City amongst nine "super-clubs" according to UEFA report

[vmsuhail]

And letting clubs function with massive debt needs to be looked at as well

Nothing more than a wild card entry for history in favour of them.

 

[SWP's back]

That's absolute bollocks. Liverpool can only buy Southampton players so they can't be deemed a superclub. For me a superclub would be any that has a realistic chance of attracting the best players in the world. PSG, Bayern, Barca, Real, City, Chelsea, Rags are those clubs. Arsenal refuse to pay the money or they would be included.

Ozil was £43m. That's not a small amount.

More than Chelsea usually pay for anyone.

 

[asahartford1]

Of those superclubs 6 are the clubs with the highest net debt in world football.

Eufa could ask those they have defined as a superclub to remove net debt over a period of say 5 years.

 

[Exeter Blue I am here]

Of those superclubs 6 are the clubs with the highest net debt in world football.

Eufa could ask those they have defined as a superclub to remove net debt over a period of say 5 years.

They could, but we all know they won't. Any tightening of the FFP rules will be exclusively limited to the areas unique only to City. State sponsorship deals, CFG group etc etc

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

They could, but we all know they won't. Any tightening of the FFP rules will be exclusively limited to the areas unique only to City. State sponsorship deals, CFG group etc etc

They've already changed the rules in that respect. There's a rule that states or individuals can't contribute more than 30% of a club's revenue. So that involves adding together all the income derived from partners such as Etihad, Aabar, Etisalat & the Abu Dhabi Tourist Authority, even though those aren't related parties according to the usual definition and the deals are for no more than market value.

And another change was about how the reporting perimeter is defined. So we have CFG, which owns City (which is the licensed entity for FFP purposes) and also owns City Football Services & City Marketing. The latter two employ staff who provide services to City, for which they charge us. They also provide services to NYCFC & Melbourne, for which those clubs also pay. The new rules now require us to report the results of the two other companies as part of our FFP submission, despite the fact that we're charged for the services they provide on a commercial basis.

If I've understood that right, we have therefore to include expenses (wages etc) incurred by these companies that don't relate to clubs covered by FFP. As an example, if CFS charge City £15m, New York £3m and Melbourne £2m and have total expenses of £25m, the £5m loss has to be included with our results.

 

[supercity88]

Ozil was £43m. That's not a small amount.

More than Chelsea usually pay for anyone.

Yeah but Chelsea do dodgy deals don't they. Ozil wasn't wanted by anyone, he was offloaded from Real

 

[Blue Pete]

Interesting to see what "fair" rules they will introduce which can impact on us ( and to some extent PSG) but not the others. I can only see our lack of debt as a financial difference. So new rules which help those clubs in debt will probably be introduced.

 

[Chi-town blues]

White towel ?
Nothing seems to work to bring city down.

 

[Newman Noggs]

Interesting to see what "fair" rules they will introduce which can impact on us ( and to some extent PSG) but not the others. I can only see our lack of debt as a financial difference. So new rules which help those clubs in debt will probably be introduced.

I reckon it will involve academies and a limit on the number of players a club can "stockpile" thus ensuring there is no "hoovering up" of young talent of the sort that leads to historic clubs being humiliated at junior level.

Throw in a limit on the number and ages of overseas youngsters and a limit on loaning out young players and job's a good 'un.

In case that doesn't work, I see a further assault on our multi-club-based business model.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Interesting to see what "fair" rules they will introduce which can impact on us ( and to some extent PSG) but not the others. I can only see our lack of debt as a financial difference. So new rules which help those clubs in debt will probably be introduced.

Let me guess. If your ground is within 10 miles of another club that has a debt of over 50% of its turnover, you have to deduct that debt from your revenue.