Nigel Posted January 22 VT Supporter Share Posted January 22 (edited) I'd like to know just how far we could take these buy backs for the 3 players we let out in the summer. For instance if we buy back philogene can we simply sell him on again and receive the benefits over again for ffp; Spreading the cost over a 4 year contract when buying but getting the lump sum of a transfer fee a few weeks later when sold on? In theory could you keep doing this with the same few players (I do realise the players wouldn't stand for it but humour me)? Edited January 22 by Nigel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imavillan Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 (edited) this is worth a watch/listen seems the best place to post this as many of us know we are way way behind when it comes to revenue Edited January 23 by imavillan 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fruitvilla Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 On 19/01/2024 at 08:36, nick76 said: What does match day revenue include because just back of the envelope calcs means £16m is roughly £800k per home game at ~40k attendance is £20 per person. Seems a low average considering tickets, corporate boxes, food, drink and programmes. What am I missing? I may just be tired and not thinking straight. This is exactly the way I approach this conundrum. Assuming with this season's price hikes, which did not go down well, we are at very optimistically at 25 million revenue. Adding 20% capacity will barely bring us to 30 million matchday revenue. There's something else going on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWARLEY2 Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 And to compound things the Premier League club heads are meeting soon to ratify bringing us into line with the UEFA rules of 70% max of revenue can be spent on transfers wages and agents. It is what it is i guess . But it isnt going to help us thats for sure. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheltenham_villa Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 2 hours ago, MWARLEY2 said: And to compound things the Premier League club heads are meeting soon to ratify bringing us into line with the UEFA rules of 70% max of revenue can be spent on transfers wages and agents. It is what it is i guess . But it isnt going to help us thats for sure. Personally I'm in favour of it, Dr Xi nearly cost us our club, any move towards the majority of clubs running sustainably is a positive for me. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Follyfoot Posted January 24 VT Supporter Share Posted January 24 On 23/01/2024 at 19:07, imavillan said: this is worth a watch/listen seems the best place to post this as many of us know we are way way behind when it comes to revenue It kind of makes me feel like we are the orphans in the Warriors film Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thabucks Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 Purslow’s exit package with the purchasing back of his shares would be included in FFP calculations right ? Add in Monchi & Heck’s wages who’d be on more than Lange & Purslow that’s perhaps quite a bump in executive pay / payouts to factor into FFP calculations. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrBlack Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 FFP has been a thing for well over a decade now. Clubs are making more money than ever from the current TV deal. What has happened that suddenly means all the clubs are right on the edge of the FFP limits? Why weren't they last January? Or the one before, or the one before? For us, are we really that close to our 3 year limit? Our spend has been moderate, and income constantly improving (Grealish sale accounted for). Our, are our limits with a view on the uefa ffp limits, which are new to us and explain why we might have to cut our cloth more than we would have? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StewieGriffin Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 10 minutes ago, MrBlack said: Are our limits with a view on the uefa ffp limits, which are new to us and explain why we might have to cut our cloth more than we would have? This will have to be a consideration - we have to comply with UEFA's rules now as well as the domestic ones. We're in Europe this season and should be in next season too, so it's something we have to factor in to our planning Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 1 hour ago, MrBlack said: FFP has been a thing for well over a decade now. Clubs are making more money than ever from the current TV deal. What has happened that suddenly means all the clubs are right on the edge of the FFP limits? Why weren't they last January? Or the one before, or the one before? For us, are we really that close to our 3 year limit? Our spend has been moderate, and income constantly improving (Grealish sale accounted for). Our, are our limits with a view on the uefa ffp limits, which are new to us and explain why we might have to cut our cloth more than we would have? What is so hard for people to understand that they repeatedly ask this question? UEFA have tightened the rules and are phased in from 2023 to 2025 and the squad cost rule essentially means 30%+ reduction in terms of your squads cost Vs revenue. If you tighten the rules it means clubs need to tighten their expenditure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomsky_11 Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 On 22/01/2024 at 10:58, Nigel said: I'd like to know just how far we could take these buy backs for the 3 players we let out in the summer. For instance if we buy back philogene can we simply sell him on again and receive the benefits over again for ffp; Spreading the cost over a 4 year contract when buying but getting the lump sum of a transfer fee a few weeks later when sold on? In theory could you keep doing this with the same few players (I do realise the players wouldn't stand for it but humour me)? That’s not quite how it would work. We could buy back and immediately sell on for profit. I believe there have been multiple instances of other clubs triggering buy back only to then immediately sell the player on for a higher price. From an accounting perspective, if both the buy back and sale occurred in the same period then the total cost of the buy back and income from the sale would appear in the same period. There wouldn’t be any spreading of the cost of the buy back over 4 years, as on any sale any remaining book value of the contract at the point of sale is expense as a cost of sale. You don’t continue to amortise an asset after it is sold. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted January 27 Moderator Share Posted January 27 Posts moved. Please use the right thread. General FFP chat goes here This Villa FFP thread is for stuff specific to us. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted January 27 Moderator Share Posted January 27 Posts removed. This is an FFP thread, not a speculation thread on imaginary/hypothetical player sales. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beachboys1 Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 david ormstein says we muast raise funds by end of june or we will be in trouble with profit and sustainabilty rules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duke313 Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 1 minute ago, beachboys1 said: david ormstein says we muast raise funds by end of june or we will be in trouble with profit and sustainabilty rules Are these the new UEFA rules? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beachboys1 Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 1 minute ago, duke313 said: Are these the new UEFA rules? didnt say Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaJ100 Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 32 minutes ago, beachboys1 said: david ormstein says we muast raise funds by end of june or we will be in trouble with profit and sustainabilty rules Spending over £50 million on Diaby is looking like it could be really painful Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichW Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 57 minutes ago, VillaJ100 said: Spending over £50 million on Diaby is looking like it could be really painful I'm thinking more the signings of Digne (plus big wages), Coutinho on a permanent (big wages also) and Dendoncker are coming back to bite us rather than Diaby. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pas5898 Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 (edited) Spurs, Arsenal, Man United, Chelsea will spend another 150 million + this summer whilst we need to sell our best prospect to comply with FFP . What happened to Everton, even Wolves should be a wake up call, not a reason to mock them. Realistically without a Grealish style sale every 3 seasons we are sell to buy. Edited January 29 by pas5898 Typo 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Steve Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 Given that Heck recently called for heavier punishments for those in breach of FFP, I remain confident we aren’t in trouble. The reality is however until we get higher up the table more often, we will have to sell players to bring in others and clear our overpaid and underused deadwood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts