aguero93:20
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2013
- Messages
- 90,262
- Location
- Hunting Cats.
- Team supported
- Some gobshites in day-glo green and black.
You need to take a closer look at what is apparently being proposed.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
City & FFP | 2020/21 Accounts released | Revenues of £569.8m, £2.4m profit (p 2395)
- Thread starter Marvin
- Start date
BlueAnorak
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 31 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 26,175
http://www.leparisien.fr/sports/foo...psg-et-manchester-city-20-01-2018-7512978.php
Here's the article - use your browsers translate facility.
-€100m Net Transfer spend.
25 man squad limits.
Targeting the meaning of "Related Party" + No more than 30% of a clubs revenue.
And they want it in place next season after it is voted on on 24th May.
Being discussed by the board on Monday (where it should be noted that PSG have a rep on the management board).
Clearly they want to nobble the City Academy model (but that will hit Chelsea very badly),
The big boys want to limit expenditure on their buys so all the clubs in Europe who make money from transfers will be badly hit (Spurs, Monaco, Lyon + All Portuguese clubs etc etc)
Related Party has a legal meaning so I think they can forget that one. Also, limiting Related party income wouldn't affect us like it will affect PSG (Etihad is not legally a related party).
Here's the article - use your browsers translate facility.
-€100m Net Transfer spend.
25 man squad limits.
Targeting the meaning of "Related Party" + No more than 30% of a clubs revenue.
And they want it in place next season after it is voted on on 24th May.
Being discussed by the board on Monday (where it should be noted that PSG have a rep on the management board).
Clearly they want to nobble the City Academy model (but that will hit Chelsea very badly),
The big boys want to limit expenditure on their buys so all the clubs in Europe who make money from transfers will be badly hit (Spurs, Monaco, Lyon + All Portuguese clubs etc etc)
Related Party has a legal meaning so I think they can forget that one. Also, limiting Related party income wouldn't affect us like it will affect PSG (Etihad is not legally a related party).
Last edited:
BlueAnorak
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 31 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 26,175
All it will do is export all the best talent to China as they will be able to spend the most money.
Not sure how they'd stop flogging players to 'associate' clubs for £1 and buying back the good ones for £2.
Not sure how they'd stop flogging players to 'associate' clubs for £1 and buying back the good ones for £2.
unlikelyfan19
Well-Known Member
It's not hurting us now per say, but it did hurt for a season, season-and-a-half a couple years ago. In the grand scheme, it just kind of delayed us a year, so no real harm, but we did have to re-adjust some things.I thought City had made it clear they won’t tolerate a repeat of what happened when we failed FFP before?
I suspect if it happens we’ll outthink it like we did FFP. It’s not really hurting us now?
creditunionhero
Well-Known Member
As has been said, this will seriously alter player contracts and wage demands. It could help the old established clubs with high annual incomes especially if wages are restricted to a percentage of total turnover eg Uniteds wage bill is small compared to turnover,
PannickAtTheDisco
Well-Known Member
more rules to stop us running anyway.
You need to take a closer look at what is apparently being proposed.
the premier league and uefa need the money men in football the players need the money men in football the tv companies demand the best players so they need the money men to buy football clubs to buy superstars its a money go round. how many clubs in football are fully based around the fans income and ticket sales all the top clubs need investment from allsorts money men outside of football
we know the clubs who are not happy about the money men in football all the ones in great debt and cover there backs in glory on past history and called themselves power clubs. but they are based on loans taken from there clubs assets. so why don't uefa and premier league punish the clubs that are debt ridden to the eye balls and bring them into order
like quote manchester united debts of £450million and counting and with the sanchez deal of £180million going to happen that can not be right for football. united go on like they are a fan founded club and don't have a major ownership. even the edwards was pumping money into united and liverpool and littlewoods pools. not many football club have been fans founded and spent what they own the history books show the best 2 teams in england had money men backing them at the time
aguero93:20
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2013
- Messages
- 90,262
- Location
- Hunting Cats.
