City & FFP | 2020/21 Accounts released | Revenues of £569.8m, £2.4m profit (p 2395)

[r.soleofsalford]

Did I read right that our £16m fine from 13/14 gets returned to us if we meet targets?

when you say return to us, could you clarify

 

[Paladin]

Did I read right that our £16m fine from 13/14 gets returned to us if we meet targets?

I thought United, Bayern, Barcelona and Real had voted to divide the spoils amongst themselves.

 

[blueincy]

Aye. There's none so blind as those that do not want to see.
And as for the sanctimonious bollox about Abu Dhabi's human rights record (which isn't anywhere near as bad as the USA's, incidentally), it's funny how they weren't so worked up about Shinawatra's record, back when we were no threat to them?
Presumably, Dubai's would have been just dandy too, back in the days when they were waving SOS banners about?

Personally, I enjoyed those comments. A spot of schadenfreude is good for what ails ya.

Read the comments with this playing in the background always helps..

 

[Centurions]

Did I read right that our £16m fine from 13/14 gets returned to us if we meet targets?

No, he got that bit wrong entirely. We don't pay the rest of the £49 million.

 

[moomba]

when you say return to us, could clarify

Just from the infamous posters very good Anfield Wrap email.

they were fined £16m. This fine was ‘suspended’ in the sense that if City’s 2014-15 accounts showed that the club had turned a profit (which they will) the fine would be returned.

I'd not heard that before.

 

[moomba]

No, he got that bit wrong entirely. We don't pay the rest of the £49 million.

Thats what I thought, but would be very happy if I am wrong.

 

[Le Havre Oswald]

well Harris has tweeted


city not in the clear completely as still will be subject to strict FFP monitoring & must meet break-even targets next yr

like every other team? No

 

[blueincy]

No, he got that bit wrong entirely. We don't pay the rest of the £49 million.

Missed the point completely.. Educate the uneducated that's what the op is doing... 9 out of 10 people believe what the rag media pump out..

 

[BlueAnorak]

They must have increased their revenue by around 150m Euros in 1 year

Obviously they didn't so one has to wonder by how much UEFA actually downgraded their 200m Euros per year sponsorship. If it was downgraded to be in line with our £40m per year deal (a deal which encompasses more than their QTA sponsor) they would have needed to find £100m from somewhere

The lack of transparency on UEFAs end in terms of the sponsorship downgrade makes it impossible to know.
This is one of the reasons this new 'voluntary deal' feature of 'FFP 2.0' is BS. It's a corrupt ****'s dream

I actually worked it out and they need to have found £45m (pounds) to cover for the loss of the non fair-value element of the Qatar tourist Authority payment £145m a season drops to £100m a season) - (and yes I mean £). Difficult for them without a massive hike in the TV deal that we got(£35m a season). OI can;t see them spending much more than £75m NET in transfers this summer.

 

[BlueAnorak]

Did I read right that our £16m fine from 13/14 gets returned to us if we meet targets?

No it doesn't. We just don't pay the £33m suspended part of the £49m fne.

 

[CheethamHillBlue]

So; aasuming the leash has been taken off, how come Messi isn't currently sampling the delights of East Manchester then?

Is the correct answer....

Because he is playing in the Copa America Final?

 

[hutton who blue]

Unless you are more experienced in the oil market or read more informed publications about it than I do I think we can disregard that comment Eh?

Opec have refused to cut production enough to stop the price drop as they usually do, instead they have created a formidable glut with the intention of driving the price down to the region of $50-60pB which does affects the whole competing fracking industry in a disasterous way.
Russia is affected but just in a non-vital way really as they don´t really need anything from outside their borders.

But feel free to argue your case by all means

Our owners are not here to fuck about. They are here to mean business. Paltry "rules" set aside by UEFA are not going to deter our owners from their objective. I am not digressing I spoke to a fella with a bad back who had a chiropractor with an excellent reputation who had a mega rich client in the Middle East who wanted his attention. He was flown over to the Middle East and on landing was met by armed bodyguards who whisked him through Customs, no passport required, straight into a van, straight to his client, he performed his duties for his client, was whisked back to the outskirts of the airport in a van, told to get out, the van speeded off and he was left to enter the airport alone. Remember the Iceland volcanic ash a few years ago when all European flights were stopped, indefinitely for safety? Six flights took place at that time regardless. All heading to the Middle East. A Sheik insisted at being home in time and that was that. Our owners are too powerful for any bollocks legislation UEFA can cook up.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Not sure anybody here has ever called him erudite!

Though I've fell out with him as he is essentially a half-dipper fir listening to the Anfield Wrap. A dip if you will

Perhaps he only takes stuff from the green bin?

 

[ojeme]

Is it true that, based on calculations, we are limited to spending £75m (aside income from transfers). If this is the case then I'm thinking how do we then sign Pogba, De Bruyne, Sterling and maybe Baba or Delph given that the maximum we can get from transfers this summer is roughly £60?

 

[aguero93:20]

Is it true that, based on calculations, we are limited to spending £75m

Where are you after getting this from?

 

[ojeme]

Where are you after getting this from?

Where are you after getting this from?

Saw something like that on one of the posts in this forum, can't remember exactly who it was.

 

[aguero93:20]

Saw something like that on one of the posts in this forum, can't remember exactly who it was.

I actually worked it out and they need to have found £45m (pounds) to cover for the loss of the non fair-value element of the Qatar tourist Authority payment £145m a season drops to £100m a season) - (and yes I mean £). Difficult for them without a massive hike in the TV deal that we got(£35m a season). OI can;t see them spending much more than £75m NET in transfers this summer.

Was it this?

 

[manimanc]

Is it true that, based on calculations, we are limited to spending £75m (aside income from transfers). If this is the case then I'm thinking how do we then sign Pogba, De Bruyne, Sterling and maybe Baba or Delph given that the maximum we can get from transfers this summer is roughly £60?

sanctions have been lifted.
we have no limits to our spending.
is your glass half empty pal?
there isn`t any negative slant to this story .....

 

[ojeme]

Was it this?

Exactly! The post had a lot of jargons so I couldn't make anything out of it except that according to him we couldn't spend more than more than £75m and since I didn't see any post refuting this I thought it necessary to at least find out what other bluemooners (perhaps the ones that understood the post better than me) had to say about it.

 

[Neville Kneville]

sanctions have been lifted.
we have no limits to our spending.
is your glass half empty pal?
there isn`t any negative slant to this story .....

This isn't true.

We are not under sanctions but we still have to comply with ffp.