The AVFC FFP thread

[richp999]

The key problem with ffp and why it protects the man u's of this world is because it prevents an owner bankrolling a club. This they don't like because it allows others with a rich owner to catch up. 

If it were just to stop clubs going bust, then the rules should just be that you are not allowed to lose more than  X amount of money a year. 

Stopping an owner throwing millions in to balance the books is where it becomes protectionist. 

If tony wanted to waste millions each year on bad transfers etc, then why is that a problem if he also was to put in the cash to balance the books at the end of the year. 

Now man city have got around it with £400m sponsorships, there is a now a change to ffp to be voted on (the uefa ffp). 

They want to change the rules to be based on a transfer loss limit. 

So next, even the clubs who have a decent income can't spend it on expensive new players, without already having expensive players to sell, to bring thier net transfer spend below a certain level. 

Who does this benefit? Ah yes, the clubs that already have large expensively assembled squads.. Surprise suprise the man u's, Chelseas,arsenal's etc.. 

Itll be almost impossible to compete even if we do ever get back to the prem. 

 

 

 

 

[R.Bear]

Its amusing to me (well not amusing, deeply painful) that for all those years that meandered around the precipice of joining the elite clubs in England and real push for major glory, we couldnt because we never really had the funds to do where other clubs seemed to have deep pockets. And now after weve been chewed, eaten and shat out of the Premier League's arsehole but have lots of money to get back there, the FFP system comes in and neuters us. Worse still its a system that every other club seem to find a way of circumventing except us.

[DCJonah]

1 minute ago, R.Bear said:

Its amusing to me (well not amusing, deeply painful) that for all those years that meandered around the precipice of joining the elite clubs in England and real push for major glory, we couldnt because we never really had the funds to do where other clubs seemed to have deep pockets. And now after weve been chewed, eaten and shat out of the Premier League's arsehole but have lots of money to get back there, the FFP system comes in and neuters us. Worse still its a system that every other club seem to find a way of circumventing except us.

I don't think we do.

[punkiller1981]

The way I see FFP other than having money to buy a club you don’t actually need a pot to piss in money wise because you can’t invest any personal funds due to the restrictions. Am I missing something or this about right ? If so great the is hope for us that we can own a club 

[punkiller1981]

1 hour ago, richp999 said:

The key problem with ffp and why it protects the man u's of this world is because it prevents an owner bankrolling a club. This they don't like because it allows others with a rich owner to catch up. 

If it were just to stop clubs going bust, then the rules should just be that you are not allowed to lose more than  X amount of money a year. 

Stopping an owner throwing millions in to balance the books is where it becomes protectionist. 

If tony wanted to waste millions each year on bad transfers etc, then why is that a problem if he also was to put in the cash to balance the books at the end of the year. 

Now man city have got around it with £400m sponsorships, there is a now a change to ffp to be voted on (the uefa ffp). 

They want to change the rules to be based on a transfer loss limit. 

So next, even the clubs who have a decent income can't spend it on expensive new players, without already having expensive players to sell, to bring thier net transfer spend below a certain level. 

Who does this benefit? Ah yes, the clubs that already have large expensively assembled squads.. Surprise suprise the man u's, Chelseas,arsenal's etc.. 

Itll be almost impossible to compete even if we do ever get back to the prem. 

 

 

 

 

Agreed it’s a scam by the elite clubs because a traditionally mid table club like Man City have come in and shocked the big clubs. So to stop that ever happening they put measures in place. Who knows one day we might be lucky enough to have as competitive a top flight as France it Germany where we all already know who the Champiobs will be this time next year. It will in many ways ruin football but all of us plebs will still pay our sky subscriptions to feed the premier league big boys so they will all be happy.

[sidcow]

I just don't understand why we are paying some of these players such huge wages, way way more than another championship team would pay. 

Example Hourihane and Landsbury supposedly on £35k per week when average championship wages are under £10k per week. 

Are we absolutely sure that players like that would not have signed from clubs like Barnsley and Notts Forest for a club like Villa at say £20k per week?

We always always always seem to pay,  not just over the top but massively over the top. 

It's gone across 2 owners now and Xia learned nothing. 

If it was going to be promotion or total wipe out why sign Terry on super massive wages, buy Hogan for a very large fee and massive wages, bring in 2 extra right backs, why get in Grabban if it will send us bust if it doesn't work out? 

I just don't understand it, it never at any point looked like a sure thing, it never looked like just a few more players would turn us from contenders into total dominance. 

It makes me weep that after squandering all that money under Lerner, we've basically accelerated the recklessness. 

Edited June 6, 2018 by sidcow

[The Fun Factory]

Also why splurge money on a new pitch in the summer now we know how tight the finances is?

