Davefevs

That was the guy I was trying to think of the other day.

I don’t understand the property stuff in fairness. But I really would like to see them relegated.

Not ‘arf. We had our fun whilst we could, but now we are a bit strapped, let’s level the playing field. I guess Mel will change his player valuation / amortisation method to fall into line at the same time too.

Nah....too soft. If deemed to be “cooking the books” and the punishment is for a retrospective season, and that season resulted in unfairly in gaining promotion, they should take the points penalty and not be able to use any of their Parachute Payments over any years they they are entitled to receive them.

Mmmmmm ?

Yes, saw the result and goal earlier She’s got some pace....seen her a few times in highlights.

Mr too for all the property stuff. Mr P had built a wealth of knowledge in this area.

I don’t think that article explains anything. Not sure what Delta gleans from that????

No idea....only ever looked at financials in the Championship.

FFS, none of us has his actual contract, but if we take Swansea’s loan, it was rumoured that a £5m loan fee, he’d just signed a £25k per week plus £25k per game (and other bonuses) contract, so Swansea had to pay him circa £50k per week because if they just paid his basic £25k, he was losing out on the opportunity to earn his bonuses. This Forum is speculating stuff from a multitude of sources. You don’t know unless you are at Villa, and neither do I. But I do know that you don’t loan a multi-million pound asset out as a favour. We’ve had enough loan business with Chelsea.

Yep, because: he was 18 at the time, having made 2 senior sub appearances he didn’t cost us a several £million loan fee he didn’t cost us £50k plus in wages per week We would love to have brought him back here last season (more so to piss you off probably), but guess what? We accepted he was beyond our budget. We would’ve liked him back when he was going to Swansea, but we accepted we couldn’tt afford it. You obviously could..... ......or took the gamble you’d be promoted before the EFL would act if (if!!!) you did go over.

You miss the debate.....again!!! Your argument was that if you had to sell a player because of FFP you shouldn’t have resort to playing youngsters, you should be able to bring in someone equally as good. If you can do that for free, then great. We don’t have FFP to worry about, because we accept that when we sell a player for £7m (Flint) we can’t then go and spend another £7m on his replacement. We go and buy Webster for £3.5m. When we sell him for £20m (so glad it was Brighton rather than you!!), we can spend £7m on Kalas. When we sell Reid for £9m, we buy Andi Weimann for £2m and Mo Eisa for £800k. You see that when your costs outweighs your income, you have to make that money up somewhere. And then we also rely on bringing Kelly (An 18 year old in) through because we sell a Joe Bryan....and sell him for £15m ahead of the end of our accounting period, and we report a profit. You see, we are forced into bringing youngsters in. Some will come through our academy like Reid, Bryan and Kelly. Others like Flint we bought for 300k as a 22 year old late developer, Brownhill for youth development compensation. We then develop them. We accept that. You see bitter that Grealish might have had to be sold. But you’re a huge club, so that’s ok. When we see your 18/19 accounts and they’ve been analysed by more (much more) experts than me in Kieran and Swiss, we’ll see what’s really happened. Might all be fine, in which case you can sit their smugly. But it does make you wonder why so many people have questioned your FFP position..

Again if you read, I gave the rationale. Why so defensive? Why so worried? And in contrast....why so confident that you are fully compliant? Do you go on a charm offensive with all these too? Thats all we are asking. When you come up with bollocks like you should be entitled to replace players like for like (and how unfair it would be to have to play “youngsters”) you sound like one of your fellow “entitled” fans.

@Delta - you have again failed to grasp all we are doing is putting forward views / opinions on a forum from stuff we’ve read, etc. Much of it from respected people like Kieran Maguire, Swiss Ramble, etc. When any club accounts come out or PL investigation is completed we’ll have our views again. Why are you so worried about what little old Bristol City fans on a forum think? Are you involved at Villa, as another club’s fan seemed suspiciously “in the know” (or at least adamant of done nothing wrong) when he / she posted on here. ???

When I post on other club’s forums I show a bit of respect.

The problem is, if you have breached for the three year period, the horse has bolted. Until you publish your accounts we don’t know. You don’t seem to get that we are speculating and therefore discussing on a forum stuff that has been put out in the media. If this thread is nonsense, why not scroll past it? We’ve had some good debate on this thread with fans of other clubs, and we’ve had some who seem to be worried by it. It’s a forum, it’s not a court.

You misunderstood me. When I say unlucky I meant that had it been Villa In exactly the same scenario, I think they’d (EFL) have bottled it. Not saying Villa have broken the rules. If you actually read what I’ve said I’ve been pretty clear that we don’t know what is really going on there. If all “ifs”.

I want fair play. FWIW I think Brum we’re unlucky. I think the EFL went after them rather than say Villa, so they could get a precedent set without too much fight. Had they (Shaun and his cronies) not taken so long to sort it, then I think Villa would’ve come under earlier scrutiny. Who knows they may have still passed FFP, we don’t know. Until we see May 31st 2019’s Account’s we won’t know. If those show failure to meet the FFP limits then you’ve got away with blue (claret and blue) murder, and the EFL failed to act on their own rules. If you pass, then that’s fair enough. Much of our info has come from a Villa guy well informed on the financials. Can’t recall his name. As for playing youngsters. Yes, why not. They are pros. We played 9 kids in 1982 to fulfil a fixture.

Yes, they are our opinions, often caveated by only knowing as much has been published. Why so salty?

So what’s the problem then? Although aren’t the PL still investigating?

This ??????

And @downendcity (in response to @delta), it’s just as cut throat in real business, where a business might try to buy another business on the cheap because it knew of profit warnings or cashflow issues, or try to do a deal on purchasing some products.

I think one thing worth considering with any action plan agreed by EFL and Brum, is that as they’d breached the 3-year limit, they are on “special measures” (my wording) and now reporting annually at £13m. In some respects, going onto a annual remediation plan, saved the double whammy of them still failing years 2,3,4, (as they moved from years 1,2,3) if that makes sense. To try to “take the piss” (again my wording) by not selling, if that indeed was the plan, is gonna incur the wrath of the EFL. They could get points and aggravation deductions if true. Its difficult being an outsider here, and I’m sure I’m showing some bias because my club are within ffp, because we don’t know exactly what is going on.

Ta....it didn’t in this case then, but good to know.