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.
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/6om 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
Mostly agree with this but I wonder...The Receivable current asset needs to be within 12 months.

Assuming that all compliant to 2019 I make the hole in 2019-20 £60-70m on the event of staying down, maybe higher but out of contract and loanees going back. The League with the losses would have had the right to agree some sort of plan, if FFP losses esdeef £15m in 3 years they have the right via Future Financial info.
 
There was no construction during 2020-21 as per Everton's own accounts so is this applicable here?

Do you think the top six who tried to destroy our league for their own personal gain and greed was a bit worse than Evertons alleged breach mate ? And all they were given was a slap on the wrist a paltry fine. They brought English football into disrepute, thoughts..
 
Do you think the top six who tried to destroy our league for their own personal gain and greed was a bit worse than Evertons alleged breach mate ? And all they were given was a slap on the wrist a paltry fine. They brought English football into disrepute, thoughts..
Of course and the punishment for them was soft as anything.
 
The media led Big spenders Everton has never sat well with me.
Yes we have bought badly , but so have other clubs.

An indicator of our "Big spending " is in the table of Premier lge biggest transfers our 2 highest ( Sigurdsson & Richarlison ) sit 67th & 97th.
This media led myth needs to be addressed pronto.
But our Chairman and board sit back meekly and accept it.
 
Mostly agree with this but I wonder...The Receivable current asset needs to be within 12 months.

Assuming that all compliant to 2019 I make the hole in 2019-20 £60-70m on the event of staying down, maybe higher but out of contract and loanees going back. The League with the losses would have had the right to agree some sort of plan, if FFP losses esdeef £15m in 3 years they have the right via Future Financial info.
Are u taking parachute payments into account? But also, the calculations are over 3 years, a club doesn't immediately need to reduce losses to 15m if they can make greater cost reductions in the following 2 yrs
 

Are u taking parachute payments into account? But also, the calculations are over 3 years, a club doesn't immediately need to reduce losses to 15m if they can make greater cost reductions in the following 2 yrs
I am, yes. I am also taking the 3 year rule into account.

2018-19 would have been the final year of Parachute Payments. Aston Villa in FFP terms deducting as per the clubs own numbers lost £31-32m after allowances in 2017-18 and 2018-19.

The latter was £10-11m despite and including the £36.6m profit on Villa Park, the income of £14.4m on HS2 compensation and a certain amount in Player sales as well as the final year or Parachute Payments. I estimate that the shift from Parachute Payments to Solidarity Payments would have set Aston Villa back £5-10m and the loss also included £10.598m in Profit on Disposal of players. Oh and £2.8m rent on Villa Park.

Otoh Bruce and Wyness payoff and Smith compensation to Brentford wouldn't be repeated.
 
I am, yes. I am also taking the 3 year rule into account.

2018-19 would have been the final year of Parachute Payments. Aston Villa in FFP terms deducting as per the clubs own numbers lost £31-32m after allowances in 2017-18 and 2018-19.

The latter was £10-11m despite and including the £36.6m profit on Villa Park, the income of £14.4m on HS2 compensation and a certain amount in Player sales as well as the final year or Parachute Payments. I estimate that the shift from Parachute Payments to Solidarity Payments would have set Aston Villa back £5-10m and the loss also included £10.598m in Profit on Disposal of players. Oh and £2.8m rent on Villa Park.

Otoh Bruce and Wyness payoff and Smith compensation to Brentford wouldn't be repeated.
5m/10m is small enough to do a fire sale of players before the accounting window shuts to be able to close and I think about 10 players had their contracts expire and our maximum allocation of very expensive loan players return to their respective clubs.. It also helps that our CEO was on the committee that wrote FFP so I am guessing he understands how to best interpret it to the benefit of the club.
Anyway, this is an EFC forum, I don't want to divert from the debate on here.
 
5m/10m is small enough to do a fire sale of players before the accounting window shuts to be able to close and I think about 10 players had their contracts expire and our maximum allocation of very expensive loan players return to their respective clubs.. It also helps that our CEO was on the committee that wrote FFP so I am guessing he understands how to best interpret it to the benefit of the club.
Anyway, this is an EFC forum, I don't want to divert from the debate on here.
Fair enough but fine to 2019, but big qs to 2020. Yes let's not detract I'll drop it now.
 

FA to investigate Chelsea over their losses
My gut feeling is that to 2022 they should be fine but face a race against time to the end of June 2023 to sell players or otherwise become compliant again. Remember the Covid years are merged and averaged which helps..everyone.
Any chance we could appeal whatever the punishment is to the CAS?
Others have already covered this hut no. Think it has to be heard in English and Welsh arbitration system.
 
5m/10m is small enough to do a fire sale of players before the accounting window shuts to be able to close and I think about 10 players had their contracts expire and our maximum allocation of very expensive loan players return to their respective clubs.. It also helps that our CEO was on the committee that wrote FFP so I am guessing he understands how to best interpret it to the benefit of the club.
Anyway, this is an EFC forum, I don't want to divert from the debate on here.
Your ceo must hate villa then if he was part of a committee that wrote FFP as it is clearly only beneficial to the top 6 sides and no one else

It’s worse than VAR, the handball rule and the rule where if an opposition player intentionally plays the ball and it goes to a player who is offside then they are not offside rules combined
 
Your ceo must hate villa then if he was part of a committee that wrote FFP as it is clearly only beneficial to the top 6 sides and no one else

It’s worse than VAR, the handball rule and the rule where if an opposition player intentionally plays the ball and it goes to a player who is offside then they are not offside rules combined
Villa voted against the implementation of FFP. Everton voted for the implementation of FFP. Why do u think Everton voted to implement FFP?

As regards our CEO hating Villa, I doubt he cares too much beyond the fact it is now his job (it wasn't when he was part of the writing of the FFP rules). He is employed to run the club, not to fall in love with the club. He makes decisions that are good for the club because that results in more money for him through bonuses and an increase in share value, he was given 3% of the club as part of the deal for him to take the job as CEO. I couldn't care less what team our CEO supports as long as he does a good job as CEO while he is at Villa.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Back
Top