Jump to content

Scott Sinclair


The_Rev

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Richard said:

How much are we likely to be getting for him though? Enough to make a difference?

FFP (or championship fair play rules). Meeting or failing to meet them depends on being one side or the other of a line. In essence half a million quid is critical - it's not about wealth, it's about meeting rules. The difference could mean a different player we want to sign not coming. 10 grand a week wages (or extra wages) not being available because of that £500k price difference as a hypothetical example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, blandy said:

FFP (or championship fair play rules). Meeting or failing to meet them depends on being one side or the other of a line. In essence half a million quid is critical - it's not about wealth, it's about meeting rules. The difference could mean a different player we want to sign not coming. 10 grand a week wages (or extra wages) not being available because of that £500k price difference as a hypothetical example.

We've a new owner.  FFP doesn't count for a few years I think.  Not that I'm encouraging the loss of a million here or there, just that I don't think FFP is currently a factor in our calculations.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, BOF said:

We've a new owner.  FFP doesn't count for a few years I think

!!!!!! Who the owner is, is utterly irrelevant to the rules (as I understand it). the EFL site page on the regs is down at the moment, but there's some stuff elsewhere on their site that applies to us.

Quote
2016/17 onwards
 
Next season will see the introduction 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 FPP 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 Football League 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 over a rolling 3 season timeframe (compared to an equivalent figure of £105m in the Premier League). 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.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, BOF said:

We've a new owner.  FFP doesn't count for a few years I think.  Not that I'm encouraging the loss of a million here or there, just that I don't think FFP is currently a factor in our calculations.

Thats the first I have heard of that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, blandy said:

!!!!!! Who the owner is, is utterly irrelevant to the rules (as I understand it). the EFL site page on the regs is down at the moment, but there's some stuff elsewhere on their site that applies to us.

Yeah I'm trying to find articles that outline the grace period for new owners but can only find ones about UEFA being about to relax FFP rules across the board, off the back of protests by the likes of Citeh & PSG arguing that it ties their hands in gate-crashing the already-established elite.  So I may have been talking from my other end here :(  Oh well.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

Thats the first I have heard of that?

See above.  I'm struggling to find any concrete proof of it.  I definitely didn't dream it up on my own, but I might be just repeating a false story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What does Financial Fair Play tell us?

As of June 2015, clubs can spend up to €5 million (approximately £3.83 million) more than they earn per assessment period (three years). However, it can exceed this level to a certain limit, if it is entirely covered by a direct contribution/payment from the club owner(s) or a related party. This prevents the build-up of unsustainable debt.

The limits are:

• €45m (approximately £34.5 million) for assessment periods 2013/14 and 2014/15.

• €30m (approximately £23 million) for assessment periods 2015/16, 2016/17 and 2017/18

In order to promote investment in stadiums, training facilities, youth development and women’s football (from 2015), all such costs are excluded from the break-even calculation.

The turnover in the most recent set of accounts, covering 2014-15, was £115.6 million.

However, that figure obviously included Premier League TV money.

In the coming season, TV revenue will be significantly lower and will only be partially offset by the parachute payment which relegated clubs receive.

In a nutshell Villa's transfer spending, wagebill and all other costs must come to roughly around their turnover. Therefore Xia faces a challenge of increasing the turnover, without the Premier League riches of years gone by.

http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/how-financial-fair-play-rules-11361849

New owners

There were concerns among potential new owners that FFP rules frustrated attempts to buy clubs and grow them gradually, so the regulations were tweaked slightly to enable them to invest cash, providing they prove to UEFA they have a valid business plan to break even within a certain timeframe. (this is all I can find @BOF)

Writing in the Guardian last year , Owen Gibson observed: "As many critics pointed out from the start, it appeared to be belated acceptance that anomalies across Europe (for example the bumper new Premier League TV deal in England) made it impossible to impose a one-size-fits-all FFP rule across the continent."

Can Villa outspend their Championship rivals?

Given the Financial Fair Play ruling that clubs can spend up to €5 million (£3.83 million) more than they earn per assessment period (three years), you would assume that Villa and Newcastle will have the largest budgets in the Championship.

Those two clubs will also be entitled to bigger Parachute Payments than their rivals having been Premier League clubs throughout the last assessment period.

Newcastle and Villa face similar issues in potentially being lumbered with a raft of high earners.

It was recently revealed that they had players signed in January earning upwards of £60,000 per week who didn’t have reduction clauses in their contracts in the eventuality of relegation.

At least Villa's blank January didn't add to the wagebill, even if it did wave a white flag on their Premier League survival hopes.

The importance of an immediate return to the Premier League cannot be underestimated.

Edited by StanBalaban
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cheers @StanBalaban.  If true, that definitely suggests there is something in place for new owners, over and above the normal course of events.  It's a little light on detail but I may not be completely mad after all @blandy ... which is nice.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, StanBalaban said:

Therefore Xia faces a challenge of increasing the turnover, without the Premier League riches of years gone by.

To get back on topic, it's this bit, in regard of the Sinclair fee, which means that every penny matters.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, BOF said:

Cheers @StanBalaban.  If true, that definitely suggests there is something in place for new owners, over and above the normal course of events.  It's a little light on detail but I may not be completely mad after all @blandy ... which is nice.

Possibly :P, not mad, but because that's the UEFA FFP (not the English Football League) rules it doesn't seem to imply there's anything to do with new owners as it affects Villa. Though as the EFL site page on their regs isn't working, there could be something in there, I guess, but I suspect not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, kurtsimonw said:

Yeah. It's definitely a good idea to get a reputation of letting players go for less than we really value them at. 

albeit Beneteke was an exception.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know why we ever bought him ( Sinclair).....Its hardly scouting Prowess.

.......we must be the country's "get out of jail card" for clubs looking to dump their rubbish.

Edited by TRO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

 When quizzed about former team-mate Scott Sinclair's possible arrival at Parkhead, the 35-year-old added: "I haven't spoken to him but he's a really good player.

"He's a top professional. I think he's going to be a good player for the club because his attitude is very good as well."

Kolo Toure in The Scottish Sun

(I realise that sounds like a fantastic film - Idriss Elba as Toure, and perhaps Willem Dafoe as the evil overlord had has to overthrow to reclaim his birthright)

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saw an article on Facebook about an hour ago saying we'd rejected another bid. It could be utter bull but a load of Celtic fans were going mad about them not stumping up the 500k extra that we're asking for. I only glimpsed at it so I'm not sure where they were getting there information from.

Edit: Just found the article, it's on the b.b.c

Edited by 7392craig
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â