mancity dan
Well-Known Member
Re: City & FFP (continued)
?
jrb said:
?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
City & FFP | 2020/21 Accounts released | Revenues of £569.8m, £2.4m profit (p 2395)
- Thread starter Marvin
- Start date
Le Havre Oswald
Well-Known Member
Re: City & FFP (continued)
Ffs why is everyone hypothesizing sheikh mansour leaving?
Ffs why is everyone hypothesizing sheikh mansour leaving?
FantasyIreland
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Oct 2008
- Messages
- 64,697
Re: City & FFP (continued)
Manchester City could be about to land one of the biggest sponsorship deals in Premier League history - reports
by Joe Hall
October 6, 2014, 5:23pm
Manchester City
Manchester City's new sponsorship deal will be reportedly worth an extra £320m (Source: Getty)
Manchester City could be set for one of the most lucrative sponsorship deals in Premier League history, according to reports.
The Premier League champions are only three years into a decade-long sponsorship deal with Etihad Airways, worth around £400m, but are in talks over a five-year extension which would add a further £320m to City's coffers.
Etihad Airways' sponsorship of Manchester City covers their shirts, stadium, academy and training complex.
According to the Mirror, City are also set to pick up an extra £80m over five years from three further brands who will sponsor a new training complex currently being built, as a well as a new 7,000-capacity stadium designed to host academy football.
If the report is correct, City’s £50m-a-year sponsorship deal would be one of the biggest in the Premier League, topping the £45m-a-year deal neighbours Manchester United signed with Chevrolet last year.
Liverpool, Chelsea, Everton and Spurs all have deals worth less than City’s but, unlike the club owned by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed al Nahyan, none have sold naming rights to their stadium or training complex. City AM understands that Chelsea are currently in the process of negotiating a new sponsorship deal with Turkish Airlines for next season.
However, United's gargantuan £75m-a-year Adidas kit deal dwarfs the champions' £9m a year from Nike.
City were fined £50m by Uefa in May, having been found guilty of exceeding permitted losses for the previous two seasons, as outlined by financial fair play regulation (FFP). That figure could be reduced to around £20m should the club comply with a number of restrictions (which it has so far) and report a maximum break-even deficit of £16.2m this year.
An improved sponsorship deal with Etihad could help the club avoid making excessive losses in the future, although some may argue that City's record-breaking sponsorship is unjustly reliant on the close relationship between the two; Etihad's owner Sheikh Khalifa is half-brother of Sheikh Mansour.
However in May, Uefa ruled that the Etihad sponsorship was not "related party transaction" and was therefore permitted.
City are ultimately owned by the City Football Group, which also has a number of other franchises around the world including New York City FC and Melbourne City FC. Melbourne are also sponsored by Etihad while New York’s shirt is yet to be designed.
Earlier this year the group agreed a sponsorship deal with Nissan, with whom it co-owns Yokohama F. Marinos, across its global network of clubs
BackgroundBlue said:Could be relevant: <a class="postlink" href="http://www.cityam.com/1412611165/manchester-city-land-biggest-shirt-sponsorship-deal-premier-league-history-reports" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.cityam.com/1412611165/manche ... ry-reports</a>
Manchester City could be about to land one of the biggest sponsorship deals in Premier League history - reports
by Joe Hall
October 6, 2014, 5:23pm
Manchester City
Manchester City's new sponsorship deal will be reportedly worth an extra £320m (Source: Getty)
Manchester City could be set for one of the most lucrative sponsorship deals in Premier League history, according to reports.
The Premier League champions are only three years into a decade-long sponsorship deal with Etihad Airways, worth around £400m, but are in talks over a five-year extension which would add a further £320m to City's coffers.
Etihad Airways' sponsorship of Manchester City covers their shirts, stadium, academy and training complex.
According to the Mirror, City are also set to pick up an extra £80m over five years from three further brands who will sponsor a new training complex currently being built, as a well as a new 7,000-capacity stadium designed to host academy football.
If the report is correct, City’s £50m-a-year sponsorship deal would be one of the biggest in the Premier League, topping the £45m-a-year deal neighbours Manchester United signed with Chevrolet last year.
Liverpool, Chelsea, Everton and Spurs all have deals worth less than City’s but, unlike the club owned by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed al Nahyan, none have sold naming rights to their stadium or training complex. City AM understands that Chelsea are currently in the process of negotiating a new sponsorship deal with Turkish Airlines for next season.
However, United's gargantuan £75m-a-year Adidas kit deal dwarfs the champions' £9m a year from Nike.
City were fined £50m by Uefa in May, having been found guilty of exceeding permitted losses for the previous two seasons, as outlined by financial fair play regulation (FFP). That figure could be reduced to around £20m should the club comply with a number of restrictions (which it has so far) and report a maximum break-even deficit of £16.2m this year.
An improved sponsorship deal with Etihad could help the club avoid making excessive losses in the future, although some may argue that City's record-breaking sponsorship is unjustly reliant on the close relationship between the two; Etihad's owner Sheikh Khalifa is half-brother of Sheikh Mansour.
However in May, Uefa ruled that the Etihad sponsorship was not "related party transaction" and was therefore permitted.
City are ultimately owned by the City Football Group, which also has a number of other franchises around the world including New York City FC and Melbourne City FC. Melbourne are also sponsored by Etihad while New York’s shirt is yet to be designed.
Earlier this year the group agreed a sponsorship deal with Nissan, with whom it co-owns Yokohama F. Marinos, across its global network of clubs
hihosilva
Well-Known Member
Re: City & FFP (continued)
Your about 20 pages too late with that information.
FantasyIreland said:BackgroundBlue said:Could be relevant: <a class="postlink" href="http://www.cityam.com/1412611165/manchester-city-land-biggest-shirt-sponsorship-deal-premier-league-history-reports" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.cityam.com/1412611165/manche ... ry-reports</a>
Manchester City could be about to land one of the biggest sponsorship deals in Premier League history - reports
by Joe Hall
October 6, 2014, 5:23pm
Manchester City
Manchester City's new sponsorship deal will be reportedly worth an extra £320m (Source: Getty)
Manchester City could be set for one of the most lucrative sponsorship deals in Premier League history, according to reports.
The Premier League champions are only three years into a decade-long sponsorship deal with Etihad Airways, worth around £400m, but are in talks over a five-year extension which would add a further £320m to City's coffers.
Etihad Airways' sponsorship of Manchester City covers their shirts, stadium, academy and training complex.
According to the Mirror, City are also set to pick up an extra £80m over five years from three further brands who will sponsor a new training complex currently being built, as a well as a new 7,000-capacity stadium designed to host academy football.
If the report is correct, City’s £50m-a-year sponsorship deal would be one of the biggest in the Premier League, topping the £45m-a-year deal neighbours Manchester United signed with Chevrolet last year.
Liverpool, Chelsea, Everton and Spurs all have deals worth less than City’s but, unlike the club owned by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed al Nahyan, none have sold naming rights to their stadium or training complex. City AM understands that Chelsea are currently in the process of negotiating a new sponsorship deal with Turkish Airlines for next season.
However, United's gargantuan £75m-a-year Adidas kit deal dwarfs the champions' £9m a year from Nike.
City were fined £50m by Uefa in May, having been found guilty of exceeding permitted losses for the previous two seasons, as outlined by financial fair play regulation (FFP). That figure could be reduced to around £20m should the club comply with a number of restrictions (which it has so far) and report a maximum break-even deficit of £16.2m this year.
An improved sponsorship deal with Etihad could help the club avoid making excessive losses in the future, although some may argue that City's record-breaking sponsorship is unjustly reliant on the close relationship between the two; Etihad's owner Sheikh Khalifa is half-brother of Sheikh Mansour.
However in May, Uefa ruled that the Etihad sponsorship was not "related party transaction" and was therefore permitted.
City are ultimately owned by the City Football Group, which also has a number of other franchises around the world including New York City FC and Melbourne City FC. Melbourne are also sponsored by Etihad while New York’s shirt is yet to be designed.
Earlier this year the group agreed a sponsorship deal with Nissan, with whom it co-owns Yokohama F. Marinos, across its global network of clubs
Your about 20 pages too late with that information.
oakiecokie
Well-Known Member
Re: City & FFP (continued)
eh ??
Puteulanus luna said:Ffs why is everyone hypothesizing sheikh mansour leaving?
eh ??
Re: City & FFP (continued)
Posted on the United thread.
But can I remind you all once again why United, Gill, Arsenal, and the other 2 PL cartel clubs wanted UEFA's FFPR introduced across the PL.
Posted on the United thread.
But can I remind you all once again why United, Gill, Arsenal, and the other 2 PL cartel clubs wanted UEFA's FFPR introduced across the PL.
It might be Arsenal headed paper, but United have always been the main player behind the PL FFPR, and UEFA's FFPR.(in England)
It's simple. United just couldn't compete with Sheikh Mansour's wealth, and as such, along with the other clubs mentioned in the letter, had to find a way of stopping City, and to an extent Chelsea, who themselves eventually decided to fall in line, knowing they were already in a strong financial and footballing position.
This letter is all you need to know about the intent of United and Gill, as well as Arsenal, to cement their positions at the top of the PL, and in the CL.
The letter was leaked.
[bigimg]http://i.imgur.com/M8JZvDg.jpg[/bigimg]
[bigimg]http://i.imgur.com/BFmCENF.jpg[/bigimg]
Note. *Inflationary spending*, And United have just spent £150mill in the transfer market.
Note the last lime. Not PL FFPR, but UEFA FFPR. The cartel wanted UEFA's FFPR introduced across the PL first.
