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

StillBluessinceHydeRoad said:
The point I'm making is that Platini had no idea how complex the problems of regulating football finance was and so his idea sounded good in the abstract but was near impossible to realise. The elite clubs were horrified when he talked about controlling debt, for obvious reasons, and they threatened action through the courts to stop him. Debt has always been accepted as a means of raising capital for investment and UEFA would have lost heavily in the courts. The threat of secession probably frightened him rather more and he gave control over regulation away and the Gills of this world replaced concern over debt with concern over spending, but they couldn't demand immediate payment for infrastructure because it was necessary and the G 14, along with everyone else, didn't have the readies. This left them with spending on players - transfer fees and wages - and this was exactly what they wanted, to make spending limited to income. My point though is the even those who wish to act in good faith and regulate football finance find they have a very limited field of action and find they either let clubs make their own decisions or introduce some clumsy control of transfers and wages which freezes football in the status quo at the time the regulations are introduced. This was made clearer by FFP was introduced precisely for that purpose but it is hard to see how it could have been avoided with the best will in the world.
Click to expand...
I can't deny any of the points you make. But Platini's view was that clubs should not gain an advantage by using debt.
It would be quite possible to regulate debt by having different tiers of debt. Thus debt to finance stadium development would not fall foul of regs but debt to finance player purchases would.
Ultimately, as you say, the cartel will just refuse under threat of secession. The only answer to that is to let them go. They can secede from uefa tournaments but not from uefa governance, unless fifa approves.
The weakness is that uefa are both a regulator and a tournament organizer from which they make money. Thus they will always give in to the cartel. I have always believed and have posted this many times: you cannot be both a policeman and a player.
And so the saga continues......
 
laserblue said:
Excellent article. Just one point. It's Athletic Bilbao that have received illegal state funding not Atletico Madrid.
Click to expand...
What about the funding received by Real Madrid and Atletico Madrid? Madrid council appear to have bought Real’s training ground at a very high price. They also bought Atletico’s former stadium to convert into a water park.

I would be interested if there were any studies into the ‘market value’ for those transactions.
 
JGL07 said:
What about the funding received by Real Madrid and Atletico Madrid? Madrid council appear to have bought Real’s training ground at a very high price. They also bought Atletico’s former stadium to convert into a water park.

I would be interested if there were any studies into the ‘market value’ for those transactions.
Click to expand...
Madrid's training ground was dealt with years ago, this is a separate case.
 
I don't get why everyone hates FFP so much. It's clearly worked wonders.

We haven't seen record transfer fees in the last decade since it was introduced. Nor have we seen huge clubs reach billions of euros worth of debt, teetering on the brink of collapse. Even on a smaller scale, when was the last time we saw a club in the lower leagues drop out of existence? League 1 and League 2 clubs have never looked healthier, right? If you look around the big European Leagues, it's really improved competition, we rarely see the same teams winning trophies year in year out.

Overall, a huge success....


*moderate levels of sarcasm included.
 
Manchester33 said:
I don't get why everyone hates FFP so much. It's clearly worked wonders.

We haven't seen record transfer fees in the last decade since it was introduced. Nor have we seen huge clubs reach billions of euros worth of debt, teetering on the brink of collapse. Even on a smaller scale, when was the last time we saw a club in the lower leagues drop out of existence? League 1 and League 2 clubs have never looked healthier, right? If you look around the big European Leagues, it's really improved competition, we rarely see the same teams winning trophies year in year out.

Overall, a huge success....


*moderate levels of sarcasm included.
Click to expand...
Don't forget player wages have stabilised as well and agents are taking less out of the game than ever before.
 
JGL07 said:
What about the funding received by Real Madrid and Atletico Madrid? Madrid council appear to have bought Real’s training ground at a very high price. They also bought Atletico’s former stadium to convert into a water park.

