Arsenal look to take advantage of Aston Villa’s financial struggles

7 Replies

Aston Villa are the worst run club in the Premier League. I am not just talking about in PSR terms, but actually in normal, running a business terms.

Their owners took a huge risk, gambling the clubs future and overspending in the hope they would become regulars in the Champions League.

Last season, their wage to turnover ratio was 96%. That means for every £1 they earned, 0.96p was spent on wages. In comparison, Arsenal’s was 53%, Manchester City 57% and Liverpool 63%. That leaves 4p in the pound to spend on other costs such as transfers and keeping the lights on.

Now some (including Aston Villa fans) will say that this is showing ambition. But what it actually is unsustainable. The owners can only continue to find ways to prop the club up for so long.

And it does not take much for everything to collapse. And that “not much” has happened.

Not getting Champions League football is a disaster for Aston Villa. It will cost them in the region of £100m in broadcasting revenue, sponsorship and gate receipts.

Following last season foray in the Champions League, their owners would have been banking on the club consistently breaking into Europe’s premier competition. And with the consistent additional revenue, that wages to turnover ratio would quickly drop.

Instead, Villa collapsed on the final day and they are facing serious financial trouble. The gamble did not pay off.

Clubs will now be circling around Villa, who clearly have to sell to not only stay within PSR rules, but also just to survive. If they do not bring in quick revenue from transfers and lower that wage bill, they will be in serious trouble. And again, this is not serious trouble due to PSR, it is serious trouble because they can not afford to keep overspending.

I am sure Arsenal will be looking at Villa and considering what bargains we could grab.

Boubacar Kamara

The defensive midfielder signed for Aston Villa in 2022 for around £22m. He currently has a book value of £8.8m – which means that selling him for anything over this figure will be considered profit in the accounts.

The 25-year-old has two years left on his current contract, with talks rumoured to have stalled following Villa’s failure to qualify for the Champions League. Talk is that he could be shipped off to Saudi Arabia.

On a salary of £150k a week, Kamara is one of Aston Villa’s top earners. His high salary combined with his low book value makes him a prime option to be sold.

A solid defensive midfielder, Kamara could be available for as little as £30m if he turns down the advances of Saudi. He could be a viable option to replace Thomas Parety should the Ghanian depart.

Ollie Watkins

The boyhood Arsenal fan.

Watkins was extremely close to joining Arsenal in January. A deal collapsed once Jhon Duran’s move to Saudi Arabia was confirmed.

Now 29, you feel this summer might be the last opportunity for Watkins to get his move to a big club, having seen his career progress from League Two to the Premier League in just 3 seasons.

Watkins joined Villa in 2020 for £28m, and signed a new deal in 2023 taking him through 2028. He currently has a book value of around £7m. Like with Kamara, any sale over this figure would be profit.

The English striker earns around £130k a week, making him Villa’s 6th highest paid player.

Whilst Villa will not want to lose their talisman, having seen Duran also leave in January, they have recently recruited Donyell Malen. And a Watkins departure could free up the cash to bring back Marcus Rashford.

Whilst Rashford may cost Villa more in wages and transfer fee, £30-40m in profit hitting their books would far outweigh what Rashford would cost in a single season (amortised transfer fee + wages). And as we have seen with Villa’s owners, they are short termist and how they afford Rashford from 2026/27 will be “next years problem”.

“Where does Watkins fit is” will be the headache for Arsenal.

Were we to sign Benjamin Sesko or Viktor Gyokeres, we would not necessarily need a 3rd striker (alongside Kai Havertz, and discounting Gabriel Jesus). but that would not mean a deal for Watkins would be off the table.

Watkins has played out left for much of his career, and even as a striker he has tended to drift to the left hand side ala Thierry Henry.

I can certainly see him being a left-sided forward option, playing a little more inside than Gabriel Martinelli, off the big man up top. He would then find that space between centre back and right back and unleash terror as a finisher rather than a creator.

Watkins would also be an option up top. An alternative problem to a Sesko or Havertz.

There would certainly be enough games to accommodate Sesko, Havertz, Watkins and Martinelli in the squad.

Amadou Onana

In Kamara, Onana, John McGinn, Youri Tielemans and Ross Barkley, Aston Villa are well stocked in the central midfield area.

Kamara earns more than Onana and has a lower book value, enabling Villa to clear more profit. He would be their first option to be sold.

However, if Arsenal prefer Onana as a replacement for Partey, a deal could also happen.

Onana only joined Villa last summer for £50m, so still has a book value of £40m. That would mean an offer close to £70m would be needed to give them the same “profit” as what selling Kamara would be.

I would be surprised if Arsenal would stretch to £70m having secured Martin Zubimendi for £50m. Whoever comes in will basically be Zubimendi’s alternative. However, if things get desperate for Villa, they may be forced to sell for closer to £40m just to get Onana’s salary off the wage bill.

Morgan Rogers

The Englishman had his breakthrough season last year, and in the second half of the season he began to get the goals and assists thto back up his dynamic play.

Turning 23 in July, Rogers joined Villa for just £8m 18 months ago, meaning he has a very low book value.

Whilst Villa would not want to see him go – he is deemed the future of the club from an attacking point of view, they might have no choice over the matter. An offer over £60m might be too much for them to turn down considering the considerable profit it will allow Villa to bank.

In terms of fitting in at Arsenal, Rogers best performances have come centrally as a dynamic, ball carrying attacking midfielder. He has bundles of talent and you could certainly see him adapting to playing out wide on the left hand side, with the licence to cut inside and influence the game more centrally.

Mikel Arteta will like Rogers versatility, and he would certainly be an upgrade on Leandro Trossard as a man who can cover all attacking positions – at wide, centrally and up top.

The sticking point would be wether he is enough of an upgrade on Gabriel Martinelli to justify us spending £60m+ on him. I am not sure he is.

Anyone else from the Villa team you would take? Let us know in the comments (just do not reply with the clown of a keeper they have who cost them Champions League football).

Keenos

Transfer windows within transfer windows

1 Reply

With the Club World Cup, this was always going to be a bit of a strange transfer window.

An “Exceptional registration period” opened on 1 June and closed yesterday. The 10 day registration period was to “allow clubs playing in the tournament to sign new players before it started”. And as such, for fairness, all clubs across the world were also allowed to sign players.

Rather than just say “we will leave the window open for the duration of the summer”, leagues have closed the registration period for 6 days and it reopens again on 16 June.

This is because Premier League regulations state that the summer window must open “at midnight on the date 12 weeks prior to the date on which it is to conclude.” That is Monday 16 June, when the actual transfer window will open, closing 12 weeks later, on Monday 1 September.

That means there was a mini deadline of last night for clubs in the Club World Cup to sign players. For clubs not in the competition, they did not really care.

The last 10-days has seen Manchester City go aggressive in the market. The talk was they only wanted to complete deals that could be done before the Club World Cup started.

City have spent over £100m on Rayan Aït-Nouri, Marcus Bettinelli, Rayan Cherki and Tijjani Reijnders. Whilst some will commend them for getting deals done early, it means they might miss out on other players that could come available later in the window. By limiting yourself only to players who were available for a 10-day period is very restrictive.

Chelsea meanwhile spoke about the “Club World Cup tax”. This was having to pay a premium to get a deal done quickly.

We all know transfer negotiating takes time. Most deals do not happen quickly. By limiting yourself to signing a player before the 10 June deadline, you could end up paying a premium as you are giving yourself less time to negotiate.

If you are not bound by the deadline, you have more time to have talks, to play games, and to seek alternatives.

We then have the unseen deadline of PSR.

The longer we operate under PSR, and the UEFA FFP version, the more we learn. And what the financial regulations do is create an unseen deadline on 30 June.

The reporting window for PSR is 1 July to 30 June. That means a player sold on 1 June 2025 goes into the 2025/26 reporting year, whilst a player sold on 30 June 2025 is included in the 2024/25 reporting year.

Teams struggling to meet the PSR requirements will look to offload players before 30 June so that they can make ends meet. This means that for buying clubs, with no PSR concerns, there might be some home grown bargains to be had before his date.

Likewise, clubs who have no PSR concerns for 2024/25 might be reluctant to sell players before 1 July as they do not really “need the income”. Meanwhile, a £50m pure profit for home grown player such as Martin Zubimendi can give their summer transfer window a huge bump if they hold off until 1 July. Selling before this date can be seen as a bit of a waste.

This creates a bit of a backlog where teams who do not need to sell will be trying to slow down deals. Hold them back until July so that the incoming fee can be reported in the next year. This is certainly something most of us have not thought of before.

And in terms of the buying club, they would not be too concerned about their deal being delayed until 1 July.

Beyond the PR and fans crying on social media about “we have not signed anyone yet”, there is very little disadvantage for a club to do rush through a deal between 16 June and 30 June.

For a start, it would mean that none of the transfer fee will hit the 2024/25 accounts – both real accounts and those prepared for PSR. Secondly, a club will save on wages.

Yes, that might only be £500k if it is a top player, but every little counts!

You might also be able to agree a little discount in the transfer fee if you agree to delay it for 2-3 weeks and not pursue any other targets. The opposite of if a buying club wants to rush a deal through.

Finally, teams will not be returning to full training until July. So by agreeing to delay the transfer until July, you are not disadvantaging yourself.

There is also talk over other deadlines clubs are looking at, such as official accounting reporting in their individual countries and the tax they would have to pay.

The talk was Real Sociedad were looking to delay the transfer as if they sold Zubimendi in June, they would be less likely to spend the profits and would be hit with a larger tax bill. Whereas once you have spent the profits (which would happen in July), you then offset the income of the sold player against the expenditure of players coming in, thus reducing your tax bill.

