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

[FanchesterCity]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

City lowered their wage costs by:

1) Increasing Revenue
This then makes the wage percentage smaller (in comparison to revenue).
Whilst not strictly lowering the absolute cost, many headlines have said 'City reduce wage bill to x%'. The key being 'percent'.

2) Renegotiating Contracts
Several key players renegotiated their contracts for LESS money, yes, you read that correctly, less money.
At first glance this seems absurd, however, the bonuses for success are much larger, thus a player hedges his bets... if he wins things with City, he stands to earn more than ever before, and City know that if they continue to win things, they can afford to pay the bonuses.
To put in into layman's terms.... it's like you boss saying 'Son, I'm going to lower your salary from 30K to 25K, but if we meet our targets, I'll pay you a 15K bonus. So you'll end up with 40K. It's a risk the players have taken - which they should do, if they really believe in themselves and the club.

3) Reduction in Staff
Some staff have been reduced, certainly most of the ones at the old training ground have now been transferred to Manchester University (I think) since they've taken over the facilities and staff.
Obviously, there will be new staff at the new facilities, but these will probably appear on next year's books. I'd also anticipate they've managed to better structure staffing levels as a result of the move.

4) Staff Movement
Some staff moved between MCFC and other parts of CFG, as you might expect from a multinational group of companies. Why pay a marketing team in the USA when they could share one with New York City? (just an example).
Of course, detractors will say it's just avoidance, well yes, it is. Legal avoidance. The kind that every large company in the world employs, including FIFA and UEFA themselves.

The renegotiated contracts were (I think) exclusively done this Summer therefore won't appear until next year.
The staff movement (which is sensible given the structure of CFG) and Mancini and his backroom staff's pay off having already been paid from the previous years accounts form a large percentage of it.

Ah yes, I stand corrected, they were mostly this summer (as far as we know). But still, I'm sure we'll have reached the end of a wave of contracts too (as is normal every year). For me, the biggest factor is the percentage of revenue, which people misinterpret as a reduction in absolute terms, and not a relative one. 'City reduce wage costs' is the headline and the speculation is that it's all dodgy accounting!

 

[jrb]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Anyone got a rough idea how much we've earned from the CL so far, and with at least one more match in the knockout stages?

Thanks.

 

[FanchesterCity]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

If Scott is implying that City are operating illegally, then has he reported his findings to the relevant authorities?

I hope you're not implying that Scott is implying that. He quite clearly says that there is no evidence of us doing any such thing.
Perhaps you missed it in amongst all his theoretical musings about some club doing this while only mentioning us by name.

Whilst we're on the subject of Scott, are you aware of the awful domestic abuse that happens in many homes?
Of course, I'm not implying he is involved in any such thing, merely that like anybody else in a domestic dwelling could be affected by it.

 

[I'm no cynic but...]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

If Scott is implying that City are operating illegally, then has he reported his findings to the relevant authorities?

I hope you're not implying that Scott is implying that. He quite clearly says that there is no evidence of us doing any such thing.
Perhaps you missed it in amongst all his theoretical musings about some club doing this while only mentioning us by name.

Like you say, it is all theoretical, yet if there is no such implication then his article becomes nothing other than a long winded and pointless way of filling up an empty space in his newspaper.

 

[momo88]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

I'm no FFP expert but with this qualification to the last 16 I'd imagine this will surely be a huge boost for the clubs operating accounts!

Oh, and should we be worried about that article?

Of course every win in CL is good for the club:

1- CL and Broadcasting money

2- Match day revenues

3- Sponsors, normally the contracts are linked to results the more you win and get me exposure the more you get

 

[Centurions]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

City lowered their wage costs by:

1) Increasing Revenue
This then makes the wage percentage smaller (in comparison to revenue).
Whilst not strictly lowering the absolute cost, many headlines have said 'City reduce wage bill to x%'. The key being 'percent'.

2) Renegotiating Contracts
Several key players renegotiated their contracts for LESS money, yes, you read that correctly, less money.
At first glance this seems absurd, however, the bonuses for success are much larger, thus a player hedges his bets... if he wins things with City, he stands to earn more than ever before, and City know that if they continue to win things, they can afford to pay the bonuses.
To put in into layman's terms.... it's like you boss saying 'Son, I'm going to lower your salary from 30K to 25K, but if we meet our targets, I'll pay you a 15K bonus. So you'll end up with 40K. It's a risk the players have taken - which they should do, if they really believe in themselves and the club.

3) Reduction in Staff
Some staff have been reduced, certainly most of the ones at the old training ground have now been transferred to Manchester University (I think) since they've taken over the facilities and staff.
Obviously, there will be new staff at the new facilities, but these will probably appear on next year's books. I'd also anticipate they've managed to better structure staffing levels as a result of the move.

4) Staff Movement
Some staff moved between MCFC and other parts of CFG, as you might expect from a multinational group of companies. Why pay a marketing team in the USA when they could share one with New York City? (just an example).
Of course, detractors will say it's just avoidance, well yes, it is. Legal avoidance. The kind that every large company in the world employs, including FIFA and UEFA themselves.

The renegotiated contracts were (I think) exclusively done this Summer therefore won't appear until next year.
The staff movement (which is sensible given the structure of CFG) and Mancini and his backroom staff's pay off having already been paid from the previous years accounts form a large percentage of it.

Ah yes, I stand corrected, they were mostly this summer (as far as we know). But still, I'm sure we'll have reached the end of a wave of contracts too (as is normal every year). For me, the biggest factor is the percentage of revenue, which people misinterpret as a reduction in absolute terms, and not a relative one. 'City reduce wage costs' is the headline and the speculation is that it's all dodgy accounting!

They'll have an apoplectic fit next December when the renegotiated wages will come into play, unless we win everything this season in which case the bonuses will kick in.
I'm presuming the bonuses will be included in the wages and don't fall under some other heading?

 

[Chippy_boy]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

I'm no FFP expert but with this qualification to the last 16 I'd imagine this will surely be a huge boost for the clubs operating accounts!

Oh, and should we be worried about that article?

I don't believe it's a huge boost, no. We get a bit more money, and obviously revenue from two extra games, but the bigger effects are our stature in Europe which then makes us a more attractive proposition for partners / sponsors.

Had we gone out last night, our PR would be all about having failed in Europe yet again. Now it's all about putting on a great display.

Of course we could go out with a whimper in the knockout stages, but it's far less negative that going out in the group stages.

Okay cheers fella!, and going off your other post, clearly that article is a load of rubbish!.

It's about €3.5m extra, plus matchday revenues, so roughly €5m or €6m of additional income. If we manage to get through the next round, it's a similar additional amount again - slightly more in fact.

 

[moomba]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

We got €1m in bonuses for last nights win, plus €3.5m for qualifying for R16. Obviously we now have the opportunity to earn more by winning games and progressing in the knockouts. Also by playing 8+ matches instead of 6 our share of the market pool will be bigger.

 

[Centurions]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Anyone got a rough idea how much we've earned from the CL so far, and with at least one more match in the knockout stages?

Thanks.

Thanks to the withheld prize money are you sure we don't owe UEFA for the privilege of appearing in their competition?

 

[Centurions]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Anyone got a rough idea how much we've earned from the CL so far, and with at least one more match in the knockout stages?

Thanks.

Thanks to the withheld prize money are you sure we don't owe UEFA for the privilege of appearing in their competition?

From: http://www.uefa.com/uefachampionsleague/news/newsid=2146867.html

Each of the 32 teams involved in the group stage will collect a base fee of €8.6m. Performance bonuses will also see €1m paid for a win and €500,000 for a draw in the group phase. The sides competing in the round of 16 can also expect to receive €3.5m each, the eight quarter-finalists €3.9m and the four semi-finalists €4.9m. The UEFA Champions League winners will pick up €10.5m and the runners-up €6.5m.

I make that €15.1 million including the next round.