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

[Bodicoteblue]

Perhaps one of the financial/ accounting wizards who star on this thread can help me with something .
Listening to Collymore's phone in today , one of hundreds of overheated scousers gave us a list of players that they should be signing with a view to next season's CL , names like Reus were bandied about.
This is my problem. Surely as things stand , from what I've been led to understand , Liverpool would fail FFP as they currently run at a considerable loss , and would have no resources to buy new players. There again , I've heard that they will not be scrutinised by Uefa for next season because they are not in European competition this season.
Does this not give them a huge and unfair advantage over other teams in the CL?
Is this not a prima facie case of exactly what FFP was supposed to prevent ? Spending money that they have not raised from revenue streams?
If this is the case , then surely someone is going to have to take Uefa to task , the two most obvious suspects being ourselves or PSG .
Therein lies another problem . If the board has decided not to recognise FFP for whatever reasons , then we can hardly make a complaint about the obvious unfairness of another club gaining a huge advantage from their total failure to comply with a system we don't officially recognise , and also making ourselves sound like Wenger et al by pointing out someone else's breaching of rules.
Do we all stand around and watch Liverpool flout all the rules that the rest of us are being obliged to comply with, or are there going to be exceptions for certain clubs?

 

[6one]

What I need to make clear to all is this:

UEFA have no jurisdiction to give transfer embargoes. This is not on the list published by UEFA of possible sanctions for breach of FFP rules.

Ignore all newspaper reports to the contrary. Sensationalism.

 

[fbloke]

What I need to make clear to all is this:

UEFA have no jurisdiction to give transfer embargoes. This is not on the list published by UEFA of possible sanctions for breach of FFP rules.

Ignore all newspaper reports to the contrary. Sensationalism.

Could you say that again slowly for the hard of thinking. ;-)

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

Perhaps one of the financial/ accounting wizards who star on this thread can help me with something .
Listening to Collymore's phone in today , one of hundreds of overheated scousers gave us a list of players that they should be signing with a view to next season's CL , names like Reus were bandied about.
This is my problem. Surely as things stand , from what I've been led to understand , Liverpool would fail FFP as they currently run at a considerable loss , and would have no resources to buy new players. There again , I've heard that they will not be scrutinised by Uefa for next season because they are not in European competition this season.
Does this not give them a huge and unfair advantage over other teams in the CL?
Is this not a prima facie case of exactly what FFP was supposed to prevent ? Spending money that they have not raised from revenue streams?
If this is the case , then surely someone is going to have to take Uefa to task , the two most obvious suspects being ourselves or PSG .
Therein lies another problem . If the board has decided not to recognise FFP for whatever reasons , then we can hardly make a complaint about the obvious unfairness of another club gaining a huge advantage from their total failure to comply with a system we don't officially recognise , and also making ourselves sound like Wenger et al by pointing out someone else's breaching of rules.
Do we all stand around and watch Liverpool flout all the rules that the rest of us are being obliged to comply with, or are there going to be exceptions for certain clubs?

It's an interesting one, I don't know when their financial year ends and I don't know the rules about what you can put in, because I can imagine when they go onto win the league and trigger their sponsorship bonuses that they'd look to add them in to this year's figures to reduce the losses.

I don't think their owners are ones to spend £50m+ on a player, sure they've made £20/30m signings but I think that'll be what they carry on doing over the summer for guys like Lallana maybe. Their financial situation is interesting, though ultimately you know Liverpool will never get punished for anything.

 

[BlueAnorak]

Supposedly sanctioned clubs already know their punishments, they just haven't been made public. Surprised no "source" has leaked yet.

The press in the UK and Europe especially Paul Heyward at the Telegraph already know our punishment bearing in mind who is on the UEFA committee but they are keeping stum because they know the 'punishment' is nothing like what the great and good in the British press are demanding.

 

[Champions2012!]

Supposedly sanctioned clubs already know their punishments, they just haven't been made public. Surprised no "source" has leaked yet.

The press in the UK and Europe especially Paul Heyward at the Telegraph already know our punishment bearing in mind who is on the UEFA committee but they are keeping stum because they know the 'punishment' is nothing like what the great and good in the British press are demanding.

I know as well but the owners told me not to tell you guys :^)

 

[Damocles]

What I need to make clear to all is this:

UEFA have no jurisdiction to give transfer embargoes. This is not on the list published by UEFA of possible sanctions for breach of FFP rules.

Ignore all newspaper reports to the contrary. Sensationalism.

Err...yes it is.

 

[Cobwebcat]

What I need to make clear to all is this:

UEFA have no jurisdiction to give transfer embargoes. This is not on the list published by UEFA of possible sanctions for breach of FFP rules.

Ignore all newspaper reports to the contrary. Sensationalism.

Err...yes it is.

Not as far as I know.

There's nine different measures. A transfer embargo is not one of them unless it has been added very recently. The nearest is a restriction on the number of players than can be registered for a UEFA competition but it doesn't stop you buying the players.

I'd be interested to see where in the UEFA regulations you've seen this. It is, I think, one of the PL sanctions.

 

[Damocles]

There's nine different measures. A transfer embargo is not one of them unless it has been added very recently. The nearest is a restriction on the number of players than can be registered for a UEFA competition but it doesn't stop you buying the players.

Not a restriction on the number of players, a restriction on registering any new players.

Of course UEFA can't dictate a transfer embargo to effect the Premier League in licensing regulations for the Champions League. But by stating that you cannot register ANY new players they create a transfer embargo for their competition

 

[Centurions]

What I need to make clear to all is this:

UEFA have no jurisdiction to give transfer embargoes. This is not on the list published by UEFA of possible sanctions for breach of FFP rules.

Ignore all newspaper reports to the contrary. Sensationalism.

Err...yes it is.

There's nine different measures. A transfer embargo is not one of them unless it has been added very recently. The nearest is a restriction on the number of players than can be registered for a UEFA competition but it doesn't stop you buying the players.

This is a list of UEFA punishments that any club breaching FFP rules could be hit with:

a) warning
b) reprimand
c) fine
d) deduction of points (in Champions League or Europa League)
e) withholding of revenues from a UEFA competition
f) prohibition on registering new players in UEFA competitions
g) restriction on the number of players that a club may register for participation in UEFA competitions, including a financial limit on the overall aggregate cost of the employee benefits expenses of players registered on the A-list for the purposes of UEFA club competitions
h) disqualification from competitions in progress and/or exclusion from future competitions
i) withdrawal of a title or award