It will now be interesting to see whether Martin Zubimendi is announced on 16 June, as soon as the new window opens. If it does happen, it will show that the delay was only due to Spain playing in the Nations League final.

I would not be surprised if it is announced that the deal is done across social media accounts during that week, but we do not see an official announcement from Arsenal until 1 July.

Always learning, trying to understand why deals that seem done are not going through quickly…

Have a good Wednesday.

Keenos

What is happening with Thomas Partey?

1 Reply

It feels like we are getting mixed messages around Thomas Partey right now.

Last week Arsenal published their released list. Mainly youth players (and for some reason players from the girls team), it also included Jorginho and Kieran Tierney, as well as confirming that Neto and Raheem Sterling’s loans were due to end. However one name was not on the initial list. Thomas Parety.

Alongside youth team defender Michal Rosiak and Chloe Kelly, Partey was on a second list of players where discussions are ongoing, and once matters are finalised between all parties, we will communicate in due course.

But then this week, the Premier League published the released players list that had been submitted to them. And on this list Partety was included.

What was a bit of a head scratcher is that Partey is on the list, but Rosiak was not.

Now we have had no news that Rosiak has signed a new deal. Everything points to him still being in discussions. So why was Partey included and not him?

Was it a clerical error? Or is it that talks have not gone well and one of the two parties have made it clear they have no intention of signing of a new contract.

Mikel Arteta would have banked on Partey staying before signing off on the Jorginho exit. Whilst the Brazilian’s contract was also due to expire, Arteta would not have wanted both of his defensive midfield options to depart.

If Partey was always slated to leave, then I am sure Jorginho, who has just married his English wife, would have easily have been persuaded to stay in London. Doing a short term loan deal with Flamengo to allow him to play in the Club World Cup would also have been a possibility.

Instead, Jorginho joined the Brazilian club and is returning to the country of his birth for the first time since leaving at 15 years old.

So what actually is happening with Partey?

It certainly felt that talks were close not too long ago, with Partey’s return to his top form this season cementing himself as the first choice defensive midfielder. And even with the incoming Martin Zubimendi, there was more than enough space for both of them.

Shortly after Arsenal published the released players list, posts were circulating on social media that Partey was considering pulling out of negotiations. The rumour was that Partey was “cautious” about signing a new deal

At 32 years old, and having played brilliantly this season, this contract could be his last big one. His retirement package.

It is likely that either the length of contract or salary offer from Arsenal is not as big as what he could get elsewhere. I imagine we would have been offering him a 2-year deal with an option for a 3rd at around £150k a week. He could get a longer term deal by moving back to Atletico Madrid, or more money by jumping on the Saudi gravy train.

This will leave Arteta with a headache if two defensive midfielders depart.

The plan would have been to have Zubimendi and Partey as the defensive options, and Declan Rice and Mikel Merino as options further forward. If Partey goes, either Rice becomes Zubimendi’s defensive cover, or we need to go into the market and buy a 2nd defensive midfielder. And that is an expenditure we perhaps did not budget for.

Throughout this blog, I have talked about Zubimendi as if it is a done deal. I believe it is.

We have been criticised by opposing fans and those boring Arsenal fans for “not completing a deal we were negotiating for in January”. My bet is all we were waiting for was the Nations League to be over.

Zubimendi’s Spain were in the final of the Nations League. The Spaniard went straight from club football into training camp for his country. He would not have had the time to fly to London, do his medical, undertake the marketing photoshoot, and prepare for playing for his country. It is right that Arsenal allowed him to focus on then Nations League.,

With the competition now over, Zubimendi will either sign today (the last day of the little transfer window), or we will see him sign on 16 June – when the window reopens. We will then use the next 6 days to get the medical done and paperwork in place ready for the announcement.

An alternate thinking is that neither Real Sociedad do not have any UEFA FFP concerns for 2024/25 and would prefer the deal to go into 2025/26 where the huge lump sum profit could be used without issues. Likewise it might suit Arsenal for the deal to not hit our 2024/25 PSR reporting year, and instead go into next.

I would not be surprised if their is an announcement today, or very shortly after.

Back to Partey, his contract does not expire until 30 June. We have plenty of time to try and get a deal done.

At £250k a week, he is one of Arsenal’s highest paid players. If he departs we would then have £22m a year to play with (his wage and amortised transfer fee). That would free us up to sign a replacement for £50m and pay them £150k a week and still save money. However we would still need to find the initial £50m.

I am sure the preference will still be for Partey to sign on lower wages.

£150k a week means the club are spending around £8m a year on him, and his initial transfer fee will be fully amortised. That would then be £14m a year saving on our accounts, and £14m a year we can spend elsewhere without having to increase our outgoings.

And in the most simplistic of terms, signing Zubimendi and keeping Partey costs us less than having Jorginho and Partey on our books.

Enjoy your Tuesday.

Keenos