Villa latest accounts

[Stevo985]

Not only that but the quite substantial increase in TV revenue is surely going to lead to increased pay expectations from players (and managers and coaches).

Definitely.

 

It's a false economy. If you give everyone something then nobody's better off. In fact, we'll end up worse off. Because players will demand higher wages, clubs will demand higher transfer fees and everyone will demand parity with everyone else. And in the end the cost clubs have to pay in wages and fees will outweigh the additional money.

 

As somebody on here put it wonderfully (I think it was The_Rev so give him credit)

 

It's like being at the theatre. Somebody near the front stands up to get a better view. So the person behind him stands up to get a better view, then the person behind them stands up to get a better view. Eventually everybody in the theatre is standing up to get a better view. They've now all got the same view as they had before, but nobody's got a seat.

[Demitri_C]

if we finish 10th though we will receive more money for placings than last year which was lower

[DelboyVilla]

This is the trouble, transfers are a competition and we have shown lately that we can't compete. Look at Newcastle's players the likes of Sissoko, Anita, even Remy's loan. We could probably afford the fees because they weren't high but wages wise we are sunk. So that leaves us shopping in the Luna, Tonev, Helenius markets. Gord 'elp us!

 

Even when we pick up a gem, they have one good season and we have to increase their wages to keep them happy?

 

We need to increase our revenue and the only way to do that realistically is improve on the pitch and by finishing higher means more prize money and hopefully bigger crowds, a cup run maybe and more merchandise sales. We are just comatose at the moment!

[danceoftheshamen]

I'm not so sure the extra TV money will necessarily result in an automatic increase in salaries at this point in time.... transfer fees though yes.

 

I think there's a chance that wages won't rise just yet because of the FFP & Premier League regulations which will surely mean clubs will continue to have to be a touch more prudent regardless of the extra money.. because lets face it many clubs are struggling to operate within these new regulations as it stands and in fact we are surely one of only a few teams who are actually now within or about to be within them.

 

Maybe transfer fees will rise though as this will be a direct extra income for clubs which will actually help them regarding FFP etc ... Didn't Randy, or maybe it was General K on Randy's behalf, say it wasn't the transfer fees which were an issue? But rather the wages

 

So i think the extra TV money will help us pay more than we have been whilst many other clubs will have to be trimming theirs back to fall in line..Result = Good for Aston Villa. At least it should enable us to regain some lost ground on several teams, especially when we finally get Bent, Hutton, Delfounso, Given and one or two others off the payroll. I certainly don't see why we shouldn't be able to bring in a few better quality players on competitive wages 

 

I don't see the transfer fees as being an issue either because if we have to pay more then we can also sell for more, so it kind of cancels itself out doesn't it? In actual fact we may even have an advantage here too as we have been buying so cheaply over the last couple of seasons and could now sell some of those purchases for much higher fees... all good so far as i can see.

[TrentVilla]

 

 

It's like being at the theatre. Somebody near the front stands up to get a better view. So the person behind him stands up to get a better view, then the person behind them stands up to get a better view. Eventually everybody in the theatre is standing up to get a better view. They've now all got the same view as they had before, but nobody's got a seat.

 

 

Apart from the chap at the front who has a better view than he started with and can sit down whenever he wants

[Rovers13]

Overseas teams still won't have the money. Only English teams will. So it will just make shopping in foreign markets more important, something lambert has been very willing to do.

[GarethRDR]

 

Apart from the chap at the front who has a better view than he started with and can sit down whenever he wants

 

This is why I buy box seats.  Can't be seen in and amongst the proles, at any rate.

 

[suttonpaul]

Stevo985 I disagree.

 

I think with previous deals you are completely correct only an idiot would argue otherwise but with FFP in place I think a lot of clubs are banking (literally) on this new TV deal to make them compliant or more towards compliance.

 

I think ALL the established clubs with large wage bills wont change but the new clubs coming up plus the odd club with a small wage bill will spend more like you said.

 

 

On another note as we aren't really talking about accounts as Risso and Cudoz have cleared all the smoke away from the headline figures on the accounts we should we talking about this sort of stuff in the Lerner thread.

[P3te]

Transfer fees will likely only see any substantial increase for signings within England. The fees for continental players won't rise because English clubs have more money unless there's a bidding war between a few of them

[Zatman]

so the average English player will be going for even more ridiculous fees than now

[Risso]

The Premier League financial regulation rules means that clubs are only allowed to increase their salary costs year on year by the following amounts:

 

 

2013/14: £4m
2014/145: £8m
2015/16: £12m

 

I imagine this was designed to prevent the reoccurence of the massive wage inflation that has been the result of the last few big TV deals.