I would be interested if there were any studies into the ‘market value’ for those transactions.
Click to expand...
The clubs found to have received illegal state aid are Real Madrid, Barcelona, Osasuna and Athletic Bilbao. They have been told they must repay the amounts involved. I don't know about Atletico Madrid.

netherlandsnewslive.com

New setback for Barcelona, club must repay state aid - Netherlands News Live

The case that ended on Thursday dates back to 2016, when, in addition to Barcelona, arch-rivals Real Madrid, Athletic Club and Osasuna were ordered to repay the wrongly obtained state aid. The other three clubs did not appeal the decision, but Barcelona did. The Catalans were initially also...
netherlandsnewslive.com netherlandsnewslive.com

www.telegraph.co.uk

EU finds that Barcelona and Real Madrid benefited from illegal state aid in Spain for three decades

The Kingdom of Spain will now be obliged to claw back taxes the four clubs were previously exempt from in their 'not-for-profit' status
www.telegraph.co.uk www.telegraph.co.uk
 
laserblue said:
The clubs found to have received illegal state aid are Real Madrid, Barcelona, Osasuna and Athletic Bilbao. They have been told they must repay the amounts involved. I don't know about Atletico Madrid.

netherlandsnewslive.com

New setback for Barcelona, club must repay state aid - Netherlands News Live

The case that ended on Thursday dates back to 2016, when, in addition to Barcelona, arch-rivals Real Madrid, Athletic Club and Osasuna were ordered to repay the wrongly obtained state aid. The other three clubs did not appeal the decision, but Barcelona did. The Catalans were initially also...
netherlandsnewslive.com netherlandsnewslive.com

www.telegraph.co.uk

EU finds that Barcelona and Real Madrid benefited from illegal state aid in Spain for three decades

The Kingdom of Spain will now be obliged to claw back taxes the four clubs were previously exempt from in their 'not-for-profit' status
www.telegraph.co.uk www.telegraph.co.uk
Click to expand...
4 more having to pay back state loans plus Real are getting billed for a land grab scam.

Real Madrid, Barcelona and Valencia are among seven professional clubs that must repay millions of euros of financial support received from the Spanish state following European Commission (EC) investigations.

The EC deduced that assistance to the clubs provided by Spain contravened European Union state aid regulations.

In one case, Real Madrid must pay back €18.4million after authorities from the Spanish capital overcompensated them when a proposed land transfer between the pair fell through.

A separate investigation found the European champions, as well as Barca, Athletic Bilbao and Osasuna "were treated as non-profit organisations, which pay a five per cent lower tax rate on profit" than other clubs and "benefitted from this lower tax rate during over 20 years, without an objective justification".

The clubs must now return this money which the EC estimates will be between €0-5m per club, but Spanish authorities will determine the precise amounts.

European Commissioner for Competition Margrethe Vestager said: "Using tax payers' money to finance professional football clubs can create unfair competition.

"Professional football is a commercial activity with significant money involved and public money must comply with fair competition rules. The subsidies we investigated in these cases did not."

Furthermore, Valencia, Hercules and Elche have all been judged to have benefited from loans granted by the state-owned Valencia Institute of Finance (IVF).

Valencia will now pay back €20.4m, while Hercules will pay €6.1m and Elche €3.7m "in order to restore the level playing field with non-subsidised clubs".

www.fotmob.com

Real Madrid, Barcelona and Valencia ordered to repay state aid

Real Madrid must pay €18.4million back to Spain after an EU investigation concluded unfair support was provided to seven clubs.
www.fotmob.com www.fotmob.com

Nothing to see here, move on...
 
KS55 said:
I can't deny any of the points you make. But Platini's view was that clubs should not gain an advantage by using debt.
It would be quite possible to regulate debt by having different tiers of debt. Thus debt to finance stadium development would not fall foul of regs but debt to finance player purchases would.
Ultimately, as you say, the cartel will just refuse under threat of secession. The only answer to that is to let them go. They can secede from uefa tournaments but not from uefa governance, unless fifa approves.
The weakness is that uefa are both a regulator and a tournament organizer from which they make money. Thus they will always give in to the cartel. I have always believed and have posted this many times: you cannot be both a policeman and a player.
And so the saga continues......
Click to expand...
One of the fundamental problems you've identified is that UEFA is both a regulatory/governing body and a market competitor to those it regulates/governs. It competes with European clubs for sponsorship and refuses to allow sponsors of clubs, which are not sponsors of UEFA's champions league any access either live or televised on match nights. This clearly undermines the idea objective governance and, I think, should preclude UEFA from any role in the regulation of football finance. It raises the risk of corruption. I think the ECJ would rule it out but this alliance of brigands between the G14 and UEFA keeps it in place - but, I also think the ECJ would have no truck with trying to outlaw debt to finance player purchase because it is yet another attempt to limit investment. Staffing is something that companies in every sector take more seriously than anything else and in no sector would they accept being told that they could not appoint (buy) the staff they want because he/she costs too much. It doesn't matter if you're an SME on the High street or the Bank of England ....and it shouldn't matter if you're Manchester City.
 
laserblue said:
The clubs found to have received illegal state aid are Real Madrid, Barcelona, Osasuna and Athletic Bilbao. They have been told they must repay the amounts involved. I don't know about Atletico Madrid.

netherlandsnewslive.com

New setback for Barcelona, club must repay state aid - Netherlands News Live

The case that ended on Thursday dates back to 2016, when, in addition to Barcelona, arch-rivals Real Madrid, Athletic Club and Osasuna were ordered to repay the wrongly obtained state aid. The other three clubs did not appeal the decision, but Barcelona did. The Catalans were initially also...
netherlandsnewslive.com netherlandsnewslive.com

www.telegraph.co.uk

EU finds that Barcelona and Real Madrid benefited from illegal state aid in Spain for three decades

The Kingdom of Spain will now be obliged to claw back taxes the four clubs were previously exempt from in their 'not-for-profit' status
www.telegraph.co.uk www.telegraph.co.uk
Click to expand...
Calling Sr. Tebas ......Sr Tebas..... anyone seen Sr.Tebas???
 
Centurions said:
4 more having to pay back state loans plus Real are getting billed for a land grab scam.

Real Madrid, Barcelona and Valencia are among seven professional clubs that must repay millions of euros of financial support received from the Spanish state following European Commission (EC) investigations.

The EC deduced that assistance to the clubs provided by Spain contravened European Union state aid regulations.

In one case, Real Madrid must pay back €18.4million after authorities from the Spanish capital overcompensated them when a proposed land transfer between the pair fell through.

A separate investigation found the European champions, as well as Barca, Athletic Bilbao and Osasuna "were treated as non-profit organisations, which pay a five per cent lower tax rate on profit" than other clubs and "benefitted from this lower tax rate during over 20 years, without an objective justification".

The clubs must now return this money which the EC estimates will be between €0-5m per club, but Spanish authorities will determine the precise amounts.

European Commissioner for Competition Margrethe Vestager said: "Using tax payers' money to finance professional football clubs can create unfair competition.

"Professional football is a commercial activity with significant money involved and public money must comply with fair competition rules. The subsidies we investigated in these cases did not."

Furthermore, Valencia, Hercules and Elche have all been judged to have benefited from loans granted by the state-owned Valencia Institute of Finance (IVF).

Valencia will now pay back €20.4m, while Hercules will pay €6.1m and Elche €3.7m "in order to restore the level playing field with non-subsidised clubs".

www.fotmob.com

Real Madrid, Barcelona and Valencia ordered to repay state aid

Real Madrid must pay €18.4million back to Spain after an EU investigation concluded unfair support was provided to seven clubs.
www.fotmob.com www.fotmob.com

Nothing to see here, move on...
Click to expand...

Isnt that against ffp ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top