The headline says it all really, but it’s as many of us suspected would happen, in that Aston Villa FC have sold the stadium to NSWE stadium LTD.
I said last week that I thought Christian Purslow was being clever with his words in saying we wouldn’t sell to a third party and it seems he was being even more economical with the truth, as the stadium had already been sold.
It seems there might be some concern amongst the fans that the ground doesn’t on paper belong to Aston Villa, but it doesn’t bother me in the slightest, as when it comes to any future sale of the club, it would surely have to include Villa park?
So really, nothing has changed, except that we’ve balanced the book as regards to FFP.
I think it was pretty obvious this was going to happen, as nobody could see how we could possibly balance the books otherwise, but what is niggling me, is why so cheap?
Derby sold Pride park for £80 million, which seems way over the top, but that does beg the question of what it would cost to build a new bowl?
A quick Wiki tells me Pride park cost £28 million to build and it was finished in 1997.
I remember going there not long after it opened, when Yorke scored the winner and found it a totally souless place, albeit it had a decent atmosphere.
As opposed to Villa Park, which is much loved throughout the game, even if it is a bit dated in places.
When the subject of Villa park being sold came up a few weeks ago, I said that I thought we could probably get away for selling at £200 million, purely because of it’s history and heritage. I think it’s still held more FA cup semis than any other stadium, if memory serves me right and although the trophy is somwhat devalued these days, it’s still important.
Putting a price on that sort of thing is really difficult.
So why only £56 odd million then?
Perhaps that was all that was needed, but this is a one-off thing and surely if the owners had bought it for say, £150 million, I’m not sure why they wouldn’t have, as it gives you a nice big FFP cushion to play with, bearing in mind no money has changed hands, except on paper?
There’s obviously a reason and perhaps it’s just that we didn’t want to be seen as taking the proverbial, in the way Derby have. Or maybe you have to demonstrate fair value, bearing in mind the price Sawaris and Edens paid for the whole club?
But that makes me wonder how Derby have got away with it?
I’ll bet Steve Gibson is doing his nut.
Never mind. He could have done exactly the same and Boro wouldn’t have had to have the clearout they did.
I don’t know. If the EFL don’t like it, they’ll just have to tighten the rules.
But it’s hard to see how they can, as it’s a perfectly legal thing to do and you can’t just stop someone doing a deal and buying/selling at a price they’re happy with.
I still find it a bit unethical and not really within the spirit of FFP, but hey, we’ve just got a big monkey off our back.
Now we concentrate on moving forwards and hopefully upwards.
UTV!
It’s all good 🙂
“…when it comes to any future sale of the club, it would surely include Villa Park?”
If this is the case, then great. If not, it will come back to bite us. If would be nice if the club could confirm that this is, in fact, the case. You don’t sound 100% sure though, Badger.
As for the low price, maybe that’s all that was needed to balance the books? So why plough more into it when you’re buying it from yourself? That’s my theory and I’m sticking to it!
It’s 100% the case to my mind, BFR.
The question mark was only there to emphasise the “surely” part.
I think the club without the ground would be worth very little, as the squad and the ground are inextricably linked.
It’s why the noses seem to have the right hump about all this, as their sty is basically owned by the bank. lol
Honestly, I think the sale value had nothing to do with what its actual value was, and more to do with what we needed for our purposes. Consider the day when we want to “buy it back” whether that’s figurative or actual, the buy back value on paper would be better if it’s lower than higher.
Yes, fair point, but buying it back would just involve a new owner buying the club, lock, stock and barrel. IE Aston Villa LTD, NSWE stadium LTD and any other child company.
I don’t see any reason why the current owners would want to buy it back, when they already own it.
I still feel we may have missed a trick, as if god forbid we were to go straight back down, the numbers will count massively.
Or maybe the FFP rules only begin once you’ve been relegated to the EFL?
In which case, I’m worrying about nothing and it really is all good.
Or if we go back down again – we quickly buy it back along with a name sponsorship and if we need to a year or two down the road we can sell it on again for more money?
Ha. I never thought of that.
Are you an accountant?
Thinking about it, there’s probably nothing in the rules to cover that.
Hmm, maybe that’s the angle, but wouldn’t that be the case whatever the price?
Nope – not an accountant, but I do consult with data for large organisations and enjoy number talk!
I think the low price keeps people like Gibson from really exploring his options as sure there’s a grey area as to the morality of it, but no accusation of overvaluing the deal, whereas Derby you could argue the value of the stadium for sure.
I don’t think our losses were as great as some assumed as we did offload a few players along the way – coupled with the assumed write off of some debt in the acquisition. Frankly, I wonder if we even needed to sell in order to comply – and whether this is that buffer mentioned above.
I suspect we definitely needed to sell, or otherwise, why would you?
If your assumptions are right, we’ve given ourselves leeway anyway.
There is no Aston Villa – not in terms of owning anything anyway. Aston Villa
Ltd. doesn’t actually exist. As I understand it all things Villa are / were owned through the Holding Company, Recon Ltd set up by Xia and bought by Sawiris / Edens. I believe NSWE Stadiums Ltd is a subsidiary (or ‘step down’) company within the Recon Group wholly owned and controlled by the owners – hence we have sold the stadium to ourselves 🙂 but Recon (whose accounts are looked at in FFP terms) can legitimately include the income from the sale in their 2018 / 19 accounts, Gibson eat your heart out!
Badger, I think Purslow has been pretty clear – selling to a third party would be selling to a company not owned and controlled by Sawiris / Edens which isn’t the case and neither do I believe it will happen.
The issue for the EFL is that Recon have sold an asset and received £56.7 m for it even though it’s not an ‘arms length’ deal. Can they or will they change the rules to look at deals between related parties?
As to the value of VP – either you calculate it based on it’s redevelopment value for an alternative use (so if a new stadium we’re to be built elsewhere) or on the basis of a multiplier against a market lease. Probably £56.7m isn’t far off true value but I agree it’s driven by the amounts needed to ‘clear the decks’.
If we were to get relegated next season, my understanding is that FFP is still calculated on the basis of three year aggregate losses so 16/17 would drop out and I guess we should show a healthy profit for years 17/18 and 18/19. We are allowed much larger losses for 19/20 to which add the benefit of subsequent parachute payments. I think we’re good to go.
PS – the sale also provides £56.7m in cash – think we might need that for initial transfer payments
PPS – the actual profit on the sale (as against cash) will depend on the value (cost) of Villa Park as included in Recon’s balance sheet.
Hope I haven’t bored everyone:-)
Not at all Hitch.
The big plus here is that Recon now have nothing to do with us.
Where that leaves Xia, I don’t know, but suspect he’s gone.
As for Purslow, I’m not suggesting he was lying or anything, but it seems to me he should have just come out and told us about the sale. It was obvious it was going to come out, so why not just clarify things to back up his “we’re complying” statement.
I’m thinking FFP is a constant 3 year rolling thing too, so while the £56.7 mill looks good on the balance sheet, a lot more money looks even better.
Hence the question.
Does the £56.7 million give an indicator of what we’re willing to spend this season?
I suspect it’ll be more than that. Again, hence the question.
One thing I’m not sure on, is did Xia still own a percentage of Recon, given that he was still a director?
I think the cash inflow is an indication of the level of investment being anticipated by the club (owners) not just on players but also ground redevelopment (which is outside FFP calculations). So, given transfers are paid for over a number of seasons, it wouldn’t surprise me to see us spend the £120m being mooted.
I suspect Xia still has a small shareholding in Recon (as evidenced by his appearance at the play off final) but, as Sawiris / Edens buy up more of the unallocated shares its being squeezed to a small percentage. Could find out at Companies House but not really that interested. To all intents and purposes he’s no longer a player.