[suttonpaul]

Unfortunately Risso the average fan hasn't looked up the details of FFP and therefore will expect things that cant be delivered and come to conclusions on idea's based on how things used to be.

[Rovers13]

The Premier League financial regulation rules means that clubs are only allowed to increase their salary costs year on year by the following amounts:

2013/14: £4m

2014/145: £8m

2015/16: £12m

I imagine this was designed to prevent the reoccurence of the massive wage inflation that has been the result of the last few big TV deals.

This is a pathetic rule. Yet another example of the powers that be protecting big clubs.

[suttonpaul]

Yea it does Rovers but I agree with the rule......

 

1, Why should someone buy Norwich for example drop 500m on them and turn them into Premiership winners and all that comes with it.

 

2. All clubs need to live within their means so they stay around for another 100 years. 

 

3. Rules like this could mean that clubs with debts pay them off, build better grounds, training facilities, produce more home grown players and lastly provide cheaper seating. All of those can be choices made by the people who run an individual club with no debts and who make profits.

[markavfc40]

The Premier League financial regulation rules means that clubs are only allowed to increase their salary costs year on year by the following amounts:

 

 

2013/14: £4m

2014/145: £8m

2015/16: £12m

 

I imagine this was designed to prevent the reoccurence of the massive wage inflation that has been the result of the last few big TV deals.

 

 

That is actually not so bad is it. Hopefully get rid of Bent, Given and Hutton that will be the best part of 160k a week or 8 mill a year. Throw that onto the 8 mill you mention above and we'd have up to 16 mill to spend on wages for new players next season. That's around 40k a week on 8 new players or 50k a week on 6. I doubt very much we will use up the initial 8 mill never mind any money we can free up by getting rid of a couple of players.

[Rovers13]

Yea it does Rovers but I agree with the rule......

1, Why should someone buy Norwich for example drop 500m on them and turn them into Premiership winners and all that comes with it.

2. All clubs need to live within their means so they stay around for another 100 years.

3. Rules like this could mean that clubs with debts pay them off, build better grounds, training facilities, produce more home grown players and lastly provide cheaper seating. All of those can be choices made by the people who run an individual club with no debts and who make profits.

That's why I somewhat agree with rules about clubs not being aloud to lose money, but I don't agree with them not being able to increase their wage bill if they can keep the books balanced. For instance, if Villa had a flukey good year and made the champions league, they might want to bring it better, more expensive players to consolidate their position, not to mention expanding the squad. However, even though they'd be getting like £15m from the UCL and a considerable amount extra in premier league prize money, they could only raise the wage bill £5m, meaning they'd be very unlikely to qualify and the big clubs could regain their position.

[OutByEaster?]

FFP won't work - it's not fair, and the big clubs have already found ways around it (City have increased their income by around £40m by buying clubs in other leagues and then selling them 'consultancy').

 

We should be restricting squad size, reducing the number of players on the bench to 5 or 6, limiting the number of players you can send on loan to 6 a season - these are the things that would make a difference, don't prevent City paying the worlds best players £1/2m a week, but restrict them to only having 22 of them - let those players that currently sit on the bench at big clubs (or are part of the 30 players that Chelsea and City each have out on loan this year) actually play some games, for clubs that want them and in doing so, make those clubs better and closer to the big clubs.

 

 

 

Edit: Apparently, City's newly formed Ladies team also pays them a seven figure sum for 'consultancy and image rights'!

[TrentVilla]

Its almost like FFP is designed to protect the elite from the threat of the nouveau riche like Man City, just like the Europa League protects the status quo of the Champions League clubs. In fact… its almost like we have a European Super League in all but name yet those clubs get to stay in their domestic competitions to hoover up all that money as well…..

 

In fact its almost like UEFA are only looking after their own interests and those elite clubs that put them up as they trot around Europe listening to that music. 

 

Oh hang on, there is a little French fella at my door with some henchmen wanting a word with me...

[OutByEaster?]

I can't get over the genius of setting up your (loss making) ladies team as a separate company and then charging them millions of pounds to coach them and let them wear your kit. It's foul, it's cheating, but you've got to admire just how slippery that is. 

[suttonpaul]

Alright but you have used one of the two teams who can get around that rule in our league City and Chelsea.

 

Those two aside the other clubs cant do that and perhaps more rules will be put in place to stop it we don't know.

 

As for the point about what if we make it to the ECL, well firstly lol we can only dream but secondly if we make it there then the team we will have put out was good enough to get there once, why not again and again.

 

This is all about stability and slow build now the growth couldn't go on forever big wages 20 years ago were less than 20k now its 250 to 500k it had to stop.