Czarnikjak

4 hours ago, villalad21 said:

I just think Danny Ings is this season's Barkley. Just a much better player

Injured for half a season and drugged up on sleeping pills for the rest of it? 
 

but seriously, who’s gonna play LW in this case? Bailey?

1 hour ago, Peter Griffin said:

The loop hole of selling your ground to yourself must be stopped and not allowed to happen, which I believe is in the pipeline. Lucky we got in early!

EFL have already closed that loophole. As of last month clubs are not allowed to do that anymore.

It might still be possible in Premier League though, not sure on that. But so far only championship teams were forced to do that.

5 minutes ago, Delphinho123 said:

Nail. Head.

We need to actively be looking to move El Ghazi, Wesley, Trezeguet and Nakamba on in the next 12 months. Nobody on here can tell me they're good enough for what we're trying to achieve. Nakamba, arguably, still has a role to play should we not bring in a Doucoure/JWP signing in this window. 

If we get decent offers for any of those players this Summer then we sell them, thank them for passing the ball to Grealish in the season we stayed up and get them off our wage bill. 

100% agree

But Wesley would need to loaned out first, nobody will take a chance to buy him out right unless it's for peanuts.

1 hour ago, Genie said:

Another reason FFP needs to be scrapped. It’s not healthy for clubs to go looking for ways to bend/break the rules. 
Just bin it off, if owners want to gift hundreds of millions to a team then so be it. 

It's not that simple though. These few owners that would be allowed to spend unlimited funds would massively inflate already high player wages.

That in turn would force other teams, not so lucky to have rich owners, to get in to debt just to try to compete and stay relevant. It would affect the whole football pyramid.

Current FFP rules are crap and need to be scrapped, but there has to be some other regulation.

33 minutes ago, Peter Griffin said:

They bought their initial share for about 55m and then pushed this to about 100m to complete the acquisition. I think they are likely to be looking to push the value of the club up as high as they can. If they were to sell AVFC now they surely they would be able to command circa 400m

Don't forget that since the takeover they injected further ~£300m via share issues.

Purslow always says the the aim of the project is to bring "sustainable success" to the club. Which makes perfect sense, this is not a charity.

I think we will not see the same level of cash injections from the owners anymore. They will still support the club where necessary, but the £100m yearly injections we saw since the takeover are gone IMO.

5 minutes ago, sne said:

We are just miles and miles behind the clubs we are aiming to compete with. Think we have people in place to amend this and we should have a good opportunity to increase our existing deals and bring in new ones. But as it stands now we are a very small club in this aspect.

Indeed, our commercial deals reflect our current reputation and exposure around the world. 

Coming back from the championship we are midtable at best in this respect.

The reason why Everton are getting £9m and we are getting £6m from Cazzoo is reputation and worldwide following.

See the real-time Social media followers numbers, good approximation of the above.

https://footballpredictions.net/social-rating/england/premier-league

One of the reasons why Chelsea are getting x10 commercial revenue to us is that they have x10 number of fans around the world.

Only through the on pitch success we will increase our worldwide recognition and commercial revenue will follow.

3 minutes ago, AV82 said:

Eye-watering graph.

Somebody left brilliant comment on Twitter about Spurs:

”Balance sheet champions, you’ll never sing that.”

37 minutes ago, dubbs said:

Drove passed this morning and I'm sure they've got rid of Dean as well??

Oh no, he’s getting sacked in the morning…

@blandy, you are really overcomplicating it

Rules are clear on this and don't allow wriggle room in terms of when you bank the profit from a player sale. You bank the whole profit at the point of sale.

PSR calculations look only at Adjusted Earnings before Tax, these are not related to Cash Losses at all.

Cash Losses are only relevant to the Secure Funding part of regulations which determines if you are allowed to go the the higher "tier" of losses (£105m vs £15m). Cash Losses indeed look at the actual money coming in from the transfer as per agreed payment plan, but in no way they affect PSR calculation, providing you satisfy the Secure Funding clause.

Basically, as per point (ii) below, we just need a guarantee from our owners that they gonna cover the extra losses, which obviously already was given in the pervious years and will be extended if we want to continue loosing more than £15m in 3 year periods.

1 minute ago, CVByrne said:

 

Are you sure the player sale is a one off for this season? Given we are receiving the money in 3 instalments over next three years. I would have expected that would be consider income for 3 years meaning a positive to FFP for 6 years until the final instalment rolled off?

I am positive. See my discussion with blandy 

1 minute ago, blandy said:

These are defined, as I already posted, as

 

Earnings Before Tax after:

(a) write back of: (i) amortisation and/or impairment of Players’ registrations; and (ii) profit or loss on the transfer of Players’ registrations; and

(b) inclusion of net cash flow in respect of transfers of Players’ registrations;

No, that's how Cash Losses are defined in the rule A.1.28

PSR calculation doesn't use Cash Losses at all.

