Davefevs

It will force the issue - and I reckon a next action against the EFL for not following their rules. The worm is turning.

I saw this on Twitter, refused to open it....almost puked at the thought.

I think this is a very clever move from Gibson. Start a legal action before Villa and Wednesday (and anyone else) try the same. Wonder how this will play out with the EFL. Suspect SL is right behind him.

All EFL and Prem clubs have to have an accounting year of End of May, June or July.

That was pretty much my point a few weeks ago. If Villa gave included a forecast sale of Grealish, then they should be bound by it imho. If they don’t sale (because they’ve gone up) then in effect there losses are bigger and they should be denied promotion.

That has been my point on this for a good while. I really hoped the projected accounts would make a difference to previous wrongdoings. Of course perhaps Villa included the forecast sale of Grealish? I don’t know. @Coppello - would that be allowed?

You have just answered the question the EFL guys should’ve been asking! It’s been hideously over-valued to make Derby stay within FFP.

Surely if the submission was wrong, there must be an option to adjust.

I think that is the angle Gibson and Lansdown are playing at. I see the good intentions of the projected accounts, but the implementation when both 1) club annual accounting periods finish after the end of the season and 2) the transfer window Re-opens before 1, is flawed. Villa will just sell Player X and / or Player Y for £Xm if they don’t go up. Perhaps in Gibson / Pulis / Boro’s case they showed their hand too early in cutting costs? Re Ground Sale, the EFL have already concluded Derby’s was fine....so have set the precedent....haven’t they? Bit late to say they are gonna investigate Wednesday, and Villa if they do the same.

I wonder whether Birmingham could be the salvation here, in terms of Villa’s flouting of FFP and finally getting done. Big wishful thinking on my part. We keep thinking about their 9 point deduction, but often forget that was for the 3 year period to 17/18. They are still gonna be in the shit for for the 3 year period to 18/19, so likely to be under embargo....and get a points deduction at some point in the 19/20 season, when the EFL finally act. They might show leniency if Adams is sold and brings some sanity back to their accounts. But compare to Villa, there 3 year period to 18/19, also gonna be a mess. Villa (if promoted) are gonna give the EFL the middle finger, but surely the EFL would need to request the Prem to apply similar treatment. If not....then the more likely scenario is that FFP is scrapped!

Villa had cashflow issues at the start of this season, but now have FFP issues!

Totally agree about not being vindictive. The EFL brought in projected accounts to deal with exactly the scenario Villa are in - breaking the rules and going for promotion. You could also argue that Birmingham's points deduction should’ve been last season. Barnsley would’ve stayed up. Or if they’d started 18/19 with 9 points deduction and been in relegation trouble at Xmas, might Adams have wanted to go then? The EFL have had a real missed opportunity here.

You couldn’t imagine how desperate I am for Villa to ****-up in the play-offs.

Wow indeed.

Couple of million isn’t it????

£15m FFP Exclusions seems high too. Thanks for posting. What it does show is that they are £25m over the FFP threshold for the 3 year rolling period ending this season. A breach of somewhere near this magnitude much be in the projected accounts submitted in March. Its obscene...unless of course they’ve been allowed to factor some huge “income” stream in before the end of their financial year.

You’re not being stupid....but however Derby structure their various businesses they will cover off / include match day income. No real difference to City, where Ashton Gate Ltd own the ground.

Yes, you had the usual half and full season loans, but also the emergency loan system (up to 93 days). Matt Smith was an emergency loan.

I believe we are in agreement.

Agree RH. Which is why I wonder what purpose the projected accounts serve. They were brought in (I believe) to apply penalties in the current season. But my hypothetical scenarios prove how difficult they are to implement in that period. And if Villa get promoted, I don’t see the Prem applying the sanction on the EFL’s behalf. Surely if Villa only scraped in for the 3 years up to 17/18, when allowed £61m losses, their projected accounts for the period to 18/19 when only allowed £39m must have smashed it. I believe Birmingham’s 3 years upto 18/19 would be the same. That is why my hope is that Villa, Derby don’t go up and they have an embargo and points deduction for start of next season. The question would then be why were they allowed to deny say us or Boro a playoff place (should that happen)!!!

All we can really hope for now is that neither Villa or Derby get promoted via the play-offs. None of the top 4 are in danger of breaching FFP, nor are we, so I hope the final promotion place comes from within the 5 (top 4 and us). We will then get to see how the extent of Villa and Derby’s projected accounts manifest into actual accounts over the summer (even if we don’t see them published ourselves til much later). Imagine for a second the hypothetical situation that Villa would bust the limits, but included the projected selling of Grealish for £25m before the end of their accounting year (again lets keep this hypothetical) to show intention to the EFL to not take the piss out of FFP. You then get several scenarios and considerations of Villa not going up: they do in fact sell Grealish for £25m and they fall into line within the 3 year rolling period to 18/19 season. Sounds fine, but EFL need to decide whether in the spirit of FFP. [What is to stop any team spending £200m to buy promotion, but sell those players if they don’t go up?] However, the EFL should also be on guard that the next 3 year rolling period includes huge losses from the first two seasons, that requires more cost cutting than selling one player. They would need to go on regular monitoring and embargo of some sort. they sell Grealish, but buying clubs know Villa are desperate and only stump up £15m. Villa now in breach for 3 year rolling period to 18/19 season. Straight embargo and points deduction to start 19/20 season based on scale set in Brum points deduction. Same as 1. Re next 3 year rolling period. they don’t sell Grealish. I dread to think, maximum punishment possible??? In the above scenarios, Grealish has been used as their security. What if they won promotion through the play-offs? they still have to sell Grealish for £25m. Toughski Shitski! They now fall into a Prem guidelines....still seems outside the spirit of FFP imho Promotion denied promotion denied I just can’t see 2 & 3 above happening. None of the first 4 of the 6 scenarios really satisfy the spirit of FFP. They’ve taken a gamble of over-spending, knowing that punishment can’t really take place within the season they’ve taken the gamble in. Anyone any bright ideas.

@Olé actually I wasn’t suggesting Gibson would look to form a breakaway, was thinking more Villa, Leeds, etc would...you know the “entitled teams”, who still think they are Prem teams.

Cue the break up of the EFL, the formation of a breakaway league, who misguidedly think they are Prem 2...only to realise the Prem are quite happy sharing between 20 clubs and don’t want to further spread their wealth!!!!

I don’t believe it is as simple as that. AGLtd has a big loan to service and a depreciation charge too. It won’t be a token rent payment. Ticketing is under Bristol Sport (not AGLtd) so again charged back to City at arms-length.

And I forgot, Mel / Derby has his own approach to amortisation.