City & FFP | 2020/21 Accounts released | Revenues of £569.8m, £2.4m profit (p 2395)

Re: City & FFP (continued)

waspish said:
St Helens Blue (Exiled) said:
Villa, the biggest club in Britain's second city, are struggling to find a buyer
UEFA claim financially astute clubs will thrive under FFP laws
But without heavy investment there is no way into the top 6 for Villa


Each January, the Birmingham Post publishes its rich list. The last one contained 20 names of Midlands business folk that, by the calculations of its experts, could afford to purchase Aston Villa outright. Yet still, nobody has.
Lord Bamford, chairman of JCB, prefers collecting vintage Ferraris. Sir Peter Rigby, founder of what is now Europe’s largest independent IT company, likes to fly helicopters and listen to classical music. Steve Morgan already has his hands full with Wolverhampton Wanderers. These are the breaks.
Even so, considering the Premier League broadcasts to a global market, one would think a buyer for the biggest club in Britain’s second city would not be so hard to find.

Yet, still, the For Sale sign resides on the unkempt lawn, as it has all summer. As it has since 2010, really, considering that was the year Martin O’Neill, Villa’s manager, walked out, unable to accept the significant shift in transfer policy that was the first indication of changing times.
Until that point, the owner, Randy Lerner, had shown great ambition in trying to drag Aston Villa into the elite. O’Neill spent over £80million net, achieving three consecutive sixth-place finishes, but faced with repeating that in a final push for glory, Lerner balked and instead implemented a sell-to-buy regime. This soon became more of a selling regime, by which time O’Neill was long gone.
Lerner was looking to follow almost from that point. Not as openly as now, true, but it has been rumoured for several years that he would be interested if the right buyer at the right price came along. Everton is on the market in a similar way, with Bill Kenwright accepting the financial reality of his stewardship.

So, a quick question for Michel Platini and the members of his UEFA brains trust: if Financial Fair Play is the gift to football club owners that you would have us believe, where is the queue of local businessmen seeking to take advantage of this windfall with Aston Villa?
In a matter of months of hard selling the asking price has already dropped by a quarter, to £150m. Yet still nothing. No rich Arabs, no interest from China, tumbleweed blows across America. Most importantly, no Brummies. Not even a sniff from the names on the Birmingham Post rich list, from Pete Waterman to Sir Euan Anstruther-Gough-Calthorpe.
Towards the end of May, there was a briefly flickering light on the horizon. Tevfik Arif, a Kazakh-born property mogul and business associate of Donald Trump, was announced as a front-runner in the acquisition of Aston Villa. Bank of America Merrill Lynch, who are handling the sale, would not confirm Arif’s involvement, but did not deny it either. He was supposed to be No 1 in a list of six to eight suitors.
Arif’s interest in sports business was said to include a share of Doyen Capital, a London-based hedge fund that has stakes in professional footballers, including Radamel Falcao. It all seemed to be falling into place. And then, within a week, the following announcement.
‘Mr Tevfik Arif has today asked us to make clear that other than being an avid sports fan himself, he: has no experience of running football clubs; has never met Randy Lerner; and neither he, nor any members of his family, or anyone acting on his behalf has any interest in acquiring Aston Villa Football Club; in addition, he has no involvement in any sports related businesses. We are happy to set out Mr Arif’s position.’

Since when, nothing. No more from Arif, silence from the six or so names in that evaporating queue behind him. Lerner must be concerned. Villa are not such a rotten proposition. They have a fine ground, a European pedigree in the pre-Champions League era, a loyal following.
Prince William supports them. So does Tom Hanks. They are centrally located in England, next to a major motorway, and easily accessible, and are the first, best- supported club of a major European city. They could be very big.

What the average fan might see as irrelevant beside the identity of the manager or the make-up of the first-team squad has value to a buyer. Paul Lambert, Christian Benteke or Ron Vlaar are passing through but a future king on the firm might put your club on the global map. Glamour, history, location, the trivial happenstance of the odd famous fan — these can all be useful selling factors.