@blandy

Apologies, I should have been clearer when I said "they". I meant Premier League and UEFA. And when I mentioned FFP, in relation to Premier League I obviously meant P&S rules.

Lets look at Premier League rules as an example.

Definition A.1.166:

1 minute ago, blandy said:

Hmmm.

The Premier League rules don't say that, anywhere I've ever seen. Maybe the UEFA ones do?

The PL handbook just says (for a given year) "estimated profit and loss account and balance sheet for T" is what the clubs submit for the purposes of Profit and Sustainability Rules. It appears that there's a degree of leeway as to how the clubs choose to manage their finances/accounting for the purposes of PSR submissions. The PL PSR seems to be as concerned with ongoing sustainability as it is with just profit/loss.

This fact does not originate from Premier League or UEFA rules. It's just how accounting works. They decided to use profit and loss account for FFP  calculations and not actual cash flows.

Just now, blandy said:

Paid over 3 years (if reports are correct) rather than a one off in terms of income calcs and FFP.

Payment structure of a transfer only impacts cash flow, not profit and loss account.The whole £100m is accounted as profit at the date of sale.

They could structure they payments over 100 years, but it still gives us £100m profit for FFP purposes this year.

Reports of United wanting £5m loan fee for Tuanzebe, if that indeed includes wages I would be ok with it, if not, than it is taking a micky.

https://www.unitedinfocus.com/news/manchester-united-hope-to-land-8-75m-in-loan-fees-for-williams-and-tuanzebe/

Quote

The Telegraph report United want £5 million for Axel Tuanzebe to go on loan, amid interest from Newcastle United and Aston Villa.

 

The same outlet reports United are seeking £3.75 million for Brandon Williams, with Southampton and Norwich City linked. The fees also cover wages for the two players.

I wouldn’t be surprised if we let Guilbert go now with Tuanzebe capable of covering RB position if Cash is out.

Smith never seemed to rate Fred.

1 hour ago, nepal_villan said:

What formation did we play after the 60th minute?  We were much better than with the 4-4-2 or 4-2-2-2 we played until then. Worry Watkins and Ings won't work

Looked like we switched to 4-3-3

I wouldn't read too much into it. Salernitana were done by that point and couldn't run anymore.

They looked really poor side tbh, average championship side at best.

2 minutes ago, Rugeley Villa said:

Maybe I’m overstating us, but surely we should be pulling more revenue than Southampton and Palace? 

We should, but 10 years of criminal negligence and mismanagement under Lerner and Dr Tony left us behind. We are also still recovering our reputation after 3 years spent in the championship.

2 hours ago, Rugeley Villa said:

Keep scrolling down, there’s a few revenue tables regarding tickets sales and merchandise etc. We are surprisingly low and below clubs I thought we’d be above. 

This data is a bit misleading as number of clubs extended their accounting period that year to cover project restart.

We didn't, hence large chunk of our revenue was deferred to 20/21 set of accounts.

Still, we are very average in our ability to generate revenue, on par with teams like Southampton and Crystal Palace perhaps.

1 hour ago, ender4 said:

We are in a rush.  Need to make Europe this year and start increasing our global presence.  The big boys are working on fully closing up elite membership and there is not much time (1-5 years) to get in there before it happens.

More so, don't make Europe this season and we might see Watkins, Konsa or Martinez pushing for a move next summer.

I'm not saying getting to Europe this season will be easy or even very likely, but the pressure is starting to build on the management team.

1 hour ago, Kiwivillan said:

Sad reacts for AEG starting. The guy scored goal in promotion while fasting and scored some bangers last season and converted every penalty he took (I think). Is it too much to ask to pay him some god damn respect?!?

Full respect to AEG. But barring major injury crisis, he will see even less minutes this season than last.

He might decide himself it's time to go and look for 1st team football.

26 minutes ago, skarroki said:

Not really a team shape discussion point, more on personnel and didn't know where to put it. 

As it stands we only have 22 players to register for our 25 man squad. When you consider that 22 includes Wesley and Hourihane (half way out the door) and then Davis and Trezeguet (no point registering before January), we surely need to bring in a fair few players still? There's even still links to El Ghazi leaving and more of our best youngsters - who I assumed would make up for our small squad - are queuing up to leave on loan 

Well, you don't HAVE to register 25 players, that's the maximum.

We can register less senior players and complement it with few youngsters (chuck, jpb for example) who don't count towards the 25 limit anyway.

We need to be a lean and mean machine, no need to bloat the squad unnecessarily ( although couple more incomings are necessary, including CB cover).

FFP or no FFP you just can't compete with state owned clubs like psg and city.

Doesn't matter how wealthy our owners are, they will never be able to compete with a sovereign state.

Fundamental changes are required in football. No idea what the right solution is thought.

We just need to accumulate more than 55 points and the league position will take care of itself.