Kylian Mbappe

Status
Not open for further replies.
SWP's back said:
The Monaco VP who said yesterday that if Mbappe left, it would be for sporting and not financial reasons.
Click to expand...
Ah hadn't heard that.

Without reading anything else, I would have interpreted his comments as "we are not selling Mbappe just to make money but to re-invest the money in Monaco to help it develop and grow". Rather than "our prime concern is to sell Mbappe to the club that plays football the right way"
 
Young Blue said:
I am not saying we would deliberately fail FFP. No one knows how complicated future transfers and fees play out.

We have already failed FFP once and been punished, that was not clever. Maybe Uefa changed the rules? maybe we overspent?
(Didn't Txiki and Sorano have a firm that had some financial problems before they came to City?)

I don't think they would deliberately mess up but Pep is probably pushing hard for the best players and if both Sanchez and Mbappe become available maybe we wont be able to balance the books from player sales? @waspish is saying we can spend £500m with FFP and @BimboBob is saying I am an idiot for saying we might buy Sanchez and Mbappe.

I love the club and don't want us to mess up and all humans mess up sometimes!
Click to expand...

I think you're falling for the media narrative.

We failed because they back dated the rules and made up new ones along the way.

It's like if Pizza was made illegal today and they then fined everyone who ate Pizza yesterday.
 
domalino said:
Which was exactly my point...
Click to expand...

except you posted the day before that, just after there had been some optimistic noises on here.

The point I was making is that after a month or so of people on here and in european press linking us with Mbappe we were not in he same position we were with Walker and Mendy odds wise both of whom were heavily odds on.

Even with the possibly red herringish photoshoot of yesterday we are still between 9/4 and 4/1.



Having said all that these markets are very thin, not a lot of money required to change the prices, so are a pretty unreliable guide.

Personal view is that despite the global appeal of Madrid, we look a better fit, young team growing together and all that.
 
Not being funny, and I am aware I'm stopping old ground, but if this was replaced with Madrid/madrids old training ground at an event for the people who sponsor their kit then I would be very concerned. Interesting that because it's us people still refuse to believe it might happen.

I for one am very giddy, already booked my tattoo and, just in case, my season ticket is next to the shredder. Ready to be disposed of if city let us all down
 
TheThirdDeano said:
Not being funny, and I am aware I'm stopping old ground, but if this was replaced with Madrid/madrids old training ground at an event for the people who sponsor their kit then I would be very concerned. Interesting that because it's us people still refuse to believe it might happen.

I for one am very giddy, already booked my tattoo and, just in case, my season ticket is next to the shredder. Ready to be disposed of if city let us all down
Click to expand...

i hear you mate, ive already had my tattoo done so ive got my arm next to the shredder.
 
SilverFox2 said:
We as fans will support our team through thick and thin and have seen the attendance figures in the dim and distant past misrepresented by various owners for whatever financial purpose. We assume our cash was shall we say misdirected.

Not all of us earn our living within the accountancy sector so perhaps somebody could help us understand the terminology that allows our Business Plan to develop within the framework of a set of rules that appear to prevent unlimited investment yet allow unlimited debt.
Click to expand...
I think you misunderstood my lighthearted joke about @Martin*'s post. ;-)
 
Last edited:
Exeter Blue I am here said:
That notwithstanding I am still at something of a loss in understanding what our financial limits are. At the time of signing Neymar, PSG hadn't already spent £210m, and amortisation or not £370m is a phenomenal amount to spend in one window, particularly when TV and EPL prize money combined only came to about £150m I think.
Not concerned by it, just trying to get my head around it
Click to expand...

£370m would be an astonishing amount to spend in one window; although you are presumably referring to a gross spend and the net will ultimately be lower than that. However, from an accounting perspective, the impact of the transfer fees in and out hits the profit and loss account in different periods; although both have some impact in the current financial year. Any profit or loss made of sales of player registrations is taken this year, whilst the fees paid are amortised over the lives of the players' contracts so approximately a fifth will be taken each year, including this one. That amounts to £74m per year if we spend £370m. The total amortisation in City's last set of accounts was £94m and there was a net 269k left to amortise; a big chunk of which will have gone now but there will also have been last season's purchases added to the pot.

I can't be arsed to try and work out how much amortisation we can now afford but I am sure City's Finance Dept have done those sums and, unless City intend to challenge UEFA, and if we spend £370m it will mean the amortisation is expected to be affordable without becoming loss making. Net net, it doesn't feel to me as though it wouldn't just about be within budget; especially if more and more of the squad are on some form of performance related pay that essentially means bonuses for winning things are paid for by the extra income that generates.

The bottom line here is that you don't need a bunch of Einstein's in your Finance Department to budget with a reasonable degree of accuracy for your transfer budget.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top