There is a French pop group called Aston Villa, just as there are English groups called St Etienne or Kaiser Chiefs. Why? It’s a cool name. That’s why Tom Hanks took an interest in it, too. If you’re an American and just getting into soccer, Aston Villa sounds as quintessentially English as the New York Yankees sound evocatively American to us.
Don’t laugh. It matters. When Roman Abramovich bought Chelsea, that iconic name and the west London location would have helped clinch the deal. They are marketable factors. It wouldn’t have concerned him greatly that Chelsea had not won the league in half a century — that was a drought he could address with investment. Now, thanks to Financial Fair Play, a new owner is close to helpless. And that is why Lerner can’t sell Aston Villa.
Owners exist for many different reasons but one of the most frequently overlooked is the human desire to have fun. Some are motivated by love, some by commerce, but the shared desire is usually still enjoyment. Kenwright looks like he is in agony watching Everton sometimes, but no doubt the victories taste very good.

Sheik Mansour spends very little time at the Etihad Stadium but it is said wherever he is in the world he never misses a Manchester City game and one imagines, at home in Abu Dhabi, when the chaps come round to watch in the air-conditioned cinema room, it’s fun. Even Mike Ashley had pleasure in mind when he bought Newcastle United. What would be the point otherwise?
And Chelsea, for Abramovich, was fun, too. He wanted to be part of the passing parade, he wanted to be entertained, to be successful, to have a good day out. And back then, he could. It was an expensive hobby but his commitment to Chelsea has never faltered.
Yet what remains for any new owner of Aston Villa? To maintain? To stay up? To exist? Where’s the fun in that? Where’s the bang for the buck?
Villa is value only if a buyer can then invest and get in the game. If all he can do is provide po-faced financial services, plodding along with neatly balanced books and a decade of mediocrity ahead, he might as well put his money into a savings account.
UEFA claim that the financially astute clubs will thrive under the new rules, but without additional owner investment, there is no longer a way forward for Villa. Any good players they produce will be poached by the privileged elite — ask Southampton — and the only frisson of excitement will be an occasional cup run, or the seasons when it all goes wrong producing the threat of relegation.

It is a miserable portfolio for a prospective owner, with none of the optimism Lerner must have felt when entering the Premier League in 2006.
Platini’s version of Financial Fair Play was introduced under pressure from the elite. ‘It’s mainly the owners that asked us to do something,’ he said. ‘Abramovich, Silvio Berlusconi at AC Milan and Massimo Moratti at Inter Milan. They do not want to fork out any more.’ Fine, then don’t fork out.

But that wasn’t what the owners demanded, really. They were tired of spending — but scared of losing ground to rivals. So they wanted to stop everyone else spending, too; and being a fool, Platini mistook this for fairness and agreed.
This is now the perfect arrangement for Abramovich, but disastrous for Lerner. Buying a football club used to be an ambition for men who sought the challenge of competition, who wished for excitement and did not really care about the cost. Now it is the preserve of the finance department, wholly bound in UEFA’s red tape.
Fred Allen, the American radio comedian, wrote an autobiography that seemed to encapsulate the plight of those trapped outside Platini’s elite: Treadmill To Oblivion, he called it.
It is hard to see how this will change either, with an exclusive group cemented so tightly in place.
How can Villa get beyond Manchester United, Manchester City, Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool and, at a stretch, Tottenham Hotspur if they can only spend what they have already generated? Where’s the thrill? How is Lerner meant to make his club saleable? What dream is he peddling, beyond the heady thrill of accountancy?
Sorry, I had to remove all the picture titles, it was doing my head in trying to read that. You also missed a chunk at the bottom.
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

St Helens Blue (Exiled) said:

TBF, Samuel has been pretty consistent on this subject.

I have a general sympathy for all the clubs that appear to have been locked out of the elite but, whilst in principle I would support measures that genuinely widen competition, I only really care what happens to City. Also, I believe that bringing about genuine financial fair play on a Europe wide scale is close to impossible. We are set to see some of the failure of the rules to level the playing field in this window, where Real Madrid are to be allowed to make the sort of purchases and strengthen their squad in a way that we would be damned for. Indeed in a way that we have been prevented from doing by the rules; not by the absence of investment money.

Makes my blood boil, which is one reason that I tend to stay away from this topic, most of the time.

Going back to Villa for a moment, I have no particular sympathy. I don't recall many of the comments that I have heard on 606 but one call stuck with me over the years. I heard it as I drove home after we had been stuffed by Villa on the opening day of '08/09. Some Villa supporter, sporting the ignorance and unwarranted sense of entitlement too many rival supporters harbour, was giving it large about how Villa supporters had higher expectations than City...Villa did finish above us that season; it was the last time that happened. Last laugh? Mr Samuel would think it is ours.
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

OB1 said:
St Helens Blue (Exiled) said:

TBF, Samuel has been pretty consistent on this subject.

I have a general sympathy for all the clubs that appear to have been locked out of the elite but, whilst in principle I would support measures that genuinely widen competition, I only really care what happens to City. Also, I believe that bringing about genuine financial fair play on a Europe wide scale is close to impossible. We are set to see some of the failure of the rules to level the playing field in this window, where Real Madrid are to be allowed to make the sort of purchases and strengthen their squad in a way that we would be damned for. Indeed in a way that we have been prevented from doing by the rules; not by the absence of investment money.

Makes my blood boil, which is one reason that I tend to stay away from this topic, most of the time.

Going back to Villa for a moment, I have no particular sympathy. I don't recall many of the comments that I have heard on 606 but one call stuck with me over the years. I heard it as I drove home after we had been stuffed by Villa on the opening day of '08/09. Some Villa supporter, sporting the ignorance and unwarranted sense of entitlement too many rival supporters harbour, was giving it large about how Villa supporters had higher expectations than City...Villa did finish above us that season; it was the last time that happened. Last laugh? Mr Samuel would think it is ours.

I lost all sympathy for the clubs that got locked out when they voted for the Prem to have it's own version as well. Turkeys voting for Christmas. Add in the fact that the majority of fans bleating on about how it will save football from big bad City. Oh how the tables have turned. We got in bitches, suck it!
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

MCFC-alan88 said:
OB1 said:
St Helens Blue (Exiled) said:

TBF, Samuel has been pretty consistent on this subject.

I have a general sympathy for all the clubs that appear to have been locked out of the elite but, whilst in principle I would support measures that genuinely widen competition, I only really care what happens to City. Also, I believe that bringing about genuine financial fair play on a Europe wide scale is close to impossible. We are set to see some of the failure of the rules to level the playing field in this window, where Real Madrid are to be allowed to make the sort of purchases and strengthen their squad in a way that we would be damned for. Indeed in a way that we have been prevented from doing by the rules; not by the absence of investment money.

Makes my blood boil, which is one reason that I tend to stay away from this topic, most of the time.

Going back to Villa for a moment, I have no particular sympathy. I don't recall many of the comments that I have heard on 606 but one call stuck with me over the years. I heard it as I drove home after we had been stuffed by Villa on the opening day of '08/09. Some Villa supporter, sporting the ignorance and unwarranted sense of entitlement too many rival supporters harbour, was giving it large about how Villa supporters had higher expectations than City...Villa did finish above us that season; it was the last time that happened. Last laugh? Mr Samuel would think it is ours.

I lost all sympathy for the clubs that got locked out when they voted for the Prem to have it's own version as well. Turkeys voting for Christmas. Add in the fact that the majority of fans bleating on about how it will save football from big bad City. Oh how the tables have turned. We got in bitches, suck it!
I stand to be corrected on this, but weren't Villa one of the few clubs that voted with us on that issue?
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

I'm no cynic said:
MCFC-alan88 said:
OB1 said:
TBF, Samuel has been pretty consistent on this subject.

I have a general sympathy for all the clubs that appear to have been locked out of the elite but, whilst in principle I would support measures that genuinely widen competition, I only really care what happens to City. Also, I believe that bringing about genuine financial fair play on a Europe wide scale is close to impossible. We are set to see some of the failure of the rules to level the playing field in this window, where Real Madrid are to be allowed to make the sort of purchases and strengthen their squad in a way that we would be damned for. Indeed in a way that we have been prevented from doing by the rules; not by the absence of investment money.

Makes my blood boil, which is one reason that I tend to stay away from this topic, most of the time.

Going back to Villa for a moment, I have no particular sympathy. I don't recall many of the comments that I have heard on 606 but one call stuck with me over the years. I heard it as I drove home after we had been stuffed by Villa on the opening day of '08/09. Some Villa supporter, sporting the ignorance and unwarranted sense of entitlement too many rival supporters harbour, was giving it large about how Villa supporters had higher expectations than City...Villa did finish above us that season; it was the last time that happened. Last laugh? Mr Samuel would think it is ours.

I lost all sympathy for the clubs that got locked out when they voted for the Prem to have it's own version as well. Turkeys voting for Christmas. Add in the fact that the majority of fans bleating on about how it will save football from big bad City. Oh how the tables have turned. We got in bitches, suck it!
I stand to be corrected on this, but weren't Villa one of the few clubs that voted with us on that issue?
From memory, yes.
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

Southampton, Swansea, Manchester City, Fulham, West Brom and Aston Villa voted against, Reading abstained. Majority two thirds put it through. Not that it matters too much, hold out for another couple of years for Dupont to get his case heard and local FFP will have to fall with EUFAs.
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

MCFC-alan88 said:
Southampton, Swansea, Manchester City, Fulham, West Brom and Aston Villa voted against, Reading abstained. Majority two thirds put it through. Not that it matters too much, hold out for another couple of years for Dupont to get his case heard and local FFP will have to fall with EUFAs.

I could understand why clubs in the bottom third voted for it, but what amazed me at the time was that teams like Everton, who espoused to be a "big club", and who might otherwise have been promising take over material themselves, should fall in line with the rags and the Arse. That overinflated opinion of themselves together with their bitterness about City, has now left them doomed to a futile existence of trophyless 6th and 7th place finishes ad infinitum. They had the opportunity to lobby Kenwright at the time, but having drunk in the propaganda about City, declined to do so. My heart doesn't exactly bleed for them now........
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

Having a bit of a debate.

Just posted this on another forum.

Nothing Earth shattering, but still a valid point.



*Then you have Arsenal. The way a club should be run*

Arsenal are part owned by Stan Kroenke, who's worth £6bill, and Alisher Usmanov, who's worth £19bill.(both Forbes) Between them that's £25bill, give or take a few dollars.

Now you'd think they would have got together and combined some of their fortune and built the Emirates themselves, on the understanding that the money was repaid to them by the club over a period of time. Let's throw in a interest free loan as well.

But no, out of the £390mill cost of the stadium, £260mill was obtined from financial institutions.

How are you funding the project?

To finance this highly complex project, Ashburton Properties, a subsidiary of Arsenal Holdings plc was formed and obtained a £260million senior loan facility from a stadium facilities banking group. This banking group comprises: the Royal Bank of Scotland PLC, Espirito Santo Investment, The Bank of Ireland, Allied Irish Banks PLC, CIT Group Structured Finance (UK) Limited and HSH Nordbank AG. Interest on the senior debt is set at a commercial fixed rate over a 14 year term.

Saying that, if the rumours are true about Kroenke and Usmanov not getting on, how on earth would they have come together to fund the stadium development?

Guessing, Arsenal could have saved in the region of £300mill-£350 in loan and interest repayments if those two had come together and funded the stadium themselves. Actually, aren't there other billionaire/millionaires on the Arsenal Board as well?

Yet Arsenal, Wenger, and Arsenal fans in general have the nerve to complain about Sheikh Mansour and his personal investment in Manchester City Football Club.
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

I would prefer we re evaluate the money we spend on administrating the compliance of the moving goal posts, and spent it on legal fees, deferring the sham until it was upheld in the courts as anti competitive.
I urge the club to think again and take on the bullies, we may miss out on what is considered the ultimate prestige of the champions league, now a tainted cartels version of a now shallow trophy, we won't be allowed to win the bloody trophy anyway for a while yet, they will see to that.
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

Re Arsenal shareholders:
From ADUG perspective it does seem an unusual way to assist the Club they invest in but perhaps they see it differently.

Maybe they are only investing for a return on their share purchases ? Part of a personal portfolio which probably includes British Gas and the odd Hedge Fund.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.