Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Important to note, Steve Bruce and Steve Round as far as we know are still there - so continuity possible and maybe player ins and mostly outs are being handled by Round. I'm happy with that, I know others are not.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, hippo said:

https://www.avfc.co.uk/News/2018/06/07/club-statement-hmrc

Club statement.

Aston Villa Football Club can confirm that an agreement has been reached with HMRC and the club will continue to fulfil its obligations. 

The club can also announce that there are no insolvency practitioners or administration advisors working with the club. 

Owner and Chairman Dr Tony Xia would like to take this opportunity to sincerely thank supporters during this difficult and unsettling time and reassure them plans are now being put in place to move the club forward.

It would have been nice if these were put into place 2 years ago when he arrived, or even 12 months ago when we were way off looking like a promotion team, rather than spending and spending and spending.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, sidcow said:

It would have been nice if these were put into place 2 years ago when he arrived, or even 12 months ago when we were way off looking like a promotion team, rather than spending and spending and spending.

Absolutely. Or even when it was obvious by their actions that they knew that they already had a cash flow problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely if we need to raise £40m just to stave off FFP issues, this won't really change our future position if we continue to lose £5m - £6m per month? We will be in the same position next season, just without any good players to sell.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, AntrimBlack said:

He won't want to be at the helm long, if he has learned anything from his tenure.

Long as in weeks ? 

Personally I think he is hear for a while yet.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, jacketspuds said:

Surely if we need to raise £40m just to stave off FFP issues, this won't really change our future position if we continue to lose £5m - £6m per month? We will be in the same position next season, just without any good players to sell.

I think we just to hope those reports were incorrect.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jacketspuds said:

Surely if we need to raise £40m just to stave off FFP issues, this won't really change our future position if we continue to lose £5m - £6m per month? We will be in the same position next season, just without any good players to sell.

The trick is not to lose £5 mill per month - I think that is going to be the plan.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, sidcow said:

It would have been nice if these were put into place 2 years ago when he arrived, or even 12 months ago when we were way off looking like a promotion team, rather than spending and spending and spending.

Nobody said this plan was a good one.

For all we know the plan is more loans and signing Charlie Adam and Glen Johnson on  4 year deals and hope for the best. Again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is humiliating that Aston Villa FC have to put out a statement confirming they have paid their tax bill and that no insolvency or administration advisors are working with the club.

This is the absolute pits.

How on earth could things have been allowed to get to this state?

I have lost all confidence in the owner and the board and it will take a long time (and most likely a change in personnel) for it to be restored.

 

Edited by briny_ear
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jareth said:

Wages are a contentious issue, those published yesterday appear to have come from a reputable source but who knows if they fudged them up for maximum effect - what they did achieve was to have their info published and for fans to take it as gospel. Much like this £5 million a month black hole figure that puts us losing £60 mill a year - we know that is untrue (see accounts) but it has stuck and is being repeated as fact. Shenanigans all over the shop at the moment.

Just on this. I've just been through the accounts again, and it's not correct that the accounts show it to be untrue - they can't, they're for last year not this year and also because of the way player purchases are covered in the accounts. For (hypothetical) example. If the club buys Joe Bloggs for 12 million quid and puts him on a 4 year contract, the accounts show outgoings for one year of 3 million quid (amortisation of 12 mill over 4 years). BUT the actual outgoings from the club are (say) 6 million on the day of purchase, and then 6 million after (say)  12 months - so accounts would show - £3million but actual outgoings are different (say) - £6 million for each of 2 years

The accounts show is an overall wage and pensions bill last year of around 61 million and quite a heap of monies owed to other parties within 12 months. It doesn't prove we are running at 5 million a month, but it doesn't disprove it either, and to my untrained in bean counting eyes, it looks entirely feasible that something of that order is right.

(The accounts also show a net cash outflow of £16,851,000 and an increase in borrowing of £48,915,000 for 2016/17.)

