Summer Transfer Window (2024/25)

[CarryOnVilla]

Just now, paul514 said:

July 8th the accounts finish July 7th

Even better, more time to find someone to pay £200m for Matty Cash 

[allani]

41 minutes ago, HalfTimePost said:

You're guesstimating based off of 2 years of accounts, the last of which we lost £105m in... since which:

• we've sold a couple of youth players,
• some which we need to buy back,
• Bought Diaby for £50m, and Pau for £30m
• Cut a kit deal early, not knowing the implications and whether Adidas will get finances in this season or next.
• Loan deals both in and out we have no idea on the wage splits of.
• We already know we increased our wage bill by qualifying for Europe.

The idea you've looked at the accounts and made an estimate based off it is pretty ludicrous, your estimates are just as likely to be wildly wrong as Journalists are.

The buy back will almost certainly apply to next year's accounts not this year.  Plus they will be offset across however many years the new contract(s) apply for.  So if we sold for say £12m last season and the buy back is £8m with a 3 year contract - then we will have booked over £10m profit last season and maybe £2.67m loss next season.

Diaby was a lot less than £50m and also included plenty of add-in / bonus payment so is likely to show up as closer to £7m loss in this year's accounts.  Similarly Pau is probably also around £5m loss.  So actually the selling of Archer and Philogene last season probably pretty much covered the booked loss for the transfers of Diaby, Pau and Rogers.  Which is nuts.

There's considerably less "loss" in the numbers you mention above.  Plus we had several extra home matches due to the Conference League, extra prize money from Europe, extra TV money from Europe and extra prize money from the PL finish.  Most of the press speculation about our PSR compliance fails to take any of this into consideration (as the projections mainly date from December / January).

I think it is highly unlikely that we are anywhere near the £50-60m "short" that some papers reported over the weekend.  I mean you are right that it is all guesswork but I think that @paul514's guesstimates are significantly more likely to be accurate on the basis that (a) he's backed up his thoughts with line items that appear to make sense and in a few cases appear to be pretty conservative / cautious, (b) as I have said we know for a fact that the "press" estimates explicitly ignored known revenue improvements over last year and (c) Paul isn't trying to sell papers or "hits" on social media and / or trying to make fans of Chelsea, Spurs and Man Utd feel better about being beaten by a team who must have "cheated" by spending more than they can afford.

Edited June 10 by allani

[Demitri_C]

40 minutes ago, duke313 said:

Mateja Kežman came from the dutch league and he is one of PL's worst ever strikers.
Luis Suarez came from the dutch league and is one of the PL's best ever strikers.
Jozy Altidore came from the dutch league and he is one of PL's worst ever strikers.
 

Bit of a mixed bag from that league, just because one player was great doesn't mean another will be, they've mostly been flops bar a few exceptions.

Yeah absolutely but thats with most leagues tbh but i get your point

1 hour ago, Philosopher said:

But he had qualities such as pace, he was 6'2 and surprisingly strong. He was also a nasty bugger, dirty, and concealed his aggressive streak. Now Holland is similar to Belgium in quality. He was also a regular starter for the Netherlands at a time when Dutch football was at a higher standing, and the prem was the clear top league in the world. Previously it was similar in standing to the French league.

On Brobby, he is only 21, strong, quick and aggressive, the qualities a prem striker thrive with.  Against us we marshalled him well, but he gave our defenders a battle. I can see the potential.

Pav would get eaten up, his confidence destroyed and he'd never be the same player again, just like Sammata! Duran would murder that league. 

Suarez was all action, everywhere, constant menace, running at, in behind, dropping off, pressing like a demon. Plus loads of goals. Was also very impressive in European games against strong opposition. The eye test was a clear pass. 

When I see Pav is see a guy not aggressive enough, not strong enough, not quick enough to handle this league. I'm not saying he isn't a good player but he isn't cut out for the Premier league.

I dont think it would be like this at all tbh. I think pavlidis who is also quite quick can cause some major issues for defenders as he is a pain in the arse to play against.

I rate him highly 

[paul514]

55 minutes ago, CarryOnVilla said:

Even better, more time to find someone to pay £200m for Matty Cash 

He is prime to be sold his book value is about 2.5 million if memory serves me right 

[paul514]

35 minutes ago, allani said:

The buy back will almost certainly apply to next year's accounts not this year.  Plus they will be offset across however many years the new contract(s) apply for.  So if we sold for say £12m last season and the buy back is £8m with a 3 year contract - then we will have booked over £10m profit last season and maybe £2.67m loss next season.

Diaby was a lot less than £50m and also included plenty of add-in / bonus payment so is likely to show up as closer to £7m loss in this year's accounts.  Similarly Pau is probably also around £5m loss.  So actually the selling of Archer and Philogene last season probably pretty much covered the booked loss for the transfers of Diaby, Pau and Rogers.  Which is nuts.

There's considerably less "loss" in the numbers you mention above.  Plus we had several extra home matches due to the Conference League, extra prize money from Europe, extra TV money from Europe and extra prize money from the PL finish.  Most of the press speculation about our PSR compliance fails to take any of this into consideration (as the projections mainly date from December / January).

I think it is highly unlikely that we are anywhere near the £50-60m "short" that some papers reported over the weekend.  I mean you are right that it is all guesswork but I think that @paul514's guesstimates are significantly more likely to be accurate on the basis that (a) he's backed up his thoughts with line items that appear to make sense and in a few cases appear to be pretty conservative / cautious, (b) as I have said we know for a fact that the "press" estimates explicitly ignored known revenue improvements over last year and (c) Paul isn't trying to sell papers or "hits" on social media and / or trying to make fans of Chelsea, Spurs and Man Utd feel better about being beaten by a team who must have "cheated" by spending more than they can afford.

Basically, yea.

Then you have belief that….

The club wouldn't budget for those extra revenues this season.

We have smart people running the business.

That they wouldn’t have added to the burden in January knowing they had to make a big sale before July 7th (a date these media reports can’t even get right).

We also have the option of selling a physical asset to our parent company V Sports such as the training ground.

Then there is the numerous behind the scenes work arounds

 

[paul514]

33 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

Yeah absolutely but thats with most leagues tbh but i get your point

I dont think it would be like this at all tbh. I think pavlidis who is also quite quick can cause some major issues for defenders as he is a pain in the arse to play against.

I rate him highly 

You can buy Jonathan David on a 5 year deal for 7m per season

[paul514]

1 hour ago, CarryOnVilla said:

Even better, more time to find someone to pay £200m for Matty Cash 

I know you were joking obviously.

There is a world where two clubs want a player off each other and a deal is done where both clubs massively overpay for each others player to make a large FFP profit on the players book value and accept a higher amortisation cost of the player they wanted.

Barca and Juve did this a few years back.

[Philosopher]

38 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

Yeah absolutely but thats with most leagues tbh but i get your point

I dont think it would be like this at all tbh. I think pavlidis who is also quite quick can cause some major issues for defenders as he is a pain in the arse to play against.

I rate him highly 

I think he'd score goals in most leagues, but he doesn't seem to have the qualities needed for a striker to succeed in the Premier League.

In the Premier league a goalscorer need at one of pace or power, anticipation and movement to be in the right place at the right time. They must be able to finish very instinctively without need to think about the finish, but also the composure for finishing clinically in moments when there is plenty of time to think. They also need to bravery and aggression to not be intimidated by the intensity and physicality. 

The player I'd compare him to stylistically is Morata (Pav isn't as good though). Good movement and sufficient pace in Spain, but just couldn't handle the intensity, pace, and physicality.

Give me one foreign striker that is neither genuinely pacy or strong that has succeed in the Premier league in the last 14 years (that is a proper no 9, not a 10) I can't think of one! 

 

[CarryOnVilla]

17 minutes ago, paul514 said:

I know you were joking obviously.

There is a world where two clubs want a player off each other and a deal is done where both clubs massively overpay for each others player to make a large FFP profit on the players book value and accept a higher amortisation cost of the player they wanted.

Barca and Juve did this a few years back.

I was thinking we could have done the same with Chelsea. if PSR is an issue for both

We buy Gallagher and they buy Luiz.

inflate the prices a touch and solve PSR without losing out. Both teams get a quality player each 

Edited June 10 by CarryOnVilla

[The_Steve]

2 hours ago, duke313 said:

Mateja Kežman came from the dutch league and he is one of PL's worst ever strikers.
Luis Suarez came from the dutch league and is one of the PL's best ever strikers.
Jozy Altidore came from the dutch league and he is one of PL's worst ever strikers.
 

Bit of a mixed bag from that league, just because one player was great doesn't mean another will be, they've mostly been flops bar a few exceptions.

We could go back further and include the likes of Overmas joining Arsenal from Ajax. Depay flopped at United but found more success in Spain. Haller was a flop for West Ham before signing for Dortmund. Kudus has looked very good for West Ham. Gakpo looks a good pick up for Liverpool. Sometimes, it’s not always about the league they come from, but the circumstances at the club they join. 

Edited June 10 by The_Steve

[MotoMkali]

7 hours ago, CarryOnVilla said:

Have we sold any physical assets? 
Where are you getting the information that tells us the 100% value of our players? 
if you looked at the accounts, did you notice the year that we had £100m+ of loses? 

Worth pointing out that didn't factor in deductibles nor does the 0.3 mil profit from the season we sold Jack. That's about 28 mil in youth team expenditures, 20 mil in infrastructure expenditures too. Plus 2 years of women's team costs which you have to imagine is like 5 mil each year surely. So a loss over those 2 seasons might be more like a 65 mil loss on psr. 

All of a sudden the situation doesn't look anywhere near as bad as the face value of 120 mil loss reported in 22/23. 

[MotoMkali]

57 minutes ago, paul514 said:

I know you were joking obviously.

There is a world where two clubs want a player off each other and a deal is done where both clubs massively overpay for each others player to make a large FFP profit on the players book value and accept a higher amortisation cost of the player they wanted.

Barca and Juve did this a few years back.

Yes and got punished by uefa

[MotoMkali]

2 hours ago, paul514 said:

Diaby didn’t cost that, but ok. 
addidas is next years accounts.

those youth players generated a large profit.

the buy back is next accounts

 cutting the kit deal is next accounts

wages of two players isn’t going to break the bank.

 

And that doesn't include any of the deductibles which we know are at least 45 mil in that period and doesn't include whatever we spent on the women's team nor what we may have spent in terms of donating to charities, arranging community events etc which could always be expensive for an organisation like ours. 

If you just accept the 119 loss at face value it does look like we are in the shit. But based on some back of the napkin math I reckon we are probably at like 80-90ish mil in losses over the rolling 3 year period. We will have to make probably a slight psr profit to break even for the end of the next period but that can be accomplished by moving on cash, Carlos, Digne, Dendoncker etc. Instead of Luiz. 

[paul514]

59 minutes ago, CarryOnVilla said:

I was thinking we could have done the same with Chelsea. if PSR is an issue for both

We buy Gallagher and they buy Luiz.

inflate the prices a touch and solve PSR without losing out. Both teams get a quality player each 

Or use Duran buy Duran for 50 instead of 30 and we will buy Gallagher for 60 instead of 40 that sort of thing 

[paul514]

20 minutes ago, MotoMkali said:

Yes and got punished by uefa

Did they? 

[MotoMkali]

1 hour ago, allani said:

The buy back will almost certainly apply to next year's accounts not this year.  Plus they will be offset across however many years the new contract(s) apply for.  So if we sold for say £12m last season and the buy back is £8m with a 3 year contract - then we will have booked over £10m profit last season and maybe £2.67m loss next season.

Diaby was a lot less than £50m and also included plenty of add-in / bonus payment so is likely to show up as closer to £7m loss in this year's accounts.  Similarly Pau is probably also around £5m loss.  So actually the selling of Archer and Philogene last season probably pretty much covered the booked loss for the transfers of Diaby, Pau and Rogers.  Which is nuts.

There's considerably less "loss" in the numbers you mention above.  Plus we had several extra home matches due to the Conference League, extra prize money from Europe, extra TV money from Europe and extra prize money from the PL finish.  Most of the press speculation about our PSR compliance fails to take any of this into consideration (as the projections mainly date from December / January).

I think it is highly unlikely that we are anywhere near the £50-60m "short" that some papers reported over the weekend.  I mean you are right that it is all guesswork but I think that @paul514's guesstimates are significantly more likely to be accurate on the basis that (a) he's backed up his thoughts with line items that appear to make sense and in a few cases appear to be pretty conservative / cautious, (b) as I have said we know for a fact that the "press" estimates explicitly ignored known revenue improvements over last year and (c) Paul isn't trying to sell papers or "hits" on social media and / or trying to make fans of Chelsea, Spurs and Man Utd feel better about being beaten by a team who must have "cheated" by spending more than they can afford.

Tbf I do think we will need to sell to buy. And we probably will need to meet around 50-60 mil in sales, but that leaves out that it could be like cash and Carlos being the 2 to take it to like 50 mil plus whatever we can get from selling Archer again. 

Cause we will need to make a slight psr profit next season to get in the green over that 3 year period. And you can help accomplish this by extending a few of our players like Digne or Buendia to take what would be a 7 mil amortisation per year down to say like 3.5 if you double the length of their remaining contracts. 

And you no longer have like Wesleys 5 mil amortisation, or Berties 3.5 which can allow us to sign a player or 2. 

Also we will have increased our revenue by about 60-80 mil from 22/23 for next year. Which will do some heavy lifting for our financials. 

[paul514]

10 minutes ago, MotoMkali said:

And that doesn't include any of the deductibles which we know are at least 45 mil in that period and doesn't include whatever we spent on the women's team nor what we may have spent in terms of donating to charities, arranging community events etc which could always be expensive for an organisation like ours. 

If you just accept the 119 loss at face value it does look like we are in the shit. But based on some back of the napkin math I reckon we are probably at like 80-90ish mil in losses over the rolling 3 year period. We will have to make probably a slight psr profit to break even for the end of the next period but that can be accomplished by moving on cash, Carlos, Digne, Dendoncker etc. Instead of Luiz. 

I had it at 90-95m but you are right on the next accounts no 100m profit from Jack next season

[MotoMkali]

2 minutes ago, paul514 said:

Did they? 

Sorry they were being investigated it seems like nothing came of it. But we've seen how uefa treats clubs like ours as essentially second class citizens I would worry they might make an issue out of it. 

[paul514]

Anyway to cheer you lot up sky just dropped this

 

[paul514]

Just now, MotoMkali said:

Sorry they were being investigated it seems like nothing came of it. But we've seen how uefa treats clubs like ours as essentially second class citizens I would worry they might make an issue out of it. 

Maybe, depends how outrageous it is