[paul1984]

6 minutes ago, The Fun Factory said:

Also why splurge money on a new pitch in the summer now we know how tight the finances is?

I think the pitch was due to be replaced as it was already past the time it was supposed to last.

[villadodo]

Probably just as well FFP exists. If not Dr Tony might have decided we could afford an even bigger wage bill!

[paul1984]

6 minutes ago, villadodo said:

Probably just as well FFP exists. If not Dr Tony might have decided we could afford an even bigger wage bill!

Which he would be paying for in that circumstance and potential new owners of the club could actually invest to ensure we go up to the premier league.

[VillaChris]

3 hours ago, sidcow said:

I just don't understand why we are paying some of these players such huge wages, way way more than another championship team would pay. 

Example Hourihane and Landsbury supposedly on £35k per week when average championship wages are under £10k per week. 

Are we absolutely sure that players like that would not have signed from clubs like Barnsley and Notts Forest for a club like Villa at say £20k per week?

We always always always seem to pay,  not just over the top but massively over the top. 

It's gone across 2 owners now and Xia learned nothing. 

If it was going to be promotion or total wipe out why sign Terry on super massive wages, buy Hogan for a very large fee and massive wages, bring in 2 extra right backs, why get in Grabban if it will send us bust if it doesn't work out? 

I just don't understand it, it never at any point looked like a sure thing, it never looked like just a few more players would turn us from contenders into total dominance. 

It makes me weep that after squandering all that money under Lerner, we've basically accelerated the recklessness. 

That's the trouble with paying big transfer fees. A 10m forward like a McCormack or Kodjia will want a wage to reflect that e.g. what a 10m signing in the premier league would be on.

With Lansbury, Hourihane and Jedinak they were all captains/key players at previous clubs so would've been one of the highest paid at those clubs so clearly played their cards right and got weekly wages way beyond their ability level.

Very easy to say now but we shouldn't have gone so mad in September 2016. We needed new players but it was always going to be a consolidation season so we shouldn't have gone mental and made all those signings in one go as we'd then have a bit more in reserve to strengthen more last summer.

[Zatman]

These are just my estimates probably way off but this is our squad wages for last season. I might be way off but that comes to over 750k a week in wages  not including bonuses

Johnstone 15k

Steer 10k

Bunn 6k

Hutton 30k

De Laet 20k

Bree 15k

Chester 40k

Terry 50k

Samba 15k 

Taylor 30k

Richards 40k

Tuanzebe 10k

Elphick 30k

Grealish 30k

Tishbola 20k

Jedinak 50k

Whelan 30k

Bjarnason 25k

Hourinhane 30k

Lansbury 40k

Adomah 30k

Elmo 25k

Kodjia 30k

Grabban 30k

Hogan 30k

Gabby 45k

McCormack 40k

 

Edited June 7, 2018 by Zatman

[paul1984]

17 minutes ago, Zatman said:

These are just my estimates probably way off but this is our squad wages for last season. I might be way off but that comes to over 750k a week in wages  not including bonuses

Johnstone 15k

Steer 10k

Bunn 6k

Hutton 30k

De Laet 20k

Bree 15k

Chester 40k

Terry 50k

Samba 15k 

Taylor 30k

Richards 40k

Tuanzebe 10k

Elphick 30k

Grealish 30k

Tishbola 20k

Jedinak 50k

Whelan 30k

Bjarnason 25k

Hourinhane 30k

Lansbury 40k

Adomah 30k

Elmo 25k

Kodjia 30k

Grabban 30k

Hogan 30k

Gabby 45k

McCormack 40k

 

Our wage bill was 61m which is about 1.2m per week im not sure if that was this season or last season though.

[PussEKatt]

Can someone please clarify FFP for me?

I understand that it was put in place because of the ManUre and Man $itys and Chelskis of this league but what I dont understand is what has that got to do with a team in the championship ? I mean before we can even attempt to be a Man $ity we have to get into the Premier League and even then we would still not be a threat to FFP unless we were in or above the top 10.

I can understand if FFP applied to a team in the top half of the Premier League but at the moment we are struggling to keep afloat and all FFP is doing is making things more difficult than they need to be.It seems to me that FFP is worried that a club in the championship could suddenly throw a half a billion pounds at the club and be challenging for a champions league place next season.Is this what they are all about ?! dipsticks.

[lapal_fan]

It suits smaller teams which break into the PL (hence Huddersfield, Bournemouth etc) and existing large clubs.  The small clubs will never be able to truly get into the top 4/6, so that suits the big clubs too. 

Clubs like us, Everton, Newcastle, Sunderland, Leeds etc - previously biggish clubs - who do have the ambition to try and break into those places will suffer because we overstretch ourselves because of the size of our infrastructures etc. 

It's a shit system and OK, in a one off season when top clubs are in a bit of turmoil, you might do something, but the odds are firmly stacked against you. 

[PussEKatt]

Its a crap system allright.It should have a cutoff point and a entry point or something more sensible than what it is at the moment.

[VillaJ100]

There must be some bollocks to get around FFP. Like say Tony is legit loaded, why not say Villa are selling the 'Ultimate Fan' package, for the person who loves the club the most, you get the seat next to the owner himself! Incredible opportunity at just £100 million for 2 seasons. Oh look who's bought it, Tony's best friend and fellow business owner who's just had 100 million invested into his company in a in no way related deal. 

Edited June 12, 2018 by VillaJ100

[terrytini]

41 minutes ago, VillaJ100 said:

There must be some bollocks to get around FFP. Like say Tony is legit loaded, why not say Villa are selling the 'Ultimate Fan' package, for the person who loves the club the most, you get the seat next to the owner himself! Incredible opportunity at just £100 million for 2 seasons. Oh look who's bought it, Tony's best friend and fellow business owner who's just had 100 million invested into his company in a in no way related deal. 

And after 2 seasons ?

FFP is hugely flawed, but it’s a faltering and unfair step in the right direction. In the end, 99% of owners will lend, not give, their wealth to a Club, and many of them will be relatively short term. And when they pull out ?

Also, if it WAS possible for owners to do as you say, and likely, you’d be back to Square 1 because 20 owners all giving £100m puts them all equal again. Plus there’d still be 82 Clubs making do.

And if you are one of the Top 4 you’ll still be miffed at Man City etc. There’s usually only 1 wealthiest, or at most 3.

Far better in my view to accept a handful of Clubs and enjoy the battle with the rest. Leicester proved it’s still possible to take it to the limit.

 

[jacketspuds]

There needs to be tighter controls over wage bills as opposed to anything else. If an owner wants to spend millions on transfer fees and signing on fees to reduce the wage then that should be allowed. It's the wages that are killing us and this needs to be the focus of sustainability.

Imagine if an owner could spend £50m on 5 players, but pay them a signing on bonus to keep the wage low, which is probably what Wolves have done to a degree. This won't create a Portsmouth situation because the money is paid up front and the wage bill is manageable.

Wishful thinking but it would work if the owner wants to do it. Not saying ours would but FFP is a flawed process designed to keep the bigger clubs at the top of the pile. Even TV rights are being contested as the bigger clubs want it to be pro-rata'd as opposed to evenly split. The gulf is only going to get bigger.

[richp999]

7 minutes ago, jacketspuds said:

There needs to be tighter controls over wage bills as opposed to anything else. If an owner wants to spend millions on transfer fees and signing on fees to reduce the wage then that should be allowed. It's the wages that are killing us and this needs to be the focus of sustainability.

Imagine if an owner could spend £50m on 5 players, but pay them a signing on bonus to keep the wage low, which is probably what Wolves have done to a degree. This won't create a Portsmouth situation because the money is paid up front and the wage bill is manageable.

Wishful thinking but it would work if the owner wants to do it. Not saying ours would but FFP is a flawed process designed to keep the bigger clubs at the top of the pile. Even TV rights are being contested as the bigger clubs want it to be pro-rata'd as opposed to evenly split. The gulf is only going to get bigger.

But you still can't do it like this. 

The signing on fee and transfer fee would be accounted for as a 'spend' "by the club and hence a loss.. 

And the club is only asked to make a £13m loss per year total. (wages, transfer fees, signing on fees.. Everything) 

If you have a rich owner that is willing to pay these costs, the problem is getting the money INTO the club. 

You cant just pop online and transfer a few million across. The club has to be seen to 'earn' it, as an income. 

I.e. Sponsorship, shirt sales etc.. 

There would be some creative ways to do it, like an earlier poster suggesting selling the seat next to Tony for £100m...sounds daft but that type of thing is the only way around it.

The money needs to come into the club then get transferred elsewhere in an unattached transaction. 

On top of this if the league think your blagging it they can still fail your ffp. 

I think the rule is the any sale of anything has to be at the going rate, or close to what you could reasonably get on the open market. 

So they would say 'nobody else would ever pay £100m for a seat at a football ground, show me someone else who would pay that' and so you wouldn't get that transaction included in your ffp calculation. 

Its pretty difficult to get around, even if the money is there to try. 

Having said that if the will and money really was there, I'm sure you could dream up ways to do it. 

Put a sponsorship spot on every seat in villa park, £1000 each per year.. That's raise £40m a year. No ones ever done it so who could say how expensive it should be?