Jareth Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 1 minute ago, ViewFromT2 said: I must admit I was lost with all that, but clearly he has read into this and knows his stuff. He sounded like we have nothing to worry about, and it's down to some accountancy work done the year we came down which the new owners can easily exploit..... Also said, villa now have the 3rd richest owners in english football. just let that sink in. only man city and chelsea are ahead of us.....if they want to flex their muscles.....wow! Purely because he's delivering good news I actually liked the sound of his voice. I'll only call him a cockwomble in private from now on. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen_Evans Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 As long as the new owners cotton on to the fact that the most lavish, expensive, amazing version of Bruceball money can buy will still not be enough. Some changes don’t need money - push up and flipping move on and off the ball! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Okonokos Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 2 minutes ago, ViewFromT2 said: I must admit I was lost with all that, but clearly he has read into this and knows his stuff. He sounded like we have nothing to worry about, and it's down to some accountancy work done the year we came down which the new owners can easily exploit..... Also said, villa now have the 3rd richest owners in english football. just let that sink in. only man city and chelsea are ahead of us.....if they want to flex their muscles.....wow! Yeah he lost me too but I get lost watching Dragon's Den so don't ask me on land valuation! But he definitely knew what he was talking about and I liked everything he said so HAPPY DAYS. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Posted July 23, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted July 23, 2018 .....Why hello there Mr Levy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PieFacE Posted July 23, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted July 23, 2018 Stick a £50m price tag on Grealish then! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villabromsgrove Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 Good to hear the Talk Sport team sounding genuinely pleased for Villa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Okonokos Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 Just now, villabromsgrove said: Good to hear the Talk Sport team sounding genuinely pleased for Villa. I used to hate Jim White but he seems to genuinely like the Villa so he's alright. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Posted July 23, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted July 23, 2018 2 minutes ago, villabromsgrove said: Good to hear the Talk Sport team sounding genuinely pleased for Villa. Think that was more to wrap up the Villa stuff! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 23, 2018 Moderator Share Posted July 23, 2018 48 minutes ago, omariqy said: ...means we have a 3 year running loss of £88m when we need to be at £39m. So a defecit of say £49m. Of that amount £13m to £15m went out the door in wages. Additionally Gil, Amavi and Gollini went permanently and on those deals we add £5m of profit to FFP. So the deficit is now £29m.... To continue the discussion, adopting those figures we were on course to be running a £88m loss when £39 mill was the max permitted. We've since got rid of all loanees, plus others out of contract and we've sold some surplus players, and we're still somewhere between 29 and 35 million over the limit. This is exactly why I take issue with "how easily we could get around it.". Sure we may sell more players, and ultimately close the gap to make sure we comply. The training ground is already sponsored so a few million for the stadium is possible, perhaps. And then the follwing season we lose another 15 million of income because no more parachute payments and we have to sell off more players. So we'll have lost the spine of last seasons's team, our remaining quality players, have sponsored up everything and still have to get rid of even more players the following year. All the while satisfying fans and owners demands for promotion. That is not and never will be "easy". It's a clusterpork. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villabromsgrove Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 The revaluation of property added an extra 40 million to our losses on paper. This enabled Xia and Wyness to blame FFP for all our restrictive problems. We had to listen to Bruce trundle the same old FFP excuse out week after week after week. We now know that the reason for a failure to spend was the obvious one that Xia hadn't got any money, and the property devaluation could well have been an ideal way of masking the fact. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 23, 2018 Moderator Share Posted July 23, 2018 18 minutes ago, PatrickCousens said: Interesting from Scott. Basically saying that we revalued our land and assets after relegation down by 40m, but that it could easily be revalued again to a similar or higher level which would give us far more room to maneuveur. No idea how true this is but it goes to show that there's a lot more than we know about. The FFP rules address "exceptional items", saying this in APPENDIX D – Permitted Exceptional Items Quote Stadium revaluation losses or reversal of losses including depreciation adjustments to the extent that these are recognised in the profit and loss account in line with FRS 15 or equivalent International Accounting Standard. It's why when the club was sold (and for FFP purposes) the devaluation of the Club (price paid by Xia) compared to book value (sort of) brought about a huge loss but it wasn't counted against us for FFP purposes. If the Club now tries to reverse that, it would first need to be verifiable (not just a made up claim that stuff is suddenly worth a load more) , then it would need to be accepted as being in good faith (which might not fly, as 2 years ago, paraphrasing, we just said the land was worth not so much). And also "the land" isn't "the stadium" Maybe the land would be permissible, maybe not. I don't see it as nailed on, problem gone. It's a journalist speculating, perhaps based around discussions with people who might have come up with the ruse. But don't treat is as "fact", cus it ain't. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post sidcow Posted July 23, 2018 VT Supporter Popular Post Share Posted July 23, 2018 Does this land revaluation thing mean that we don't have to bring on Chris Samba up front anymore? 1 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richp999 Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 29 minutes ago, Okonokos said: Very interesting listening to him on TalkSport now. Saying we could get a revaluation of all the land we own (which apparently we own a lot) which could get us in excess of 40 million. Hmm maybe this is the new guys ffp fairies at work already... All income is income... Maybe we lease or sell some land for inflated prices.. Another way to get cash in. Im sure they'll think of something.. It doesn't have to be a huge one of sponsorship to cover our approx 40-60m ffp problem.. It could be a number of investments to add up to what's needed. But remember we'll need to cover the defecit and then some for new signings. But i think new signings can be amortised over the number of years of the contract, so signing a 10m player may not mean a 10m to the ffp balance in year 1.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 23, 2018 Moderator Share Posted July 23, 2018 24 minutes ago, villabromsgrove said: So AVFC recorded a 40 million downgrade of their property valuation. Pragmatic, but damaging within the confines of FFP. No, not damaging within the confines of FFP. 2 years ago we said "our overall value (worth) fell by 40 million, please don't count that for FFP purposes. It's an exception (see my earlier post). "Cool" they said. "No worries". Now we're (it's claimed) going to go back to them and say ""our overall value (worth) rose by 40 million, please do count that for FFP purposes...." And we reckon the EFL FFP johnnies will just go "sure". Jimmy Hill. Chinny reckon 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob182 Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 I love the way that this devaluation of our land, that presumably happened 2 years ago, is resulting in the new investors getting praise. Surely Randy or Xia were the ones that put this in place? Maybe this was the 'Plan B' that Keith and Tony had all along. Of course, the plan falls off the table and into the bin if Tony hasn't got any money to pay the phone bill. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob182 Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 2 minutes ago, blandy said: And we reckon the EFL FFP johnnies will just go "sure". FWIW, I wouldn't trust the EFL FFP Johnnies to know how to use a regular Johnny. So who knows? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jareth Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 3 minutes ago, blandy said: No, not damaging within the confines of FFP. 2 years ago we said "our overall value (worth) fell by 40 million, please don't count that for FFP purposes. It's an exception (see my earlier post). "Cool" they said. "No worries". Now we're (it's claimed) going to go back to them and say ""our overall value (worth) rose by 40 million, please do count that for FFP purposes...." And we reckon the EFL FFP johnnies will just go "sure". Jimmy Hill. Chinny reckon I wonder what happened back then - I mean if the stadium/land is in the FFP calculation then surely they couldn't just waive that loss especially for us - unless this is what folks mean about new owners getting leeway... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villabromsgrove Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 7 minutes ago, blandy said: No, not damaging within the confines of FFP. 2 years ago we said "our overall value (worth) fell by 40 million, please don't count that for FFP purposes. It's an exception (see my earlier post). "Cool" they said. "No worries". Now we're (it's claimed) going to go back to them and say ""our overall value (worth) rose by 40 million, please do count that for FFP purposes...." And we reckon the EFL FFP johnnies will just go "sure". Jimmy Hill. Chinny reckon I haven't got any personal knowledge of either the "devaluation" or the way that such a loss (on paper) would affect our FFP status. Matt Scott was introduced as a financial expert on such matters, and he indicated that a "positive revaluation" would be extremely helpful in terms of FFP. Perhaps we need to wait for third party analysis of Scott's comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted July 23, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted July 23, 2018 I bet the new owners have far far better accountants than the EFL do. I bet they could make the figures in the accounts stand up and sing whilst the EFL accountants looked on in wonder before breaking down in tears and sobbing at their own limitations. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jareth Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 I take it this means that the revaluation plan is viable because FFP would still not have been breached had the losses on the land been accounted for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts