not the mains. Every little bit chips away and if we go left field even more so.

If FFP was a fine I'd be in the camp of suck it and tell them where to pay it. But it's not now, the EFL have shown they will punish - Forest with an embargo for example. We have to box clever, show willing and whether we like it or not, go for promotion this year but not spend for promotion. Wipe this season and see what youngsters shine - if some fans can't get that, stuff them.

The club is bigger than an owner, players, and fans who only live in social media.

Nothing has changed today in reality in terms of the problems we have (short of cash flow). What has changed is hope of dealing with those problems and I'll take that.
 
Fair comments Mike. To be fair Bruce did say in his interview we need to sell players regardless of whether the owner has .money or not. A good friend of mine follows Leeds everywhere his theory is the EFL don't want teams like Villa Leeds etc getting out of the league as they generate money for other clubs. Mind you he also says it's not to bad in the championship after the 1st 10 yrs.
 
The comment was true owing to the hole, as next season we get no Parachute Payment, we have a bloated squad so sales are necessary......the question is who.

And yes, I don't disagree with the EFL comment - third biggest in Europe 2 years ago from memory - so big clubs, with solid followings, especially as the EFL are now manually screwing the fixture list to get long journey, low interest games in midweek, so other fixtures can shine at the weekend on the box - the game is now about money and foreign audience, hence the EFL Cup bollocks with draws in Thailand at 4am etc.

That's not a theory, EFL chief exec Shaun Harvey has confirmed it. I've wrote about it!
 
Yes new part owners but, the dreaded FFP is still dragging at our ankles. The only way I can see of staying within FFP rules, not only this year but for the next two or three years, is a massive clear-out of the high earners.
Our management are going to have to be inventive to move some players.
Richards for example, cost us nothing to buy but, is one of the highest paid on our books. Why not just free transfer him.
HITC came up with an interesting solution to the McCormack mess. They suggest loaning him to Sunderland, who apparently need strikers as a way of solving, at least in part, problems for three sides.
One, Sunderland get a decent striker.
Two, McCormack gets a chance to resurrect his career.
Three, we get most of his wages off the books and if he does well, we have a saleable asset.
The same would need to be done with Lansbury for us to have a chance of shifting his large salary.
Kodjia, Tshibola, Adomah and Hogan need to go the same way, loan to get a saleable asset at a later date.
So we do still need to sell Grealish.
The good thing is, we are now not desperate, so Levy will have to dig that bit deeper to get him nearer our valuation.
The one player we really do need to keep, is Chester. He has too much value to the club, over and above that as a player.
 
1958Villan said:
Yes new part owners but, the dreaded FFP is still dragging at our ankles. The only way I can see of staying within FFP rules, not only this year but for the next two or three years, is a massive clear-out of the high earners.
Our management are going to have to be inventive to move some players.
Richards for example, cost us nothing to buy but, is one of the highest paid on our books. Why not just free transfer him.
HITC came up with an interesting solution to the McCormack mess. They suggest loaning him to Sunderland, who apparently need strikers as a way of solving, at least in part, problems for three sides.
One, Sunderland get a decent striker.
Two, McCormack gets a chance to resurrect his career.
Three, we get most of his wages off the books and if he does well, we have a saleable asset.
The same would need to be done with Lansbury for us to have a chance of shifting his large salary.
Kodjia, Tshibola, Adomah and Hogan need to go the same way, loan to get a saleable asset at a later date.
So we do still need to sell Grealish.
The good thing is, we are now not desperate, so Levy will have to dig that bit deeper to get him nearer our valuation.
The one player we really do need to keep, is Chester. He has too much value to the club, over and above that as a player.
Click to expand...

I think we've tried offloading Richards on a free transfer over the last 2 years but there haven't been any takers. Plenty of rumours that his knee is shot, although if that is true surely he would retire and both player and club get a decent insurance pay off. I'd rather keep hold of the likes of Adomah and Kodjia who are in our best X1 and move on fringe players like Taylor, Lansbury and Barney.
We may not be able to buy players at the moment, but the investment should enable us to make some moves in the loan market. CB and GK are surely positions we need to strengthen in
 
The thing is garygary, we are, believe it or not, overloaded in the forward positions with highly paid unused players, who because of our managers hissy fits, we will find it difficult to move on.
Those that are 'in our best 11', are the very players we have to move on and replace with cheaper versions. (I say cheaper, not necessarily worse).
If we moved Taylor on at present, we wouldn't have a first choice left back.
As for Barney, I'd much prefer we moved on Whelan and Jedinak, both at the end of their careers and both on higher wages than Barney. I have a suspicion that that defensive midfield spot would suit him down to the ground.
 
I suppose its all about opinions, but I'd have Hutton and Mitch Clark ahead of Taylor this season myself - pretty sure Taylor is on a decent wage too. Barney looks good against some teams, but against more direct, physical teams like Boro and Bolton he gets pushed off the ball too easily. Jedi will be a massive miss for us if he moves on.
I agree that its our better players that will attract the interest unfortunately, but Kodjia has far more about him than either Hogan or Fat Ross, so I'd be doing what I could to keep hold of him. I wouldnt be too surprised to see Snoddy come back on loan either if Uncle Albert does join Newcastle. Cant see him getting a look in at West Ham with the money they are throwing around
 
Don’t know if I’m imagining this, but I thought I read somewhere a while back that if a club receives a cash injection due to a change in ownership then there is an exception made or stay-of-execution regarding FFP compliance...
 
Think you're remembering wrong - least I've not come over that.

Change in ownership does however open up better mitigation if FFP is breached as long as new owners can show they did all they could to fall into line. That was backed up by the Milan appeal.
 
According to transfermarkt.co.uk we're £14.45 million in the black on transfers this summer so far - £9 mil from Amavi, £3.87 mil from Gollini and £1.58 mil for Gil. We've also lost Terry, Samba and Gabby's wages, as well as the loan players. I've no idea whether these things will count come March, but I think it's worth thinking about.

Knowing that we're allowed to lose £13 mil a season with owner investment, I'd be surprised if the hole is anywhere near £40 mil. This is based on quotes from last season (Wyness and Bruce saying repeatedly that we were 'just inside' FFP restrictions), and the loss for the year ending 31st May 2017 was £14.5 mil (link - https://www.avfc.co.uk/News/2018/02/06/financial-accounts-2017)

So what's the issue?
 
We just don't know what the FFP situation is at Villa. Nobody outside the club knows, and that includes the "experts". It's not rocket science to realise we have big restrictions, but the actual situation could be almost anything. I'm highly sceptical of the mail's claim that the black hole is £50m though; it just doesn't fit with what we do know.

Maybe we ought to just wait and see what the new owners actually do. They seem to be ambitious for the club. They're experienced enough to understand the fianancial situation. They have some big decisions to make, like what are they aiming for next year and year after, not just this year.

At least we know we won't have Villa Park replaced by the Gabby Pie Factory.
 
mike_field said:
Think you're remembering wrong - least I've not come over that.

Change in ownership does however open up better mitigation if FFP is breached as long as new owners can show they did all they could to fall into line. That was backed up by the Milan appeal.
Click to expand...
Maybe that’s what it was and I embellished my memory due to sheer blind optimism.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.