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

[SilverFox2]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

To be within £30/£40 million off the rags turnover is enough for me especially when you factor into they are about £400 million behind us squad wise and our wage bill will massively drop with all the new pay structures and there's is going to massively increase with all the new signings and desperation wages they are having to throw about.

I agree. As long as our revenues going forward are enough to sustain a decent enough net transfer spend each year to remain competitive at the top of the league while complying with FFP then that will do for me for the time being. If that's the case I'm not really arsed about getting into pointless pissing contests with the Rags about who has the biggest turnover. Of course, with everything that's going on behind the scenes it could well be that we do overhaul them sometime in the next 3-5 years in the revenue stakes and that would annoy them no end which would be amusing to see!

I am getting a bit ahead of events at the moment but I look with interest (pun) at CFG of which City are a member.

This global approach by ADUG may not make Man City the financial centre of the operations.

When massive profits are eventually made will they look to the best way of retaining this profit Amazon style or will our tax authorities understand global investments as a tax deduction ?
In fact could ADUG channel certain sponsors to pay their 'premiums' direct to a tax saving geographical area ? That way MCFC would only get turnover applicable to its balance sheet needs.

Alternatively, maybe a Holding Company charge from a tax haven (Abu Dhabi ?) would do the same job.

Not a tax expert but why should ADUG pay tax in this country if the benefit to global sponsors is a global or even country reward eg Insurance Companies in Indonesia paying for player use in their local adverts.

 

[NipHolmes]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

I can see some really upset pundits, hacks and fans seeing City's future unfold. That single infraction against us was celebrated like a cup final win for some. Jubilation will turn into hate filled resentment soon enough. Love it.

On and off the field we are mustard :)

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

According to Soriano, our revenue for 13/14 - the accounts set to be released in the new year - is expected to be around 404m Euros (£315-320m)

With the extra £30-35m p/a from the new CFA sponsors and the Etihad extension that would put us at around 444m Euros (£350m) *before* any other increases in revenue for this season - not far away from being the highest in the PL (Utd expected to be around £390m this season)

Suck on that, twatini et al.

But you have to remember that even if we catch them in 2014/15, they will take 1st place again because of the Adidas deal, IF they get to Champions League, otherwise they have 30% slashed off that Adidas deal per annum. Also the CL revenue they get on top of that.

The Adidas deal they signed is something £75m per annum?, IF Champions League.

One thing is laughable tho that their wage bill went over £200m mark even before Falcao and Di Maria.

The Adidas deal created headlines for its size but once the details started to emerge it is clear that for the £75m figure to be hit they have to win the league and CL.

If they fail to win silverware and fail to get into the CL they get paid less than under the previous Nike deal.

It was a deal of desperation as far as united are concerned and Adidas were being very businesslike and realistic in the structure. The theatre of dreams means nothing to the hard nosed German businessmen at Adidas.

They refused to sign with Nike as they (Nike) wanted performance related clauses in. and that was before they appointed Moyes.

My understanding is that the Chevrolet deal is also over-stated as well, as they had to renegotiate it downwards after the Marketing Exec was sacked for exceeding his authority.

 

[Latics Fan SJK]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

I wonder if we will go in for Bale again? It's us or them lot.

Eh? Bale?

 

[fbloke]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

To be within £30/£40 million off the rags turnover is enough for me especially when you factor into they are about £400 million behind us squad wise and our wage bill will massively drop with all the new pay structures and there's is going to massively increase with all the new signings and desperation wages they are having to throw about.

I agree. As long as our revenues going forward are enough to sustain a decent enough net transfer spend each year to remain competitive at the top of the league while complying with FFP then that will do for me for the time being. If that's the case I'm not really arsed about getting into pointless pissing contests with the Rags about who has the biggest turnover. Of course, with everything that's going on behind the scenes it could well be that we do overhaul them sometime in the next 3-5 years in the revenue stakes and that would annoy them no end which would be amusing to see!

I am getting a bit ahead of events at the moment but I look with interest (pun) at CFG of which City are a member.

This global approach by ADUG may not make Man City the financial centre of the operations.

When massive profits are eventually made will they look to the best way of retaining this profit Amazon style or will our tax authorities understand global investments as a tax deduction ?
In fact could ADUG channel certain sponsors to pay their 'premiums' direct to a tax saving geographical area ? That way MCFC would only get turnover applicable to its balance sheet needs.

Alternatively, maybe a Holding Company charge from a tax haven (Abu Dhabi ?) would do the same job.

Not a tax expert but why should ADUG pay tax in this country if the benefit to global sponsors is a global or even country reward eg Insurance Companies in Indonesia paying for player use in their local adverts.

ALL Abu Dhabi owned companies (at least those associated with the royal family) are known to pay tax at the point the revenues are generated.

MCFC for example pay UK tax as they are a UK registered business.

 

[fbloke]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

But you have to remember that even if we catch them in 2014/15, they will take 1st place again because of the Adidas deal, IF they get to Champions League, otherwise they have 30% slashed off that Adidas deal per annum. Also the CL revenue they get on top of that.

The Adidas deal they signed is something £75m per annum?, IF Champions League.

One thing is laughable tho that their wage bill went over £200m mark even before Falcao and Di Maria.

The Adidas deal created headlines for its size but once the details started to emerge it is clear that for the £75m figure to be hit they have to win the league and CL.

If they fail to win silverware and fail to get into the CL they get paid less than under the previous Nike deal.

It was a deal of desperation as far as united are concerned and Adidas were being very businesslike and realistic in the structure. The theatre of dreams means nothing to the hard nosed German businessmen at Adidas.

They refused to sign with Nike as they (Nike) wanted performance related clauses in. and that was before they appointed Moyes.

My understanding is that the Chevrolet deal is also over-stated as well, as they had to renegotiate it downwards after the Marketing Exec was sacked for exceeding his authority.

You may also have heard the suggestions that some are hinting (in private) that the deal was indeed renegotiated downwards but that no public proclamation was made. The lower figures will come in to play in the 3rd and 4th years of the deal.

 

[mad4city]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

The Adidas deal created headlines for its size but once the details started to emerge it is clear that for the £75m figure to be hit they have to win the league and CL.

If they fail to win silverware and fail to get into the CL they get paid less than under the previous Nike deal.

It was a deal of desperation as far as united are concerned and Adidas were being very businesslike and realistic in the structure. The theatre of dreams means nothing to the hard nosed German businessmen at Adidas.

They refused to sign with Nike as they (Nike) wanted performance related clauses in. and that was before they appointed Moyes.

My understanding is that the Chevrolet deal is also over-stated as well, as they had to renegotiate it downwards after the Marketing Exec was sacked for exceeding his authority.

You may also have heard the suggestions that some are hinting (in private) that the deal was indeed renegotiated downwards but that no public proclamation was made. The lower figures will come in to play in the 3rd and 4th years of the deal.

A Chevrolet not holding its value? Oh well...

Forward with King Louis!
What could possibly go wrong?

 

[fbloke]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

They refused to sign with Nike as they (Nike) wanted performance related clauses in. and that was before they appointed Moyes.

My understanding is that the Chevrolet deal is also over-stated as well, as they had to renegotiate it downwards after the Marketing Exec was sacked for exceeding his authority.

You may also have heard the suggestions that some are hinting (in private) that the deal was indeed renegotiated downwards but that no public proclamation was made. The lower figures will come in to play in the 3rd and 4th years of the deal.

A Chevrolet not holding its value? Oh well...

Forward with King Louis!
What could possibly go wrong?

They've also decided to kill the Chevy brand in the UK.

I wonder what the future holds for the mufc brand?

 

[NipHolmes]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

I wonder if we will go in for Bale again? It's us or them lot.

Eh? Bale?

If it's to be believed that his family wants a move to UK again then this would be the perfect place for him would it not?

 

[SilverFox2]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

I agree. As long as our revenues going forward are enough to sustain a decent enough net transfer spend each year to remain competitive at the top of the league while complying with FFP then that will do for me for the time being. If that's the case I'm not really arsed about getting into pointless pissing contests with the Rags about who has the biggest turnover. Of course, with everything that's going on behind the scenes it could well be that we do overhaul them sometime in the next 3-5 years in the revenue stakes and that would annoy them no end which would be amusing to see!

I am getting a bit ahead of events at the moment but I look with interest (pun) at CFG of which City are a member.

This global approach by ADUG may not make Man City the financial centre of the operations.

When massive profits are eventually made will they look to the best way of retaining this profit Amazon style or will our tax authorities understand global investments as a tax deduction ?
In fact could ADUG channel certain sponsors to pay their 'premiums' direct to a tax saving geographical area ? That way MCFC would only get turnover applicable to its balance sheet needs.

Alternatively, maybe a Holding Company charge from a tax haven (Abu Dhabi ?) would do the same job.

Not a tax expert but why should ADUG pay tax in this country if the benefit to global sponsors is a global or even country reward eg Insurance Companies in Indonesia paying for player use in their local adverts.

ALL Abu Dhabi owned companies (at least those associated with the royal family) are known to pay tax at the point the revenues are generated.

MCFC for example pay UK tax as they are a UK registered business.

Thanks fbloke, however it does seem that having a Holding Company (CFG) in between MCFC and ADUG has a little bit of mileage regarding the possibility for inter company business.