Badger
On the face of it, the price Villa Park has been sold for in comparison to Derby’s ground sale. Excluding sentimental value, land in Birmingham would be more expensive than Derby. Could the lower valuation do with any of the following?
* Value that does not seem excessive and helps us avoid FFP issues.
* Low enough so as not to be subject to capital gains tax.
* At a level where the ground could be bought back by the club. I know this seems stupid with all the subsidiary companies, but allows owners to take capital out of the club at a later stage when it is profitable.
As to Purslow’s previous comments they were truthful. I believe there is a game to be played and as professional business men he and the owners are playing it out as would be expected.
Sam Wallace at the Telegraph is saying we’ve agreed a £14 mill, rising to £17 mill fee for Matt Targett of Southampton and it should be completed over the weekend.
I can’t say I know anything about him, but he’s probably better than Taylor.
I work with a Southampton fan. He reckons Targett is an excellent defender. Although not so good at attacking. He prefers Targett to Bertrand. Looks like a good signing.
Sid, whereas what I’ve read is that his defending is not so good and he seriously lacks pace. Although he’s rated for his crossing.
Opinions, eh?
I’d assume we’ve watched him and Smith will know how he fits our playing style.
And it’s hard to see how he couldn’t be an improvement on Taylor.
Not that I don’t like Taylor, as it might seem.
I just see him as not good enough.
Badger
The beauty of football – differing opinions. I am looking fort to him putting on a Villa shirt. I agree with your comments about Taylor.
If rumours that we want to sign another 6 players, does this mean Smith needs to play his starting 11 together in all pre-season friendlies, as it is crucial they play together as a team knowing each other rather than individuals? We saw what happened to Fulham and the year we were relegated there were a lot of new players who did not play as a team. We need to push the team further up the experience curve ASAP of knowing each other’s game.
Lets go with the Watford case….all unknown to each other and gelled.
Targett was loaned to Fulham when they beat us in play off final. It seems that Fulham fans were disappointed they didn’t make his loan permanent. Fulham did have a strong rank attack with both full backs overlapping – just saying.
I think all these points are valid.
Fulham did have a decent attack but it wasn’t enough for survival and you have to be good all round.
Sid, as Villaaway suggests, it can work.
I think our biggest hope is the system Smith wants to play.
Targett might not have been my choice, as Southampton fans thinks they’ve pulled our pants down, but it doesn’t matter.
Smith knows what he wants and if he’s happy, so am I.
We looked in major trouble when he came and he achieved what I thought was practically impossible at the time.
Hence I’m happy to trust his judgement.
For now, at least.
I’m experienced enough to know that things can always change 🙂
A Southampton fan’s view;
“WEAKNESSES
Defensively, Targett does leave a lot to be desired. He has a nasty habit of losing focus rather easily, and this has, at times, cost Southampton. He makes decent recovery challenges, but his positioning at the back is not especially impressive.
Also, while he possesses the forward-thinking traits of a modern-day full-back, he does lack pace. Physical attributes are not everything, of course, but do not expect him to bypass opposing players with blistering speed and agility.
IS HE AN UPGRADE FOR VILLA?
Without a doubt. Neil Taylor flattered to deceive in the Championship at times last season, and it was clear that an upgrade would be required this summer, especially following the failure to sign Joe Bryan last year.
Targett will improve the Villa team. He still has the potential to be a decent Premier League player, but if he becomes anything more than that, I would be surprised.”
Not particularly encouraging, but hopefully we’ll improve him.
https://readastonvilla.com/2019/06/29/matt-targett-qa-what-to-expect-from-the-incoming-villa-signing/
So basically he’s got the same weaknesses as Taylor. 😐
BFR, that’s exactly what I thought.
Except I don’t recall Taylor putting many good crosses in, whereas Targett can.
Crossing, generally has been a massive poor point for ages at the Villa, it seems to me.
Elmo isn’t not bad at all at crossing, to be fair.
Oh, man.
Man U have apparently targetted John McGinn.
