KHV Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 7 minutes ago, mrjc said: Agreed. Although it’s interesting, the new PL rights deal looks like it may be lower than the current one (although with some packages yet to be sold). So alongside all our general mismanagement over the last decade or so, we will have even timed our (hopefully short) stint out of the PL to have avoided the most lucrative years! Unbelievable I think they are expecting a large increase in the overseas rights which is why the big 6 tried to demand a larger slice of that particular pie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrjc Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 20 minutes ago, KHV said: I think they are expecting a large increase in the overseas rights which is why the big 6 tried to demand a larger slice of that particular pie. Ah yes, true - hopefully then! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa89 Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 27 minutes ago, mrjc said: Agreed. Although it’s interesting, the new PL rights deal looks like it may be lower than the current one (although with some packages yet to be sold). When all's said and done it will be higher than the current one, just not by as much as the Premier League thought. Also it's the domestic television rights that have fallen (which are awarded on merit) and the foreign rights (which are split evenly) have gone up. This means non top 6 clubs will actually get more money than they do now. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 I am glad if they do give clubs less then the reckless and stupid fees might be controlled better. In a way its perhaps been better if this were to happen spending 30m on average players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omariqy Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 Saw Matt Maher on twitter said we made losses of £7.5m for the 2016/17 year, down from £30m the year before. Largely thanks to £24m profit on player sales but commercial revenue down significantly, as expected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom_avfc Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 15 hours ago, OutByEaster? said: There's some very interesting stuff in those accounts - almost all of which I don't think I understand. It does tend to suggest that we made a slight profit on player trading in the summer (which probably makes sense) - it looks like we've reduced our overall losses from £80m in the previous year to £14m in this year and that sounds good - even though it's not immediately clear how we did it - there's a £57m figure floating about which I think Dr T has either given or borrowed to the club (I can't understand which it is but I do realise there's a huge difference between the two things!) and the value of our property seems to have dropped by £30m. I'm not an accountant, but the comments and stuff seem to suggest that we're in pretty solid shape at the moment. Can anyone unbeffudle me on the £57m or the property value drop? Also, We seem to be a lot of companies: 1874 Developments is our property company - is it active does anyone know? Is its purpose the redevelopment of the ground? Why would we separate that off? Recon Properties is also a property company that seems to be part of Aston Villa - anyone know why on that one? There are three or four things that look like they might be the football club - is that a result of the process of the buying and selling of the club and the way in which Recon did that, or something else I don't understand? Qualified accountant to aisle number 4 please. I'll have a go at answering some of your points: The property value hasn't decreased as far as I can see. We have freehold land and buildings of around £39 million which is largely the same as in the previous year. What interests me with regards to this is the £934,000 addition of land during the year. I don't know if this has been mentioned elsewhere and I've missed it but it'd be interesting to know what land we've been buying up. The £57 million is the amount invested by the company into the subsidiary companies. There is no detailed breakdown of what has been invested into each company but the £57m will effectively be split in some way among the various subsidiaries listed in the accounts. Also of interest may be the increase in loan notes of £15 million which presumably means we owe Dr Tony (via his Chinese company) £15 million more than we did in 2016 (£49 million as opposed to £34 million). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NurembergVillan Posted February 15, 2018 Moderator Share Posted February 15, 2018 As retweeted by @omariqy, here are the figures for Recon - the holding company. Looks like the club is losing £800k per week if we exclude player sales to balance the books a little. Potentially this means that if we don't go up we need to sell more players, not buy any, and account for a drop in income through decreased parachute payments. If where my head's at is correct, Steve Bruce could quite literally save Aston Villa by getting us promoted. No pressure, big man... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrjc Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 5 minutes ago, NurembergVillan said: As retweeted by @omariqy, here are the figures for Recon - the holding company. Looks like the club is losing £800k per week if we exclude player sales to balance the books a little. Potentially this means that if we don't go up we need to sell more players, not buy any, and account for a drop in income through decreased parachute payments. If where my head's at is correct, Steve Bruce could quite literally save Aston Villa by getting us promoted. No pressure, big man... Yep, generally agree. Although other moving parts in the 'stay-down' scenario.: If Terry and Gabby are no longer here, we will be saving maybe £100k per week in wages, or £5m annually? (Although Terry wasn't included in the numbers above, others were). Admittedly this is a half good / half bad scenario, as replacing Terry with no money to spend on fees and wages would be pretty disastrous! Or we keep him and only make savings on the Gabby wages. A suggestion I heard a while ago was that we have loaned, rather than sold, some players so that we can make profits on their sales over several years (important given the EFL rolling three-year test). Amavi's fee will be helping in this respect for the current season. We don't really have any prize assets out on loan now, but maybe realising some fees from RDL / Elphick / Gollini / Gardner / Tshibola could help a bit. You're right though, I think staying down puts enormous pressure on the FFP test, which would likely mean us competing for promotion with a much weaker squad (I doubt we could afford the likes of Snodgrass on loan, for example). Big relief that things are looking up so much! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omariqy Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 I reckon we would have to sell one of Grealish/Kodjia/Green/Hogan to balance the books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eastie Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 1 minute ago, omariqy said: I reckon we would have to sell one of Grealish/Kodjia/Green/Hogan to balance the books. Probably more than One Grealish and kodjia would be most likely to attract bigger money but hopefully we will go up and keep all . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 Can someone clarify surely we are not under any penalties though as we are nowhere near the 80m losses we had last year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don_Simon Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 14 minutes ago, omariqy said: I reckon we would have to sell one of Grealish/Kodjia/Green/Hogan to balance the books. Laters John. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 If we sold a player for like 30m lets say it would not be end of world as we can sign some quality players with that. if i had to choose it would be hogan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrjc Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 7 minutes ago, Demitri_C said: Can someone clarify surely we are not under any penalties though as we are nowhere near the 80m losses we had last year? Difficult (impossible) to clarify definitively, as the test isn't a direct read across from the accounts. For more context / detail though... The test is on a rolling three-years - you are allowed to lose £35m for each season in the PL, and £13m for each season in the Championship. That means that up to season 15/16, our maximum cumulative loss would have been £105m (3 x PL years). We exceeded these losses based on the pure accounting loss shown in the accounts, which was cumulatively -£112m (13/14 -£4m, 14/15 -£27m, 15/16 -£81m). So, given we didn't have any penalties, we must have been able to excluding some of the losses for the purpose of the FFP test - I figure some of the exceptional losses in 15/16 were deemed allowable. Bringing that forward a year, our rolling loss from the accounts becomes -£122m (14/15 -£27m, 15/16 -£81m, 16/17 -£14m), despite the current season being better than last. And that is against a more strict test of an allowable loss of £83m (2 x PL years, 1 x EFL year). However, given this was last season, I'm pretty sure we would know already if we had breached on this basis (so again, some of the exceptional losses must have been excluded from the FFP test). Including this season, the test will become even more strict with an allowable loss of £61m (1 x PL year, 2 x EFL years). Our losses may reduce a bit from last season, but I don't think materially. So it's complicated (without full visibility of the information). But given the club have said we are tight, it gives me confidence that it is being very closely looked at. They will know to a reasonable level of accuracy what our revenue will be, and what our cost base is. I'm therefore presuming that the last two windows have been managed with this very much in mind - and it would therefore be a big big error if we do face penalties. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 3 minutes ago, mrjc said: Difficult (impossible) to clarify definitively, as the test isn't a direct read across from the accounts. For more context / detail though... The test is on a rolling three-years - you are allowed to lose £35m for each season in the PL, and £13m for each season in the Championship. That means that up to season 15/16, our maximum cumulative loss would have been £105m (3 x PL years). We exceeded these losses based on the pure accounting loss shown in the accounts, which was cumulatively -£112m (13/14 -£4m, 14/15 -£27m, 15/16 -£81m). So, given we didn't have any penalties, we must have been able to excluding some of the losses for the purpose of the FFP test - I figure some of the exceptional losses in 15/16 were deemed allowable. Bringing that forward a year, our rolling loss from the accounts becomes -£122m (14/15 -£27m, 15/16 -£81m, 16/17 -£14m), despite the current season being better than last. And that is against a more strict test of an allowable loss of £83m (2 x PL years, 1 x EFL year). However, given this was last season, I'm pretty sure we would know already if we had breached on this basis (so again, some of the exceptional losses must have been excluded from the FFP test). Including this season, the test will become even more strict with an allowable loss of £61m (1 x PL year, 2 x EFL years). Our losses may reduce a bit from last season, but I don't think materially. So it's complicated (without full visibility of the information). But given the club have said we are tight, it gives me confidence that it is being very closely looked at. They will know to a reasonable level of accuracy what our revenue will be, and what our cost base is. I'm therefore presuming that the last two windows have been managed with this very much in mind - and it would therefore be a big big error if we do face penalties. Thanks for that. You are right Very complicated, in a way its good that we have gone through this if we go up, as we wont make this mistake again if we yo yoed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Pangloss Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 39 minutes ago, Demitri_C said: If we sold a player for like 30m lets say it would not be end of world as we can sign some quality players with that. if i had to choose it would be hogan We don't have any players that would fetch anywhere near that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eastie Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 47 minutes ago, Dr_Pangloss said: We don't have any players that would fetch anywhere near that Grealish would attract the most money but nobody else would get near it . 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AntrimBlack Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 1 hour ago, Demitri_C said: If we sold a player for like 30m lets say it would not be end of world as we can sign some quality players with that. if i had to choose it would be hogan Hogan has played a large part in getting us into second. And we would not get £30m for him. Grealish is the only player we have who might realise that sort of fee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Pangloss Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Eastie said: Grealish would attract the most money but nobody else would get near it . He's worth no where near that I'm afraid, not yet anyway. Edited February 15, 2018 by Dr_Pangloss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eastie Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Dr_Pangloss said: He's worth no where near that I'm afraid, not yet anyway. I expect Sunderland fans thought that about Pickford - some of the prices paid these days by premier league teams are crazy . sigurdsson at £50m and van dijk at £75m being further cases of the crazy fees . Edited February 15, 2018 by Eastie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts