| Aston Villa approach to PSR 09:24 - Jun 20 with 3989 views | itfcjoe |
Dealing with Juventus....
Douglas Luiz goes from Villa to Juve
Sam Iling Jr and Weston McKinnie go from Juve to Villa
Dealing with Chelsea
Ian Maatsen goes from Chelsea to Villa
Jhon Duran goes from Villa to Chelsea
Dealing with Everton
Tim Iroegbunam goes from Villa to Everton
Lewis Dobbin goes from Everton to Villa
All with fake fees in their, set at levels which get teams on both sides out of FFP and PSR troubles.
It's clever, but almost a bit US Sports like with Trades etc - wonder how some of the players feel about it? i.e the deal with Everton are just 2 players not good enough for the PL being traded |  |
| |  |
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 09:34 - Jun 20 with 3844 views | BseaBlue |
This is always the issue with the rules that there are always loop holes that can be exploited.
- Man City with the over inflated stadium sponsorship
- Chelsea with the long-term contracts
- Villa with the player trades
I've probably missed a load as well but time and time again, the rules are just made a mockery of. |  | | |
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 09:49 - Jun 20 with 3680 views | _clive_baker_ |
It certainly looks a case of fiddling the system a little bit. Take the Everton deals, if both clubs are keen on that then they can effectively both overpay for those deals, they'll then both realise a 2024 benefit from the sales and defer the PSR pain downstream by way of the amortisation on their purchase, but that's a future problem. |  | | |
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 09:59 - Jun 20 with 3600 views | itfcjoe |
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 09:49 - Jun 20 by _clive_baker_ |
It certainly looks a case of fiddling the system a little bit. Take the Everton deals, if both clubs are keen on that then they can effectively both overpay for those deals, they'll then both realise a 2024 benefit from the sales and defer the PSR pain downstream by way of the amortisation on their purchase, but that's a future problem. |
Yep, they are both booked as an instant profit as youth players and get them out of this seasons hole | |
| |
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 10:01 - Jun 20 with 3560 views | nodge_blue |
Bottom line for all these clubs though is that they run a loss?
I mean if you trade sell a player for 100 mil and buy one back for 100 mil - that's still net 0 profit? |  |
| |
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 10:12 - Jun 20 with 3429 views | crouchendyachtclub |
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 10:01 - Jun 20 by nodge_blue |
Bottom line for all these clubs though is that they run a loss?
I mean if you trade sell a player for 100 mil and buy one back for 100 mil - that's still net 0 profit? |
Not as far as PSR is concerned.
You would be seen as receiving 100m (less any un amortised transfer fees) this year and the cost is split over the length of a 4 year contract so in this years books it's a 75m profit. You still have an issue in future years but you can always work out something similar down the line if you need to. |  | | |
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 10:16 - Jun 20 with 3376 views | nodge_blue |
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 10:12 - Jun 20 by crouchendyachtclub |
Not as far as PSR is concerned.
You would be seen as receiving 100m (less any un amortised transfer fees) this year and the cost is split over the length of a 4 year contract so in this years books it's a 75m profit. You still have an issue in future years but you can always work out something similar down the line if you need to. |
So it gets around some rules that stop a points deduction, which is fairly important these days.
It still doesn't affect the actual pounds in their bank account though.
I don't understand these days how clubs can be happy to be within rules, but still holding 200 million of debt. Surely not every club has an owner that is going to pay off those levels of debt?
I think the rules should change to allow owners to fund what they want. At the end of the day, if they want to spend their cash on a football club then let them get on with it. What's important as far as Im concerned is that clubs don't accrue debt that sits on the club should an owner walk away. [Post edited 20 Jun 2024 10:17]
| |
| |
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 10:20 - Jun 20 with 3304 views | _clive_baker_ |
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 09:59 - Jun 20 by itfcjoe |
Yep, they are both booked as an instant profit as youth players and get them out of this seasons hole |
It makes a mockery of the rules, and while there's governance around fair-market-value on things like sponsorship deals to protect against this, its much more difficult to enforce that on transfers. It's also a dangerous precedent to keep kicking the problem down the road, you only need to do it 3 times and your future amortisation is then 75% of the benefit per annum (assuming 4 year deals at consistent prices), unless the fees just keep getting bigger and bigger each season, which is possible.
What's stopping anyone signing a youth player from another club for £100m on a 10 year deal, and selling one the other way on the same terms. £100m benefit to this year, and -£10m for the next 10. I would quite like to see loads of this happen and then a rule to come in, that would properly screw clubs over. | | | |
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 10:24 - Jun 20 with 3230 views | Pinewoodblue |
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 10:20 - Jun 20 by _clive_baker_ |
It makes a mockery of the rules, and while there's governance around fair-market-value on things like sponsorship deals to protect against this, its much more difficult to enforce that on transfers. It's also a dangerous precedent to keep kicking the problem down the road, you only need to do it 3 times and your future amortisation is then 75% of the benefit per annum (assuming 4 year deals at consistent prices), unless the fees just keep getting bigger and bigger each season, which is possible.
What's stopping anyone signing a youth player from another club for £100m on a 10 year deal, and selling one the other way on the same terms. £100m benefit to this year, and -£10m for the next 10. I would quite like to see loads of this happen and then a rule to come in, that would properly screw clubs over. |
Premier League rules place a 5 year limit on player contracts. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 10:26 - Jun 20 with 3203 views | HighgateBlue |
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 10:16 - Jun 20 by nodge_blue |
So it gets around some rules that stop a points deduction, which is fairly important these days.
It still doesn't affect the actual pounds in their bank account though.
I don't understand these days how clubs can be happy to be within rules, but still holding 200 million of debt. Surely not every club has an owner that is going to pay off those levels of debt?
I think the rules should change to allow owners to fund what they want. At the end of the day, if they want to spend their cash on a football club then let them get on with it. What's important as far as Im concerned is that clubs don't accrue debt that sits on the club should an owner walk away. [Post edited 20 Jun 2024 10:17]
|
So what rules to you bring in to stop an owner walking away and leaving the club in debt?
If you go down the road of saying that they can do whatever they want with their money, that means that they can fund expensive transfers with expensive wages, and then just stop with the funding. Either because they get bored, or because they run out of money. If the club is sitting on £1bn of debt when the music stops (far from impossible if you scrap PSR), then the club is wound up. That would be a tragedy.
I think the PSR need tightening (and properly enforcing), and not scrapping. Player swaps at artificial values need curbing (like sponsoring your own team at an artificial value already has been), and spreading the cost of a transfer over numerous years for accounting purposes also needs looking at. Not sure whether the latter is easy to outlaw, given that they might genuinely be paying a fee over a number of years. |  | | |
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 10:31 - Jun 20 with 3121 views | _clive_baker_ |
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 10:24 - Jun 20 by Pinewoodblue |
Premier League rules place a 5 year limit on player contracts. |
I didn't know that, that's a start. Still doesn't really change the principle though, clubs could literally do this annually to manipulate the numbers and never actually face in to the issue. | | | |
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 10:34 - Jun 20 with 3089 views | BseaBlue |
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 10:31 - Jun 20 by _clive_baker_ |
I didn't know that, that's a start. Still doesn't really change the principle though, clubs could literally do this annually to manipulate the numbers and never actually face in to the issue. |
Yes. Your point remains that the issue will still present itself further down the line.
In answer to the above poster about curbing and shaping the rules, whist I don't disagree, the issue is that another loophole will just be found somewhere and exploited. That is what makes the rules pointless. | | | |
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 10:34 - Jun 20 with 3086 views | iamatractorboy |
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 10:12 - Jun 20 by crouchendyachtclub |
Not as far as PSR is concerned.
