Jump to content

The AVFC FFP thread


Recommended Posts

On 15/07/2017 at 22:02, jackbauer24 said:

If we are so screwed should we fail to get promoted this season then isn't there quite a strong argument for IGNORING FFP this season and going for it?

If we're in an all or nothing situation then why try to stay within FFP regulations if we'll fall foul of them next year regardless if we stay down? Spend a load (largely on midfield) to try and guarantee (as much as we can) promotion and use any slap on the wrist as the necessary cost of success. If we fail we're screwed anyway so saving us from a FFP fine will make little difference.

You're Peter Ridsdale and I claim my £5.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see elphick and veretout leaving between them hopefully we should get about 8m-10m. hopefully the likes of hutton, bacuna, tish, richards and possibly mccormack (i would sell if Sunderland come up with a  reasonable bid as we need to get his wages off the books) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bobzy said:

We don't know what sanctions would be imposed on the club and FFP testing occurs in March.

Let's say we spend £100m this window in an attempt to get promoted. In March, we're top of the league by 8 points but also are assessed and found to fail to meet FFP requirements. The punishment is a 15 point deduction. We don't get promoted because of this.

Not a risk worth taking IMO.

I remember when Xia came in that the majority of fans were clamouring for someone to spend big. In many ways, we're getting what we deserve. 

100% agree

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't City get away with this by their owners buying naming rights within the club and stadium, and paying just whatever they needed to balance the books. Is this not what Xia could do with Recon, such as when we had that logo on the shirts for the Terry signing. If that was a 3rd party advertiser they would pay, so no reason why Villa couldn't have received some cash there, even if it was from our owner, and we can charge whatever we like for that. This is an issue, and we need to balance the books for all sorts of reasons, but there are ways around it as I see it. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, jimcohen said:

Didn't City get away with this by their owners buying naming rights within the club and stadium, and paying just whatever they needed to balance the books. Is this not what Xia could do with Recon, such as when we had that logo on the shirts for the Terry signing. If that was a 3rd party advertiser they would pay, so no reason why Villa couldn't have received some cash there, even if it was from our owner, and we can charge whatever we like for that. This is an issue, and we need to balance the books for all sorts of reasons, but there are ways around it as I see it. 

 

 

I believe there were tighter rule changes regarding FFP this season to cut out some loopholes .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm yet to see any real sanctions for breaking FFP; so far it's been fine (which teams that overspend can afford) or an embargo (which needs to happen if you've overspent anyway). Has anyone been deducted points? Especially in the first year of breaking the rules.

But no, I don't think we should be ridiculous with our spending. I don't even think we need that much, just a midfielder now. So whilst I think we can stay within the FFP parameters with sales etc, I just wouldn't put even a seconds thought in to FFP and the sanctions they could impose on us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, jackbauer24 said:

I'm yet to see any real sanctions for breaking FFP; so far it's been fine (which teams that overspend can afford) or an embargo (which needs to happen if you've overspent anyway). Has anyone been deducted points? Especially in the first year of breaking the rules.

But no, I don't think we should be ridiculous with our spending. I don't even think we need that much, just a midfielder now. So whilst I think we can stay within the FFP parameters with sales etc, I just wouldn't put even a seconds thought in to FFP and the sanctions they could impose on us.

They can impose much stiffer punishments now and that could even mean points deductions or denying us promotion - wyness and xia are well aware of the risks of FFP - the squad is easily good enough to get up - the manager has to get them playing or be replaced.

Edited by Eastie
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

But what are the potential punishments? Previously the Football League has only been able to either; fine promoted clubs (a fine the Premier League didn’t help them collect), or impose a transfer embargo for historic overspending (which always like a stable-door/horse scenario). With this change, a wide range of punishments are now available. Nothing is off the table; the Football League are now able to impose a points deduction during the current season, or demote a club from an automatic promotion position into the play-offs (or out of the play-offs altogether). Transfer embargoes are also available (with the earliest one potentially applying during the Summer 2017 Transfer window

http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/financial-fair-play-explained.php

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Eastie said:

But what are the potential punishments? Previously the Football League has only been able to either; fine promoted clubs (a fine the Premier League didn’t help them collect), or impose a transfer embargo for historic overspending (which always like a stable-door/horse scenario). With this change, a wide range of punishments are now available. Nothing is off the table; the Football League are now able to impose a points deduction during the current season, or demote a club from an automatic promotion position into the play-offs (or out of the play-offs altogether). Transfer embargoes are also available (with the earliest one potentially applying during the Summer 2017 Transfer window

http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/financial-fair-play-explained.php

It's ridiculous imo. 

It's a stupid rule/idea, that protects nobody and there's no 'set punishment' for infringement. 

Its like saying shoplifting carries a penalty ranging from £100 fine to life in prison. 

Pathetic 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, wazzap24 said:

It's ridiculous imo. 

It's a stupid rule/idea, that protects nobody and there's no 'set punishment' for infringement. 

Its like saying shoplifting carries a penalty ranging from £100 fine to life in prison. 

Pathetic 

 

And I think you'll find that ambiguity is what will mean it's all pretty toothless. Can practically guarantee that if they try to take points off anyone they'll fight it in the courts and come out with something like a fine. If there are no set punishments, or a guideline to what constitutes what punishment then from a legal standpoint they're on very shaky ground. They've already had to backtrack on many of the sanctions they tried to enforce.

I'm certainly no expert but FFP is the least of our worries. Performance, the team, our future and even actual survival as a football club (going bust) would be a more pressing concern than what FFP can do to us at this stage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, jimcohen said:

Didn't City get away with this by their owners buying naming rights within the club and stadium, and paying just whatever they needed to balance the books. Is this not what Xia could do with Recon, such as when we had that logo on the shirts for the Terry signing. If that was a 3rd party advertiser they would pay, so no reason why Villa couldn't have received some cash there, even if it was from our owner, and we can charge whatever we like for that. This is an issue, and we need to balance the books for all sorts of reasons, but there are ways around it as I see it. 

 

 

no. The rules mean that you can only pay fair value for sponsorship - and the FA will oversee whether they agree its fair value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, jackbauer24 said:

And I think you'll find that ambiguity is what will mean it's all pretty toothless. Can practically guarantee that if they try to take points off anyone they'll fight it in the courts and come out with something like a fine. If there are no set punishments, or a guideline to what constitutes what punishment then from a legal standpoint they're on very shaky ground. They've already had to backtrack on many of the sanctions they tried to enforce.

I'm certainly no expert but FFP is the least of our worries. Performance, the team, our future and even actual survival as a football club (going bust) would be a more pressing concern than what FFP can do to us at this stage.

One and the same.  If we get restricted financially, we get restricted as a club.

It may well be a ridiculous system with no set punishments, but it's a system that exists and that we should adhere to.  To be honest, to preserve the long-term future of the club in any case.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, bobzy said:

One and the same.  If we get restricted financially, we get restricted as a club.

It may well be a ridiculous system with no set punishments, but it's a system that exists and that we should adhere to.  To be honest, to preserve the long-term future of the club in any case.

Adhering to the FFP rules won't help preserve the long term future of the club. That's the irony of the stupid rules, it doesn't protect clubs from going bust.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, jackbauer24 said:

And I think you'll find that ambiguity is what will mean it's all pretty toothless. Can practically guarantee that if they try to take points off anyone they'll fight it in the courts and come out with something like a fine. If there are no set punishments, or a guideline to what constitutes what punishment then from a legal standpoint they're on very shaky ground. They've already had to backtrack on many of the sanctions they tried to enforce.

I'm certainly no expert but FFP is the least of our worries. Performance, the team, our future and even actual survival as a football club (going bust) would be a more pressing concern than what FFP can do to us at this stage.

Clubs can be embargo-ed though. Pretty sure Forest and Blackburn had them in January which considering Blackburn went down would be pretty crucial I reckon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, wazzap24 said:

Adhering to the FFP rules won't help preserve the long term future of the club. That's the irony of the stupid rules, it doesn't protect clubs from going bust.

Yep.

I can't believe that clubs agreed to this hogwash. An absolutely horrible thing to happen to the game. Gone is the ability for a club to rise up the divisions and actually become a big club through hard work. Even when winning the Premier League, Leicester would have been unable to capitalise on it for sustained success even if they'd had Scrooge McDuck money.

You simply can't invest in your own future.

I'd love us to challenge it through the courts, but unfortunately we're a big enough club for them to use to make a statement without being too big for a serious punishment.

Edited by ThunderPower_14
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Following on from the FFP talk elsewhere. 

Anyone have an idea on how much we've brought in through sales? Our transfer expenditure of £70m - £80m is frequently mentioned but I haven't seen anything on the total transfer fee we've brought in since relegation.

Obviously the figures are estimates based on what was being quoted at the time and there's more to come in with the obligation to buy deals like Amavi, Gil etc.

Sinclair £3.5m

Westwood £5m

Ayew £5m

Clark £5m

Gestede £6m

Adama £6m

Gueye £7m

Sanchez £2.5m

Veretout £6m

Cissokho £1m

Baker £4m

Amavi (loan) £2m

Bacuna £2m

I make that out to be around the £55m mark. Does that seem accurate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â