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

[Matty]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

For continued success you need around 2 in and 2 out every season. The squad simply has to be freshened up every season.

Lescott has already departed, and it's rumoured Richards will be following suit. We'll certainly be adding 2 (Sagna and, most likely, Fernando) with the distinct possibility we'll add a centre half as well. Job done.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

For continued success you need around 2 in and 2 out every season. The squad simply has to be freshened up every season.

It does but now we have a top class squad, with players who have a re-sale value, our net spend should be lower. Also from a P&L point of view, amortisation is now bottoming out as we either get rid of expensive players like Lescott or tie them down to extended contracts. Getting Nasri, Aguero, Dzeko, Kolarov and Milner signed up to new 4 or 5 year contracts probably saves us about £10m a year, which is equivalent to a gross spend of £50m on new players.

And some of the '2 in' will hopefully start to come from the EDS over the next 3 years or so.

 

[fbloke]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Add in the income from players who are simply not up to the very high levels we now play at and you have a recipe for a FFP profit.

Guidetti, for example, is likely to go either on loan with a fee of a couple of million or permanently for £4-5m - as the cost of developing is chalked off for FFP its win win.

 

[LoveCity]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Looks probable that Mario is moving this summer so City will be entitled to at least 10% of the fee I believe. Arsenal and Monaco are both rumoured to be bidding, so let's hope Milan fleece either.

 

[Centurions]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Looks probable that Mario is moving this summer so City will be entitled to at least 10% of the fee I believe. Arsenal and Monaco are both rumoured to be bidding, so let's hope Milan fleece either.

I'm guessing that's 10% of anything over whatever we sold him for? Around €20 million from memory?

 

[LoveCity]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Looks probable that Mario is moving this summer so City will be entitled to at least 10% of the fee I believe. Arsenal and Monaco are both rumoured to be bidding, so let's hope Milan fleece either.

I'm guessing that's 10% of anything over whatever we sold him for? Around €20 million from memory?

I don't know, there have been a few stories that just said "sell-on fee", but the latest one (in the Star, so yeah) said City would get £2.5m of a theoretical £25m transfer.

 

[Centurions]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Looks probable that Mario is moving this summer so City will be entitled to at least 10% of the fee I believe. Arsenal and Monaco are both rumoured to be bidding, so let's hope Milan fleece either.

I'm guessing that's 10% of anything over whatever we sold him for? Around €20 million from memory?

I don't know, there have been a few stories that just said "sell-on fee", but the latest one (in the Star, so yeah) said City would get £2.5m of a theoretical £25m transfer.

If you just take that as € rather than £ (I doubt The Star differentiates between the two) then it would be 10% of any fee over what they paid.
Fabregas was supposed to have a similar clause which made me suspicious that Barca included the bought and sold fees in their peculiar statement. Not that Barca would do anything dodgy in relation to transfer fees.

 

[route46]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

do we know what city failed FFP on????
was it not allowing certain sponsorships or something else???

 

[grunge]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

do we know what city failed FFP on????
was it not allowing certain sponsorships or something else???

going by announcements it was mostly a technicallity with pre 2010 player wages, Uefa did seem to take offence at sister companies ( NYCFC etc ) paying for expertise too.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

do we know what city failed FFP on????
was it not allowing certain sponsorships or something else???

We failed because our losses were higher than those allowed. I don't believe sponsorships were a problem but the use of revenue from within the group for the sale of IP clearly gave UEFA some concerns, as we agreed not to include those in any future FFP calculations. But the key problem seems to have been our inability to use the wages paid in 2011/12 to players signed prior to June 2010 to offset our losses. I posted on this a while back but it now appears it might be more complicated than that. We might have tried to be a bit too clever and I'm not sure we were ever really in a position to pass FFP this summer. That's why I believe that the sanctions which effectively took out the losses in FY2012 & 2013 and allow us to start with a clean slate in FY2014 are probably the best thing to come out of this.