Why are you jumping to such absolutist descriptions of my thoughts on this? I don't think they're the same, I just think they're similar enough to some of our own dealings that it's worth bringing our dealings up again.
I think we'll find out a lot of things about Neymar's various transfers when he's long since retired and the people at UEFA, FIFA, Barca, Santos, and PSG who allowed the transfers to go ahead have either died or stepped away from the game, if you catch my drift. Mbappe's moves too, for that matter.Yeah. What Barcelona and Valencia did is not shady. It is smart accounting.
Shady is more like when Barcelona bought Neymar for 40 something M€ and it turned out the transfer was worth close to 90 M€ (and even then, the true value is unknown).
I don't agree but I think we'll just end up repeating ourselves.Yes but we didn't, and haven't, effectively trade 2 players.
We paid a loan fee and his wages.
The two scenarios are not close to being comparable
I don't think we did anything wrong, but it's a little convenient to flag the agreement made between Barcelona and Valencia to circumvent FFP as something inherently corrupt when we ourselves have engaged in similar dealings with clubs we've literally founded.
Well, Neymar transfer to PSG is simple : release clause paid. Same as lot of release clauses paid in Spain. You will get Rodri the same way very soon.I think we'll find out a lot of things about Neymar's various transfers when he's long since retired and the people at UEFA, FIFA, Barca, Santos, and PSG who allowed the transfers to go ahead have either died or stepped away from the game, if you catch my drift. Mbappe's moves too, for that matter.
Oh, absolutely, we've all seen it for what it is ever since we were taken over and FFP was hurried into the rule book. I don't think it was created to directly target us, but we were just a high profile and timely example of the kind of investment UEFA intended for FFP to stop, where one single person funnels their own money into a football club. We sneaked in just as the drawbridge was pulled up. We got lucky.I agree with the first part in as much as FFP is inherently corrupt and clubs shouldn't have to perform financial contortions to comply. So I wouldn't criticise PSG, Barca or anyone for failing to comply. What other clubs (legally) do to be successful is none of our business as ours is none of theirs. Where I draw the line is in a) people pretending that FFP is some sort of legitimate and well-meaning "law" b) the manifestly different application of those "laws" depending on who is breaching them and c) the contrasting ways such "breaches" are represented in the media.
I think you will find a lot of us disagree with you.Oh, absolutely, we've all seen it for what it is ever since we were taken over and FFP was hurried into the rule book. I don't think it was created to directly target us, but we were just a high profile and timely example of the kind of investment UEFA intended for FFP to stop, where one single person funnels their own money into a football club. We sneaked in just as the drawbridge was pulled up. We got lucky.
Totally different situations.I think you will find a lot of us disagree with you.
FFP was definitely brought it to stop us and other non “Old Boys” clubs from breaking up the cartel.
After AC Milan agreeing a one year ban, I honestly fear the worse and the Club might have to resort to legal proceedings.
I looked at that and thought they got a result there. Two year ban reduced to passing up a Europa League campaign.I think you will find a lot of us disagree with you.
FFP was definitely brought it to stop us and other non “Old Boys” clubs from breaking up the cartel.
After AC Milan agreeing a one year ban, I honestly fear the worse and the Club might have to resort to legal proceedings.
bullshit it wasn’t brought in to do anything other than stop us. They smelt change on the wind coming from the Middle East and created rules directly opposing what we were doing, and then when it became apparent we might still comply they changed the rules.Oh, absolutely, we've all seen it for what it is ever since we were taken over and FFP was hurried into the rule book. I don't think it was created to directly target us, but we were just a high profile and timely example of the kind of investment UEFA intended for FFP to stop, where one single person funnels their own money into a football club. We sneaked in just as the drawbridge was pulled up. We got lucky.
Oh, no, I agree with that side of it. I wasn't clear there at all, apologies. I don't think it was designed to stop City specifically, but I believe it was designed to make sure that success stories like ours couldn't be achieved en masse. They were happy to allow City to join the big boys club so long as they constantly had the opportunity to undermine us and treat us like shit, but if too many clubs got wind that you could disrupt the cabal with some investment, then there'd be trouble, and so FFP was set up. As Hopper said in A Bug's Life: "You let one ant stand up to us, then they all might stand up. Those puny little ants outnumber us a hundred to one. And if they ever figure that out, there goes our way of life."I think you will find a lot of us disagree with you.
FFP was definitely brought it to stop us and other non “Old Boys” clubs from breaking up the cartel.
After AC Milan agreeing a one year ban, I honestly fear the worse and the Club might have to resort to legal proceedings.
Have responded to another post asking the same question. Wasn't very clear in the one you've quoted, apologies.bullshit it wasn’t brought in to do anything other than stop us. They smelt change on the wind coming from the Middle East and created rules directly opposing what we were doing, and then when it became apparent we might still comply they changed the rules.
You seem very naive about FIFA and yet remarkably skeptical of city’s behavior.
Why didn’t you mention the marketing reasons/global identity creation relating to the creation of a sister club in a growing MLS?
How the fuck do you work our we saved ourselves a ton of money?We founded New York City and immediately loaned Lampard from them. We saved ourselves a tonne of money and got a useful squad player for a season. It wasn't the same as this Barca / Valencia agreement but it's fishy enough for UEFA to come sniffing, and as far as we're all aware they haven't done yet. My point is that it's hard for us to take the moral high-ground in this instance when we've exploited loopholes for our own gain in similar ways.
For example, we've bought players from football clubs we own before loaning them out to raise their value and profit from their eventual transfers. We've attempted this (or something similar) with Luke Brattan, Aaron Mooy, Anthony Caceres, Mix Diskerud, Jack Harrison, Eirik Johansen, David Villa, Angelino, Shay Facey, and Yangel Herrera. The loophole exists so we've exploited it, but that doesn't stop it from being shady.
We founded New York City and immediately loaned Lampard from them. We saved ourselves a tonne of money and got a useful squad player for a season. It wasn't the same as this Barca / Valencia agreement but it's fishy enough for UEFA to come sniffing, and as far as we're all aware they haven't done yet. My point is that it's hard for us to take the moral high-ground in this instance when we've exploited loopholes for our own gain in similar ways.
For example, we've bought players from football clubs we own before loaning them out to raise their value and profit from their eventual transfers. We've attempted this (or something similar) with Luke Brattan, Aaron Mooy, Anthony Caceres, Mix Diskerud, Jack Harrison, Eirik Johansen, David Villa, Angelino, Shay Facey, and Yangel Herrera. The loophole exists so we've exploited it, but that doesn't stop it from being shady.
I am sure i read that Milan had failed FFP 5 years out of 6 so this G14 team has got away with it very very leniently,no transfer bans no fine and all previous transgressions have been wipedTotally different situations.
Milan is in a terrible financial situation in regards of the break even rule. They simply couldn't get away with it, so they opted for an all-inclusive (mild) sanction.
City is in a good financial situation. And they can deny having mislead UEFA investigators. It is harder for UEFA to prove alleged City tricks than to point out Milan books are not balanced.
I think we have different definitions of "shady" in this instance, but that's fine.
Sorry but that wasn't shady at all.Shady is more like when Barcelona bought Neymar for 40 something M€ and it turned out the transfer was worth close to 90 M€ (and even then, the true value is unknown).
Totally different situations.
Milan is in a terrible financial situation in regards of the break even rule. They simply couldn't get away with it, so they opted for an all-inclusive (mild) sanction.
City is in a good financial situation. And they can deny having mislead UEFA investigators. It is harder for UEFA to prove alleged City tricks than to point out Milan books are not balanced.