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

gordondaviesmoustache said:
Prestwich_Blue said:
Someone accused me of looking like a wizened ET on here the other day
That Ric can be a right nasty fucker.

Terrible thing to say. However, if you gave him a pointy hat and a fishing rod...............
 
stony said:
gordondaviesmoustache said:
Prestwich_Blue said:
Someone accused me of looking like a wizened ET on here the other day
That Ric can be a right nasty fucker.

Terrible thing to say. However, if you gave him a pointy hat and a fishing rod...............
If I can ban de niro I can certainly ban you!
 
Mr. Aguia said:
Chippy_boy said:
Cobwebcat said:
Not saying I'm right but as Platini specifically said loans are fine as long as you can afford the interest I'd need to be pointed in the direction of the rules to the contrary before I believed you 100%.

All that matters is revenue (income) and expenses (outgoings). A loan just affects how much cash you have got and how much debt you have on the balance sheet. It doesn't change your revenue or expenses (other than adding to your expenses in terms of interest payments).

So a club can borrow what it likes and it doesn't help FFP at all.

This is how I see it as well. The point it seems he's making is can they use a loophole around FFP. By getting a loan and using that money to buy players but only the yearly payments being counted as "spending". It's an interesting idea but I don't think UEFA would see it that way. IMO they would count all money spent on players regardless of how much of "our money" was being used opposed to the "banks money". They would just say we spent 200m, regardless of the payment plan so to speak.

Wondering how the NYCFC and the club in Australia could help us beyond having them pay us for scouting costs. Could we sell say Clichy to NYCFC for 20m?

But cobwebcat is making a very valid point. Why are the rags able to carry a 400million pound debt and simply service the debt as part of their expenditure but we can't borrow the same amount and do likewise. FFP my arse, but then we all know that anyway. I still don't understand why the Sheikh giving us £400 million can't be counted as income?
 
stony said:
Prestwich_Blue said:
stony said:
Terrible thing to say. However, if you gave him a pointy hat and a fishing rod...............
If I can ban de niro I can certainly ban you!

Haha, getting back in my box.
There's only one poster that's unbannable, mate. Has your time as a mod taught you nothing?
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.