mrjc

Fair enough, agree with some parts, definitely disagree with others...but it's one approach!

I had the same - despite the email saying the 9th, it looks like it is actually tomorrow (Tuesday 10th) at 5pm

Out of interest, what makes you think we are £18m in the green on transfers? I'm not sure it will be as positive as that, although I guess it depends what you assume on Buendia / Ings / Engels. But also - I don't think £80m per window is normal / sustainable - it gets a lot more complex, but basically we wouldn't be able to keep doing what we have been the last two summers forever. There's some good analysis from Czarnikjak on the previous page which sets out our various options - essentially it depends on whether we want to go very aggressive this year (which almost certainly WILL cause us problems down the line), or take a more (sensible) longer term view. Very difficult to know though, ultimately - I could maybe see how we'd just about get one more big-ish signing done at most, but would seem odd if it's more than that.

We've effectively already 'spent' the Grealish money though. In transfer fees: Buendia + Bailey + Ings is reportedly £95m / £100m. In wages, you would think those three + Young, in total, are earning more than Jack was. So unless we have any underlying headroom (previous analysis from Czarnikjak suggests there is some, but not loads) or get some sales in, I don't think we can be overloading the P&L with lots of big signings this summer / January.

I don't think this is right - the FFP calc is on profit, not cash. So even if the cash is paid over 3 years, the profit is all recognised now, both in accounting and FFP terms

Good stuff, and interesting. One big opportunity has to be have more players in the squad with a decent resale value, even once they are surplus to our first team / squad requirements. This was the big problem when we came up - we had the extreme position of loans ending - players retiring - needing to keep some bodies - one outlier with a huge value. So basically no £ inflows and lots of £ outflows needed (wages and fees). If we've been buying well, but continue to improve the squad....the players who drop down the pecking order can hopefully maintain some value to help balance things up. This is all part of the long term problem we've been having to correct over the last few years, but should ultimately help balance between options 2 and 3.

Agree with this - it hurts, of course it does. But it's also understandable from where he is as a truly elite footballer. For what it's worth, while I'm gutted, I'll have pride as a Villa fan if he goes on to really big things.

Fair point, I hadn't taken account of that (although understand how it works). That's probably only really offsetting wages for Mings though. For McGinn - his annual amortisation would have been pretty low anyway (not more than £0.5m / £0.6m I would think)....adding a year to his contract, which I think is what was done, will only reduce that fairly marginally, so I suspect it's not offsetting his wage increase (£10k per week would effectively be worth his whole amortisation charge, for example). I guess these things are relatively marginal though, so difficult to assess with too much accuracy given the uncertainty over the overall 2020/21 position.

Haven't visited this thread for a while, and thanks for this, looks good. Only thoughts which might make this a bit less positive (admittedly without having fully thought this through....): I think using the average of 19/20 and 20/21 as the 'start point' for 21/22 maybe ends up too optimistic for a couple of things For example, even if we are saving £11m year-on-year for Barkley....because that's going into a two-year average, I think we'll only save half of that compared to the average, if that makes sense? On the 'ins', wouldn't we also need to include the fairly significant contract increases that we handed out last season to Jack, Mings, McGinn etc, which will also be diluted as being part of a 2-year average, but we will have a full year of next year? A full year of Sanson wages vs effectively a 1/4 year in a 2-yr average calc. As I say, not fully thought through, but wouldn't this eat into the ~£10m surplus? That said, this also ignores any increase in income (hopefully a bit through league position + gates + commercial), and also is pretty difficult given the uncertainty over the 20/21 numbers. Also, clearly all before any change in Jack status!

Yeah I get that impression too. Feels like he knows he's good enough (he clearly is), and the exposure to real elite football / players over the summer may have whetted the appetite even more

This might be right...but if so...is that such a good thing? Doesn't scream 'loyalty'!

Guardian article suggested exactly that, it was with a bit of a smile. I think he comes across very well with media actually - quite genuine and honest (including in this case!)

First touch was phenomenal last night, pretty much every time. He stands out so highly, against virtually everyone he plays against. Interestingly he said there was interest, Smith said (I think, as it was quick) that no bids were received (both of which are probably true). Either way, as some of those have said above, I don't think you can blame him for considering his options, but he seems genuinely excited to stay - here's to a massive season ahead!

Haha, very random but made me laugh for some reason. Maybe getting him confused with Paul Warhurst?!

For the second CB (assuming #5 is a given), are people more #4 or #6? I've always thought of #4 as a defensive midfielder, #6 as a CB. Good chat