You would be seen as receiving 100m (less any un amortised transfer fees) this year and the cost is split over the length of a 4 year contract so in this years books it's a 75m profit. You still have an issue in future years but you can always work out something similar down the line if you need to. |
Is that right though? Don't you have to write off the remaining value of the contract immediately if you are terminating it IE selling the player? So if you still had £75m asset for the player you've just sold, you'd need to write that off now and you'd be no better off? | | | |
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 10:43 - Jun 20 with 2991 views | _clive_baker_ |
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 10:34 - Jun 20 by iamatractorboy |
Is that right though? Don't you have to write off the remaining value of the contract immediately if you are terminating it IE selling the player? So if you still had £75m asset for the player you've just sold, you'd need to write that off now and you'd be no better off? |
That's correct, but also why they'll be trading players with a minimal book value such as yoofs, so there's no hit on disposal initially, its purely 'profit' for PSR. They'll then just let the corresponding purchase unwind over the course of the contract.
Eg.
Y1: Sell to Everton for £50m, Buy from Everton for £50m (5 year deal). Net +£40m
Y2 - Y5: Net -£10m per year
Net position is zero, but pulls forward the upside into the current year and defers the cost to future years, thus kicking the problem down the road. Theoretically could rinse and repeat the process annually as to not ever face into the issue. | | | |
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 10:48 - Jun 20 with 2934 views | iamatractorboy |
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 10:43 - Jun 20 by _clive_baker_ |
That's correct, but also why they'll be trading players with a minimal book value such as yoofs, so there's no hit on disposal initially, its purely 'profit' for PSR. They'll then just let the corresponding purchase unwind over the course of the contract.
Eg.
Y1: Sell to Everton for £50m, Buy from Everton for £50m (5 year deal). Net +£40m
Y2 - Y5: Net -£10m per year
Net position is zero, but pulls forward the upside into the current year and defers the cost to future years, thus kicking the problem down the road. Theoretically could rinse and repeat the process annually as to not ever face into the issue. |
Yeh sorry I've just read Crouch End's post again and they did say about taking off the unamortised costs. I should learn to read properly! | | | |
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 12:52 - Jun 20 with 2513 views | itfcjoe |
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 10:31 - Jun 20 by _clive_baker_ |
I didn't know that, that's a start. Still doesn't really change the principle though, clubs could literally do this annually to manipulate the numbers and never actually face in to the issue. |
It also incentivises selling your own acaedmy products rather than playing them - it's much better for Chelsea to sell Conor Gallagher and keep one of their new signings even though Gallagher is 'proper Chels' and one of their best players.
20 years ago they'd have sold John Terry to keep Winston Bogarde | |
| |
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 13:02 - Jun 20 with 2415 views | SmithersJones |
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 10:20 - Jun 20 by _clive_baker_ |
It makes a mockery of the rules, and while there's governance around fair-market-value on things like sponsorship deals to protect against this, its much more difficult to enforce that on transfers. It's also a dangerous precedent to keep kicking the problem down the road, you only need to do it 3 times and your future amortisation is then 75% of the benefit per annum (assuming 4 year deals at consistent prices), unless the fees just keep getting bigger and bigger each season, which is possible.
What's stopping anyone signing a youth player from another club for £100m on a 10 year deal, and selling one the other way on the same terms. £100m benefit to this year, and -£10m for the next 10. I would quite like to see loads of this happen and then a rule to come in, that would properly screw clubs over. |
By the sounds of things the fee Villa are paying for Maatsen is his release clause, so they’ll claim that’s a realistic market value. Interestingly the BBC are reporting that Villa and Chelsea initially looked at a swap deal for Maatsen and Duran but then decided to treat Maatsen as a stand alone deal. But no one will be surprised if a stand alone deal happens for Duran shortly afterwards.
You’re right, it’s just kicking the problem down the road and means that if it doesn’t work out for one or other player it’s going to be very hard for them to move on. | | | |
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 13:09 - Jun 20 with 2358 views | tractorboy1978 |
| Aston Villa approach to PSR on 12:52 - Jun 20 by itfcjoe |
It also incentivises selling your own acaedmy products rather than playing them - it's much better for Chelsea to sell Conor Gallagher and keep one of their new signings even though Gallagher is 'proper Chels' and one of their best players.
20 years ago they'd have sold John Terry to keep Winston Bogarde |
It is the same with Omari really isn't it? Seems mental to me they are looking at selling him for £25m (if they can get that) whilst signing a 16 year old from Brazil for £60m.
I've heard a couple of stories re that Duran being trouble. Villa will be very happy to get rid apparently. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
