Jump to content

The AVFC FFP thread


Recommended Posts

I honestly don't think the new owners are about pump in zillions on overpaid journey men to get promotion quick. They seem so far to be far more savvy and cleverer than that.  I think we can achieve promotion with sensible spending and still begin to see a progressive coaching style brought in (don't think Bruce can or will deliver that imo).

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It really puzzles me how new owners can be punished for previous owners ill management.

How can it be legally allowed to fine the new owners money for miss-spending of the previous regime. Especially if the new owners are willing to pay off all previous debts upon purchasing the business? Especially if in the new owners first finiancial year doesnt add to any further losses.

Previously agreed contracts and transfer fees should be taken out of consideration for the 3 year cycle, I do not see how the EFL can legally do this. They should either be removed completely from the accounts or be told if the new owners place these 'assets' (Richards, McCormack, Neil Taylor etc) on the transfer market then they shouldn't be held accountable for them, but the ones they want to keep (Chester, Kodjia etc) only those will be considered towards the FFP profit/loss calculations. 

New owners should not be forced to sell their best players when they can clearly afford to keep them. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Fowlersrs said:

Lots of talk on Twitter now that villas assets in the form of land have been massively under valued. Having them reassessed could help to eliminate the 40m black hole??

Lots of talk over the previous 5 pages or so as well ?

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Junxs said:

It really puzzles me how new owners can be punished for previous owners ill management.

It ought not to. It's not even true, strictly. It's like if you go to your local shop, buy a watch. If the shop is then sold to a new owner as an ongoinbg business, if your watch breaks, you take it back to the shop, not to the previous owner of the shop.

It's the business (in this case the shop/Villa) that has to abide by the law, not indivdual owner(s). 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a great game!  What else did we under-value?

"Oh hello EFL, yeah we've just been avin a quick gander about the place and we seem to have accidentally forgotten about these 24 carat gold urinals we installed a few years back.  Yeah we didn't bother to include them at the time, you know, didn't really think they were worth much, but hey guess what - turns out they're actually a worth a few million.  Anyway moving on, there's then the 200 diamond encrusted mop handles Jerry the janitor accidentally ordered from Harrods that time..."

Edited by GREAT_BEARD_OF_ZEUS
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm, interesting stuff. Regardless, I'm choosing not to believe it since I can't see how a club can get away with exploiting such a major loophole. 

If this was so every relegated club would do the same, and FFP would be blown out of the water. 

If we have some loophole that prevents the club from having the sell the family jewelry then I'm more than happy, it doesn't change my opinion that we should start to do things properly. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, GREAT_BEARD_OF_ZEUS said:

Matt Scott has just done a massive backtrack on twitter.  Seems we're not about to benefit from a re-evaluation. 

We can go back to disliking him again ?

At least he didnt start shouting his mouth off on national radio!

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, GREAT_BEARD_OF_ZEUS said:

Matt Scott has just done a massive backtrack on twitter.  Seems we're not about to benefit from a re-evaluation. 

We can go back to disliking him again ?

Should have known not to trust a cockwomble!

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â