JAMAICAN-VILLAN Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 Was just watching Nasser Al Khelaifi ( PSG Chairman/Owners - Qatar ) on CNN and of course the FFP questions were asked. To be fair, he nailed it. The amount of money they have made in Commercial Revenue/Partners based on their recent signing, Messi being the overwhelmingly obvious is ridiculous. He says it's even surpassed their expectations I might be wrong, but I think he said something stupid like 42 million in 3 days. He says the players they have signed, along with commercial partners and other things, has put their value up- to 3 billion. I say all that to say, we REALLY need to be looking at TOP, top players from Eastern Markets etc to make a step up, as several of our VT'ers have been suggesting. Shirt sales alone ffs. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nepal_villan Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 15 minutes ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said: Was just watching Nasser Al Khelaifi ( PSG Chairman/Owners - Qatar ) on CNN and of course the FFP questions were asked. To be fair, he nailed it. The amount of money they have made in Commercial Revenue/Partners based on their recent signing, Messi being the overwhelmingly obvious is ridiculous. He says it's even surpassed their expectations I might be wrong, but I think he said something stupid like 42 million in 3 days. He says the players they have signed, along with commercial partners and other things, has put their value up- to 3 billion. I say all that to say, we REALLY need to be looking at TOP, top players from Eastern Markets etc to make a step up, as several of our VT'ers have been suggesting. Shirt sales alone ffs. Most of PSG's sponsors are Qatari and are basically ordered to sponsor the club at inflated sums. Similar to Man City and Abu Dhabi. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAMAICAN-VILLAN Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 2 minutes ago, nepal_villan said: Most of PSG's sponsors are Qatari and are basically ordered to sponsor the club at inflated sums. Similar to Man City and Abu Dhabi. Scenes when we get our " Fair value " 1.2 billion pound over 5 years sponsorship from Adidas. On a serious note though, yeah I get what you are saying. However, I also think, best example I could find is " Fake it till you make it ". So while the likes of them and City, have obviously inflated sponsorship deals ( Self Sponsored ), they have now come so far, the initial fake values they inked those deals for, probably now equal the actual value of the clubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Griffin Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 52 minutes ago, nepal_villan said: Most of PSG's sponsors are Qatari and are basically ordered to sponsor the club at inflated sums. Similar to Man City and Abu Dhabi. Their principal sponsors are Nike and Accor. They do have some Qatari sponsors but also have Amex, Coca Cola, Nivia, EA Sports, beinsports, Orange, Unibet, Hisense and others. QNB is a good sponsor to have as they could provide funding for player acquisition while accepting a risk level other banks may avoid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Griffin Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 52 minutes ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said: they have now come so far, the initial fake values they inked those deals for, probably now equal the actual value of the clubs. Spot on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nepal_villan Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 32 minutes ago, Peter Griffin said: Their principal sponsors are Nike and Accor. They do have some Qatari sponsors but also have Amex, Coca Cola, Nivia, EA Sports, beinsports, Orange, Unibet, Hisense and others. QNB is a good sponsor to have as they could provide funding for player acquisition while accepting a risk level other banks may avoid. Accor has strong links to Qatar. They received major investment from the Qatar sovereign wealth fund. BeIN is also Qatari. It's an open secret that the Qatari sponsors pay disproportionately more than all their other sponsors. What I'm trying to establish is that PSG and ManCity operate differently than other clubs. If we're looking for commercial role models the likes of Bayern and Dortmund or even Arsenal and Spurs are much better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Griffin Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 6 minutes ago, nepal_villan said: What I'm trying to establish is that PSG and ManCity operate differently than other clubs Yes, they do operate differently to the rest of us. Maybe things are changing with FFP/P&S though. There is a lot of talk about it changing radically to allow investors to put more money into clubs. Although this would likely suit Villa, I am not sure how much it would suit football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nepal_villan Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 3 minutes ago, Peter Griffin said: Yes, they do operate differently to the rest of us. Maybe things are changing with FFP/P&S though. There is a lot of talk about it changing radically to allow investors to put more money into clubs. Although this would likely suit Villa, I am not sure how much it would suit football. I would allow for ambitious investors to put money in an escrow account to cover future players salary that exceed the FFP caps. Therefore if the investor bails or loses half their fortune, future liabilities are covered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Griffin Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 1 hour ago, nepal_villan said: 1 hour ago, Peter Griffin said: I would allow for ambitious investors to put money in an escrow account to cover future players salary that exceed the FFP caps. I have often thought that would make sense but the numbers would be huge and it would not be too palatable for an owner to have to potentially put hundreds of millions in escrow. Maybe a lein on a capital asset or some other form of form of liability that is to the owner as opposed to the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adman Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 4 minutes ago, Peter Griffin said: I have often thought that would make sense but the numbers would be huge and it would not be too palatable for an owner to have to potentially put hundreds of millions in escrow. Maybe a lein on a capital asset or some other form of form of liability that is to the owner as opposed to the club. Maybe the ownership of the ground would work? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Griffin Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 5 minutes ago, Adman said: Maybe the ownership of the ground would work? For overspend on FFP I would like the liability to be away from the actual club. you could have owners coming into clubs like Xia and gambling the club's assets and making a complete mess of it and walking away with the club in the mire and the owner not giving a crap. I don't think that is fair on any set of fans. However, is the liability for the funds was a personal liability against the owner then that would be completely different. And in the case of Xia, we would not have been permitted to spend in excess of FFP as he wouldn't have passed a credit check for the money. However, owners like ours, Chelsea, Man Utd etc would pass the credit check and could be held personally liable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adman Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 1 minute ago, Peter Griffin said: For overspend on FFP I would like the liability to be away from the actual club. you could have owners coming into clubs like Xia and gambling the club's assets and making a complete mess of it and walking away with the club in the mire and the owner not giving a crap. I don't think that is fair on any set of fans. However, is the liability for the funds was a personal liability against the owner then that would be completely different. And in the case of Xia, we would not have been permitted to spend in excess of FFP as he wouldn't have passed a credit check for the money. However, owners like ours, Chelsea, Man Utd etc would pass the credit check and could be held personally liable. Sorry, maybe I didn't explain. Our owners bought the ground with their own cash. It's their asset worth let's say for arguments sake £50mill. Would it make sense to let our owners overspend on the club, with the asset of the ground set as a "guarantor" if they decide to bail? So essentially the ground is returned to our ownership if they decide to bail out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Griffin Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 3 minutes ago, Adman said: Sorry, maybe I didn't explain. Our owners bought the ground with their own cash. It's their asset worth let's say for arguments sake £50mill. Would it make sense to let our owners overspend on the club, with the asset of the ground set as a "guarantor" if they decide to bail? So essentially the ground is returned to our ownership if they decide to bail out. I get you and for Villa and a few other clubs that may work. I don't like the separation of club and stadium tbh and I wouldn't like to see the club's stadium, whether owned directly as a lien for a liability. It still messes things up for the fans 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adman Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 4 minutes ago, Peter Griffin said: I get you and for Villa and a few other clubs that may work. I don't like the separation of club and stadium tbh and I wouldn't like to see the club's stadium, whether owned directly as a lien for a liability. It still messes things up for the fans True, "selling" the ground in the first place is to sideline the ffp rules...I'm torn between whether a system should help the richest billionaires spend as much as they like on their toys (which seems the only realistic way to upset the status quo) or if this is the beginning of the end for the competition Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaJ100 Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 On 11/08/2021 at 16:18, Peter Griffin said: Another way to look at it is that NSWE have billions of $ that they need to put somewhere, there is a limit to how much you can stuff under the mattress before it starts to get too uncomfortable to sleep on. I don't think NSWE are looking at Villa to be a cash cow, rather they are looking at it from a long term investment of their capital. They bought their initial share for about 55m and then pushed this to about 100m to complete the acquisition. I think they are likely to be looking to push the value of the club up as high as they can. If they were to sell AVFC now they surely they would be able to command circa 400m (Covid market conditions ignored), so they are probably very happy with their investment as they would consider it as profitable on their total investment and we have barely scratched the surface on our potential to add real value and have the club valued in the billions. If they were to start extracting money from Villa it would just create another headache of where to put it and tax liabilities while also reducing the value of their current investment. I could be wrong but I think we will see continued and sustained investment for quite a few years to come. At some stage they will want the club to be self financing but as we are in a growth phase that will be a few years into the future. £400 mil! But SHA are valued at £800 mil according to the HKSE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Griffin Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 22 minutes ago, Adman said: True, "selling" the ground in the first place is to sideline the ffp rules...I'm torn between whether a system should help the richest billionaires spend as much as they like on their toys (which seems the only realistic way to upset the status quo) or if this is the beginning of the end for the competition I am torn too and particularly so now that we have owners that appear willing to invest. If the shackles were off I wonder what players we would be buying this window. I am probably a little hypocritical in that I want restrictions but I want NSWE to blow everyone out of the water and become the biggest club in the world Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Griffin Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 3 minutes ago, VillaJ100 said: £400 mil! But SHA are valued at £800 mil according to the HKSE It brings a smile to my face when I think how much they absolutely hate Jack and he was just sold for more than their club, including all their players and including their ground is worth. And after about 6 or 7 years Jack will be work nothing form a resale perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Griffin Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 27 minutes ago, Adman said: True, "selling" the ground in the first place is to sideline the ffp rules... The loop hole of selling your ground to yourself must be stopped and not allowed to happen, which I believe is in the pipeline. Lucky we got in early! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Czarnikjak Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, Peter Griffin said: The loop hole of selling your ground to yourself must be stopped and not allowed to happen, which I believe is in the pipeline. Lucky we got in early! EFL have already closed that loophole. As of last month clubs are not allowed to do that anymore. It might still be possible in Premier League though, not sure on that. But so far only championship teams were forced to do that. Edited August 12, 2021 by Czarnikjak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Griffin Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 7 minutes ago, Czarnikjak said: EFL have already closed that loophole. As of last month clubs are not allowed to do that anymore. Thanks, that is good news and we were very lucky to get in before it was closed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts