Aston Villa post losses of £122m for 22/23 season

Soutra said:
Some owners could say and do that. The problem is that, for every billionaire owner, there are a hundred chancers who will buy a club and fund it from borrowing. If it works - great - but if it doesn't then the owner walks away and the club goes bust.

You can't have one rule for people who are obviously bona fide and another for people who may not be.

A wage cap is the way to control out of control football spending.
Click to expand...
Or rather a restriction on the total wage spend, as opposed to restricting what a single player can earn?
 
Ffp is a joke tbh it has not taken into account inflation I watched recently it should be atleast £260million if adjusted for rises in football
 
J_Boro_Clock said:
Ffp is a joke tbh it has not taken into account inflation I watched recently it should be atleast £260million if adjusted for rises in football
Click to expand...

Yes but would be nowhere near that if it was inflation of the ordinary man. What I mean by that is football has its own rate of inflation that is way above any other industry.

If you allow it to move at pace of “Football inflation” then it will become meaningless.

Can’t remember the exact numbers but when premier league began average player wages where £3k or there abouts, it is now like £80k or something
 
Yeah just let the billionaires keep spending whatever they want.
The trouble is an element of increased transfer fees and wages then follow suit for all Clubs.
Football is already screwed - Boro just lost £6m in a year despite recovering £22m in transfer fees.
Just think....a mid-table Champo Club losing £28M in just 12 months o_O
Absolutely stupid situation.
Just needs the legislators to grow some balls.
Gibbo did his best taking Derby to task but it looks like the situation will get worse before it gets better :(
 
J_Boro_Clock said:
Ffp is a joke tbh it has not taken into account inflation I watched recently it should be atleast £260million if adjusted for rises in football
Click to expand...
You’re right, it should be higher based on real world inflation - I think one of the reasons it came in though was to protect the clubs themselves from prices doubling every summer.

£130m over 3 years does seem low considering the broadcast deals. Will be interesting to see what the average PL fee ends up at after the summer because I think there might be a rebalancing. Used to be the bog standard transfer would be about £7.5m, then that shot up to £15m-£20m, then very quickly became £30m-£40m.

Transfer fees are dictated by what people can and are prepared to pay, so if there’s a collective reality check and clubs can only afford £15m a pop for an average PL talent, I don’t think that’s too much of a bad thing, even though FFP is flawed.
 
Scrap the loan system.
Scrap buy back clauses
Scrap sell on fees
Scrap multi year transfer instalments.
Let owners spend as much as they want as long as they are not levying loans against the club or banks to do so
 
[QUOTE="jonny_greenings_sock, post: 1385670, member: 1436"

£130m over 3 years does seem low considering the broadcast deals.

[/QUOTE]

You say that but it’s still an average of over £40m a season loss on what is a turnover of £120m for the bottom end premiership teams. That’s a big percentage, and also year on year. That could be as much as £400m in a decade, just to hang in there and try to compete. What other business produces those losses.

I would argue it’s to high and should be breakeven. Problem is can’t be done in isolation needs a global fix
 
Boro4life said:
I don't see the point in FFP as it just limits clubs ability to break the footballing hierarchy. I mean their owners are worth 6 billion why does it matter they should be able to spend and lose even more to catch up to City
Click to expand...

See your point, but at moment we have top 5 or 6 in the Prem who the rest can’t catch up with, if these all have billionaire owners losing £100’s of million a year to compete with themselves and rest of league whipping boys, the game is dull and boring with any jeopardy taken out. Nobody has a chance of doing what Newcastle did last year or what lester did and we end up with the Scottish model but with a few more who will share the trophy’s.
 
Soutra said:
A wage cap is the way to control out of control football spending.
Click to expand...

I think good in principle but not sure how it would work. Can’t restrict pay due to law, so would have to be a soft cap, prob based on turnover , therefore the top earners would far out spend everyone out of top 6. How do you bridge gap when you can spend £80m on wages and city can spend £380m
 
You would have to adopt a system similar to American sports, but the way their finances work and the way ours do would make this unworkable - and the owners would never go for it in a million years.

For arguement the cap is set at £50m. What would stop the likes of Boro sh*t or busting it increasing their wage expenditure from £20m ish to £50m......then ending up in financial trouble?

And even if it were a % of revenue, the top clubs would just blow everyone out of the water with their off pitch revenue streams.

Football financially is fooked, but I haven't a clue what the answer is 🤷🏻‍♂️🤷🏻‍♂️
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top