The AVFC FFP thread

[blandy]

1 minute ago, brummybloke said:

I recall in the 'olden days' players such as Kevin keegan or Ian Botham being paid their wages by sponsors as the clubs they played for couldn't afford their wages.

Could we look to off set wages in that way ? 

For example, the company who own villa Park sponsors 50% of player wages ? 

Taking that liability off our ffp books to comply with eufa rules on the 80% ? 

In a word, No.

[brummybloke]

23 minutes ago, blandy said:

In a word, No.

Oh well

I meant we officially reduce players wages by 50% on new contracts but all players are signed up to the new sponsor and the sponsor pays each player the equivalent of their contracted wage.

 

I guess the answer is still no 

Edited January 14 by brummybloke

[Follyfoot]

32 minutes ago, blandy said:

In a word, No.

Is that not the Man City model though?

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

43 minutes ago, blandy said:

In a word, No.

Yeah imagine if clubs were allowed to do this?

The likes of Man City, Man U, Newcastle and Chelsea would form the world's Galacticos FFS 

Edited January 14 by JAMAICAN-VILLAN

[CVByrne]

Our biggest benefit is stability and a quality expensive squad. We have one of the three best coaches in the League.

I trust our recruitment team as we've assembled a squad that has is 3 points off the top of the League in mid Jan. We have brought in one of the best in Monchi also to add another dimension to this.

We have in Chris Heck a top level man in charge of our commercial growth and we're seeing some of that already with Adidas deal. 

Once we get through this summer we should have moved on more of the players who don't contribute on the pitch but cost us money in our accounts and replaced them with player Emery wants. 

Edited January 14 by CVByrne

[MaVilla]

23 minutes ago, Follyfoot said:

Is that not the Man City model though?

i think its Chelsea who have been accused of this (paying players off the books through other sources).

Not sure if Saud City have.

[tomsky_11]

Just had a relook at my calcs from in the summer for where we might be at this season regards PL and UEFA rules, and I really think it's only the UEFA rules we need to be concerned with (although not that concerned.)

On the P&L side, adjusting for what we did in the summer, I think we are in a situation where we might actually further from the limit this season than last. We're talking £60-70M range clear of the limit.

UEFA rules look tighter, but even then right now I think we are good to come just under the 90% limit. Next season we will need either a big kick in revenue/sales profit (estimating £60-70M on this season) or a big drop in squad cost (£40-50M), or a combination of the two to get under the 80% limit. Not sure there's a lot to be worried about here though. On the revenue side, I'd guess we are likely to see a decent boost from the Adidas deal. Then if we get CL qualification, which looks highly likely right now, that will bring further significant increases both directly and indirectly. On the squad cost side of things, just getting rid of Traore, Dendoncker, Coutinho and Digne would give us most of the squad cost drop we'd need.

[MaVilla]

1 minute ago, tomsky_11 said:

Just had a relook at my calcs from in the summer for where we might be at this season regards PL and UEFA rules, and I really think it's only the UEFA rules we need to be concerned with (although not that concerned.)

On the P&L side, adjusting for what we did in the summer, I think we are in a situation where we might actually further from the limit this season than last. We're talking £60-70M range clear of the limit.

UEFA rules look tighter, but even then right now I think we are good to come just under the 90% limit. Next season we will need either a big kick in revenue/sales profit (estimating £60-70M on this season) or a big drop in squad cost (£40-50M), or a combination of the two to get under the 80% limit. Not sure there's a lot to be worried about here though. On the revenue side, I'd guess we are likely to see a decent boost from the Adidas deal. Then if we get CL qualification, which looks highly likely right now, that will bring further significant increases both directly and indirectly. On the squad cost side of things, just getting rid of Traore, Dendoncker, Coutinho and Digne would give us most of the squad cost drop we'd need.

can add Chambers and Sanson to that also tbh, for another 100k-ish a week off the books.

[allani]

22 minutes ago, CVByrne said:

Our biggest benefit is stability and a quality expensive squad. We have one of the three best coaches in the League.

I trust our recruitment team as we've assembled a squad that has is 3 points off the top of the League in mid Jan. We have brought in one of the best in Monchi also to add another dimension to this.

We have in Chris Heck a top level man in charge of our commercial growth and we're seeing some of that already with Adidas deal. 

Once we get through this summer we should have moved on more of the players who don't contribute on the pitch but cost us money in our accounts and replaced them with player Emery wants. 

I think it is also worth noting that a lot of our key players are relatively young and so shouldn't need replacing at the same time / in the immediate future.  Defence was probably our riskiest area 12 months ago when you could argue that Digne / Moreno / Carlos and Mings were all the wrong side of 30.  However, Pau Torres is now arguably our most important defender (in terms of allowing us to play the way that Emery wants us to) and the injuries to Carlos and Mings have given Konsa time to flourish.  Indeed I'd say that Torres and Konsa is probably our strongest CB pairing.  When you compare that with the significant upheaval that some of our rivals have had / are about to have with several key players being close to the twilight of their careers - it is definitely going to help us recruit and strengthen more strategically.

I still think that Emery and his team are over-achieving with the squad of players we have available - but the fact that we're now 14 months into "over-performing" suggests that (a) our "base" level / consistency has become much higher over that period, (b) it is no "flash in the pan" and (c) that if we are consistently able to extract more out of the team than the potential sum of its parts then we can spend "smarter" than some of our competitors might be able to.

Finally, as you say we're coming from a position of having very low revenue levels (in comparison to the teams around us) and so it should be more realistic to expect that we can achieve better revenue growth than clubs who are much closer to having maximised their opportunities.  I've deliberately used the term "more realistic" rather than "easier" because it does seem like there is already a bit of a narrative that any improvements we (or specifically Heck) make are down to our on pitch improvements.  Obviously this does help (trying to sell a team that are 3rd from the top is "easier" than trying to sell a team that are third from the bottom), however, I do think that we need to recognise that Heck's contact list is significantly better/richer than our previous commercial leaders (especially in the USA where spending money on sports seems particularly strong at the moment).  When you add that onto the contacts of NSWE - we are in a really good position as (I hope) the Adidas and Atairos deals imply.  As a brief aside - I do feel that it is a bit disingenuous to suggest that the deals were mainly done because of NSWE - if it was all down to them then why weren't such deals done before?  Even if NSWE did open the door (and I am not convinced that they did) then Heck's contacts at the level of negotiating the actually contracts would have made that a much easier process and (I suspect) enabled us to get some better terms as a result.  NSWE hired Heck for a reason.

[CVByrne]

52 minutes ago, tomsky_11 said:

Just had a relook at my calcs from in the summer for where we might be at this season regards PL and UEFA rules, and I really think it's only the UEFA rules we need to be concerned with (although not that concerned.)

On the P&L side, adjusting for what we did in the summer, I think we are in a situation where we might actually further from the limit this season than last. We're talking £60-70M range clear of the limit.

UEFA rules look tighter, but even then right now I think we are good to come just under the 90% limit. Next season we will need either a big kick in revenue/sales profit (estimating £60-70M on this season) or a big drop in squad cost (£40-50M), or a combination of the two to get under the 80% limit. Not sure there's a lot to be worried about here though. On the revenue side, I'd guess we are likely to see a decent boost from the Adidas deal. Then if we get CL qualification, which looks highly likely right now, that will bring further significant increases both directly and indirectly. On the squad cost side of things, just getting rid of Traore, Dendoncker, Coutinho and Digne would give us most of the squad cost drop we'd need.

Yes the 90% limit is calculated on 2023 calendar year. So it includes our ECL income and it counts 2021/2022/2023 player sales prorated so Jack sale is in there. We're good. 

2024 will depend on if we get CL or not, if we do we are fine for the 80% as we'll have that income added in autumn plus our Adidas deal and more PL prize money for higher finish. Plus any further ECL money if we go deep.

We have to get CL this season to really push on. With 5 places usually available we should have a good chance of improving in summer and using the ECL experience to manage our squad well for a repeat European qualification. 

[CVByrne]

53 minutes ago, MaVilla said:

can add Chambers and Sanson to that also tbh, for another 100k-ish a week off the books.

from Summer we will hopefully have no more amortisation for Traore, Wesely, Digne, Sanson, Dendonker and if we are super lucky Coutinho. 

I think we can hopefully replace Dendonker for free with Ndidi or Guido Rodriguez. We open up lots of space to work in under FFP with Jack rolling off 

[allani]

48 minutes ago, tomsky_11 said:

Just had a relook at my calcs from in the summer for where we might be at this season regards PL and UEFA rules, and I really think it's only the UEFA rules we need to be concerned with (although not that concerned.)

On the P&L side, adjusting for what we did in the summer, I think we are in a situation where we might actually further from the limit this season than last. We're talking £60-70M range clear of the limit.

UEFA rules look tighter, but even then right now I think we are good to come just under the 90% limit. Next season we will need either a big kick in revenue/sales profit (estimating £60-70M on this season) or a big drop in squad cost (£40-50M), or a combination of the two to get under the 80% limit. Not sure there's a lot to be worried about here though. On the revenue side, I'd guess we are likely to see a decent boost from the Adidas deal. Then if we get CL qualification, which looks highly likely right now, that will bring further significant increases both directly and indirectly. On the squad cost side of things, just getting rid of Traore, Dendoncker, Coutinho and Digne would give us most of the squad cost drop we'd need.

I do think that the potential "up" side on the revenue figures for us put us in a stronger position than other teams around us.  They've already got significant deals in place - which whilst not impossible to improve on - will be harder to continue to prove to be in line with the "market value".  Meanwhile we're starting off with some pretty low bars (financially and ethically) in terms of those same type of deals.  Clearly our improved league standing and involvement in European competitions will help - but Adidas and Comcast (via Atairos) are already signs that we're accessing a different level of "partner".  Also - let's just assume a poor case scenario and assume that we finish 6th this season (which in itself would mean dropping about 10 points to teams below us) then that would still be an improvement in our performance revenues (higher league position, Europa League, etc).  Meanwhile, Newcastle, Man United and Chelsea are at high risk of a significant downturn in their performance revenues (and budgets).  There's signs of some pressure on Arsenal too - if they were to have a few more poor results and drop down towards West Ham for example then they could be looking at some scary minuses hitting their accounts. 

So from that respect I think there's a lot to feel positive about.  I think across the board all our revenue numbers are far more likely to go up than they are to go down.  Which should mean that we are at lower risk of needing to sell key players to balance the books. 

[HeyAnty]

What’s changing in August and how will it affect us?

 

[Aston_Villan4]

When are they expected to announce the findings/penalties for teams?

[The_Steve]

Heck’s language tells me they aren't worried about any breaches 

 

 

[MrBlack]

1 hour ago, HeyAnty said:

What’s changing in August and how will it affect us?

 

Good grief, I do not miss them. Horrendous presenters and people to boot

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

Just realised Nottingham Forest have been charged for breach of FFP!!!

[CVByrne]

26 minutes ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

Just realised Nottingham Forest have been charged for breach of FFP!!!

Their argument is they are not in breach after Johnson sale which was made a month after accounts ended. It's still a breach as far as we are all concerned.

I think Heck is talking about City and Chelsea. Especially if City are properly punished by being given a massive points deduction which essentially means they are relegated. That would mean two seasons without them competing for the PL title.

That would be a huge opportunity for us with likelihood of Top 5 being Champions League places and City gone from it. They would have two seasons then with big revenue drop and have to sell players etc..

Chelsea punishment would be just a points deduction. They self reported (probably as they know it would be more lenient punishment). 

it's only right we should benefit by not cheating the rules despite having vastly wealthy owners who could cheat if they were so inclined but don't. 

[CVByrne]

6 hours ago, HeyAnty said:

What’s changing in August and how will it affect us?

 

I forgot these morons still had a platform for the moronic ignorance. 

The rules they are bound by are the current rules where points deductions are applied in the same season. The rules they are in breach of have been the same rules for years.

The moron who wrote the article said "It could be that Everton pass PSR as they will be from August, having suffered relegation in May under the redundant system". Let's clarify for this uber moron. The rules are not being made more lenient, they are being tightened to keep in line with UEFA rules. They are also introducing a salary cap so no PL club has a wage bill bigger than the income of the bottom club. That was agreed by the PL as from next season UEFA CL prize money grows for those involved in it.

So just lots of morons needed to create the linked tweet video.

[MrBlack]

22 minutes ago, CVByrne said:

I forgot these morons still had a platform for the moronic ignorance. 

The rules they are bound by are the current rules where points deductions are applied in the same season. The rules they are in breach of have been the same rules for years.

The moron who wrote the article said "It could be that Everton pass PSR as they will be from August, having suffered relegation in May under the redundant system". Let's clarify for this uber moron. The rules are not being made more lenient, they are being tightened to keep in line with UEFA rules. They are also introducing a salary cap so no PL club has a wage bill bigger than the income of the bottom club. That was agreed by the PL as from next season UEFA CL prize money grows for those involved in it.

So just lots of morons needed to create the linked tweet video.

What's the income of the bottom club been the last couple of seasons? Is that not going to be way below what the likes of City and Chelsea spend?!