City & FFP | 2020/21 Accounts released | Revenues of £569.8m, £2.4m profit (p 2395)
- Thread starter Marvin
- Start date
The Light Was Yellow Sir
Well-Known Member
I also think Madrid are somewhat closely linked, via various sponsorships, to Abu Dhabi and would probably be reluctant to bite the hand that has fed them. Their new stadium expansion was almost entirely funded through IPIC (an Abu Dhabi government investment company) whilst they also have a massive deal with Emirates airlines.
Smacks of the bully boy crying when the new kid arrives at school and not only tells him he won't hand over his dinner money but gives him a good hiding as well!!!
blueparrot
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 7 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 33,490
Didn't theirs and our original punishment include a monitoring period, don't know if they are still under that. I seem to remember we were taken off it.
balotelli's back pocket
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Jan 2016
- Messages
- 9,521
Nope, lost to swansea. Wenger out :-)
taleofbluehalves
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 5,941
We were.
taleofbluehalves
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 5,941
I'd suggest Madrid would only be pointing at PSG. We seem to have a good relationship with Madrid.
The wider issue is should a country sponsor a club? If China took over Newcastle as an example it would be a rather slow trajectory because of the new rules on limiting salary increases and FFP. In the long run I'm not sure I'd want a lot of state sponsored clubs plus there is no guarantee new investment leads to sucess as Villa and Blackburn have found out.
I think despite some criticism we have excellent owners and as a club we are on the up. Our model is a sound one for financial sustainability.
They were happy enough to get Net Spend Top 4
City_Sean
Well-Known Member
We're fine in regards to spending this summer, plenty of wages freed up, and recouping £80m+ with a net spend of £120m is better than I anticipated. Our club is in a massive position financially, we've also got a new kit deal to be renegotiated soon, something which should surely bring us more than the £20m we're on now.
Kit deal is £12M last time I heard.
This UEFA investigation of PSG is interesting.
PSG bought Neymar for £200m, and they have a loan agreement with Monaco for Mbappe which commits them to pay around £150m in 12 months. At the end of the window they sold Aurier and Matuidi, According to https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/fc-paris-saint-germain/transfers/verein/583/saison_id/2017 they have a net spend of around £160m which is £25m more than Man Utd. They are now committed to another £150m approx for Mbappe in the following year.
I think they will be OK on the break even requirement. They will do the maths and could sell in the Jan window if necessary but UEFA could go after them on the basis of their domestic sponsorship. I think it's reasonable that the national club of France should have commercial income comparable to MCFC but there's politics involved here.
PSG have though with these spending commitments taken themselves out of the transfer market for a couple of seasons which is significant.
On a footballing level I think they need to be successful this season. i.e. win the French league and get to the last 4 at least of the Champions League. They have not played that fluently in the French league in the opening weeks but they have won their games. On paper they should be very successful, but the Champions League comes down to a couple of ties after the group stages when small things can be decisive. Anything can happen in short. They have taken their spending to the limit this season so that if they struggle on the pitch there will be no coming back for 2-3 seasons i.e. they wont be able to spend their way out of it which is what the top clubs usually do.
PSG bought Neymar for £200m, and they have a loan agreement with Monaco for Mbappe which commits them to pay around £150m in 12 months. At the end of the window they sold Aurier and Matuidi, According to https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/fc-paris-saint-germain/transfers/verein/583/saison_id/2017 they have a net spend of around £160m which is £25m more than Man Utd. They are now committed to another £150m approx for Mbappe in the following year.
I think they will be OK on the break even requirement. They will do the maths and could sell in the Jan window if necessary but UEFA could go after them on the basis of their domestic sponsorship. I think it's reasonable that the national club of France should have commercial income comparable to MCFC but there's politics involved here.
PSG have though with these spending commitments taken themselves out of the transfer market for a couple of seasons which is significant.
On a footballing level I think they need to be successful this season. i.e. win the French league and get to the last 4 at least of the Champions League. They have not played that fluently in the French league in the opening weeks but they have won their games. On paper they should be very successful, but the Champions League comes down to a couple of ties after the group stages when small things can be decisive. Anything can happen in short. They have taken their spending to the limit this season so that if they struggle on the pitch there will be no coming back for 2-3 seasons i.e. they wont be able to spend their way out of it which is what the top clubs usually do.
I was a bit surprised to see the Citywatch story suggesting a FFP investigation but I think Ric is probably right. One journalist has put 2 and 2 together and got 5. I don't know much about football finance but we appear to be financially strong and City's commercial income does not as far as I know have an inflated UAE source. We have the Etihad Airlines deal which is relative small fry compared to our rival clubs.
When the window closed I was thinking that this Summer has been spent completing the squad rebuilding and next Summer we will be able to cherry pick the stars. maybe the land will look very different by then though?
Neville Kneville
Well-Known Member
People are forgetting, they could sell Neymar & Mbappe, maybe for a profit. They may be worth more next year, than they are now, once Utd pay 200 mil for Bale, or some other ridiculous move. In fact I bet Utd would buy Neymar for more money than PSG paid.
As for UEFA, they have set up a system for clubs hadning over their accounts for assessment. It's none of their fucking business, or La Liga's, what is in a club's accounts prior to that period & PSG should refuse to let them see anything. If they are in breach of the rules when the time comes to hand in the accounts, then it's UEFA's business.
I don't see PSG having any problems at all financially.
Don't think that table is very accurate. Our net spend was around 120 in the balance sheet thread. Even Chelsea is much less. Think the Rags are 141 net spend.
City net spending - 135.5m
FFP ? fuck La Liga
blueparrot
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 7 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 33,490
I do think it's tight and they know it, that's why they were haggling over the wording of Mbappe's loan. That said I think as long as they can keep Mbappe deal off this years books they'll be fine.
portisheadblue
Well-Known Member
transfermarkt dont seem to have the Jadon Sancho transfer. The BBC used them as a source in the past and I wouldn't be surprised if that's why. There are also a lot of loan fees and then there's the issue of loan fees and undisclosed fees. A murky world.
Neville Kneville
Well-Known Member
If they have done the Mbappe deal without first making sure UEFA can't move the goalposts & corruptly sanction them, then indeed, they are in grave danger.
But from the previous reports, it appeared that they have made absolutely sure of this being within the rules, before signing the deal. If UEFA then resort to corruption I imagine PSG will go absolutely ballistic with legal actions.
So I just can't see this being a problem at all. I don't believe they would do this if they thought there was any chance it could backfire.
If UEFA were able to sanction them, it would be draconian measures, they would throw the book at them. PSG know this & would be completely stupid to risk it.
For signing one player, however talented, it's not worth the gamble.
The Nike deal has to be improved dramatically. 12m per year is a joke. Nike did very well to ties us down for years for so small amount.
Adidas paying United 75m with them having their worst kind of results since Ferguson retired. With hardly any CL performance from them recently.
Would expect 40-50m per year deal and hopewe change from Nike too. If we sign a contract for 5-6 years again for 20m per year we are fools.
Adidas paying United 75m with them having their worst kind of results since Ferguson retired. With hardly any CL performance from them recently.
Would expect 40-50m per year deal and hopewe change from Nike too. If we sign a contract for 5-6 years again for 20m per year we are fools.
Maybe but the argument that other clubs receive Middle Eastern cash does not blunt the argument that some clubs are inflating their own commercial income. You need another argument to knock that back. Man Utd have the largest sponsorship deals in English football. They do not come on this agenda because they are arranged on a commercial basis as presumably are the Abu Dhabu and Qatari deals with Spanish clubs