Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

 

Financial Fair Play investigation

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jacko93 said:
Because if we can successfully argue the valuation that was placed upon him was £30m and a buyer was in place, then we can claim losses of £30m. Would obviously have to prove a deal close to completion prior to Covid though.

Only a theory.

As far as I am aware, only a purchase is amorticised, not a sale. If we bought a player on a 5 year contract at £25m, and sold him the next day for £25m, we would have £20m profit for that year.
Click to expand...
When an asset is disposed of all remaining amortisation amounts must be written down in that year as a cost and thus a loss. No 20m profit unfortunately
 
Narntwinnysivven said:
Yeah but he got the witsel signing wrong so anything else he said carried no weight on here.
Click to expand...
There were rumours at the time (that I'm staggered the media failed to pursue) that the Witsel deal was 99% done but subsequently, literally overnight, the player made additional demands that the club (rightly) refused to meet and the deal was therefore pulled.
Robert Elstone, CEO at the time, would be in a position to confirm this.
 
Mr Popodopolous said:
He was arrested in July 2021?

Alright then £30m sale price- £8-9m in remaining book value plus £5.2m estimated in wages. £26.2-27.2m.

That's being generous. He played 36 games for Everton in 2020-21 out of 3i League games.
Click to expand...
In dealing with the hypothetical sale of a player it will also be assumed that there would be a hypothetical replacement of the player which would incur a cost and wages.
 
Villa_Fan said:
In dealing with the hypothetical sale of a player it will also be assumed that there would be a hypothetical replacement of the player which would incur a cost and wages.
Click to expand...
Yes very valid point. It just seems suspect as a concept. Sorry to say Aston Villa also used it but it wouldn't have affected FFP compliance. Fulham £20-21m in Covid impairment, Nottingham Forest seemed to add some profit and Stoke argued for £30m in impairment in 2019-20, £11m in lost profits in 2020-21 and £2-3m in lost profits last season.

EFL should be looking at this, £22.5-23.5m.
 

AndyC said:
There were rumours at the time (that I'm staggered the media failed to pursue) that the Witsel deal was 99% done but subsequently, literally overnight, the player made additional demands that the club (rightly) refused to meet and the deal was therefore pulled.
Robert Elstone, CEO at the time, would be in a position to confirm this.
Click to expand...
I don’t doubt that but the ridicule the esk has took on here ever since is insane. Even after he explained what happened it meant nothing.
 
Neiler said:
So if we add in the uncrystlised losses, to the crystallised - which I haven’t to this point we are proposing something like:

Year 1) Loss : £111mill in 2018-19

Year 2) Loss Averaged £134 mill - less crystallised and uncrystallised losses off £256.2 mill = £122 mill profit. 19/20 & 20/21

Year 3) Projected loss £50 mill. 21/22

*Less £45 mill for youth football, women's football and community over three years.

Tight.
Click to expand...
I am not sure I understand your use of crystalised and uncrystallised losses and where u get 256m and the resulting 122m profit. If the claim from EFC is that they would have made 122m profit on average during the Covid years I think that the PL will throw the book at EFC as that is completely unrealistic given the EFC accounts pre Covid. Also, the uncrystallised losses will need to be replaced with new players and uncrystalised losses amortisation amounts written off. Surely there were no crystalised losses that can be attributed to Covid or maybe I am missing something.
 

Mr Popodopolous said:
Yes very valid point. It just seems suspect as a concept. Sorry to say Aston Villa also used it but it wouldn't have affected FFP compliance. Fulham £20-21m in Covid impairment, Nottingham Forest seemed to add some profit and Stoke argued for £30m in impairment in 2019-20, £11m in lost profits in 2020-21 and £2-3m in lost profits last season.

EFL should be looking at this, £22.5-23.5m.
Click to expand...
Don't be sorry about saying what Villa dod or don't do, whether dodgy or otherwise. I may support the club but I don't make the decisions. Regarding uncrystalised losses of player valuation due to Covid, yes Villa did claim this but the amount attributed to it was 9m. The majority of the losses claimed were for match day revenue, rebates to the PL, broadcasting revenue and losses due to not hosting international games. The dodgy thing Villa has done, although, at the time it was fully compliant with FFP rules, was selling Villa Park to themselves.
 
Could it be that the PL is trying to protect us from any future investigation by an imposed government appointed body by getting any case closed before they are in place?
‘Cleaning all the dirty laundry in house’ prior to externals getting involved?
 
Villa_Fan said:
Don't be sorry about saying what Villa dod or don't do, whether dodgy or otherwise. I may support the club but I don't make the decisions. Regarding uncrystalised losses of player valuation due to Covid, yes Villa did claim this but the amount attributed to it was 9m. The majority of the losses claimed were for match day revenue, rebates to the PL, broadcasting revenue and losses due to not hosting international games. The dodgy thing Villa has done, although, at the time it was fully compliant with FFP rules, was selling Villa Park to themselves.
Click to expand...
Agree with you, I think had Aston Villa stayed down it could have been quire interesting had they been solely under the EFL jurisdiction. Premier League seemed more permissive in 2019 compared to the Football League FFP regime under Parry

Yes that was the majority and there is no question of an Aston Villa breach to 2021.
 
Mr Popodopolous said:
Agree with you, I think had Aston Villa stayed down it could have been quire interesting had they been solely under the EFL jurisdiction. Premier League seemed more permissive in 2019 compared to the Football League FFP regime under Parry

Yes that was the majority and there is no question of an Aston Villa breach to 2021.
Click to expand...
Selling the ground meant that we cleared the FFP problems and were compliant, however, if we hadn't been promoted we would have had to dispose of some assets ie Grealish and McGinn, say 50m/60m for the pair fo them. Then the club would have had to rebuild a team for the EFL and within an EFL financial structure. It would have been a huge dent in the ability to progress up to the PL and then try to become a top half team with aspirations of European football
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Register
Back
Top