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
lancs blue
Well-Known Member
In addition, lottery players will, for the first time, be able to take advantage of ‘money can’t buy’ offers, including flights to see Manchester City play and access to private Club events.
Chelsea away to sell out at 15,000pts next season.
B
B
blueinsa
Guest
lancs blue said:In addition, lottery players will, for the first time, be able to take advantage of ‘money can’t buy’ offers, including flights to see Manchester City play and access to private Club events.
Chelsea away to sell out at 15,000pts next season.
If you're lucky....
blue b4 the moon
Well-Known Member
lancs blue said:In addition, lottery players will, for the first time, be able to take advantage of ‘money can’t buy’ offers, including flights to see Manchester City play and access to private Club events.
Chelsea away to sell out at 15,000pts next season.
This is the price we all have to pay, the partyline is due to FFP, which will be blown out of the water hopefully after the court case when we'll be left like all clubs with a greedy system.
i'm in no way saying City should be our own personable charity but we all know our attendance money won't make much difference if FFP is gone, not that it makes a great impact even now.
OB1
Well-Known Member
LoveCity said:Sam Wallace, one of the few reporters who isn't a twat:
Manchester City are confident that they will comply with Uefa Financial Fair Play regulations this year despite spreading losses from the club’s accounts to subsidiary companies.
City say they have had the structure approved by Uefa, in which two separate companies – City Football Services (CFS) and City Football Marketing (CFM) – have assumed around £25.9m of losses that might otherwise have been on Manchester City’s club accounts. The club announced their most recent financial figures, a combined loss of £23m last month, and as ever these will have to be approved by Uefa in order to receive their license to play in European competition next season.
The club say that spreading the losses outside of City’s accounts is justified given that so many of their staff have a global remit, working for two sister clubs, Melbourne City and the newly-constituted MLS franchise New York City. Executives such as Ferran Soriano, the club’s chief executive, as well as other Manchester-based heads of department, including marketing and commercial, also work in both the United States and Australia.
The turnover of the two subsidiaries CFS and CFM is only likely to rise as the operations at the two sister clubs, especially the MLS franchise, become more involved over the coming years. It will be up to Uefa to decide whether the services assigned to those two clubs, and away from Manchester City’s accounts, is commensurate with the work being done by employees of the club. The club do not believe there is any fresh investigation from Uefa but that, as ever, they are under constant scrutiny from the governing body to ensure that they keep within the prescribed FFP boundaries.
City were judged not to have complied with FFP in the last monitoring period and as a result were subjected to a £49m fine, with two-thirds of that suspended, and a reduced 21-man squad for this season’s Champions League.
It is standard practice for groups of companies to recharge one another for costs incurred in one company that relate to the activities performed by another company. Senior and junior staff employed by one company will often perform work that relates to other group companies but have their salary etc paid by one company. Tax authorities often get quite upset if such shared costs are not recharged; especially those authorities that charge higher rates of corporation tax. The practice is often comes under the heading of transfer pricing and I note that City are currently recruiting for a Financial Accountant and transfer pricing appeared to be a key part of the role - I did not read the add carefully as the role would not be appropriate for me; although I have designed / overseen the set-up and operation of an intragroup cost recharge mechanism and dealt with transfer pricing issues.
Danny Hoekman
Well-Known Member
Chippy_boy said:I don't get it.
We are a small club with no histry and no fans. We can't even fill our council house stadium. Why on earth would a Chinese company wan't to sponsor us? We must be lying about something. UEFA should investigate!
It's a UK company.
fbloke said:With all the Chinese lottery players landing in Manchester we're gonna need to expand the stadium quicker than we are!
You may remember around the time of the take over there was much talk of Super Casinos. The UK gov turned down the one in East Manchester IIRC.
I joked at the time that we could build the casino outside the Stadium. Stranger things have happened. It's obviously Haram and so it'd have to be 'out-sourced'. I assume that it's already the case for alcohol sales.
Cobwebcat
Well-Known Member
Chippy_boy said:sam-caddick said:What percentage chance do you think DuPont has of winning?
I am kindof ambivolent about it now.
From a purely ethical point of view, I am hoping it's thrown out since the whole thing was so obviously ill-intentioned and corrupt.
But that said, City have been penalised and whereas we can debate the extent of the damage, the penalties (and indeed the restrictions themselves before we have been sanctioned) have certainly held us back. I find it difficult to imagine that we would not now be in an even better place had FFP never existed. Doubtless I am sure, we would have signed a few players we've missed out on, and we may very well have done better in the CL by now.
It will really irk me if those same restrictions are now about to bite on other clubs (Liverpool, Milan etc) and then they are thrown out.
On balance I think I am probably erring on the side of hoping DuPont loses. That said, any implied vindication of Twatini and his henchmen would be hard to take as well. It's a toughie.
I know what you mean but I hope he wins.
If he loses we are forever in the top 5 football clubs but will ultimately struggle to catch the top 4.
If he wins we are no longer guaranteed to be in the top 5 but have a shot of No1.
That's how I see it anyway.
From a moral point of view its a no-brainer. He has to win.
I want to see what we could do with the restrictions off, maybe not much more than with, but Id rather see the likes of Messi here rather than United because we have one arm tied behind our backs.