The AVFC FFP thread

[sne]

Regardless it should not be an issue going into the final few weeks of the season.

If the rules and regulations are that iffy that clubs and FA do not know how they work, they probably are not working.

I've  no doubt we and other clubs have bent the rules or tried to work around them, it's the only way to be successful.

[TRO]

32 minutes ago, PieFacE said:

I really don't think we would have sanctioned a £7m purchase for a keeper if there was any danger of us falling foul of FFP. Seeing as Purslow helped write the rules, you'd think he would know what he was doing. 

Though, stranger things have happened. 

For Sure.

I guess the man who invented the "hang mans noose".....paid particular attention to ensure he never ended up in it.

[wilko154]

1 hour ago, Djemba_Villan said:

The article on sky sports paints a more serious picture of today’s meeting, suggesting Purslow is lobbing to disregard a rule to force all clubs to openly publish Profitability/Sustainability figures.

lets face it, something doesn’t smell right about our position given how things panned out in the summer but all we can do is hope Purslow is right!

it would be annoying to be held back by half thought through rules and handful of bitter chairman who’ve just realised their investment was bad. 

I would imagine it's more about us using loopholes where possible to fall in line with FFP, loopholes that he doesn't want the entire league seeing and utilizing themselves.

The less people that see how we are working our books the better, and realistically if the EFL have approved our finances this year there shouldn't be a problem.

Gibson's just a sad man who blew his money on poor players and backed a manager who fell short at the final hurdle.

 

[PieFacE]

 

Well that's that. 

[wilko154]

[TRO]

58 minutes ago, wilko154 said:

I would imagine it's more about us using loopholes where possible to fall in line with FFP, loopholes that he doesn't want the entire league seeing and utilizing themselves.

The less people that see how we are working our books the better, and realistically if the EFL have approved our finances this year there shouldn't be a problem.

Gibson's just a sad man who blew his money on poor players and backed a manager who fell short at the final hurdle.

 

The sad bit is......If they were top of the league ,heading for promotion, this complaint would not have been levied.

Its the "sour grapes" that are sad.

If he wants to find mitigation in our double 3-0 over his club .....Our players involved have not constituted big money signings....In fact only 1 player currently playing for us cost big money , Jonathan Kodjia....and he has mainly come from the bench.

He needs to search deeper to find the answer he is looking for....what ever that is?

Edited April 24, 2019 by TRO

[sne]

[S-Platt]

All clubs publish their audited accounts annually and are available on companies house website don't know what the issue is here!  

[MaVilla]

Looks like gibson put a vote to championship teams that if accepted would allow accountants to review any clubs finances.

It was voted down apparently.

This guy is starting to come across like a bitter, desperate saddo that is throwing his toys out his pram because pulis ball failed to get his team promoted?

[blandy]

14 hours ago, MaVilla said:

Looks like gibson put a vote to championship teams that if accepted would allow accountants to review any clubs finances.

It seems to me that would always be likely to be rejected - if clubs can demand to look at another club's books, then they might do so before making a bid for a player and see how much spare loot, or how skint they are, or what the wage bill is and be able to get themselves an advantageous negotiating position, so that' not gonna go through.

I have some sympathy with his grudge, as some clubs would seem to be playing less fairly than others, perhaps with FFP, but the timing's not a good look as posters have pointed out.

If you're a club with wealthy, ambitious and responsible owners you'll take a different view to one with no such advantages. For the likes of say Villa, the rules are unfit for purpose, for the likes of say Rotherham they're fine, because of our completely different circumstances. They're creaking at the seams because of the money some owners would like to be able to spend.

[sidcow]

I'm sure too many clubs have too many skeletons in too many closets to allow open inspection by all and sundry.  I'm sure all sorts of shenanigans go on they would rather keep out of the public eye. 

He's barking up the wrong tree anyway.  We more than anyone have shown that spending loads in this league doesn't guarantee anything. 

Most teams that get out of this league don't actually cost a ton of money.  The key is to have a defined style of play which the players are well drilled in, good management and coaching and getting in the right, not necessarily expensive players. 

Wolves might have spent a load of money but it is the other things that got them promoted.  Without those things they would have been just like us the last 2 years. 

How much have Norwich spent to build that team? How much did Brighton, Huddersfield, Bournemouth, Burnley, Watford, Crystal Palace spend? 

He should spend more time trying to get in a good coaching team instead of sitting in a corner biting his nails mithering about how much we have pissed away on rubbish players who have just held us back. 

[OutByEaster?]

The three teams that went up last year lost £140m between them. 

To compete near the top, you have to cheat the rule.

 

[dounavilla]

6 hours ago, TRO said:

For Sure.

I guess the man who invented the "hang mans noose".....paid particular attention to ensure he never ended up in it.

He probably created a loophole.

[Villarocker]

5 hours ago, PieFacE said:

 

Well that's that. 

I wonder how many other clubs, that we probably wouldn't even suspect, have broken ffp rules in our league? 

[ciggiesnbeer]

FFP needs to be abolished. A failed experiment which has achieved nothing but more distress for clubs already having financial difficulties. 

[OutByEaster?]

I don't think it needs to be abolished, I think the idea of protecting clubs from themselves is a good one. The addition of limiting clubs that could spend (made to suit those wit money right at the top) has spoiled the rule for those at both the top and ironically for those at the bottom - clubs in trouble should be judged on their debt, not on profit or loss - owners that are prepared to gift money to clubs and owner that will borrow it to them should be treated differently. 

[TheStagMan]

2 hours ago, OutByEaster? said:

I don't think it needs to be abolished, I think the idea of protecting clubs from themselves is a good one. The addition of limiting clubs that could spend (made to suit those wit money right at the top) has spoiled the rule for those at both the top and ironically for those at the bottom - clubs in trouble should be judged on their debt, not on profit or loss - owners that are prepared to gift money to clubs and owner that will borrow it to them should be treated differently. 

If they want to protect clubs, and owners are willing to invest money, there should be sustainability rules that say - stay within them and you can do what you like, but if you want to, a willing owner should be allowed to put money into the club to buy a player (no loans or dodgy accounting tricks etc), and then pay his wages for the duration of his contract into an Escrow account or trust that the player can then be paid from and that player is completely removed from the calculations. Maybe add a limit of players that you can do this with at any one time - e.g. max of 4 players under these rules. Protects the club from reckless spending (Can only spend what they generate or has been given to them as a gift from the owner). Over time, the value of the club will rise as it is gaining "paid for" assets. e.g. Pay £10m for a player, owner puts in the transfer fee and salary for that player - costs the club nothing, but when sold, the money returns to the club. Stops unscrupulous owners bankrupting clubs, but allows those that want to spend, to do so.

[TRO]

7 hours ago, blandy said:

It seems to me that would always be likely to be rejected - if clubs can demand to look at another club's books, then they might do so before making a bid for a player and see how much spare loot, or how skint they are, or what the wage bill is and be able to get themselves an advantageous negotiating position, so that' not gonna go through.

I have some sympathy with his grudge, as some clubs would seem to be playing less fairly than others, perhaps with FFP, but the timing's not a good look as posters have pointed out.

Of you're a club with wealthy, ambitious and responsible owners you'll take a different view to one with no such advantages. For the likes of say Villa, the rules are unfit for purpose, for the likes of say Rotherham they're fine, because of our completely different circumstances. They're creaking at the seams because of the money some owners would like to be able to spend.

didn't Karl Marx have a similar plan, to fix that?

[QldVilla]

The main issue I have with FFP is that it is indescriminate.

Villa played in every season of the PL before being relegated. They operated financially at a far higher level to nearly every other club in England, to the point were Villa were one of the Top 20 clubs in Europe for turnover. Then to say you have to get your books in order within 3 years after 30 years at the top level is not reasonable.

Don't get me wrong, Villa have been run poorly for many years, but the financial implications of Villa being relegated are far greater than 95% of clubs in England, and something that FFP fails to recognise.

[trom_borg]

5 hours ago, QldVilla said:

The main issue I have with FFP is that it is indescriminate.

Villa played in every season of the PL before being relegated. They operated financially at a far higher level to nearly every other club in England, to the point were Villa were one of the Top 20 clubs in Europe for turnover. Then to say you have to get your books in order within 3 years after 30 years at the top level is not reasonable.

Don't get me wrong, Villa have been run poorly for many years, but the financial implications of Villa being relegated are far greater than 95% of clubs in England, and something that FFP fails to recognise.

The amount of money we've wasted since relegation for a quick return to PL is criminal. FFP didn't fail to recognize it in my view, rather we failed to adapt to the situation and think long term. With that said I don't think FFP is working well either and it's not really helping creating a "level" playing field.