PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

jrb said:
  • Amid all the growing scrutiny on clubs' spending, the Premier League's Profit and Sustainability Rules have been designed to keep some form of control.
  • The likes of Everton, Manchester City, Chelsea and Nottingham Forest are among the clubs to be sailing dangerously close to the line.
  • Now, GIVEMESPORT has taken a look at every Premier League club's PSR status.
www.givemesport.com

Premier League PSR tracker: Every club's FFP status

Nottingham Forest are the latest side to have been docked points after a PSR breach, but who else is at risk?
www.givemesport.com www.givemesport.com
Click to expand...

It’s Give Me Sport they produce stuff like this one their website to then get a pile in on social media. How have they come up with that figure for City when they’ve made profit the last few seasons? Then they have Spurs at +5 when they’ve been making losses and had to sell Harry Kane to stop them failing psr on their newer accounts. Awful stuff.
 
CC1 said:
So - those who understand all this - are we feeling a bit negative about the outcome now? it seems a bit glum on here??
Click to expand...

I really don't think you can base anything at all of anything at all, on the collectively amplified mood on here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CC1
jrb said:
  • Amid all the growing scrutiny on clubs' spending, the Premier League's Profit and Sustainability Rules have been designed to keep some form of control.
  • The likes of Everton, Manchester City, Chelsea and Nottingham Forest are among the clubs to be sailing dangerously close to the line.
  • Now, GIVEMESPORT has taken a look at every Premier League club's PSR status.
www.givemesport.com

Premier League PSR tracker: Every club's FFP status

Nottingham Forest are the latest side to have been docked points after a PSR breach, but who else is at risk?
www.givemesport.com www.givemesport.com
Click to expand...
These red cartel fans really do live in cuckoo land, I mean what is this shite?
We're sailing dangerously close to the line?

What line would that be, the one the author of this crap has just snorted?

Desperate these fuckers.
 
BlueLou82 said:
On another note, we could welcome another into our little club. The 'breaches' club is getting bigger
Click to expand...

Some club owners want a system where there's no chance of relegation, with PSR we've virtually got that, same three clubs coming and going down each season as they can't spend to compete.
 
jrb said:
  • Amid all the growing scrutiny on clubs' spending, the Premier League's Profit and Sustainability Rules have been designed to keep some form of control.
  • The likes of Everton, Manchester City, Chelsea and Nottingham Forest are among the clubs to be sailing dangerously close to the line.
  • Now, GIVEMESPORT has taken a look at every Premier League club's PSR status.
www.givemesport.com

Premier League PSR tracker: Every club's FFP status

Nottingham Forest are the latest side to have been docked points after a PSR breach, but who else is at risk?
www.givemesport.com www.givemesport.com
Click to expand...
Clickbait nonsense mate. I very much doubt that we're in any danger of failing PSR
 
StillBluessinceHydeRoad said:
I think what is interesting that the PL rules stipulate that they require a statement from a director (or equivalent) of the sponsoring company to say that the deal is at fair market value. In PL terms they want a statement from one plotter that there is no plot!. It may be fair to point out that City and Etihad produced documentary evidence that City performed everything they had been contracted to perform and that Etihad paid what they had agreed to pay. So City don't seem to have a problem. The PL might, though, if it persists with its categorisation of associated parties and deals. The independent regulator may also wish to know why the PL is determined to stop money coming into the game when it is needed quite desperately. But then it might also wish to know why the sustainability of a growing number of clubs is put at risk by points deductions in the name of profitability and sustainability .....
Click to expand...
I paid £250 to play at Maine Road in the match prior to Bob Brightwell's testimonial.
I thought it was fair value.
My missus said that I must have been out of my fucking mind.
And she's a lifelong Blue.
All subjective innit?
 
jrb said:
  • Amid all the growing scrutiny on clubs' spending, the Premier League's Profit and Sustainability Rules have been designed to keep some form of control.
  • The likes of Everton, Manchester City, Chelsea and Nottingham Forest are among the clubs to be sailing dangerously close to the line.
  • Now, GIVEMESPORT has taken a look at every Premier League club's PSR status.
www.givemesport.com

Premier League PSR tracker: Every club's FFP status

Nottingham Forest are the latest side to have been docked points after a PSR breach, but who else is at risk?
www.givemesport.com www.givemesport.com
Click to expand...
I think the figures for City are wrong. They have overstated losses for the period. Quelle surprise! I contacted the writers of the report and told them that I thought their numbers were wrong. Strangely, I have not heard from them.
 
Our revenues are, in simple terms, derived from...

Match day sales
TV payments
Prize money
Player Sales
Sponsorships/partners
Equity funding subject to FFP/PSR

Does anyone know what percentage of our total revenue is derived from Sponsorship and what percentage of that is from Etihad Airways ?. The PL cartel despise our deal with Etihad and are doing everything they can to illegitimise it. But it may not be that significant as it once was. If we can replace it with a non APT deal and smash the 115 it will business as usual. Onwards and upwards !
 
M18CTID said:
Clickbait nonsense mate. I very much doubt that we're in any danger of failing PSR
Click to expand...
According to my figures, which are from the published accounts, our aggregate losses over the 3 years to 2022 are £81.9m. That will include the Covid season, where we had no ticket revenue, which would be around £55m.

So that will get added back, along with the normal allowances for spending on youth/women's football, which will be at least £75m, probably more. So we're absolutely in no danger of breaching PSR. It's pure clickbait.

Over the 3 years to 2023 our aggregate profit is just under £125m.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
According to my figures, which are from the published accounts, our aggregate losses over the 3 years to 2022 are £81.9m. That will include the Covid season, where we had no ticket revenue, which would be around £55m.

So that will get added back, along with the normal allowances for spending on youth/women's football, which will be at least £75m, probably more. So we're absolutely in no danger of breaching PSR. It's pure clickbait.

Over the 3 years to 2023 our aggregate profit is just under £125m.
Click to expand...
I know who's figures I believe.
Thanks blue
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
According to my figures, which are from the published accounts, our aggregate losses over the 3 years to 2022 are £81.9m. That will include the Covid season, where we had no ticket revenue, which would be around £55m.

So that will get added back, along with the normal allowances for spending on youth/women's football, which will be at least £75m, probably more. So we're absolutely in no danger of breaching PSR. It's pure clickbait.

Over the 3 years to 2023 our aggregate profit is just under £125m.
Click to expand...
It’s bizarre they look to have put a fair amount of work into the article yet our figure is completely wrong could not be right unless they have made a decision to exclude certain income without any rules from any body or even explanation. It’s even worse when the source link takes you to our last set of accounts which isn’t in the period mentioned and shows a massive profit but covers some of the calendar year mentioned
 
LeonardoDaVnci said:
Our revenues are, in simple terms, derived from...

Match day sales
TV payments
Prize money
Player Sales
Sponsorships/partners
Equity funding subject to FFP/PSR

Does anyone know what percentage of our total revenue is derived from Sponsorship and what percentage of that is from Etihad Airways ?. The PL cartel despise our deal with Etihad and are doing everything they can to illegitimise it. But it may not be that significant as it once was. If we can replace it with a non APT deal and smash the 115 it will business as usual. Onwards and upwards !
Click to expand...
Try https://bluecitybrain.substack.com/p/manchester-citys-202223-finances for 10 years of figures (but not a commerical partner breakdown) from @BlueBrain (i think - not posted since sept 2023)
 
WRicko said:
It’s bizarre they look to have put a fair amount of work into the article yet our figure is completely wrong could not be right unless they have made a decision to exclude certain income without any rules from any body or even explanation. It’s even worse when the source link takes you to our last set of accounts which isn’t in the period mentioned and shows a massive profit but covers some of the calendar year mentioned
Click to expand...
There are lots of experts, espcially in finance, at the moment. Some are more expert than others. The name for this sub group of experts is KFA's.
 
The Stockport Iniesta said:
Masters is the **** in charge, he's the one conniving with and doing the deals for the redshirts in the back rooms. He's the one who had to pass a utd and dipper interview to get the job. He's the **** doing their bidding and bringing charges. Scudamore was a far stronger and able person for the job, and I'm sorry to see a blue fighting Masters corner.

He's a greasy, pole climbing, arse licking red shill ****.
Click to expand...
Masters is an employee of the Premier League, which is owned by the 20 clubs in it.

However, with ManUre, the Dippers, ArseAnal & Spuds having power so heavily weighted in their favour, it's fair to say that Masters is merely the Cartel clubs' puppet.

They tell him to jump, he asks how high. They tell him to bend over, he asks dry or vaseline today. That's his job & if he doesn't like it, there are several arse-licking yes men waiting in the wings who're more than happy to replace him & take their orders from the Red Mafia & Spuds.
 
WRicko said:
It’s bizarre they look to have put a fair amount of work into the article yet our figure is completely wrong could not be right unless they have made a decision to exclude certain income without any rules from any body or even explanation. It’s even worse when the source link takes you to our last set of accounts which isn’t in the period mentioned and shows a massive profit but covers some of the calendar year mentioned
Click to expand...
It's not bizarre at all, how many just on here have clicked on it? How many non City fans have clicked on it just because our name is there?
 
Centurions said:
It's not bizarre at all, how many just on here have clicked on it? How many non City fans have clicked on it just because our name is there?
Click to expand...
I don’t think you understand my point wasn’t that the fact the article exists is odd it makes perfect sense that it does and it should exist what’s odd is our figures not making any sense especially when it’s not even written to grab anti city click bate
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top