- Team supported
- Some gobshites in day-glo green and black.
http://www.leparisien.fr/sports/foo...psg-et-manchester-city-20-01-2018-7512978.php
Here's the article - use your browsers translate facility.
-€100m Net Transfer spend.
25 man squad limits.
Targeting the meaning of "Related Party" + No more than 30% of a clubs revenue.
And they want it in place next season after it is voted on on 24th May.
Being discussed by the board on Monday (where it should be noted that PSG have a rep on the management board).
Clearly they want to nobble the City Academy model (but that will hit Chelsea very badly),
The big boys want to limit expenditure on there buys so all the clubs in Europe who make money from transfers will be badly hit (Spurs, Monaco, Lyon + All Portuguese clubs etc etc)
Related Party has a legal meaning so I think they can forget that one. Also, limiting Related party income wouldn't affect us like it will affect PSG (Etihad or not legally a related party).
the premier league and uefa need the money men in football the players need the money men in football the tv companies demand the best players so they need the money men to buy football clubs to buy superstars its a money go round. how many clubs in football are fully based around the fans income and ticket sales all the top clubs need investment from allsorts money men outside of football
we know the clubs who are not happy about the money men in football all the ones in great debt and cover there backs in glory on past history and called themselves power clubs. but they are based on loans taken from there clubs assets. so why don't uefa and premier league punish the clubs that are debt ridden to the eye balls and bring them into order
like quote manchester united debts of £450million and counting and with the sanchez deal of £180million going to happen that can not be right for football. united go on like they are a fan founded club and don't have a major ownership. even the edwards was pumping money into united and liverpool and littlewoods pools. not many football club have been fans founded and spent what they own the history books show the best 2 teams in england had money men backing them at the time
Ancoats read the post quoted above yours, this would limit our spending regardless of how low our debt was or high our revenue was.
Once you start down this route, you are doomed and you will finish having rules governing every line in the P&L.
So far, there are restrictions on:
Owner capital investment, sponsorship, total spend versus costs, roster make up and size, etc. etc. Each new rule just gives rise to new practices which in turn lead to another new rule. It's like the tax code, it just gets more complex every year. And it solves nothing. Adam Smith, author of The Wealth of Nations, said all this type of regulation leads to shady deals in smoke filled back rooms. We have quite enough of them, already. Just another attempt by the failing old guard to prop themselves up. They pretend it's about competition, so why introduce more anti competitive rules?
Note that the only rules that make sense are those limiting debt....wonder why the G14 refused to accept those?!
City should resist this strongly through the European Clubs Association. The French and Germans love regulation, much of which is self seeking, and they hate what they call "the anglo saxon economic model".We tend to favour free markets, with sensible regs. This proposal is bonkers.
So far, there are restrictions on:
Owner capital investment, sponsorship, total spend versus costs, roster make up and size, etc. etc. Each new rule just gives rise to new practices which in turn lead to another new rule. It's like the tax code, it just gets more complex every year. And it solves nothing. Adam Smith, author of The Wealth of Nations, said all this type of regulation leads to shady deals in smoke filled back rooms. We have quite enough of them, already. Just another attempt by the failing old guard to prop themselves up. They pretend it's about competition, so why introduce more anti competitive rules?
Note that the only rules that make sense are those limiting debt....wonder why the G14 refused to accept those?!
City should resist this strongly through the European Clubs Association. The French and Germans love regulation, much of which is self seeking, and they hate what they call "the anglo saxon economic model".We tend to favour free markets, with sensible regs. This proposal is bonkers.
Ancoats read the post quoted above yours, this would limit our spending regardless of how low our debt was or high our revenue was.
but how can that work if the players don't want it. the players are greedy ones and need the clubs like manchester city and PSG like i said its a money go round somebody gets a very nice deal from selling a player it means that money will be spent on new players and selling clubs are happy the player is happy
uefa and football must be daft if they think stopping the money men will be good for the game just like the premier league it got stale back in the 1990s when united was winning it every season the the money was invited into the game come and buy a football club and take on united come and shake up the game and bring in the best players from all over the world was setup the biggest show on earth the premier league needed new money and better players to promote it