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

[BoyBlue_1985]

PSG made an example? Not as long as there's a Thursday in the week.

The same media you lot on here are getting would up by this morning are claiming PSG are getting hit with a massive fine (£30 million) banned from registering new CL players and being set a wage limit on the squad they can register. Make your mind up.

Jesus that hard core, sounds like we must be looking at £15 mill then

 

[aguero93:20]

What about Liverpool - I thought they have recorded losses in excess of £50m

Allegedly, they weren't in European competition in 11/12 along with Monaco so neither face FFPR this year, although they will next year. Since there's no mention of that in their own legislation, if true it'll be a minefield for UEFA if ourselves or PSG challenge a sanction.

It would be the end of FFPR, I am certain of it. It breaches all sorts of anti-competitive EU legislation I have no doubt.

Bizarrely though, we don't want that either, so that really is our weapon of last resort. Whereas we do have a very rich owner, no-one is keen on spending more money on players and wages that he would otherwise have to. FFPR is actually a desirable thing for club owners since it acts as a downward pressure on costs, which is why most of the PL clubs were in favour of introducing something similar.

So we are probably broadly in favour of it, so long as we can negotiate our way through this rather tricky interim period whilst we transition from local no hopers to global super brand :-)

^^ This might be true, but I still won't be in favour of it and I hope it crashes and burns and it's not for the sake of mcfc that I hope that, we're well able too take care of ourselves these days.

 

[john@staustell]

PSG made an example? Not as long as there's a Thursday in the week.

The same media you lot on here are getting would up by this morning are claiming PSG are getting hit with a massive fine (£30 million) banned from registering new CL players and being set a wage limit on the squad they can register. Make your mind up.

Jesus that hard core, sounds like we must be looking at £15 mill then

I think it's all made up to be honest.

 

[The Stockport Iniesta]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

So the Two clubs that ffp was set up to stop, are the only Two clubs to get their names leaked. Now there's a coincidence.

 

[BoyBlue_1985]

The same media you lot on here are getting would up by this morning are claiming PSG are getting hit with a massive fine (£30 million) banned from registering new CL players and being set a wage limit on the squad they can register. Make your mind up.

Jesus that hard core, sounds like we must be looking at £15 mill then

I think it's all made up to be honest.

Well we have both failed so something will happen

 

[aguero93:20]

Jesus that hard core, sounds like we must be looking at £15 mill then

I think it's all made up to be honest.

Well we have both failed so something will happen

We know most of the reporters talking about punishments wanted to see us banned, so they're probably very disappointed and bitter right now, it could well be made up.
All depends on the manner of 'failed' BB. We were always going to fail and have to use the pre-2010 clause, so it could well be that.

 

[nmc]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

What about Liverpool - I thought they have recorded losses in excess of £50m

Allegedly, they weren't in European competition in 11/12 along with Monaco so neither face FFPR this year, although they will next year. Since there's no mention of that in their own legislation, if true it'll be a minefield for UEFA if ourselves or PSG challenge a sanction.

It would be the end of FFPR, I am certain of it. It breaches all sorts of anti-competitive EU legislation I have no doubt.

Bizarrely though, we don't want that either, so that really is our weapon of last resort. Whereas we do have a very rich owner, no-one is keen on spending more money on players and wages that he would otherwise have to. FFPR is actually a desirable thing for club owners since it acts as a downward pressure on costs, which is why most of the PL clubs were in favour of introducing something similar.

So we are probably broadly in favour of it, so long as we can negotiate our way through this rather tricky interim period whilst we transition from local no hopers to global super brand :-)

The whole FFP process just highlights the serious flaws in Football regulation. UEFA have been pushed into this via the paranoia of the old G14 clubs terrified that 'new money' might destroy their cosy cartel. None of the G14 clubs want to stop spending - they just don't want anyone else to be allowed to. United were the ones that pushed for an equivalent regime in the Premier League - but one bad season and they want to outspend everyone to buy their way back to the top - how does that square with their arguments 12 months ago. FFP is seriously bad for Football - it limits and deters Equity investment which is a joke but it could discourage sponsorship if UEFA are going to start ruling that certain deals are illegal. I'm remain optimistic that the whole process will collapse and will prove to be Napoleon's Waterloo (200th anniversary next year!) the thought of that idiot at FIFA is too much to stomach.

 

[St Helens Blue (Exiled)]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

when do we find out the following points?

How we have failed?
What the punishment is going to be?
When is Gill going to fuck right off?

 

[blueinsa]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Stop fretting. We will be well aware of whats about to happen and it will have been planned for as we have been working closely with UEFA on this for a while.

Token punishments im going for and nothing that will in any way hurt us too much.

 

[BoyBlue_1985]

I think it's all made up to be honest.

Well we have both failed so something will happen

We know most of the reporters talking about punishments wanted to see us banned, so they're probably very disappointed and bitter right now, it could well be made up.
All depends on the manner of 'failed' BB. We were always going to fail and have to use the pre-2010 clause, so it could well be that.

Well thats PSG's problem I guess because they have just blatantly over inflated a deal to help them it wasn't even subtle

 

[aguero93:20]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

when do we find out the following points?

How we have failed?
What the punishment is going to be?
When is Gill going to fuck right off?

1. May
2. May
3. Very quickly if he tries to influence the guy from the EU court on the CFCB.

-- Tue Apr 29, 2014 10:06 am --

Well we have both failed so something will happen

We know most of the reporters talking about punishments wanted to see us banned, so they're probably very disappointed and bitter right now, it could well be made up.
All depends on the manner of 'failed' BB. We were always going to fail and have to use the pre-2010 clause, so it could well be that.

Well thats PSG's problem I guess because they have just blatantly over inflated a deal to help them it wasn't even subtle

I think so, they haven't made even a token attempt to increase other streams of revenue and are doing nothing in youth development and infrastructure.<br /><br />-- Tue Apr 29, 2014 10:08 am --<br /><br />

Stop fretting. We will be well aware of whats about to happen and it will have been planned for as we have been working closely with UEFA on this for a while.

Token punishments im going for and nothing that will in any way hurt us too much.

Good man, that's exactly my view. They won't want to give us anything we'll be willing to challenge, the gloves have stayed on up until now and UEFA won't want them to come off.

 

[cibaman]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

I find this process whereby Arsenal or Liverpool can appeal against our punishment very bizarre. If we accept our punishment and they appeal, would we have undermined our position by accepting guilt? And if you were in their position would you appeal knowing that the eventual consequence could be a court case leading to the abolition of FFP?

 

[George Hannah]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Manchester City appeared on Monday night to have paid the price for tabling obscure income figures which suggested they had earned more than £46m for selling their services, as it emerged Uefa had deemed the club to be in breach of Financial Fair Play rules.

City had initially been confident of passing the FFP test but Uefa has been sceptical of the way that City reduced their financial losses by claiming they had earned £24.5m from the sale of their own players’ image rights to a company they have never been willing publicly to name.

Such a financial arrangement has never been attempted by a football club before. City claimed an additional £22.45m income, in their latest annual financial results, by stating they were selling their intellectual property to “related parties”, including City’s American and Australian franchises and the club’s own women’s team.

Those two figures enabled City to scrape breaking even within the FFP regime. But it emerged last night that Uefa’s club financial control board has now made offers to City and Paris Saint-Germain, whom it deems in breach of the rules. If Uefa finds both those income figures void, City could be in breach to the tune of more than £40m. The club was not available for comment last night.

City are one of fewer than 20 clubs in breach. The club can either accept the penalty Uefa is proposing, under a plea bargaining system or try to negotiate a lesser punishment, ahead of the control board meeting on Thursday and Friday. The penalty could range from a reprimand or a fine up to restrictions on the squad for European competition next season.

Now that City have failed FFP, a “directly affected party” has 10 days to appeal against any attempt by the club to cut a deal with Uefa to reduce their sanction of a likely Champions League ban. City would then be exposed to a Uefa tribunal.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/blow-for-manchester-city-as-uefa-finds-club-have-broken-financial-fair-play-rules-9299476.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/foot ... 99476.html</a>

 

[aguero93:20]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

I find this process whereby Arsenal or Liverpool can appeal against our punishment very bizarre. If we accept our punishment and they appeal, would we have undermined our position by accepting guilt? And if you were in their position would you appeal knowing that the eventual consequence could be a court case leading to the abolition of FFP?

They can't challenge if we accept.

 

[hertsblue]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

League title is in our own hands. Yep. Try and distract us, Yep.
Watch the media witch hunt now against us. Probably will get to the stage where USA is allowed to invade Manchester to get rid of our evil regime here.
If I was City I would be watching any allegations from the gutter press for half truths, inaccurate reporting and take strong action against such reports.
Just ignore all the press until the facts come out. I have 100% faith in our owners and they know what they are doing and what they will do if needed

 

[St Helens Blue (Exiled)]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Manchester City appeared on Monday night to have paid the price for tabling obscure income figures which suggested they had earned more than £46m for selling their services, as it emerged Uefa had deemed the club to be in breach of Financial Fair Play rules.

City had initially been confident of passing the FFP test but Uefa has been sceptical of the way that City reduced their financial losses by claiming they had earned £24.5m from the sale of their own players’ image rights to a company they have never been willing publicly to name.

Such a financial arrangement has never been attempted by a football club before. City claimed an additional £22.45m income, in their latest annual financial results, by stating they were selling their intellectual property to “related parties”, including City’s American and Australian franchises and the club’s own women’s team.

Those two figures enabled City to scrape breaking even within the FFP regime. But it emerged last night that Uefa’s club financial control board has now made offers to City and Paris Saint-Germain, whom it deems in breach of the rules. If Uefa finds both those income figures void, City could be in breach to the tune of more than £40m. The club was not available for comment last night.

City are one of fewer than 20 clubs in breach. The club can either accept the penalty Uefa is proposing, under a plea bargaining system or try to negotiate a lesser punishment, ahead of the control board meeting on Thursday and Friday. The penalty could range from a reprimand or a fine up to restrictions on the squad for European competition next season.

Now that City have failed FFP, a “directly affected party” has 10 days to appeal against any attempt by the club to cut a deal with Uefa to reduce their sanction of a likely Champions League ban. City would then be exposed to a Uefa tribunal.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/blow-for-manchester-city-as-uefa-finds-club-have-broken-financial-fair-play-rules-9299476.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/foot ... 99476.html</a>

Are we not supposed to worry about shit like this being put in the public domain? I fucking worry simply because the knives are out for us. When will the club make a response??They have to surely.Huge game Saturday and the media are at us again..

 

[George Hannah]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

I find this process whereby Arsenal or Liverpool can appeal against our punishment very bizarre. If we accept our punishment and they appeal, would we have undermined our position by accepting guilt? And if you were in their position would you appeal knowing that the eventual consequence could be a court case leading to the abolition of FFP?

They can't challenge if we accept.

but

Now that City have failed FFP, a “directly affected party” has 10 days to appeal against any attempt by the club to cut a deal with Uefa to reduce their sanction of a likely Champions League ban. City would then be exposed to a Uefa tribunal.

 

[St Helens Blue (Exiled)]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

It's all about our muslim owners for me. 100%
Those dinosaurs at uefa fifa..All racist cunts

 

[aguero93:20]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Manchester City appeared on Monday night to have paid the price for tabling obscure income figures which suggested they had earned more than £46m for selling their services, as it emerged Uefa had deemed the club to be in breach of Financial Fair Play rules.

City had initially been confident of passing the FFP test but Uefa has been sceptical of the way that City reduced their financial losses by claiming they had earned £24.5m from the sale of their own players’ image rights to a company they have never been willing publicly to name.

Such a financial arrangement has never been attempted by a football club before. City claimed an additional £22.45m income, in their latest annual financial results, by stating they were selling their intellectual property to “related parties”, including City’s American and Australian franchises and the club’s own women’s team.

Those two figures enabled City to scrape breaking even within the FFP regime. But it emerged last night that Uefa’s club financial control board has now made offers to City and Paris Saint-Germain, whom it deems in breach of the rules. If Uefa finds both those income figures void, City could be in breach to the tune of more than £40m. The club was not available for comment last night.

City are one of fewer than 20 clubs in breach. The club can either accept the penalty Uefa is proposing, under a plea bargaining system or try to negotiate a lesser punishment, ahead of the control board meeting on Thursday and Friday. The penalty could range from a reprimand or a fine up to restrictions on the squad for European competition next season.

Now that City have failed FFP, a “directly affected party” has 10 days to appeal against any attempt by the club to cut a deal with Uefa to reduce their sanction of a likely Champions League ban. City would then be exposed to a Uefa tribunal.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/blow-for-manchester-city-as-uefa-finds-club-have-broken-financial-fair-play-rules-9299476.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/foot ... 99476.html</a>

So, UEFA are going to try and put a fair value on the image rights of the following players:
Yaya
Silva
Aguero
Vinny
Nasri
Fernandinho
etc etc.
If this is true (I doubt it is, the independent ran a similar article before UEFA began examining our accounts) then it should be fun, I reckon those image rights are under value if anything.

 

[blue b4 the moon]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

The not in Europe line so can't be touched is a worry....just thinking of how the rags could spend if they had any money to start with but other teams who drop out ie AC will have a field day.