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

[Exeter Blue I am here]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

If we miss out on the Chimps League spots this season, we will have a pig of a job to get back in.

I'm an acknowledged glass half empty merchant, but I don't think I'm wrong about the depths of spite UEFA will plumb if they have to. My hope is that City's legal team, having had one taste of what these bent fuckers are like, will not let their guard down for a second again

I can't imagine any scenario whatsoever where we finish outside the top 4. Liverpool will struggle to stay in the top 4 this season, which makes our failure to qualify for the CL even more unlikely.

Liverpool look the weakest of our rivals to me as well, but there were plenty on here refused to take them seriously last year

 

[taconinja]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

I think too many people on here (not you) underestimate the Machiavellian nature of FFP. If the rules are vague, then they are vague at the behest of UEFA, and I hope City are not so foolish as to believe that that vagueness will be of benefit to us as well, cos it won't be. These are absolute c*nts we're dealing with and this is their last chance to nobble us before the BT money kicks in. Even if City comply in this window I do not expect the suspended sanctions to be lifted, nor if we break even. UEFA will simply re-arrange the qualification criteria to suit its own agenda.

We are in a unique situation in that our involvement in the Chimps League, necessarily means that one of G14 old guard has to miss out, and the financial rewards are simply too great for them to stomach such a scenario, which therefore means stopping City by fair means or foul. If an oil baron took over Vfb Stuttgart or Bordeaux, it wouldn't matter a shit, cos Paris and Munich (and clubs like them in other leagues) will qualify in one of the other slots without any bother, but in the Premier League it's a different story.

My ambitions for the season ahead extend no further than a top 4 finish for that very reason, and anything else is a bonus. The £49m spending cap is already having an effect, and whilst we have bought a decent defensive midfielder (but not so decent as to have made the World Cup) and hopefully a promising centre half, who, and I'll be blunt, is not a significant upgrade on DiMichelis, based on the former's indifferent performances in the Europa League last season and the latter's excellent form post-January (although Mangala's pace would be a welcome bonus given our high defensive line), there are some serious hitters being lined up by our competitors. Fabregas, Costa, Lallana, Sanchez and prospectively Vidal and Khaderia, strengthen our rivals to a far greater degree IMO. If we miss out on the Chimps League spots this season, we will have a pig of a job to get back in.

I'm an acknowledged glass half empty merchant, but I don't think I'm wrong about the depths of spite UEFA will plumb if they have to. My hope is that City's legal team, having had one taste of what these bent fuckers are like, will not let their guard down for a second again

"glass half empty"??? Jeez, this reads like the glass was knocked over and then stamped on.
It is vague as hell to us because no information has really been released but I refuse to believe City have accepted anything as half assed as that statement put out by UEFA.

There were plenty on here thought we had nothing to worry about before the FFP decisions were announced, and presumably the club were confident of passing themselves. The fact is though, we didn't. All I'm saying is that I hope we are now fully aware of the nature of the beast. These people are there to hinder us, not assist us.

Doesn't FFP sanctions kick in only if the club takes a loss on the accounts? If we're profitable or break even this year with the standard approved system, they can't really touch us without a huge lawsuit, correct?

 

[Wilf Wild 1937]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

People keep saying that the spending limit is for this window only or at worst for this season only.

Looking at the Settlement Document on page 983 it clearly states as a bullet point that this applies
for 2 full seasons 2014-15 & 2015-16.

The squad restriction of 21, which applies for 2014-15 and that will be lifted for 2015-16, assuming we
financially comply, is a separate bullet point.

Am I missing something here? I know that the club has stated that we won't have any restrictions for
2015-16 but that is not how I read the Settlement Document.

Personally I think that FFP will be thrown out by the courts anyway and if PSG are going to ignore it
good luck to them.

 

[FanchesterCity]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Something that people are overlooking is that whilst the G14 maybe constantly looking for ways to strengthen their positions, there is little honour amongst thieves (not to be taken literally of course).

If another club offers a genuinely realistic proposition of benefiting the other 13, they'll gladly ditch the weakest one of their band.

CL was seen as a way for the top clubs to secure themselves most of the pie, and they didn't want it diluted with lesser teams who took away from their pot. It's a very different situation when you might be helping improve the size of that pot!. And that's their dilemma. Are PSG and City likely to bring something to the table - enough that they might be happy to let them dine at the top table, or even cut two existing clubs loose?

I think they are still undecided about what we can bring to the table, but if we make CL more interesting and thus help bring more money to the table, the G14 will eat their own to have us. We just have to show that we CAN bring things to the table.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

If we miss out on the Chimps League spots this season, we will have a pig of a job to get back in.

I'm an acknowledged glass half empty merchant, but I don't think I'm wrong about the depths of spite UEFA will plumb if they have to. My hope is that City's legal team, having had one taste of what these bent fuckers are like, will not let their guard down for a second again

I can't imagine any scenario whatsoever where we finish outside the top 4. Liverpool will struggle to stay in the top 4 this season, which makes our failure to qualify for the CL even more unlikely.

Liverpool look the weakest of our rivals to me as well, but there were plenty on here refused to take them seriously last year

Yes, but they are lacking bite in attack this season aren't they ;-)

 

[FanchesterCity]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

People keep saying that the spending limit is for this window only or at worst for this season only.

Looking at the Settlement Document on page 983 it clearly states as a bullet point that this applies
for 2 full seasons 2014-15 & 2015-16.

The squad restriction of 21, which applies for 2014-15 and that will be lifted for 2015-16, assuming we
financially comply, is a separate bullet point.

Am I missing something here? I know that the club has stated that we won't have any restrictions for
2015-16 but that is not how I read the Settlement Document.

Personally I think that FFP will be thrown out by the courts anyway and if PSG are going to ignore it
good luck to them.

The restrictions are for 2 years, but they can be reduced for good behaviour.
Essentially UEFA have said "you've been very bad, and we are going to punish you for this year, and until you prove you're playing by the rules, we'll punish you for the year after too".

If City demonstrate they HAVE broken even at the end of this financial year, then (in theory) parts of the sanctions will be lifted. This is why the Chairman says he expects us to be without transfer restrictions next year (because he believes we will break even and that aspect of the sanctions / punishment will be lifted).

We will just have to see if UEFA pull any stunts on us on the mean time.

 

[lloydie]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Manchester City agrees to significantly limit spending in the transfer market for seasons 2014/2015 and 2015/2016. Manchester City further accepts a calculated limitation on the number of new registrations it may include within their “A” List for the purposes of participation in UEFA competitions. This calculation is based on the clubs net transfer position in each respective registration period covered by this agreement.

So even if we break even and other sanctions are lifted this still applies?

 

[Chippy_boy]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

People keep saying that the spending limit is for this window only or at worst for this season only.

Looking at the Settlement Document on page 983 it clearly states as a bullet point that this applies
for 2 full seasons 2014-15 & 2015-16.

The squad restriction of 21, which applies for 2014-15 and that will be lifted for 2015-16, assuming we
financially comply, is a separate bullet point.

Am I missing something here? I know that the club has stated that we won't have any restrictions for
2015-16 but that is not how I read the Settlement Document.

Personally I think that FFP will be thrown out by the courts anyway and if PSG are going to ignore it
good luck to them.

The restrictions are for 2 years, but they can be reduced for good behaviour.
Essentially UEFA have said "you've been very bad, and we are going to punish you for this year, and until you prove you're playing by the rules, we'll punish you for the year after too".

If City demonstrate they HAVE broken even at the end of this financial year, then (in theory) parts of the sanctions will be lifted. This is why the Chairman says he expects us to be without transfer restrictions next year (because he believes we will break even and that aspect of the sanctions / punishment will be lifted).

We will just have to see if UEFA pull any stunts on us on the mean time.

How do you know this?

As soon as the sanctions were announced, there was an obvious discrepancy between UEFA's statement that clearly says that spending restrictions and squad limit restrictions will apply in the 2015/2016 season, and the club statement that says we'll be operating without restriction in that season.

To my knowledge there's been no statement by either party that explains the difference in those positions.

Note, other restrictions imposed by UEFA specifically say - as you suggest - that the 2015/16 restrictions will be lifted provide we comply with the 2014/15 restrictions. This is NOT the case with the transfer spending caps and squad restrictions, which are stated as applying unconditionally for both season 2014/15 AND season 2015/16.

 

[SilverFox2]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Just wonder how much legal stuff will be effective against FIFA.

I read somewhere in the FT that it acts like a Sovereign State and as such is not accountable to any outside body.
It is legally incorporated as a Swiss non-profit organisation so should be subject to the Swiss Government who could force change on FIFA.
Switzerland ought to make international sports organisations based on its territory subject to Swiss criminal law but has been reluctant to do so. Hence, even if criminal activity occurs (eg corruption charges re Quatar), Switzerland will not persue FIFA.

Perhaps the pending FFP court case is different (being non criminal) and maybe any external judgement can be implemented ?

 

[Exeter Blue I am here]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

I can't imagine any scenario whatsoever where we finish outside the top 4. Liverpool will struggle to stay in the top 4 this season, which makes our failure to qualify for the CL even more unlikely.

Liverpool look the weakest of our rivals to me as well, but there were plenty on here refused to take them seriously last year

Yes, but they are lacking bite in attack this season aren't they ;-)

By gum you're right!