The irony is that the scousers wanted ffp. Just like the rags with the United way malarkey bet the dippers change their tune pretty sharpish!LoveCity said:If Liverpool get done, someone get on the phone to the Spirit of Shankly. Nothing like thousands of outraged scousers.
BluessinceHydeRoad said:We are, again, treating FFP as an English question, and, as M. Dupont has pointed out it most certainly is not. Liverpool are not, any more than City, part of the oppressed clubs served up as victims to FIFA. They have American owners and are in the champions league, just like Anderlecht, but whereas Anderlecht's revenue for the entire year was 40 million euros Liverpool's income from TV rights alone was over two and a half times that. Anderlecht is the main football club in Brussels and Brussels has just as much right to a "top" club as Liverpool. Ajax has won the competition 4 times, but UEFA restricts its spending to ridiculously uncompetitive levels simply because it's in a "poor" league. Ajax has a very good ground, good crowds and an academy which is the envy of Europe but FFP will condemn it to selling its best players to FFP's big clubs or simply to winding down their academy and putting up ticket prices. This is half-baked, ill thought out and unfair, if only because German clubs, owned by their fans (who are therefore shareholders!) are allowed to count their fans/shareholders annual subscription as non-shareholder investment income. And finally there is the problem of the Spanish clubs. Leaving aside dodgy land deals, financial irregularities over transfer deals and child trafficking offences which don't involve UEFA or the CL, there is the difficulty clubs find themselves in because they don't pay tax. Many have it appears agreed to pay these outstanding tax bills on the drip, but though some of these "arrears" run into amounts nearing 100 million euros, they don't seem to have violated FFP! Only Malaga have been punished by UEFA....
City will see FFP as a very temporary "pinch" and our income will increase exponentially. We will be, without a shadow of a doubt, one of the wealthiest clubs in the world, if not the wealthiest, in a very short time. Liverpool will be, for the forseeable future, one of the 5 or 6 wealthiest clubs in the PL, and already the gap between the top 5 or 6 and the rest is alarmingly large and growing. The PL is the richest league in the world and twice as much money is pumped into it every year as goes into the second richest! The PL will suffer from FFP and become less competitive, but City and Liverpool will not suffer. As M. Dupont said, the fans of Villa, Everton and Newcastle will suffer a lot more - but not as much as those in Belgium, the Netherlands and, in fact, those outside a "magic circle" of clubs from England, Germany and Spain.
Because ours came after we "failed", Candlepools is because they may fail and is only a placeholder in effect (I'm not even sure theirs is confirmed yet). if found guilty there will be, no doubt, proper sanctions involved or not as the case may be.waspish said:Why are Liverpool only going to get 7m withheld and we got 50m
onceabluealways said:The fact that football within UEFA is played in numerous countries, all with different financial rules including tax etc. Even within countries - say UK where Arsenal in the capital can charge 1500 for a season ticket yet Liverpool charge 800 shows that FFP can never be fair.
The world is set up so that companies can make as much as possible without being illegal. No matter what UEFA think football is a business andd if the owners of the business believe that spending 100 million may in 3 years time reap the benefits for the company then UEFA are restricting the potential growth of the company in a way that doesn't affect everybody else in the same way as other football clubs will have totally different models.
I wonder what would have been said when the banks got millions of pounds fines if the goverment had said we are going to give that money to your competitors.
FFP is the biggest load of b*llock ever.
Rösler von Stretfordbömber said:St Helens Blue (Exiled) said:latest article in the fail reckons uefa are ultra confident ffp will be upheld in a fortnight.Some decision being made by the european courts?
bet the dippers worm there way out of it..Of that I am certain.
Every party involved in litigation professes confidence in the outcome.
If anything, I think some very recent (non-football but on some of the same issues) court decisions in the ECJ should make UEFA worry a bit about its chances.
SilverFox2 said:onceabluealways said:The fact that football within UEFA is played in numerous countries, all with different financial rules including tax etc. Even within countries - say UK where Arsenal in the capital can charge 1500 for a season ticket yet Liverpool charge 800 shows that FFP can never be fair.
The world is set up so that companies can make as much as possible without being illegal. No matter what UEFA think football is a business andd if the owners of the business believe that spending 100 million may in 3 years time reap the benefits for the company then UEFA are restricting the potential growth of the company in a way that doesn't affect everybody else in the same way as other football clubs will have totally different models.
I wonder what would have been said when the banks got millions of pounds fines if the goverment had said we are going to give that money to your competitors.
FFP is the biggest load of b*llock ever.
Further to your Bank analogy I note that we all subsidised some of them to enable their continuing existence (via the Government) whereas our owner (Sheik M.) personally loaned Barclay's several £ Billions to prevent the need for Government intervention.
Seems that the Banks know exactly where their bread is buttered when investment is required. Perhaps UEFA were unaware that this private investment by our owner was vital to the Bank they allowed to sponsor one of their European Leagues.