Re: City & FFP (continued)
waspish said:
mcfcinprague said:
tonea2003 said:
genuine question to those with a bit more FFP knowledge than i possess
with the leading european clubs spending money like its going out of fashion
how come they can? are their revenues so far in front of ours and PSG'S
we supposed to be 6th in revenue?
so apart from they are out to stop us line, were our finances so out of line from the others
We made losses and they made profits, which is why we got fined and restrictions
And the rules are that fcuking stupid if the scum spend 300m this summer and make a loss they won't have there accounts go through with a fine toothpick by UEFA because they are not in Europe! Fucking Madness
That's a bit misleading. They don't suddenly become exempt. They don't get checked this year because they aren't in Europe, but when they get back in, this years accounts will still count.
Otherwise, it would actually be beneficial to deliberate drop out of CL for a year, spend 200 million, then come back in the year after.
Regarding other people's posts. Revenue is not profit. You can have a 1 billion revenue and make less than someone with a £1 revenue (if that quid is profit, and the 1 billion leads to a loss).
The big clubs DO make a hell of a lot more money than we do. We might have won the league a couple of times, but lets not kid ourselves, we are long way behind. Our progress is fantastic, but our growth won't be exponential forever. Sometimes, the bigger you get, the harder it becomes to squeeze more money out of, so the growth can start to slow down a bit, or worse, flatten off, or decline (shrinkage).
We're doing great, absolutely great, but the massive clubs are simply a good way ahead.
There are other factors too... Spanish TV money has been split massively in favour of the top two clubs. In the PL, we earn more money as a combined league, but we split the money evenly resulting in less ACTUAL money to individual clubs.
Barca and Real don't have to pay the same wages as us, because they are more attractive clubs, and thus can persuade players to join them far more easily. This is arguably also true of transfer fees.
Yes they break world records, but they also buy players at better prices, and sell them on for better prices too.
And moving on to the likes of Villa....
It's probably right to suggest that FFP poses a real problem for larger clubs like Villa, but at the same time, they'll still blame the likes of City for making things so uncompetitive that any new buyer will look at us and know they can't compete (even if FFP were abolished). And in a sense, that true too.
I would argue that we are not the cause of this issue though - it always existed when clubs like United and Liverpool are simply huge and were always likely to be able to outspend Villa. It was always going to be hard for them to buy success anyway. It was hard for us... 100m was never going to be enough. It cost us about 500m to be 'pretty sure' of success.
Despite all that, it's probably true that we've just made it even harder than it was before. But Villa didn't mind it when their sugar daddy (Lerner) invested in O'Neill's spending. Admittedly it was nowhere near our level, but it still pushed many other clubs down the pecking order, in the same way we are doing now.
They played the spending game too (as have most clubs), but learned that spending similar amounts to the big boys for a couple of years isn't enough. You have to spend a LOT MORE than they are doing just to catch up, then have to sustain it at a comparable level to them to remain competitive.
We've been lucky. Villa haven't. Simple as that
