UEFA FFP investigation - CAS decision to be announced Monday, 13th July 9.30am BST

[Parisian]

Like I did say perhaps due to my ignorance, and if you read carefully I did not have a go at psg it was aimed at UEFA. Perhaps I am just looking at the sums involved regarding both Mbappe and Neymar, but I still don't understand how they can afford both players. Especially given the lower profile of both psg and the French league.
My point and maybe I didn't spell it out was that it appears uefa are prepared to let some things go if it isn't City or that's how it seems.
It seems and always will seem bizarre that a club that has no debt and runs at a profit and can sustain itself is in the wrong.

First of all, as SWP explained, with the fair market value applied to their contracts, you should stop thinking PSG had an allowed sponsorship of 200 or 100 M with QTA. PSG worked with 50 M.
Secondly, City could have totally bought Neymar and Mbappé (and was quite interested in the second). City does spend more money than PSG overall. They are just spending in 40/50 M on lots of players. PSG will spend 145 M on Mbappé and then spend 0 on Buffon and 0 on Alves. 222 on Neymar and 0 on Choupo Moting and 15 on Bernat. You see the trends.
As SWP explained, City approach is more sound and balanced but PSG is on a lower profile league. As a consequence, they need that "star factor" to draw attention and get that sponsorship, marketing money. One dimension you ignored about the value of the non related party deals PSG are getting is PSG is, thanks to their strategy, one of the biggest kit seller worldwide. If you consider the kit as an advertising space, it makes sense for some companies to offer big money. For example, Nike will renew with PSG for a similar amount than what CFG is getting from Puma. And the bonus is that PSG does have that Jordan brand collaboration, so the overall value of their kit deal should be higher than City's one.

Every club in the world does loan player with a option to buy or compulsory option : Coman loaned by Juve to Bayern, Douglas Costa loaned by Bayern to Juve, James Rodriguez loaned by Real to Bayern, Lo Celso loaned by PSG to Betis Seville, and a lot more in Italy. Why is it because it involved PSG and the option is bigger than usual (145 M), people are seeing a shady deal ? For your information, since the deal was compulsory, UEFA had publicly declared from the start that they considered it as a direct transfer and not a loan. Which means that the Mbappé transfer was already in the FFP calculation from the first year of loan he had in PSG.

From what SWP and i have explained to you, i'm sure you can understand now how preconceived views are hard to change. This is exactly the same behaviour and process of thoughts other clubs fans have towards City. They are certain City is guilty and no matter what you say, that conviction will stay. Here, you are certain, despite all the facts shown, that PSG is a little bit guiltier, shaddier than City and should have been punished more than City and that alone is the sign that Nasser corrupted UEFA.

 

[Bozo]

I mean, has anyone ever investigated the awarding of the World Cup to Qatar?

 

[Parisian]

1) PSG don’t get anywhere near as much (for FFP purposes - at 50m per year from QTA) than we get from Etihad.

2) how is the Mbappé purpose not in the spirit of the rules? We’ve sold players before on a one year loan with a compulsion for the other team to buy at the end of it. Negredo being one of them.

I do wish people would stop trying to have a go at PS fucking G and simply concentrate of UEFA being a bunch of ****s.

PSG May have spent big of two players but we have spent significant sums on LOTS of players and have a higher annual amortisation cost per year. Personally I’d rather have a very strong squad rather than a good squad with one or two stars in it and am perfectly happy with City’s approach.

I have to add, though, that QTA is special in the sense this deal is not the main kit sponsor sponsorship.
QTA pays for the "visit Qatar" around the stadium, for the winter tour (PSG plays in Qatar and goes to the cool places of Qatar and does local activities) and for PSG being often (always) associated to Qatar, hence the inherent publicity.
The shirt deal was Emirates at 25 M€ and will be ALL (Accor Hotels) at 60/75 M€ from July.

So, one could say that this value was high for a non first kit deal.

 

[Parisian]

I mean, has anyone ever investigated the awarding of the World Cup to Qatar?

Since we are talking about FFP, what is the relevance of Qatar World Cup with the decision UEFA FFP CFCB is taking ?

