The AVFC FFP thread

[blandy]

10 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

I might be wrong, but I think we've already had that. I think it's been included in the last FFP period.

Yeah, me too - 2 million quid I think it was.

[thunderball]

All FFP does is keep the PL top 6, and already wealthy clubs, in the top 6 in perpetuity. While they lived by one rule, they pull down the drawbridge and prevent others acquiring wealth in order to challenge their money go round of prize money and European cup appearance money aswell as the biggest dip into the Sky pot. The top 6 already have an unassailable advantage and FFP only maintains this by preventing disruption, its perverse because the league reward and distribution system just widens the gap year on year, guaranteeing the top 6 move further away.

We were bought for circa £60m, but most of the top 6 are valued around £1B and even up to £2B. With the combined wealth of our owners we won’t get into financial trouble and they could quite conceivably ‘invest’ (say £150m/year) over the next 5 years to challenge the top 6 if they were allowed and still make a profit over their investment. But they can’t because the rules have established the big boys into a status quo. Just look at money spent on squad and correlation to league position: money buys success. Also note Spurs building a £1B stadium and still making a £100m profit.

Now take a hypothetical, but plausible example close to our own hearts: we fail to get promoted, Grealish leaves for Spurs for £35m at age 23. Spends 2 seasons with Spurs and gets in the England team because the same talent is vetoed access while at our club; Spurs have him in the Champions League window which we don’t have access to because the top 6 (ok, top 4 in this case) is a monopoly, and at 25 he is worth £100-150m netting a nice £65-115m profit for Spurs. We can’t leverage like that so are kept under the glass ceiling in perpetuity.

It is poorly conceived. Clubs defaulting and going into liquidation should be rightly punished but this can happen without FFP. And the FA also have a terrible reputation for assessing new owners - just look at Xia and now Bolton.

If only Randy had bought us 2-3 years earlier the story could be so different....

Edited April 27, 2019 by thunderball

[Vive_La_Villa]

12 minutes ago, thunderball said:

All FFP does is keep the PL top 6, and already wealthy clubs, in the top 6 in perpetuity. While they lived by one rule, they pull down the drawbridge and prevent others acquiring wealth in order to challenge their money go round of prize money and European cup appearance money aswell as the biggest dip into the Sky pot. The top 6 already have an unassailable advantage and FFP only maintains this by preventing disruption, its perverse because the league reward and distribution system just widens the gap year on year, guaranteeing the top 6 move further away.

We were bought for circa £60m, but most of the top 6 are valued around £1B and even up to £2B. With the combined wealth of our owners we won’t get into financial trouble and they could quite conceivably ‘invest’ (say £150m/year) over the next 5 years to challenge the top 6 if they were allowed and still make a profit over their investment. But they can’t because the rules have established the big boys into a status quo. Just look at money spent on squad and correlation to league position: money buys success. Also note Spurs building a £1B stadium and still making a £100m profit.

It is poorly conceived. Clubs defaulting and going into liquidation should be rightly punished but this can happen without FFP. And the FA also have a terrible reputation for assessing new owners - just look at Xia and now Bolton.

If Randy had bought us 2-3 years earlier the story could be so different....

Or if NSWE bought us when Lerner did...

I don’t think it would have mattered when Lerner bought us. He was just not cut out for sports club ownership and was always destined to fail. Made a mess of Cleveland Browns too. 

Edited April 27, 2019 by Vive_La_Villa

[thunderball]

2 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Or if NSWE bought us when Lerner did...

I don’t think it would have mattered when Lerner bought us. He was just not cut out for sports club ownership and was always destined to fail. Made a mess of Cleveland Browns too. 

No, I agree on the Randy vs NSWE issue, but we were close to being a top 4 club before the drawbridge dropped and big money poured in, two years earlier with cash we could’ve competed with Spurs and Liverpool at that point in time (and it would have predated Man City 2.0)

[Vive_La_Villa]

2 minutes ago, thunderball said:

No, I agree on the Randy vs NSWE issue, but we were close to being a top 4 club before the drawbridge dropped and big money poured in, two years earlier with cash we could’ve competed with Spurs and Liverpool at that point in time (and it would have predated Man City 2.0)

I see where you are coming from but we should have been breaking top 4 in those 4 seasons with MON considering the money spent on both transfer fees and wages. The right manager at the time would have done it. 

I remember one of the seasons we were in complete control and as far as im aware Lerner was prepared to back MON in January to secure the striker we needed.  Who did he go out and buy? Emile ****** Heskey!!

I get angry just thinking back to what a wasted opportunity those years were.

[Dave-R]

5 hours ago, thejoker said:

I was thinking about the Derby situation earlier (the owner buying Pride Park and leasing it back). Would there be anything to stop our owners doing the same, but then sell Villa Park back to the club for £1? 

It would certainly be a good way to get around FFP if we stay in The Championship for the next few years.

I’m sure Steve Gibson would approve.

That's a right bit naughty right there and a way round things.

Sell a floodlight for 50 mill and get it back for 50p lol..

[Dave-R]

2 hours ago, thunderball said:

All FFP does is keep the PL top 6, and already wealthy clubs, in the top 6 in perpetuity. While they lived by one rule, they pull down the drawbridge and prevent others acquiring wealth in order to challenge their money go round of prize money and European cup appearance money aswell as the biggest dip into the Sky pot. The top 6 already have an unassailable advantage and FFP only maintains this by preventing disruption, its perverse because the league reward and distribution system just widens the gap year on year, guaranteeing the top 6 move further away.

We were bought for circa £60m, but most of the top 6 are valued around £1B and even up to £2B. With the combined wealth of our owners we won’t get into financial trouble and they could quite conceivably ‘invest’ (say £150m/year) over the next 5 years to challenge the top 6 if they were allowed and still make a profit over their investment. But they can’t because the rules have established the big boys into a status quo. Just look at money spent on squad and correlation to league position: money buys success. Also note Spurs building a £1B stadium and still making a £100m profit.

Now take a hypothetical, but plausible example close to our own hearts: we fail to get promoted, Grealish leaves for Spurs for £35m at age 23. Spends 2 seasons with Spurs and gets in the England team because the same talent is vetoed access while at our club; Spurs have him in the Champions League window which we don’t have access to because the top 6 (ok, top 4 in this case) is a monopoly, and at 25 he is worth £100-150m netting a nice £65-115m profit for Spurs. We can’t leverage like that so are kept under the glass ceiling in perpetuity.

It is poorly conceived. Clubs defaulting and going into liquidation should be rightly punished but this can happen without FFP. And the FA also have a terrible reputation for assessing new owners - just look at Xia and now Bolton.

If only Randy had bought us 2-3 years earlier the story could be so different....

You make some lovely points, nice read. It does feel like FFP is a concealment of protection for the bigger clubs than what it actually is supposed to be which is to protect clubs in trouble.

It's like a level 99 spell that places an indestructible shield over the top 6 and there's no way of taking it down because the developers just have not put the means to do so into the game as of yet.

The top bunch must be loving it..

.

[Dave-R]

2 hours ago, thunderball said:

No, I agree on the Randy vs NSWE issue, but we were close to being a top 4 club before the drawbridge dropped and big money poured in, two years earlier with cash we could’ve competed with Spurs and Liverpool at that point in time (and it would have predated Man City 2.0)

Yes I agree we could of been a top club, then Beckham happened and the start of the big money signings.

The 90s were the sign that we really couldn't bring in massive money signings with big talent and compete any longer at a high level after Gregory left..

Would be real sweet if we could correct the mistakes made if we return to the premier. That's why I believe our Owners are very different to all the Owners we've had in the past. They have to much laying around that they see money everywhere that they want rid of some of it and trophys in football is a good way to get rid of money.

Edited April 27, 2019 by Dave-R

[Zatman]

73 million was the wage budget last season, 19 million more than Fulham who had the 2nd highest in the league

Wolves spent 51 million 

[Vive_La_Villa]

1 hour ago, Zatman said:

73 million was the wage budget last season, 19 million more than Fulham who had the 2nd highest in the league

Wolves spent 51 million 

Was that before or after we had to beg, steal and borrow?

Edited May 24, 2019 by Vive_La_Villa

[Tomaszk]

2 hours ago, Zatman said:

73 million was the wage budget last season, 19 million more than Fulham who had the 2nd highest in the league

Wolves spent 51 million 

Joke figure for what we produced. Turgid crap.

Can't compare Wolves' figures to anyone though. They had an inside agent getting them players for a fifth of what they were worth.

[Zatman]

Only 19 clubs in the entire EFL made a profit last season 

[Tomaszk]

1 hour ago, Zatman said:

Only 19 clubs in the entire EFL made a profit last season 

Unsustainable mess. We need to be in the PL for 2 of the next 5 years or we're in big trouble.

Without reform, so many clubs are going to go bust in the next 20 years. It'll change the whole league. I can see L2/Conference getting merged at some point, or maybe L1 & L2. That's if Scotland don't get involved, which many will try to avoid as Celtic/Rangers will eventually become established PL sides and take spots away from English clubs.

[dudevillaisnice]

So now we are promoted it changes things a bit. FFP still exists in the prem but from I remember it was certainly more lenient compared to the championship. 

[ferguson1]

[Demitri_C]

The good thing is we have learned so much about when we went down last time so I doubt we will make same mistakes as last time. 

[Don_Simon]

 

[Dodgyknees]

FFP? Completed it.

[MaVilla]

just seen this, what does a "soft embargo" actually mean?

also....pls dont deduct us 9 points for our first season in the prem

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-7088131/Championship-clubs-fear-Aston-Villa-avoid-points-deduction-breach-FFP-rules.html

"Championship clubs are concerned that the Premier League will not impose a points deduction on Aston Villa if they are found to have breached profit and sustainability rules.

Villa, who were promoted to the top flight after beating Derby County in Monday's Championship play-off final at Wembley, are among a number of clubs — Derby included — currently operating under a soft transfer embargo while the English Football League continue to assess their P and S submission.

Officials at Villa Park have insisted they will be compliant with financial fair play regulations despite reports of heavy losses."

[KenjiOgiwara]

The mistake is to assume FFP was made and implemented to have anything to do with financial fair play. Everyone know it was the complete opposite story. Most ironic name ever. 

Soft transfer cap I think, is when you are temporary not allowed to make new signings, due to a due diligence being performed. You can actively pursue players, make deals and keep doing what you're doing, but can't actually pass money from A to B. At least that's my impression of it.