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

[SilverFox2]

Just trying to understand why we as MCFC are critisised when we spend say £40M on a player yet MUFC are almost encouraged to spend on their new expensive players and for it to carry on with £80M for Bale.

Real Madrid have always done it and perhaps that sums it up.

The problem for City is that we are changing too fast for some so when we suddenly have an owner who can compete in a none MCFC way with say Real Madrid and MUFC for star names we are seen as buying our wins and titles.
They are insulated from this criticism because they are just doing what they have always done.

In other words a team is not allowed to change its culture without incurring the type of press we always receive.

Much the same reason why FFP was implemented except that the media has been seduced to accept that a cartel has the right to spend earned money within that cartel but an owner who legitimately earns money in a different sector is somehow tainted money and unfair to those who have been using their clubs as cash cows for years.

 

[laserblue]

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.

Their 2013-14 financial figures released last month showed their debt had increased albeit by only £1.2 million.

 

[Victoria-bahs]

I still do not understand the following.

If we buy a player and he is not in our euro squad ( we cannot have any one else anyway unless we take a player out) does the purchase still Count against the FFP laws?

I can understand them (uefa) having a moan about the club/team in europé but if the player bought is not involved in the eufa cups whats the problem.

 

[Centurions]

I still do not understand the following.

If we buy a player and he is not in our euro squad ( we cannot have any one else anyway unless we take a player out) does the purchase still Count against the FFP laws?

I can understand them (uefa) having a moan about the club/team in europé but if the player bought is not involved in the eufa cups whats the problem.

No, but then again which top player would sign with the proviso that he can't play in the chumps league?

 

[Centurions]

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?

Was it not 3 ( I think) 2nd tier deals?

 

[Victoria-bahs]

When Cook was the CEO.. the ideas he had ,and the work he had done on the Jorden brand ( made it the top brand within a brand ) will i am sure lead to Nike being one of the very top sponsors at the Worlds best training centre with a massive.. yearly fee.. on a par with the rags deal

ps

just seen that shawcross clearance from the Dzeko shot on goal.. grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

 

[SilverFox2]

I believe our Chairmans view that it is just a pinch.
UEFA had no idea that City had a global plan so choked existing deals. All this did was accelerate CFG and overseas awareness of City.

I think Mr K. mentioned that he would now concentrate on this commercial target. Obviously with the frozen ones potentially growing and growing with time.
In fact the more MUFC et al, get for their major sponsors the better for City when the sanctions allow.

We should remember that MUFC need quick high value sponsors to pay for high value newcomers and to maintain the Glazers personal income.
Whilst ADUG want maximum return for the Sheik M.s money I am sure they can literally play the long game as they do with all of their other investments.

 

[Blue Coop]

I keep hearing FFP won't affect us from the summer onwards but can we only spend what we make as profit?

Say we make a profit of 100 million but the combined cost of Pogba and Barkley is 110 million does that mean we can only afford one of them, and we look for a cheaper 2nd option?

If we signed Pogba and Barkley then we'd have to sell 1 or 2 anyway, so job done.

In terms of the forward planning of signings if you assume that your current business plan would continue to yield £100m profit a year then you could actually cover much more of summer spend in a short term view. If you spend £100m on 2 players on 5 year contracts then the cost is £20m a year for the next 5 years (plus circa £10m a year on wages). Your profit drops from £100m to £70m a year and you comfortably pass FFP (that leaves you plenty of room for signings in future summers too). If a football club can get to the position of £100m a year profit then they're laughing - that's not easy to do.

 

[fbloke]

On united's reducing debt - it has only been reducing because they had the Ronaldo money and bought very little at the top end for the past decade. That has all changed now and as they are having to spend their debt will either remain where it is or indeed grow.

The old FFP said that as long as debt was manageable then it was all OK. The suggestion is that any debt has to reduce over a monitoring period - leading to all clubs being debt free over time. I would have no issue with an FFP that had that as its focus.

 

[Chippy_boy]

I still do not understand the following.

If we buy a player and he is not in our euro squad ( we cannot have any one else anyway unless we take a player out) does the purchase still Count against the FFP laws?

I can understand them (uefa) having a moan about the club/team in europé but if the player bought is not involved in the eufa cups whats the problem.

No, but then again which top player would sign with the proviso that he can't play in the chumps league?

Di Maria did.

I accept it's an issue, but honestly signing a player in January who can't play in the CL would mean he misses what, 2 games? We all hope for more games than that of course, but realistically unless we win the whole thing he's not missing much is he.

I can see some players might be prepared to miss out for half a season with the promise of CL starts from next season and beyond.