Popular Post WallisFrizz Posted September 4 Popular Post Share Posted September 4 4 minutes ago, The_Steve said: The interview all but confirms that Spurs did try to low ball us with £20m and Lo Celso for JJ knowing our PSR issues at the time. Another reason to hate them. I will enjoy it very much when he scores against them. 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alakagom Posted September 4 Share Posted September 4 10 minutes ago, The_Steve said: The interview all but confirms that Spurs did try to low ball us with £20m and Lo Celso for JJ knowing our PSR issues at the time. Another reason to hate them. But there's tons of people here saying selling Louiz was not a PSR decision but he wanted to leave 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jareth Posted September 4 Share Posted September 4 2 minutes ago, Alakagom said: But there's tons of people here saying selling Louiz was not a PSR decision but he wanted to leave Both could be true on Doug, someone had to go and Unai has clearly chosen Doug to go, which could be for a few reasons including him having been here a while and not against a move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted September 4 Share Posted September 4 interesting that they felt Doug was the expendable one , but i guess he was probably the one whose contract was also likely to run out first ? The wages thing could be a problem going forward , presumably Mings and Buendia (and Kamara though his injury doesn't seem to have been as bad ?) are high earners and both might not get back to their past peaks after injury .. but equally offloading them will be difficult as other clubs won't want to take on their wages , unless both like desert heat and watching public executions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post thabucks Posted September 4 Popular Post Share Posted September 4 Monchi is right that we should never be afraid to sell players - something I think in the past the club and fans have been hesitant on. We need to buy low and sell high on our terms and timetable . We have the best set up we’ve ever had post premier league and feel a hell of a lot calmer navigating these restrictions with them at the helm. You may like Heck and his actions but if he raises revenues to the point we don’t have to sacrifice a player every summer to satisfy the rules then he’s doing his job. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichW Posted September 4 Share Posted September 4 Refreshing that the club have been so open about the transfer window and good to read various articles this morning. Was pretty much rumoured from January onwards there would need to be a big sale in the summer for PSR (despite people on here/twitter refusing to believe it was the case) and I think the club have done well with the cards they've been dealt with. Hopefully won't be in the same position next summer but I guess we will not know that until January onwards next year when the accounts start coming out. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted September 4 Share Posted September 4 Everything comes down to commercial revenue. It's the area we are so far behind on compared to the big 6. We can make sporting income by being competitive with them. We can compete with an edge in coaching, stability and youth development. We just can't compete in commercial and match day revenue. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Steve Posted September 4 Share Posted September 4 56 minutes ago, Alakagom said: But there's tons of people here saying selling Louiz was not a PSR decision but he wanted to leave You do realise multiple things can be true at the same time? Maybe his desire to leave was a factor in why Unai was more willing to sell him than JJ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post The_Steve Posted September 4 Popular Post Share Posted September 4 14 minutes ago, RichW said: Refreshing that the club have been so open about the transfer window and good to read various articles this morning. Was pretty much rumoured from January onwards there would need to be a big sale in the summer for PSR (despite people on here/twitter refusing to believe it was the case) and I think the club have done well with the cards they've been dealt with. Hopefully won't be in the same position next summer but I guess we will not know that until January onwards next year when the accounts start coming out. I think communication has been an issue for many years, but I fully welcome their honesty on the topic because it exposes the deep faults in the current rules and helps us as fans understand why some decisions are made. 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted September 4 Moderator Share Posted September 4 38 minutes ago, CVByrne said: We just can't compete in commercial and match day revenue. I think in matchday terms we're definitely now in contention - it's difficult because what each club includes in its "matchday" figure is different and it's not entirely clear what we do and don't include in ours - but given our price increases, increased hospitality and GA+ and so on, I'd imagine that Villa Park generates well in excess of £2m per game now - which whilst it doesn't compare to Spurs does at least put us in the same ballpark as some of our competitors - matchday revenues aren't that big a chunk of the total so we're most likely within £10m of Chelsea and Liverpool on that measure and possibly closer still. It's the commercial income that's the big differentiator (and now the largest source of income for clubs, ahead of TV revenue). In 2022-23, Liverpool made £148m in sponsorship revenues, we made £23m (still more than our matchday revenues) and whilst the deals with Betano, Adidas et al will help push us forward, the gap in commercial income is massive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarryOnVilla Posted September 4 Share Posted September 4 what’s our solution to both PSR and SCR? More commercial investment. To get that, we need to win more. To do that we need better players. To get them, we need more money. To get that we need more commercial investment. It’s a luxury loop that only the already established big clubs can keep going. yet if you’re not already established, the rules prevent you entering the loop. The rules are fine to protect clubs from going bust, but they also hinder upward mobility. There needs to be an allowance for smaller clubs to be able to invest.. because there’s rules are only protecting the already established. however, our guys manoeuvred around the rules to get us top 4 and sell (what I think) the right players to make us comply has been a master stroke. We are now a different kind of Villa this season, but I don’t feel any weaker. If we can punch above our weight for a few more seasons than we also be in the luxury loop. More so if Chris Heck can meet his claims of earning the club £400m a year. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avfc96 Posted September 4 Share Posted September 4 (edited) 14 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said: I think in matchday terms we're definitely now in contention - it's difficult because what each club includes in its "matchday" figure is different and it's not entirely clear what we do and don't include in ours - but given our price increases, increased hospitality and GA+ and so on, I'd imagine that Villa Park generates well in excess of £2m per game now - which whilst it doesn't compare to Spurs does at least put us in the same ballpark as some of our competitors - matchday revenues aren't that big a chunk of the total so we're most likely within £10m of Chelsea and Liverpool on that measure and possibly closer still. It's the commercial income that's the big differentiator (and now the largest source of income for clubs, ahead of TV revenue). In 2022-23, Liverpool made £148m in sponsorship revenues, we made £23m (still more than our matchday revenues) and whilst the deals with Betano, Adidas et al will help push us forward, the gap in commercial income is massive. We're not close to Liverpool. Far from it and we'll be even further away this season. New Anfield Road at Anfield is fully operational this season which means their capacity is now upwards of 60,000+ and they will charge a hell of a lot more for their corporate /hospitality offerings. Just for reference from the latest accounts from both us and Liverpool (22/23) Villa: £19M Liverpool: £80M Edited September 4 by Avfc96 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted September 4 Moderator Share Posted September 4 19 minutes ago, Avfc96 said: We're not close to Liverpool. Far from it and we'll be even further away this season. New Anfield Road at Anfield is fully operational this season which means their capacity is now upwards of 60,000+ and they will charge a hell of a lot more for their corporate /hospitality offerings Fair enough, Liverpool made £80m in matchday revenue in their last listed accounts - dependent on what we record, we'll make around £50m this season - so we'll be £30m behind them. Hospitality-wise, our pricing is very similar. Their commercial revenues were at £272m, ours were £41m - it's not matchday income that makes the difference between where clubs are, it's sponsorship income - that's why we're not doing the North Stand, it's not the bit that matters. The difference between clubs isn't about who has the most seats, it's about who can get Nivea and Expedia and who can find a bank willing to pay £50m a year to be on the front of shirts, it's about getting a £10m a year sponsor for your training ground. That should be our focus - finding another £100m of sponsorship money - the rest sorts itself out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Steve Posted September 4 Share Posted September 4 NSWE should create an energy drink to sponsor us as the official energy at this rate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted September 4 Share Posted September 4 21 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said: I think in matchday terms we're definitely now in contention - it's difficult because what each club includes in its "matchday" figure is different and it's not entirely clear what we do and don't include in ours - but given our price increases, increased hospitality and GA+ and so on, I'd imagine that Villa Park generates well in excess of £2m per game now - which whilst it doesn't compare to Spurs does at least put us in the same ballpark as some of our competitors - matchday revenues aren't that big a chunk of the total so we're most likely within £10m of Chelsea and Liverpool on that measure and possibly closer still. It's the commercial income that's the big differentiator (and now the largest source of income for clubs, ahead of TV revenue). In 2022-23, Liverpool made £148m in sponsorship revenues, we made £23m (still more than our matchday revenues) and whilst the deals with Betano, Adidas et al will help push us forward, the gap in commercial income is massive. On Match day. I still think our ticket prices are behind that of say West Ham etc.. while Villa Park capacity also lags all bar say Chelsea by a material size. I think facilities to get people to the ground earlier and keep them longer is still lagging. So we've improved but still some ground to make up there. The commercial income gap is not bridgeable. There is a size of a commercial pie for the sport. We are trying to get a share of it but why would you leave Liverpool to go to Villa as a commercial partner? This is the problem we face which is insurmountable unfortunately. It's a time to market issue and dominant position problem. If we can grow to be a competitive tier below the big six and importantly try to be competitive with Juventus and Atletico we can still be competitive on the pitch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted September 4 Moderator Share Posted September 4 In terms of incomes for Premier League clubs though, matchday revenues are like a side hustle - they're 20% - it matters, but it's not going to make the big difference. If you closed Anfield for the season, Liverpool would still make almost double the money we do. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rightdm00 Posted September 4 Share Posted September 4 2 hours ago, Alakagom said: But there's tons of people here saying selling Louiz was not a PSR decision but he wanted to leave In the article they said they still would have sold Douglas but for money since they wouldn't be rushed by PSR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Townsend Posted September 4 Share Posted September 4 6 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said: In terms of incomes for Premier League clubs though, matchday revenues are like a side hustle - they're 20% - it matters, but it's not going to make the big difference. If you closed Anfield for the season, Liverpool would still make almost double the money we do. Why do people argue, then, that closing our smallest stand can't be done for redevelopment because we need bums on those 6,000 seats? I have never bought that whereas I do buy into the idea that a bigger stand with better offerings would get me to a few games a season and I would spend my whole day there eating and drinking pre and post match. So in the club's perspevtive there woild be a small hit for a bigger gain long term Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinker Posted September 4 VT Supporter Share Posted September 4 Our kit launch got big social media figures, bigger than any premier league team, it was clever using Ozzie. We need to win something or get very close, We are only just beginning to grow commercially but you can already see the start of it happening. Champions league group stage should give us around £50m, looking at Newcastle figures. Ollies profile is helpful as well and if we can get Ramsey and Rogers firing on all cylinders plenty of impressionable youngsters will be calling their names out as they take a shot. It's not impossible to build a brand, Spurs have done it winning nothing and we can close that gap with a better manager and a more successful team, which we are atm. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted September 4 Share Posted September 4 5 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said: In terms of incomes for Premier League clubs though, matchday revenues are like a side hustle - they're 20% - it matters, but it's not going to make the big difference. If you closed Anfield for the season, Liverpool would still make almost double the money we do. Yes but when considered as a % of non sporting income it's more material for the non big six like us and West Ham. However we are close to the limit of what we can achieve without demolition of a stand and rebuilding which is not worth doing due to the loss of revenue to generate small additional revenue. Commercial is our only real hope and we will never bridge the gap there only try close it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts