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

[Mr Ed (The Stables)]

If he goes there at that price well what a "steal" they will have got themselves.

No worries it'll be like he's back at Spuds an average side with a great player, a top four finish guaranteed maybe is what they'll want?.

What these clowns don't realise is they need two World Class centre halves and a World Class defensive midfielder minimum + back ups.

On paper they are already supposed to be half decent going forward!!!! I hope we put another 6 past them when we next meet.

 

[Blue Beard]

Pretty reliable Argie journalist (the same one who broke the original Aguero injury news) says United are preparing a £120million bid for Bale next summer. Maybe true, maybe not, but that to me sums FFP up in a nutshell, making players like that/fees like this possible for a small pool of clubs and making it impossible for anyone else, even if they have the money but not the 'revenues'. The concept remains just as offensive as ever despite its effects on City starting to fade away.

media will wank themselves silly over it if he did go there and nothing will be negative about the money he cost

it's like their pining for a "Manure" revival, and FFP will move to suit them, like the Champs League seeding system has been changed after this season : just in case they turn the tables. any coincidence that gill and bacon face now work for eufa?
Chelski trade with the dippers and the rags, but would never trade even half decent players with us. I suspect this extends to the established clubs of Europe. Real Madrid would never sell a first class asset to City. We are feared !
We City fans need to dig deep here, in the face of continued adversity.
Fuck em ! Fuck em all !! LOL We fight to the end , not really here

 

[Kinkys Left Foot]

Pretty reliable Argie journalist (the same one who broke the original Aguero injury news) says United are preparing a £120million bid for Bale next summer. Maybe true, maybe not, but that to me sums FFP up in a nutshell, making players like that/fees like this possible for a small pool of clubs and making it impossible for anyone else, even if they have the money but not the 'revenues'. The concept remains just as offensive as ever despite its effects on City starting to fade away.

media will wank themselves silly over it if he did go there and nothing will be negative about the money he cost

I think this may be dependant on them finishing top four this year which is still not a done deal.
Alternatively it may be affordable due to the re-negotiated kit/sponsorship deal of an entirely reasonable 75 million a year whilst we have had to promise like good little boys to not renegotiate our tier one deals with Etihad etc
How the fuck is that by anyway fair?

Is that still a sanction/agreement we should be worried about?
Is it a time barred agreement or the lifetime of the existing tier one deals? I don't know but it smells fishy as fuck whilst Utd, Arsenal and all the rest re implement fucking outrageously large sponsorship deals. Anyone know the ins and outs?

 

[fbloke]

There is some talk that FFP will also take debt into account from 2016.

I've heard it suggested that for clubs to be FFP compliant they MUST reduce debt in any given monitoring period.

Now that would put the cat amongst the pigeons.

 

[Tim of the Oak]

The Rags might be able to afford Bale but I doubt he would sign for a smaller club - at the peak of his career.

 

[aguero93:20]

There is some talk that FFP will also take debt into account from 2016.

I've heard it suggested that for clubs to be FFP compliant they MUST reduce debt in any given monitoring period.

Now that would put the cat amongst the pigeons.

Unfortunately it won't fuck the rags, theyve been reducing their debt year by year.

 

[Blue Beard]

There is some talk that FFP will also take debt into account from 2016.

I've heard it suggested that for clubs to be FFP compliant they MUST reduce debt in any given monitoring period.

Now that would put the cat amongst the pigeons.

Unfortunately it won't fuck the rags, theyve been reducing their debt year by year.

if it suits the yanks to draw more, they will : and with low oil prices I wouldn't be so sure of that. one more season of winning fuck all could mean anyone could buy them on the cheap

 

[john@staustell]

There is some talk that FFP will also take debt into account from 2016.

I've heard it suggested that for clubs to be FFP compliant they MUST reduce debt in any given monitoring period.

Now that would put the cat amongst the pigeons.

Unfortunately it won't fuck the rags, theyve been reducing their debt year by year.

Except this year.

 

[Neville Kneville]

There is some talk that FFP will also take debt into account from 2016.

I've heard it suggested that for clubs to be FFP compliant they MUST reduce debt in any given monitoring period.

Now that would put the cat amongst the pigeons.

Unfortunately it won't fuck the rags, theyve been reducing their debt year by year.

Except this year.

It will be arranged to perfectly suit whatever repayment plan they have, with any knd of exemptions they require, so it doesn't cause them any problems whatsoever.

 

[whipper]

There is some talk that FFP will also take debt into account from 2016.

I've heard it suggested that for clubs to be FFP compliant they MUST reduce debt in any given monitoring period.

Now that would put the cat amongst the pigeons.

Unfortunately it won't fuck the rags, theyve been reducing their debt year by year.

Wouldn't reducing their debt increase money available for transfers though.
It would be frightening if they were debt free.