Bent, corrupt, b******'s! And this from 3 out of the 4 clubs massively in debt.
Helmet Cole
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 23 Jul 2007
- Messages
- 8,054
Re: City & FFP (continued)
Wrong forum mate - I think it's redissue or the caf you are after?Puteulanus luna said:Ffs why is everyone hypothesizing sheikh mansour leaving?
BlueAnorak
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 31 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 27,835
Re: City & FFP (continued)
Yes - really. But they hoped that that UEFA would listen to reason and use the original guidance that City had been working too. That is probably the main reason why City were livid and held out for so long.
Chippy_boy said:BlueAnorak said:Prestwich_Blue said:Well we could presumably have got Etihad to pay us more, so we passed. But by doing that, UEFA might have taken a different view on the deal and asked more questions or declared it a related party transaction. But by not doing that, we didn't draw attention to the Etihad deal but got them so worked up about the IP sales and the calculation of the wages paid to players signed pre-June 2010 that they just waved it through. Having done that made it difficult for UEFA to go back on that decision and also, having seen what PSG were told was "fair value", it gave us a yardstick for our own deals.
Of course I could be completely overestimating the cunning and subtlety of our owners and we could just have failed FFP because we weren't clever enough.
I think you actually have a point PB.
I certainly think that City knew they would just fail FFP as they knew they would be unable to exclude pre June 2010 wages as a result of changes to the FFP submittal spreadsheet and framed subsequent accounts accordingly. My guess is to clarify the probable rules on City Group / MCFC interaction - but hey - why not also clarify rules on what existing sponsor income was Related Party/Fair Value and what was "unlimited" valid income.
Really? All in the indication at the time was that we were shocked to have be deemed to have failed. Of course that could be a bluff on our part, but it sure didn't look like it. The other thing is, if we were going to miss and we knew it, why on earth would we have been so careful as to only miss by a tiny amount? We might as well have gone down the PSG route if we knew we would miss.
Yes - really. But they hoped that that UEFA would listen to reason and use the original guidance that City had been working too. That is probably the main reason why City were livid and held out for so long.
Davs 19
Well-Known Member
Re: City & FFP (continued)
And "you're" missing the point ;.)
Hihosilva said:FantasyIreland said:BackgroundBlue said:Could be relevant: <a class="postlink" href="http://www.cityam.com/1412611165/manchester-city-land-biggest-shirt-sponsorship-deal-premier-league-history-reports" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.cityam.com/1412611165/manche ... ry-reports</a>
Manchester City could be about to land one of the biggest sponsorship deals in Premier League history - reports
by Joe Hall
October 6, 2014, 5:23pm
Manchester City
Manchester City's new sponsorship deal will be reportedly worth an extra £320m (Source: Getty)
Manchester City could be set for one of the most lucrative sponsorship deals in Premier League history, according to reports.
The Premier League champions are only three years into a decade-long sponsorship deal with Etihad Airways, worth around £400m, but are in talks over a five-year extension which would add a further £320m to City's coffers.
Etihad Airways' sponsorship of Manchester City covers their shirts, stadium, academy and training complex.
According to the Mirror, City are also set to pick up an extra £80m over five years from three further brands who will sponsor a new training complex currently being built, as a well as a new 7,000-capacity stadium designed to host academy football.
If the report is correct, City’s £50m-a-year sponsorship deal would be one of the biggest in the Premier League, topping the £45m-a-year deal neighbours Manchester United signed with Chevrolet last year.
Liverpool, Chelsea, Everton and Spurs all have deals worth less than City’s but, unlike the club owned by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed al Nahyan, none have sold naming rights to their stadium or training complex. City AM understands that Chelsea are currently in the process of negotiating a new sponsorship deal with Turkish Airlines for next season.
However, United's gargantuan £75m-a-year Adidas kit deal dwarfs the champions' £9m a year from Nike.
City were fined £50m by Uefa in May, having been found guilty of exceeding permitted losses for the previous two seasons, as outlined by financial fair play regulation (FFP). That figure could be reduced to around £20m should the club comply with a number of restrictions (which it has so far) and report a maximum break-even deficit of £16.2m this year.
An improved sponsorship deal with Etihad could help the club avoid making excessive losses in the future, although some may argue that City's record-breaking sponsorship is unjustly reliant on the close relationship between the two; Etihad's owner Sheikh Khalifa is half-brother of Sheikh Mansour.
However in May, Uefa ruled that the Etihad sponsorship was not "related party transaction" and was therefore permitted.
City are ultimately owned by the City Football Group, which also has a number of other franchises around the world including New York City FC and Melbourne City FC. Melbourne are also sponsored by Etihad while New York’s shirt is yet to be designed.
Earlier this year the group agreed a sponsorship deal with Nissan, with whom it co-owns Yokohama F. Marinos, across its global network of clubs
Your about 20 pages too late with that information.
And "you're" missing the point ;.)