It is like asking, as Beckenbauer is involved in Germany World Cup corruption case and Hoeness is a known tax evading convict, why Bayern is not suspicious in the eye of FFP.

A reminder about the World Cup corruption : https://heigos.hypotheses.org/4680
From the 1998 World Cup in France to the 2022 World Cup in Qatar, according to the charges and guilty pleas, all electoral procedures turned out to have been influenced by the bribery of some FIFA officials.
https://www.independent.co.uk/sport...-with-former-adidas-ceo-s-money-a6696936.html


It is a known fact that you won't get to host a World Cup without corruption. Saying otherwise is being delusional or just lying through the teeth.

 

[nmc]

1) PSG don’t get anywhere near as much (for FFP purposes - at 50m per year from QTA) than we get from Etihad.

2) how is the Mbappé purpose not in the spirit of the rules? We’ve sold players before on a one year loan with a compulsion for the other team to buy at the end of it. Negredo being one of them.

I do wish people would stop trying to have a go at PS fucking G and simply concentrate of UEFA being a bunch of ****s.

PSG May have spent big of two players but we have spent significant sums on LOTS of players and have a higher annual amortisation cost per year. Personally I’d rather have a very strong squad rather than a good squad with one or two stars in it and am perfectly happy with City’s approach.

Totally agree - PSG have been subjected to a similar process of indiscriminate attacks from UEFA. It’s obvious like City they pose a threat to the hegemony of certain ‘elite clubs’ and those clubs via UEFA have sought to stop PSG in their tracks. The purchase of Mbappe and Neymar clearly upset Barca and Real who thought (and think) they have the God given right to cherry pick whomever they want from other clubs. Personally I think we should show more solidarity with PSG and I applaud them sticking it up La Liga et al. UEFAs attempts to downgrade PSGs sponsors is farcical in the extreme - I don’t recall UEFA having a problem with Liverpool’s Warrior kit deal - which was the highest our league had seen up to that time and Liverpool were not even in Europe that season. It does seem PSG like ourselves are singled out for additional scrutiny and a set of rules designed to impact our unique business models. There are clearly big issues between Qatar and the UAE but on this matter PSG and City would be stronger acting together.

 

[richards30]

Barcelona and Real Madrid are the two biggest hypocrites in world football

 

[taconinja]

Barcelona and Real Madrid are the two biggest hypocrites in world football

Hey, don't underestimate Bayern Munich!

 

[Breadsnapper]

First of all, as SWP explained, with the fair market value applied to their contracts, you should stop thinking PSG had an allowed sponsorship of 200 or 100 M with QTA. PSG worked with 50 M.
Secondly, City could have totally bought Neymar and Mbappé (and was quite interested in the second). City does spend more money than PSG overall. They are just spending in 40/50 M on lots of players. PSG will spend 145 M on Mbappé and then spend 0 on Buffon and 0 on Alves. 222 on Neymar and 0 on Choupo Moting and 15 on Bernat. You see the trends.
As SWP explained, City approach is more sound and balanced but PSG is on a lower profile league. As a consequence, they need that "star factor" to draw attention and get that sponsorship, marketing money. One dimension you ignored about the value of the non related party deals PSG are getting is PSG is, thanks to their strategy, one of the biggest kit seller worldwide. If you consider the kit as an advertising space, it makes sense for some companies to offer big money. For example, Nike will renew with PSG for a similar amount than what CFG is getting from Puma. And the bonus is that PSG does have that Jordan brand collaboration, so the overall value of their kit deal should be higher than City's one.

Every club in the world does loan player with a option to buy or compulsory option : Coman loaned by Juve to Bayern, Douglas Costa loaned by Bayern to Juve, James Rodriguez loaned by Real to Bayern, Lo Celso loaned by PSG to Betis Seville, and a lot more in Italy. Why is it because it involved PSG and the option is bigger than usual (145 M), people are seeing a shady deal ? For your information, since the deal was compulsory, UEFA had publicly declared from the start that they considered it as a direct transfer and not a loan. Which means that the Mbappé transfer was already in the FFP calculation from the first year of loan he had in PSG.

