Jump to content
Just visiting?

Peter Griffin

Established Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5,400

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Peter Griffin

  1. Peter Griffin
    I agree, wages, sign on etc are important but I don't believe they add up to the same amount as a transfer fee, particularly for the 'free transfers' we would make. Maybe if we got a Messi or a Ronaldo type player the costs may be more but in general I think it is safe to say that a free transfer will cost us less than a transfer that has a fee. For example, I expect 3 years of Danny Ings is a lot more expensive than 3 years of Kamara
  2. Peter Griffin
    On VT a lot of people make the assumption that the club doesn't employ any competent people in any role. Gerrard, transfer team, Purslow, coaches etc all get torn apart by some on here
  3. Peter Griffin
    Amortisation impacts taxable income. It can be considered fraudulent not to amoritise as this can impact tax liability. In accounting amortisation is based around the principle of consumption i.e. you pay for something when you use it. This is why we amoritise footballers over the term of their contracts, as we consume their value over the term of their contract. We can't account for the full cost of the player in year 1 of a 4 year contract as we have only consumed 25% of the value of the player. If we were to account for the full cost that would increase our costs for year 1, therefore reducing our profits. As we only pay tax on profits that would decrease the amount of tax we would pay and HMRC don't like that idea. Obviously football is a different business and unlike a company delivery van which is amortised over a 4 year period and is effectively worth nothing at the end of the 4 years a footballer can increase in value which does complicate things. But the above explanation is the guiding principal without getting into detailed accounting practices.
  4. Peter Griffin
    Net spend has a very significant impact on FFP. Spend 200m on players and that is 200m cost amortised as per contracts. If we spend 200m on players and sell 120m i.e 80m net spend then we have a cost that year of circa 50m (assuming 4 year amortisation) and revenues of 120m. Of the 120m, lets say 50% is amortisation amounts brought forward which would leave a 60m profit for that accounting year on player sales. The difference between the two transactions is one shows a 50m loss while the other shows a 10m profit, yet both of them have us spending 200m on players. Net spend is very important.
  5. Peter Griffin
    I agree they are both just costs, but as i said, it is an indication of how effective our transfer team is and how our coaching is. The lower the cost allocated to fees the better we are at transfers (providing that we are not suffering on the pitch)
  6. Peter Griffin
    Its funny how we discuss transfers for varying different positions and what options we have and it usually ends up with the determination that we don't need anyone else. Maybe we should listen to our own logic
  7. Peter Griffin
    I don't think it is total nonsense but I do fully understand the point u are making. Transfers like Kamara make the 'net spend' meaningless and even more so as we compete towards the top of the food chain with regard to wages. Net spend is a good indication as to how effective our transfer team is and how effective our coaching and development it.
  8. Peter Griffin
    Yeah, I would tend to agree that he is more of a striker than a winger, I just didn't want to delve into a childish debate with Zatman where is constantly moves the goal posts and tries to deflect as he just wants to troll what I say. He does his best to find reasons to find me wrong and bad mouth Gerrard and Purslow and it just gets tiresome and ruins the forum. Re Cornet, as I said, lots of exciting things about him but I think there are too many dodgy Traore like moments too. I don't see him as a player for the top half of the PL, I think he is much better suited lower down. But who know, Moyes or Howe could prove me wrong and I may think why the f*** did we not buy him for 17m when he was available.
  9. Peter Griffin
    He has looked exciting at times, but I just can't get the picture out of my head of the sitters he missed in the run in last season. He should have kept Burnley in the PL and he was dire
  10. Peter Griffin
    I know, I didn't say he is a striker, but we would expect goals from a winger and his finishing is not good enough imo, not that we even want a winger. The point of the comment is about the quality of his finishing
  11. Peter Griffin
    Our spend each year is not a target, its a budget i.e. the maximum allocated for spend on players. If we recruit for the positions we have agreed to recruit for and our net spend is lower than the budget that does not mean we should go an spend more. We need the club to be sustainable and profitable.
  12. Peter Griffin
    Hammers agree 33.5m for Onana, they are investing and will be difficult to overtake next season. I think the highest we can realistically aim for is 8th. But hopefully we will punch above our weight and they will slip up or maybe buy Cornet and put him in the starting 11
  13. Peter Griffin
    I don't think he would improve out team, his finishing can be worse than Ollie's. I am happy to steer clear of him
  14. Peter Griffin
    Not to mention the fact that Archer could potentially be that player, it would be really daft to stop his progress now and not give the lad a chance as every single aspect of his development to date suggests he will be a really good striker
  15. Peter Griffin
    Most of Chuk's reputation is from youth international football and that is what justified the high price. When we bought Doug, he was on the back winning the 2019 Toulon Tournament with Brazil and he was voted player of the tournament. We also purchased him from City. Yes, he is worth a few quid now mega money.
  16. Peter Griffin
    TBH, I would prefer Saints or Brighton to a newly promoted team on their turf. It will have a bit of a cup game atmosphere which I think helps the underdog more
  17. Peter Griffin
    We have brought in Carlos, Kamara and Digne as clear improvements in their respective positions. I don't think any of us would have suggested Carlos or Digne and if we suggested Kamara we would have been accused of not being realistic as he will go to a Champions League club or Man Utd, actually we would probably be accused of that for all three players. I find this 'who could we get is better' question such BS and only used by people that want to disagree with things or make noise on the forum
  18. Peter Griffin
    I don't know the particulars of the contract but I have read 15m upfront and 5 on addons. As for gushing over Purslow, I am not doing that. I am using the example to highlight the stupidity in trying to run down Purslow for mismanagement.
  19. Peter Griffin
    Anyway, I am off to bed, good night everyone. Can't wait for Saturday, hopefully our manager and team will do us proud and put Villa on top of the Premier League (if only on alphabetical order) for Saturday evening and with a bit of luck an early appearance with lots of praise on MOTD
  20. Peter Griffin
    Not while Gerrard and Purslow are at the club. Change the names and it would be brilliant business
  21. Peter Griffin
    I know why he was sold for 51m and I understand it was a release clause. Do u think by chance the BD CEO approved the insertion of a release clause in Haaland's contract? Yes CEOs may have to agree to a release clause to secure a contract, what is Purslow's history of inserting release clauses in contracts like? Oh yeah, we got 100m for Jack
  22. Peter Griffin
    They have a big funnel, it reduces risk, sensible business strategy. That doesn't mean that they don't have a very healthy flow of youth coming through that have hugely successful careers and either play for Chelsea or make Chelsea a lot of money
  23. Peter Griffin
    Isn't Haaland the highest rated player in world football and BD only got 51m for him? Not great business from BD. Villa could have lost Chuk for a few hundred grand next summer and Purslow managed to get 20m. That looks like good management of our assets to me
  24. Peter Griffin
    Bournemouth and Fulham at Villa Park. Both easier games to Bournemouth away and Everton at home.
  25. Peter Griffin
    As it stands today I would have us ahead of Leicester. They are on the verge of losing Fofana and Schmichael and Maddison and Tielmans future doesn't look secure
×
×
  • Create New...

exclamation-mark-man-user-icon-with-png-and-vector-format-227727.png

Ad Blocker Detected

This site is paid for by ad revenue, please disable your ad blocking software for the site.

Disabled
Not Now

Â