Plans Change For Bruce With Summer Budget?

VitalFootballAdmin

Vital Squad Member
Staff member
It was being reported over the weekend that manager Steve Bruce will only be given a £1million summer transfer budget with the plan being sell to buy moving forward.


<br><br><a href ="http://www.vitalfootball.co.uk/router.asp?7522974">Click here to read the article</a><br><br>
 
Hopefully not another manager being thrown under the bus.

Hopefully he is ok with this and that there isn't any disharmony.

You can understand why the board (if this report is true) is thinking this way though. Millions spent (not just this regime) and loads of players simply not fulfilling the big price tags. You can understand why some of the loan players (that this regime isn't to blame for) need off loading to clear their wages before bringing in more. Just hope Bruce is able to sell some of the deadweight (any offers for Gabby please take!) and then have a bit of leeway.

The players with big price tags need to turn up next season and justify their hefty price tags and wages.
 
Reason i am sceptical about this story is the £1 million budget.

Its not even a budget. Even in the championship. May aswell not give anything.
 
Apologies for the copy from the other post but the £81m v £83m is such poor reporting.....

There is some truth in this but also some lazy journalism...

Dr T stated on Twitter early this morning that "we need well prepared for the FFP as we inherited heavy burdens. If we get more ins but can't succeed in outs, we'll have headache with FFP."

Which shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.

With regards to the press stories:

1. The c.£81m loss reported for the 12 months to 31 May 2016 appears to relate to that reported in Reform Acquisitions Limited - the UK Holding Company - for the Aston Villa Group, not the company that is the Football Club and presumably the member of the EFL; it therefore includes a number of non-football club losses which I cannot believe are included in the return to the EFL for FFP purposes (apparently "Regulation 16.4 applies but I cannot find it);

2. More importantly the £81m loss is the amount reported, whereas the FFP rules (which are available on the EFL website) state in section 4.2 that the loss reported is adjusted for many items, including 4.2.2 "depreciation / impairment of tangible fixed assets". The £81m loss included the small matter of £3.7m of depreciation of TFA and £44.8m of impairment of TFA".

Both of these are non-cash items, and in the case of impairment, largely affected by the opinion of the board of directors and I can't imagine a case would have been put forward for such a write-off if it impacted on FFP!

3. FFP makes some provision for shareholder equity input so Dr T could (or may already have done so) inject some funds to offset losses for FFP reporting purposes.

FFP appears to be for a rolling three year period as follows:

"Financial Fair Play 2016/17

This season sees the implementation of a new set of ‘Profitability and Sustainability’ regulations that will deliver a consistent approach to Financial Fair Play for those clubs that move between the Premier League and Championship through promotion and relegation.

Championship clubs voted to change their FFP rules in November 2014 as part of wide-ranging negotiations with the top-flight about future solidarity arrangements that has contractually linked the finances of the EFL and Premier League for the first time since the formation of the latter in 1992.

The £13m limit for the 2015/16 season is in line with the losses permitted under the new regulations which will permit a maximum loss of £39m (compared to an equivalent figure of £105m in the Premier League) over a rolling three season timeframe measured from March 2017. A club that moves between the Premier League and Championship will be assessed in accordance with the permitted loss in the relevant divisions played in during the three-year period in question. For example, a club that had played two seasons in the Championship and one in the Premier League would have a maximum permitted loss of £61m, consisting of one season at £35m and two at £13m.
Read more at http://www.efl.com/news/article/2016/efl-financial-fair-play-sky-be...

Thus a 3 year rolling amount of losses allowed, with a higher proportion for the years in the Premier League.

Not only does our income fall the longer we stay in the Championship (reducing parachute payment over 3 years) but so does the maximum amount of losses permitted under FFP - a double whammy - it will be harder to compete the longer we stay in the Championship - stating the bloody obvious....

Read more: http://www.astonvilla.vitalfootball.co.uk/forum/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=63926&start=290#ixzz4h5Tbyw1F
 
Yes there is something like 35 players on our books , which is far too many. It would make perfect sense to get rid of a few first before adding to the squad.
 
I must admit, I am always a bit sceptical about these kind of stories, especially this soon after the season has ended/before transfer window opens.

I think we all know that the likes of Gil, Veretout, Richards, Tshibola etc need to be shipped out (assuming Bruce doesn't rate them) so we will surely see some outgoings. Even if the income from these doesn't give Bruce much wriggle room, he ought to be able to organise what's left into a decent side. That's what he is paid for after all.

To be honest, I'm really not bothered how much we have to spend this summer - Brighton, Huddersfield, Fulham or Reading are not packed with big money signings and they've done OK. Now is the time for the coaches and playing staff to step up to the plate and show they deserve to represent Aston Villa and our amazing fans.

:94:
 
Think the article is spot on. This won't (shouldn't?) have come as a surprise to Bruce. It's in line with what's been said over the season.

I think it's a very good thing. At the moment we have what's effectively another, and larger, bomb squad. Needs clearing. We only need players at the club who have a part to play. I'm convinced we already have the core of the squad we need; use it. Only sign players where we obviously need to improve.
 
I dont know why Tony X dont tell the world Bruce has £30 million to spend that way other clubs can price their players accordingly.

No chairman/club would be stupid enough to make their financial budget for players public.
 
Our financial problems have and will continue to be, related to the size of the pay packets we hand out and not the fees we pay for player.
Compare, for example, Tottenham's Eriksen, on £30k a week until this season and Hourihane, who was on £7k, until he moved to Villa for £28k a week.
Paying distinctly average and below average players, highly inflated wages, is still an hangover from the early Lerner years and responsible for the difficulty we have in moving senior players on.
 
Chief Executive Keith Wyness has said the players will have 'no excuses' if we fail next season.


<br><br><a href ="http://www.vitalfootball.co.uk/router.asp?7523016">Click here to read the article</a><br><br>
 
maninapinksuit on the financial fair play rules and the situation at Aston Villa


<br><br><a href ="http://www.vitalfootball.co.uk/router.asp?7522978">Click here to read the article</a><br><br>