LondonLax Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 Were over the hill with the finances, our losses will only fall from here. I think there are a few clubs who are still going up the hill in terms of losses and a small hitch with the TV revenue will hit them well before it hits us. The thing is if the "big clubs" do pull away and make their own league who's going to watch them? I wouldn't and I don't think many neutrals will either, its a big risk for them. What the others clubs should make perfectly clear is that once they have made the move there will not be an easy way back in for them when the "super duper league" goes tits up. It's the other way round. If the big clubs pull away and form their own league no one would watch us anymore. We would basically be a championship club in a championship league with similar TV revenue and exposure. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick76 Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 Were over the hill with the finances, our losses will only fall from here. I think there are a few clubs who are still going up the hill in terms of losses and a small hitch with the TV revenue will hit them well before it hits us. The thing is if the "big clubs" do pull away and make their own league who's going to watch them? I wouldn't and I don't think many neutrals will either, its a big risk for them. What the others clubs should make perfectly clear is that once they have made the move there will not be an easy way back in for them when the "super duper league" goes tits up. It's the other way round. If the big clubs pull away and form their own league no one would watch us anymore. We would basically be a championship club in a championship league with similar TV revenue and exposure. I think a bit of both will happen!!! I rarely watch champions league games these days and it's the same with a lot of people I know, so if they pull away I may even watch less. It'll be like watching Spanish football when Madrid play Barca, if I'm at home or at the pub and it happens to be on tv I'll watch but otherwise won't go out of my way and that's not how I used to be. Like you say the rest of football will suffer as the neutrals and people on the fence will less likely watch whatever league villa will be in and so will be left to the clubs fans to watch their games.... I think that's why the break away super league will never happen and the format aka the champions league, is likely to stay because the big clubs need us and we need them. If it did happen then football might implode, which maybe a good thing in some ways and we can get back to some normality rather than what it is now... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaCas Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 Staff costs UP £2.3m to £72m Not quite the predictions/guesses we've had over the last year on here, is it? Step forward VillaCas with his assertion that the wage bill would be down to £35m! http://www.villatalk.com/index.php/topic/10485-why-paul-lambert-should-get-the-sack/page-67#entry1175557 Haha, nice try Risso but as you well know I was talking about the cost of players actually used by Lambert versus the cost of players available to McL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 Staff costs UP £2.3m to £72m Not quite the predictions/guesses we've had over the last year on here, is it? Step forward VillaCas with his assertion that the wage bill would be down to £35m! http://www.villatalk.com/index.php/topic/10485-why-paul-lambert-should-get-the-sack/page-67#entry1175557 Haha, nice try Risso but as you well know I was talking about the cost of players actually used by Lambert versus the cost of players available to McL Haha, nice try, but it's there in black and white: "Only in your fantasy world would you expect someone going from a £70m a year to a £35m a year wage bill to "improve" the squad!" Which, as it turns out, was the most wildly inaccurate ball park figure ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Pangloss Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 With staff costs up to £72m it's nice to know that we're paying a premium for the shower of shite that is representing this club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samjp26 Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 For what it is worth, staff costs going up by £2.3m works out at about £44k a week, but of course that figure doesn't include any of the players brought in or sold last Summer. If we're to believe the press and their wage estimates for Given, Ireland, Bent, Makoun, Hutton and Bannan (those who will more than likely leave at the end of this season, plus those who left last Summer) then that would knock off approximately £14m from that £72m figure at least. Obviously on top of that £58m figure you would have to add the new contracts that were given to our current bunch as well as the contracts of the players who came in this season, but I'm sure it would end up quite a bit less than what it was before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 (edited) Why would you 'knock off' the pay of Hutton and (part of) Given, Bent, Bannan and Ireland? Edited March 9, 2014 by snowychap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samjp26 Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 (edited) Why would you 'knock off' the pay of Hutton and (part of) Given, Bent, Bannan and Ireland? Read what I said after I mention their names. Hint: It is in brackets. Edited March 9, 2014 by samjp26 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 (edited) Read what I said after I mention their names. Hint: It is in brackets.So you've skipped a year (and are guessing about wages in 2014/15)? What's the point in that?If you want to talk about the change in wages/personnel from this summer then it would seem a little bizarre to take the 12/13 figure as your base. Edited March 9, 2014 by snowychap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tarjei Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 With staff costs up to £72m it's nice to know that we're paying a premium for the shower of shite that is representing this club. I'm a bit confused by this. I can't see the £71.8m figure anywhere in the document. So what's that about? Is it including exceptional items (terminations,etc)? Here's the section covering staff costs, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samjp26 Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 Read what I said after I mention their names. Hint: It is in brackets. So you've skipped a year (and are guessing about wages in 2014/15)? What's the point in that? If you want to talk about the change in wages/personnel from this summer then it would seem a little bizarre to take the 12/13 figure as your base. I've not missed a year, the wage figure for 12/13 does not take into account the incoming players and outgoing players that have happened since last Summer, I put that in my original post. My point is that come this Summer, should things go to plan with those who are heading out of the door, the amount spent on wages should be cut substantially meaning there should be no problem with spending. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cudoz Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 With staff costs up to £72m it's nice to know that we're paying a premium for the shower of shite that is representing this club. I'm a bit confused by this. I can't see the £71.8m figure anywhere in the document. So what's that about? Is it including exceptional items (terminations,etc)? £71.8 million is from the accounts of Reform Acquisitions Ltd - the parent company of Aston Villa FC Limited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tarjei Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 Oh, okay... I think it's time for me to give up trying to understand this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 Oh, okay... I think it's time for me to give up trying to understand this ....and take suttonpaul with you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 (edited) I've not missed a year, the wage figure for 12/13 does not take into account the incoming players and outgoing players that have happened since last Summer, I put that in my original post. My point is that come this Summer, should things go to plan with those who are heading out of the door, the amount spent on wages should be cut substantially meaning there should be no problem with spending.They were supposed to have been cut substantially a couple of years ago and then last year...You have missed a year as you've taken the staff costs for last year (i.e. 12/13 - £72m) and whilst saying that it doesn't take in to account incomings or outgoings this FY have then gone on to 'calculate' that outgoings next summer should make it £14m less at £58m (without any other incomings) - that would be a 'guess' at the staff costs for 14/15, wouldn't it?So you've taken a figure for 12/13, acknowledged that it doesn't take in to account anything that may have happened in between and guessed at a figure for a load of people who may be leaving at the end of this season and come up with a figure of £58m for next season's staff costs.Brilliant. What on this sorry and god forsaken shithole of a planet is the point in that kind of nonsense? Edited March 9, 2014 by snowychap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samjp26 Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 I'll go ahead and quote myself one last time: "Obviously on top of that £58m figure you would have to add the new contracts that were given to our current bunch as well as the contracts of the players who came in this season, but I'm sure it would end up quite a bit less than what it was before." The bit in bold was the point I was trying to make, that before the start of next season our wage bill shouldn't be anywhere near £72m. I don't really understand why or how you are trying to argue with me for no apparent reason because of my opinion, but each to their own I guess. I'm not necessarily talking about financial years, just that before any business was done last summer our wage budget stood at £72m. I'll try one last time to break down what I think: (£72m + Summer 2013 spend + January 2014 spend) - (Summer 2013 sales + Summer 2014 sales) = far less than £72m. Bannan has gone, Makoun has gone, Ireland has gone, Bent is out on loan and should be moved on permanently, Given is out on loan and should move on permanently. The only one I'm still weary of not moving on now is Hutton and I'm sure some club will end up taking him if he genuinely just wants to play football like he says. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briny_ear Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 samjp26.: stop digging! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 I'll go ahead and quote myself...Why? That would appear to be a mistake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samjp26 Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 (edited) I'll leave you folks to it sorry for posting my opinion Edited March 9, 2014 by samjp26 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raver50032 Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Were over the hill with the finances, our losses will only fall from here. I think there are a few clubs who are still going up the hill in terms of losses and a small hitch with the TV revenue will hit them well before it hits us. The thing is if the "big clubs" do pull away and make their own league who's going to watch them? I wouldn't and I don't think many neutrals will either, its a big risk for them. What the others clubs should make perfectly clear is that once they have made the move there will not be an easy way back in for them when the "super duper league" goes tits up. It's the other way round. If the big clubs pull away and form their own league no one would watch us anymore. We would basically be a championship club in a championship league with similar TV revenue and exposure. This - a poor comparison I know, but I am looking at this like the PDC versus the BDO in darts... This is why the BBC still have the BDO to broadcast... it's pretty cheap and pointless in the grand scheme of things. The PDC is where the money and big, big crowds are. Mind you, I think the PDC will lose a lot of viewers when Phil Taylor finally packs it in... Though that young Dutch nutcase (Van Gerwen) looks to be a prospect... There will however, never be another Phil Taylor... Up the Power... Get in. To the point being made though - I probably wouldn't watch a super duper league either (unless we were in it), but I think the paying public neutral probably would. However, given that I pay for a TV license and pay a subscription to Sky, I refuse point blank to pay a third company to watch TV/Sport etc. So BT will never have my money unless they take over everything that Sky has and provides a fully comparable service. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts