V Sport Investments Ltd - More Villa Clubs around the world?

[gwi1890]

48 minutes ago, useless said:

If Vitoria got anyone half as good as Grealish they're losing him sooner or later anyway, and it probably wouldn't be us that got that player even if we did part own them. And even if we were to get their better players at reduced cost they probably won't mind because overall our investment will be more benefical to them, that investment might end up being the very reason why they have such an highly rated player in the first place.

Overall they might lose certain players, but the net result will be a positive one for them, we will lose players as a result of NSWE's investment into us, but overall we still benefit, we lost Chukwuemeka for a fee below is actually worth

Vitoria's record sale is twenty million, all their other top sales are ten million or below, after we've bought them I bet that eventually goes up.

Also they loan players in all the time, doesn't make any difference if it's from us or some other team, for the most part it's still about developing players for other clubs, we've been in that position ourselves, and they're not going to take players from us that they don't want or that will be detrimental to their results.

Most of the stuff people are highlighting as potentially bad are things that happen at most clubs anyway including ours.

I would say Raphinia was half as good and he went to Leeds initially.

[KMitch]

2 hours ago, sharkyvilla said:

I'm not sure about it being near impossible to sign European players.  The threshold for signing overseas players must be pretty lax in order for us to sign a 19 year old Colombian from the MLS.  I should think the vast majority of decent players in Europe would be eligible.

I think you're misunderstanding how this process works.  It's a well documented points system where a player needs to accumulate 15 points in order to qualify for a work permit.  

https://worldfootballindex.com/2020/12/work-permits-premier-league-post-brexit-english-clubs-efl-libertadores/

Key Highlights Post Brexit:

1. Clubs can only sign a maximum of 6 U21 players from abroad every season
2. It's easier to sign South American players than it was prior to Brexit
3. An over 18 player playing in any of the European top leagues basically is guaranteed a work permit under these rules
4. Regular internationals for a top 50 ranked FIFA national team are guaranteed a work permit
5. It's hard to sign up and coming young players unless there is a big fee/wages involved, they're already full internationals, and/or regularly playing in a good league
6. Some leagues are valued/scaled higher for points than others

It's easier now to sign players who are internationals or regularly playing outside of the EU, but the U21 restrictions will bottleneck teams like Man City and Chelsea from continuing to sign 30+ of the best foreign youth internationals every season and stocking their academy with "home grown" talent to sell and bankroll their blockbuster signings.  Owning additional clubs will help skirt these rules, especially in countries like Portugal, who have much more relaxed work permit and transfer restriction requirements than the Premier League has.

Edited February 15, 2023 by KMitch

[useless]

Raphinia was at two other clubs before joining Leeds, when he was at Vitoria wasn't rated anywhere nearly as high as Grealish, hence why Sporting paid just £6m for him.

[abdomlahor]

20 hours ago, Davkaus said:

I'm not sure what the "confused" reactions are about.

I guess the question is whether you view the City Football Group and other global football brands to be an abomination to football, or a blueprint to aspire to. Our owners clearly feel the latter, and I **** hate it.

i made the grave mistake in tweeting this exact opinion and my mentions still haven't recovered.

[useless]

Grealish is an extreme outlier, it's highly unlikely Guimarães are going to have a player that good on their books, if they did we wouldn't be getting that player, Bournemouth owner just bought into Lorient in France, if Lorient happened to have the next big thing in French football, Bournemouth wouldn't be getting that player either.

But in terms of highly rated players in general at Os Vimaranenses, of course us part owning them might give us an advantage in getting that player if wanted, but that's not bad for them, if not us then some other club would sign that player anyway, Vitoria will lose their best players like they always do, and like we sometimes do, again it's another one of those things that happens at all clubs anyway.

I think people getting carried away anyway, we aren't going to be changing their strip, badge, or colors, we aren't going to make them take our academy players if they're not good enough and they will be ones to decide which ones are good enough, we won't be filling their team with players worth tens of millions of pounds (although they probably would like that one)

For the most part on the playing side of things we will probably just send them a couple of academy players needing first team football each season, again if good enough, maybe potential for them to have one or two Duran type players initially before coming to us, but we won't be hoarding squads worth or teams worth of that type, we're not in a position to do that if we wanted to, and actually goes what we're doing with our academy.

Basically this deal on playing side is likely more about the academy side of things than us signing their best first team players, I wouldn't be surprised if we didn't sign a single one of their first team players, if we take players from them will be more likely from their academy and even then will be ones that we've put there in the first place.

[abdomlahor]

4 hours ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

Exactly.

Also, imagine the likes of Archer, Iroegbunam ( Just as samples, insert any other top young talent here ) et all getting a chance to play in the Portuguese top League, be exposed to different environments, coaching methods etc and vice versa.

Smaller clubs than us have similar link ups.

I'm not certain the people who are mad, have actually pinpointed why they are upset.

These clubs will have been looking in places others won't have, this is how you find the Bissoumas, Julian Alvarez etc before they become them.

It's easy to sell this as a mutually beneficial agreement, but we're essentially using smaller, poorer clubs to grow the Aston Villa brand. I'd hate for us to be on the end of it so I'm not gonna change my tune just because it benefits us.

I just hope it isn't the start of a City style "portfolio" (I despise that term in this context) but I fear that it will be.

Edited February 15, 2023 by abdomlahor

[villa89]

Their entire club is worth about the same as we paid for Ross McCormack. Think about that.

[villa89]

6 minutes ago, abdomlahor said:

I just hope it isn't the start of a City style "portfolio" (I despise that term in this context) but I fear that it will be.

I hope it is. It's the only chance we have to compete. Get a network of feeder teams to gather up talent otherwise we will, at best, in midtable forever.

[est1874]

1 hour ago, villa89 said:

Their entire club is worth about the same as we paid for Ross McCormack. Think about that.

Shouldn't be. Dunno how we pulled this off or who did the valuations. Their fans are rightly livid that 46% has cost us so little. Feels like daylight robbery and I'm not sure I feel good about that, given the way the game's going overall.

[useless]

Their current owner paid four hundred thousand for forty percent, their fans being 'livid' is just one fan that Birmingham Mail have used as clickbait, most of the quotes in the article are actually positive.

[useless]

The only real concern amongst the majority of their fans the twenty million loan option.

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

6 minutes ago, est1874 said:

Shouldn't be. Dunno how we pulled this off or who did the valuations. Their fans are rightly livid that 46% has cost us so little. Feels like daylight robbery and I'm not sure I feel good about that, given the way the game's going overall.

They'll be getting much more than this in the grand scheme of things.

"As a result of the established pre-agreement, the future partner of SAD will support the investment of two million euros in infrastructure, to be applied in two years, also making possible a credit line of up to 20 million euros, with interest rate under preferential conditions."

[Spoony]

My only thoughts on this is that the Americanisation of football (sorry, soccer) continues. We are all just becoming franchises. 

[ender4]

8 minutes ago, est1874 said:

 Dunno how we pulled this off or who did the valuations. Their fans are rightly livid that 46% has cost us so little. Feels like daylight robbery 

Probably some agreement that we’ll send some of our players there and stuff like that to compensate them.

For example, they could have Sanson who would probably be amazing for them. 

[sidcow]

23 hours ago, Zatman said:

I fully agree, its great as a football club but it stinks for the sport especially when a lot on here are happy to criticise City sports group etc

We have just took a club with a great history and pretty made much them our bitch and ruined any chance of them being successful. There fans should be rightfully livid

Football is a disgrace

Or, like us they now have a super wealthy owner prepared to invest in them, chances to jointly develop all kinds of common things with a Premier league team, revolutionise sponsorship and give them more income to compete with the bigger Portuguese clubs. 

[MotoMkali]

1 hour ago, est1874 said:

Shouldn't be. Dunno how we pulled this off or who did the valuations. Their fans are rightly livid that 46% has cost us so little. Feels like daylight robbery and I'm not sure I feel good about that, given the way the game's going overall.

They have 40 million in debt and their bylaws state there is a set period of time between when they purchase shares and when they can sell them for profit. They don't have the liquidity to purchase the shares of the other owners without our investment so cannot wait that period of tie. 

[sidcow]

5 hours ago, Zatman said:

Or a better example would be Real Madrid buying us then signing Grealish for half his value and then loaning us some youngsters and squad players in the hopes they might develop for Real Madrid or put them in the shop window going forward

But maybe they would never ever have had Grealish because inevitably Benfica or Porto would have sucked up all the top talent, and now they can finally retain someone like Grealish because of the backing of V Sports. 

[sidcow]

It's a low payment for 46% but I expect to buy eg a further 5% will proportionately cost one hell of a lot more. 

[MNVillan]

4 hours ago, sidcow said:

It's a low payment for 46% but I expect to buy eg a further 5% will proportionately cost one hell of a lot more. 

Wouldn’t buying an additional 5% cause a potential problem? If V Sports are majority owners in two clubs that could both be in, say, Europa League, doesn’t that break UEFA or FIFA rules?

I’m not 100% sure on that, but wasn’t the issue when news broke that Qatar might come in with a bid for Man U, since they already own PSG?

[Khizzy]

Would Cameron Archer be one of the best strikers in the Portuguese league right now? Probably.