And we won’t sell for less than £50 million.
I’m not even going to post the source, as it’s utter crap.
Laughable.
I hope you’re right about McGinn. I can honestly say that I have thought on several occasions that he is exactly the type of player Fergie would’ve had in his teams and the type of player they lack now.
Anyway, he’s worth at least £75 ‘extra large’.
If it’s true, I hope the top brass at VP don’t even comment on it and don’t even reply to bids. They (Utd) will soon bugger off.
Another Keane, you mean?
Yes, I can see that and I’ve predicted he will be THE outstanding mid this year.
McGinn is the type of mid every side could do with.
I’m convinced I’m right, no worries.
He won’t be going anywhere.
That story is rubbish.
The Daily Mail have picked it up too.
You have to laugh.
The McGinn alleged transfer to Utd has been picked up by more news outlets. £50m. Well this is great news! This is confirmation that McGinn is expected to shine in the Premier next season.
More importantly McGinn will be shining with the Villa. I do not expect him to be sold because:
1: Last year our new owners refused to sell Grealish. The precedent has been set that we only sell when we want. The days of larger clubs bullying us out of players has ended.
2: Too much change. Smith will be aware that few of the 11 who played last year will make the starting 11 this season. The value of a Grealish/McGinn experienced combination, who know each other’s game inside out cannot be lost.
3: Utd who? The Ferguson dominance has gone. Utd are a shadow of their former selves. Why join a club that is lost and is poorly run? After years of us being lost, we now have a purpose and unity which will take us places.
4: Friendship: It appears Grealish and McGinn are best of friends off the pitch. For a transfer to occur this bond would need to be broken. Villa will say no, meaning McGinn would need to force the transfer. I do not believe he would want to brake his bond with Grealish.
Hopefully the high esteem McGinn is held in will act as a magnet for player recruitment. McGinn and Grealish pairing are the strong foundations to build the new Villa team on. It would make no sense to wilfully damage these foundations.
Exactly. Another Keane is what I was thinking, minus the vicious ‘nutter’ element.
Apparently the McGinn ‘transfer’ didn’t even make the BBC gossip column so I wouldn’t put much faith in it anyway.
I fully expect McGinn to give us a good two years or so before Barca or Real make a proper bid.
Pat57, I think it’s all paper talk, or fake news as they say, our owners want what we all want a very successful football club. When clubs ask or want players its because they are a threat to them, Well it’s my belief, we have the making of being a top club again they won’t throw that away. I firmly think that we are in the making of going places out side of Villa Park ,we have plans of hotel being built all our last 3 decade’s of agony will be forgotten. The good times are coming. Utv.
It’s also probably not coincidence that there’s talk John is to be offered a new contract. It’s more than likely the work of his agent.
That’s a big probability Texas Villan, work of the agent 100% it is.
https://www.myoldmansaid.com/confirmed-john-mcginn-is-off-to-manchester-united-via-magaluf/
Apologies for posting article from another blog but this really sums up the McGinn non story rather well I think.
Villa stadium needs updating quickly, it looks like a second division ground.in one part of the stadium you can’t see the corner flag,need to be in the round🙄
Mat Targett – confirmed as having been signed. Must assume Dean Smith thinks he has a future.
Yep, Targett in, welcome to the Villa, kid.
And Southampton announce they’ve signed Che Adams.
I can’t help thinking that’s an excellent bit of business.
For Southampton? I would rather we signed Adams over Targett. Hopefully he will have a point to prove after being an understudy to Bertrand last season. Still getting used to the ridiculous fees for average players!
Yep, for Southampton. Sell a backup LB and gain a good striker for not much more.
I’d have liked to see us in for Adams, as he seems our sort of player and I don’t know if it means we have other irons in the fire or we’re going to go with what we’ve already got up top.
Targett feels like a slightly underwhelming signing, but he has at least played in the Prem and we have to at least give him a chance.
While the fact that he’s a good crosser is great, the fact that he doesn’t sound much better than Taylor at defending concerns me.
It’s the defensive and positioning part of his game that bothers me most.
Still, in Smith we trust, I suppose and no doubt he’s studied Targett a lot more than we have, so hopefully knows exactly what he’s getting.
Bristol just confirmed CB signing from Chelsea in Tomas Kalas for 8m. I’d say that’s a sign they’re about to let Webster go.
Good spot.
I’d agree with that assessment.
If we really are in for Webster, where does that leave us re; Mings?
Hopefully we get both.
In the meantime, I’ve just spent the last couple of hours reading about Targett in the forum about him on the “Saintsweb” site.
And it’s not particularly good reading, I’m afraid.
Badger
I spoke with my Saints friend yesterday. I mixed up what he previously said, which confirmed your point the other day. He is good going forward and crossing. He does not have extreme space nor is the greatest defender. He also described Targett as being less bright than Luke Shaw, who is not bright at all. This might explain why Targett appears to switch off. However, my friend rates him as a player. I think he will benefit from having vocal leader such as Mings helping him keep focused.
On the other hand Fulham fans really rated him and Dean Smith must believe that he can improve him as a player.
Fans don’t always have an objective view – I mean we’ve never been guilty of having a poor opinion of one of our players that has moved and shown us to be wrong – have we 🙂
It’s important that we don’t pre judge any player that joins us but give them a fair chance.
That’s fair comment Hitch.
Veretout is a good example of a decent player in a poor side.
But you can only go on what you see and yes, it can be slanted if they have poor/low on confidence/out of form players around them.
For me, he’s an excellent signing. His assist stars are superb. Only the likes of Akexander-Arnholt ahead of him. For his age, talent, and the fact that he’s English, why are people moaning about price? Decent full backs were going for 7-8 million a good team years ago. Excellent signing. Next please!
Apparently, the stadium sale is going to be investigated by the Premier league, particularly the value.
Now we know why it was so cheap and it’s hard to see how they can say it was too much.
I’ll bet we knew this was coming and shows those running the club are not a bunch of amateurs;
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/aston-villa-facing-investigation-after-stadium-sale-0tcrzjl7b
(Subscription only)
From memory, the Trinity cost £12mill to build and the Holte was about £14mill.
I have £5mill in my head for the Witton lane and £1mill for the North stand, but that was donkey’s years back.
So that’s £32mill before the land, plus inflation etc.
I can’t see the value being a problem at all and still think it was too cheap.
How are they going to establish a true value for Villa Park? What will be the basis of the valuation – ongoing use, cost (which is your point Badger) or redevelopment for another use which is what? Also have to remember that Villa Park is on a substantial price of land including the car parks and the Villa Village which is to be redeveloped. I believe we also own the Holte End pub.
Like you Badger I think £56.7m is a fair valuation and this is the Premier League paying lip service to complaints from EFL clubs remembering that, according to reports, the EFL have already ‘ticked’ Villa’s accounts to the end of the 18/19 accounting period.
There is also a whiff of hypocrisy here – didn’t WHU and Manchester City ‘acquire’ their stadiums for nothing or certainly way below market value and wasn’t Pride Park sold for £80m between related parties (now that does strike me as overvalued) giving them an unfair financial advantage?
Rant over!
Exactly Hitch.
Personally, I think you’d have to go with what it would cost to replace and you would think we’d have an insured value on it.
If so, I’d have thought it would be way higher than £56 mill.
I think this is more about warning other clubs not to overvalue their grounds, myself, because they know more clubs will do it and they can’t stop them.
That’s a fair point Badger – not only ground valuations but ‘unfair’ sponsorship deals. Weren’t Man City (again) involved in some sort of related parties over hyped sponsorship deal – a related party happening to own an airline – I seem to recall some controversy at the time.
Oh, yes!
I’m sure it was £400ish mill too, over 10 years, so way higher than what we’ve done, especially as it was a few years back.
Totally unfair.