From what SWP and i have explained to you, i'm sure you can understand now how preconceived views are hard to change. This is exactly the same behaviour and process of thoughts other clubs fans have towards City. They are certain City is guilty and no matter what you say, that conviction will stay. Here, you are certain, despite all the facts shown, that PSG is a little bit guiltier, shaddier than City and should have been punished more than City and that alone is the sign that Nasser corrupted UEFA.

Thanks for explaining that I get what you are saying about preconceived ideas based solely on one source or the press.
However the cynic in me says there are deals being done by UEFA behind closed doors that help some and hinder others. Is the guy you mention from PSG who is now something to do with UEFA a coincidence? Again the cynic in me says not.
I don't pretend to understand FFP regulations but in a nutshell you can only spend what you earn. City do that and then we're questioned as to where the money has come from, which is strange because it was said to be ok initially.
I really don't understand why UEFA have gone about this the way they have, any investigation is now flawed and will not stand up to scrutiny.
The fact that some quarters of the media are saying they know what we're guilty of because UEFA have told them are either telling the truth or lying. They would be silly to lie as they'd leave themselves wide open, but again why would UEFA divulge this information?
It seems for whatever reason UEFA are he'll bent on sullying our name and to me it defies logic.

 

[Breadsnapper]

Since we are talking about FFP, what is the relevance of Qatar World Cup with the decision UEFA FFP CFCB is taking ?

It is like asking, as Beckenbauer is involved in Germany World Cup corruption case and Hoeness is a known tax evading convict, why Bayern is not suspicious in the eye of FFP.

A reminder about the World Cup corruption : https://heigos.hypotheses.org/4680
From the 1998 World Cup in France to the 2022 World Cup in Qatar, according to the charges and guilty pleas, all electoral procedures turned out to have been influenced by the bribery of some FIFA officials.
https://www.independent.co.uk/sport...-with-former-adidas-ceo-s-money-a6696936.html


It is a known fact that you won't get to host a World Cup without corruption. Saying otherwise is being delusional or just lying through the teeth.

And this is exactly the problem, why believe that the Qataris would operate PSG any differently. I am not saying that is what has happened at PSG but assumptions will be made. Simply the truth doesn't matter.

 

[nmc]

Hey, don't underestimate Bayern Munich!

Or the Dippers

 

[SWP's back]

Perhaps I am just looking at the sums involved regarding both Mbappe and Neymar, but I still don't understand how they can afford both players.

Call it £400m, on five year contracts, that’s £80m per year amortised. Sounds a lot (and it is to some extent) but take into account City’s player amortisation is £129m per year.

That £49m difference is the same as another £245,000,000 worth of players (on five year deals).

Plus having them both raises PSG’s profile and has in turn brought in bigger sponsors and increased their global appeal.

 

[blueparrot]

Call it £400m, on five year contracts, that’s £80m per year amortised. Sounds a lot (and it is to some extent) but take into account City’s player amortisation is £129m per year.

That £49m difference is the same as another £245,000,000 worth of players (on five year deals).

Plus having them both raises PSG’s profile and has in turn brought in bigger sponsors and increased their global appeal.

The bigger issue for FFP may come when negotiating contract renewals for them and others. I've said repeatedly wages and how it effects other players contracts is much more of an issue when targeting players than their fees as far as FFP is concerned.

 

[Parisian]

Thanks for explaining that I get what you are saying about preconceived ideas based solely on one source or the press.
However the cynic in me says there are deals being done by UEFA behind closed doors that help some and hinder others. Is the guy you mention from PSG who is now something to do with UEFA a coincidence? Again the cynic in me says not.
I don't pretend to understand FFP regulations but in a nutshell you can only spend what you earn. City do that and then we're questioned as to where the money has come from, which is strange because it was said to be ok initially.
I really don't understand why UEFA have gone about this the way they have, any investigation is now flawed and will not stand up to scrutiny.
The fact that some quarters of the media are saying they know what we're guilty of because UEFA have told them are either telling the truth or lying. They would be silly to lie as they'd leave themselves wide open, but again why would UEFA divulge this information?
It seems for whatever reason UEFA are he'll bent on sullying our name and to me it defies logic.

I have already explained the election of Nasser Al Khelaifi.

ECA can elect and nominate two people that will have a seat in the executive committee. UEFA merely ratifies the decision made by ECA. Before, it was Agnelli (Juve) and Gazidis (ex-Arsenal). When Gazidis left Arsenal for Milan AC, the rules states that the two seats can't be given to members from the same football association (here the Serie A). The consequence is Gazidis had to forfeit his position and a new election had to be done. Nasser, surprisingly, won that election. I'll not tell you how and why he won, i don't know, and i doubt anyone not in ECA know. The bottom line is he got elected by ECA members (the other clubs presidents and CEO) despite his vocal opponents like Tebas, the MU guy, etc. If i would hasard a guess, i would say that it involves the new Champions League format because PSG became vocal about ECA when there was that proposition (that i dislike) which will benefit the club greatly.


If you want to be cynical, you should note that tolmie said here that there is a guy from the Emirates in the CFCB chambers that is like secret services chief. Wouldn't a guy with such a prominent role in the UAE tip the balance in the CFCB dealings ? Why would UEFA be after City, then, since they have a guy inside the chambers that decide punishment ?

About the leaks, i have already shown they are quite frequent and usual. It can even be considered as usual practice for UEFA. The reason why ? Because it doesn't/didn't hurt them till now. UEFA considers itself as above everything as far as european football is concerned and as far as the old cartel is supporting them. Everyone is happy when there are news about PSG or City about to fail FFP : press, fans, other clubs. And it is an indirect sanction as it can hinder/lower some investment by potential sponsors. One thing that should be done first, imo, is to find a way to make all those fuckers like Tebas, Beckenbauer, Hoeness, Barca, Agnelli, Real shut the fuck up about other clubs matters. Why is it ok for Tebas and co. to pressure UEFA to do something about other competitors ? Even if we assume UEFA is neutral (they are not), it creates a climate where it becomes important or vital to sanction said clubs if one were to give a just ruling. When PSG escapes sanction, what is the sentiment, even here in a City fan club ? That FFP was not just and didn't sanction as it should. And the only explanation is PSG has bribed their way. No ones notice that by FFP regulation, when inflated deals are put in a fair market value, the club is not instantly punished. He is given the chance to balance his account if the 3 year period is not over. And this is exactly what PSG has done. So why are everyone so angry PSG didn't get punished when they have effectively breached no rule ! The UEFA statement is there is no wrongdoing !

In City case, it is not a matter of break even rule, it is about lying/misleading the monitoring inspectors. This is what Football Leaks said about your practices. In PSG Football Leaks, they only talked (as relevant facts for UEFA FFP) about the inflated sponsoring deals, which were already investigated by UEFA. Football Leaks didn't bring a new charge in PSG case.This is why i don't see why you want to compare two cases that have nothing to do with each other. The only similar trait is that UEFA wants you guilty and will use every method they can to achieve that goal.

 

[Parisian]

The bigger issue for FFP may come when negotiating contract renewals for them and others. I've said repeatedly wages and how it effects other players contracts is much more of an issue when targeting players than their fees as far as FFP is concerned.

I'll give you some ammunition about PSG potential circumventing of FFP about Neymar.
This year, he became the official worldwide ambassador of QNB, the Qatar National Bank.
I think we can see that as a potential wage raise without going through PSG accounts.


Apparently, PSG is trying to renew Mbappé. This will impact their FFP status because the deal was structured as 145 + 35 bonus M€. This 35 M option is activated whenever Mbappé signs a new contract with PSG or is sold. It is a big problem for PSG to find the right timing to bring in that renewal (if the player agrees to it, of course).

 

[blueparrot]

I'll give you some ammunition about PSG potential circumventing of FFP about Neymar.
This year, he became the official worldwide ambassador of QNB, the Qatar National Bank.
I think we can see that as a potential wage raise without going through PSG accounts.

Yes, though I wasn't just talking about PSG. When Pep says we can't afford Greizman I think he's talking wages and the effect on KDB etc when they want to renew, not the transfer fee.

 

[Breadsnapper]

I have already explained the election of Nasser Al Khelaifi.

ECA can elect and nominate two people that will have a seat in the executive committee. UEFA merely ratifies the decision made by ECA. Before, it was Agnelli (Juve) and Gazidis (ex-Arsenal). When Gazidis left Arsenal for Milan AC, the rules states that the two seats can't be given to members from the same football association (here the Serie A). The consequence is Gazidis had to forfeit his position and a new election had to be done. Nasser, surprisingly, won that election. I'll not tell you how and why he won, i don't know, and i doubt anyone not in ECA know. The bottom line is he got elected by ECA members (the other clubs presidents and CEO) despite his vocal opponents like Tebas, the MU guy, etc. If i would hasard a guess, i would say that it involves the new Champions League format because PSG became vocal about ECA when there was that proposition (that i dislike) which will benefit the club greatly.


If you want to be cynical, you should note that tolmie said here that there is a guy from the Emirates in the CFCB chambers that is like secret services chief. Wouldn't a guy with such a prominent role in the UAE tip the balance in the CFCB dealings ? Why would UEFA be after City, then, since they have a guy inside the chambers that decide punishment ?

About the leaks, i have already shown they are quite frequent and usual. It can even be considered as usual practice for UEFA. The reason why ? Because it doesn't/didn't hurt them till now. UEFA considers itself as above everything as far as european football is concerned and as far as the old cartel is supporting them. Everyone is happy when there are news about PSG or City about to fail FFP : press, fans, other clubs. And it is an indirect sanction as it can hinder/lower some investment by potential sponsors. One thing that should be done first, imo, is to find a way to make all those fuckers like Tebas, Beckenbauer, Hoeness, Barca, Agnelli, Real shut the fuck up about other clubs matters. Why is it ok for Tebas and co. to pressure UEFA to do something about other competitors ? Even if we assume UEFA is neutral (they are not), it creates a climate where it becomes important or vital to sanction said clubs if one were to give a just ruling. When PSG escapes sanction, what is the sentiment, even here in a City fan club ? That FFP was not just and didn't sanction as it should. And the only explanation is PSG has bribed their way. No ones notice that by FFP regulation, when inflated deals are put in a fair market value, the club is not instantly punished. He is given the chance to balance his account if the 3 year period is not over. And this is exactly what PSG has done. So why are everyone so angry PSG didn't get punished when they have effectively breached no rule ! The UEFA statement is there is no wrongdoing !

In City case, it is not a matter of break even rule, it is about lying/misleading the monitoring inspectors. This is what Football Leaks said about your practices. In PSG Football Leaks, they only talked (as relevant facts for UEFA FFP) about the inflated sponsoring deals, which were already investigated by UEFA. Football Leaks didn't bring a new charge in PSG case.This is why i don't see why you want to compare two cases that have nothing to do with each other. The only similar trait is that UEFA wants you guilty and will use every method they can to achieve that goal.

Like I have said I am not having a go at PSG rather UEFA. The decisions they make don't make sense and seem to be based on a whim.
I am not getting into a debate with you but my view is that it all stinks, some clubs are treated differently than others. Whether there is corruption, back handed deals or whatever that's open to each individual's view.

 

[Parisian]

Yes, though I wasn't just talking about PSG. When Pep says we can't afford Greizman I think he's talking wages and the effect on KDB etc when they want to renew, not the transfer fee.

Yeah. It is very hard to maintain a good wage structure. But i think it is mainly political. If City really wanted him, they can afford Griezmann. City was closely linked with Messi, at one point, and i doubt they would not pay him handsomely. Messi, smartly, used that interest to get his 100 M/year at Barca (i.e; the club that are telling the others how they should spend wisely their money...).

 

[blue ranger]

I have already explained the election of Nasser Al Khelaifi.

ECA can elect and nominate two people that will have a seat in the executive committee. UEFA merely ratifies the decision made by ECA. Before, it was Agnelli (Juve) and Gazidis (ex-Arsenal). When Gazidis left Arsenal for Milan AC, the rules states that the two seats can't be given to members from the same football association (here the Serie A). The consequence is Gazidis had to forfeit his position and a new election had to be done. Nasser, surprisingly, won that election. I'll not tell you how and why he won, i don't know, and i doubt anyone not in ECA know. The bottom line is he got elected by ECA members (the other clubs presidents and CEO) despite his vocal opponents like Tebas, the MU guy, etc. If i would hasard a guess, i would say that it involves the new Champions League format because PSG became vocal about ECA when there was that proposition (that i dislike) which will benefit the club greatly.


If you want to be cynical, you should note that tolmie said here that there is a guy from the Emirates in the CFCB chambers that is like secret services chief. Wouldn't a guy with such a prominent role in the UAE tip the balance in the CFCB dealings ? Why would UEFA be after City, then, since they have a guy inside the chambers that decide punishment ?

About the leaks, i have already shown they are quite frequent and usual. It can even be considered as usual practice for UEFA. The reason why ? Because it doesn't/didn't hurt them till now. UEFA considers itself as above everything as far as european football is concerned and as far as the old cartel is supporting them. Everyone is happy when there are news about PSG or City about to fail FFP : press, fans, other clubs. And it is an indirect sanction as it can hinder/lower some investment by potential sponsors. One thing that should be done first, imo, is to find a way to make all those fuckers like Tebas, Beckenbauer, Hoeness, Barca, Agnelli, Real shut the fuck up about other clubs matters. Why is it ok for Tebas and co. to pressure UEFA to do something about other competitors ? Even if we assume UEFA is neutral (they are not), it creates a climate where it becomes important or vital to sanction said clubs if one were to give a just ruling. When PSG escapes sanction, what is the sentiment, even here in a City fan club ? That FFP was not just and didn't sanction as it should. And the only explanation is PSG has bribed their way. No ones notice that by FFP regulation, when inflated deals are put in a fair market value, the club is not instantly punished. He is given the chance to balance his account if the 3 year period is not over. And this is exactly what PSG has done. So why are everyone so angry PSG didn't get punished when they have effectively breached no rule ! The UEFA statement is there is no wrongdoing !

In City case, it is not a matter of break even rule, it is about lying/misleading the monitoring inspectors. This is what Football Leaks said about your practices. In PSG Football Leaks, they only talked (as relevant facts for UEFA FFP) about the inflated sponsoring deals, which were already investigated by UEFA. Football Leaks didn't bring a new charge in PSG case.This is why i don't see why you want to compare two cases that have nothing to do with each other. The only similar trait is that UEFA wants you guilty and will use every method they can to achieve that goal.

Forgetting the politics of UAE and Qatar, I don’t know whether any tension between the owners or not, I wonder why City and PSG haven’t joined forces and worked against the devious workings of UEFA.

 

[BlueLou82]

Hope not only are you found innocent, but your owner actually wipes the floor with them to get these stupid rules removed altogether.

This rule is solely designed and implemented to keep the footballing status quo and stop anyone else posing a threat.

Plus UEFA should be embarassed about accusing anyone of breaking rules when they, along with FIFA are corrupt to the core.

 

[Parisian]

Like I have said I am not having a go at PSG rather UEFA. The decisions they make don't make sense and seem to be based on a whim.
I am not getting into a debate with you but my view is that it all stinks, some clubs are treated differently than others. Whether there is corruption, back handed deals or whatever that's open to each individual's view.

From the get-go, there is a vested interest to keep City and PSG in check. They quite didn't manage it, so they are going by hook or crook. On PSG they have nothing else than inflated deal, so it is the way. On City, they have nothing else than the non truthful reporting of financial affair, blah blah stuff, so it is the way. Other big clubs can't be threatened by FFP because it was designed in a way it could affect the City and PSG but not the cartel.
Just watch exactly what UEFA is implementing recently and you'll know who they serve :
-they gave more guaranteed spot for the 4 big leagues to please the big historical clubs,
-they introduced an historical coefficient in CL cash prize (so that means even an underachieving historical club will get potentially more than the overachieving non historical club) to please the big historical clubs,
-they want a new reform of the CL that will give guaranteed spot, guaranteed money, bigger cash prize to the selected few clubs of their choices. Again, acting as a cartel.