I am not an accountant and might be completely missing something technical or whatever, but I'm unable to see how last year's accounts disprove the 5 mill a month thing for this year.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, blandy said:

Just on this. I've just been through the accounts again, and it's not correct that the accounts show it to be untrue - they can't, they're for last year not this year and also because of the way player purchases are covered in the accounts. For (hypothetical) example. If the club buys Joe Bloggs for 12 million quid and puts him on a 4 year contract, the accounts show outgoings for one year of 3 million quid (amortisation of 12 mill over 4 years). BUT the actual outgoings from the club are (say) 6 million on the day of purchase, and then 6 million after (say)  12 months - so accounts would show - £3million but actual outgoings are different (say) - £6 million for each of 2 years

The accounts show is an overall wage and pensions bill last year of around 61 million and quite a heap of monies owed to other parties within 12 months. It doesn't prove we are running at 5 million a month, but it doesn't disprove it either, and to my untrained in bean counting eyes, it looks entirely feasible that something of that order is right.

(The accounts also show a net cash outflow of £16,851,000 and an increase in borrowing of £48,915,000 for 2016/17.)

I am not an accountant and might be completely missing something technical or whatever, but I'm unable to see how last year's accounts disprove the 5 mill a month thing for this year.

Matt Scott said pretty much the same. The last published accounts were 2016/17.

2017/18 accounts should make interesting reading, perhaps they'll start using examples of our accounts in the AAT exams!

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, blandy said:

Just on this. I've just been through the accounts again, and it's not correct that the accounts show it to be untrue - they can't, they're for last year not this year and also because of the way player purchases are covered in the accounts. For (hypothetical) example. If the club buys Joe Bloggs for 12 million quid and puts him on a 4 year contract, the accounts show outgoings for one year of 3 million quid (amortisation of 12 mill over 4 years). BUT the actual outgoings from the club are (say) 6 million on the day of purchase, and then 6 million after (say)  12 months - so accounts would show - £3million but actual outgoings are different (say) - £6 million for each of 2 years

The accounts show is an overall wage and pensions bill last year of around 61 million and quite a heap of monies owed to other parties within 12 months. It doesn't prove we are running at 5 million a month, but it doesn't disprove it either, and to my untrained in bean counting eyes, it looks entirely feasible that something of that order is right.

(The accounts also show a net cash outflow of £16,851,000 and an increase in borrowing of £48,915,000 for 2016/17.)

I am not an accountant and might be completely missing something technical or whatever, but I'm unable to see how last year's accounts disprove the 5 mill a month thing for this year.

Original accusation about this black hole referred to the last 2 years I think, not just the last 12 months - it implied that we were losing about £5 mill per month and that Tony was funding that loss personally - it was very simplistic but the notion that we had made losses of £60 mill a year, for two years running was what was being disputed using the accounts as evidence - because we know we have not made a £120 million loss over 2 years. Everything has become very distorted these last 48 hours!

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, briny_ear said:

It is humiliating that Aston Villa FC have to put out a statement confirming they have paid their tax bill and that no insolvency or administration advisors are working with the club.

This is the absolute pits.

How on earth could things have been allowed to get to this state?

I have lost all confidence in the owner and the board and it will take a long time (and most likely a change in personnel) for it to be restored.

 

Things must be bad if even you’ve lost faith! ;)

It really is a joke that an historic sporting institution like Villa has come to this. Even older neutral fans that love the game will feel it’s a crying shame. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.avfc.co.uk/News/2018/06/07/club-statement-hmrc

Quote

 

Aston Villa Football Club can confirm that an agreement has been reached with HMRC and the club will continue to fulfil its obligations. 

The club can also announce that there are no insolvency practitioners or administration advisors working with the club. 

Owner and Chairman Dr Tony Xia would like to take this opportunity to sincerely thank supporters during this difficult and unsettling time and reassure them plans are now being put in place to move the club forward.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Palace can here though wife is villa 

we are the champions of administration 

it does hurt as you lose your best players at cheap prices we sold victor modes for 2 million 

You must hope to stay in the championship and get a buyer who loves the club 

Parish did wonders for us and look where we are now 

Good luck

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Things must be bad if even you’ve lost faith! ;)

It really is a joke that an historic sporting institution like Villa has come to this. Even older neutral fans that love the game will feel it’s a crying shame. 

I've been supporting Villa since the early sixties and I have seen some terrible times for the club. But I don't think I have ever been as angry as I am at the moment.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • limpid locked this topic
  • limpid locked and unlocked this topic
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of use Terms of Use, Cookies We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Â