lancs blue
Well-Known Member
BlueAnorak said:
The figures are from 12 months ago.
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
The figures are from 12 months ago.
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
It's unbelievable, isn't it?blueinsa said:Us top and its evidence of everything wrong in football, rags top and its proof they are the biggest sporting club in the world pmsl.
B
B
blueinsa
Guest
gordondaviesmoustache said:It's unbelievable, isn't it?blueinsa said:Us top and its evidence of everything wrong in football, rags top and its proof they are the biggest sporting club in the world pmsl.
More worrying is the fact that Millions of our population take it as gospel pmsl.
How fucking dumbed down are we to the shite the written and visual media feed us these days?
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
We?blueinsa said:gordondaviesmoustache said:It's unbelievable, isn't it?blueinsa said:Us top and its evidence of everything wrong in football, rags top and its proof they are the biggest sporting club in the world pmsl.
More worrying is the fact that Millions of our population take it as gospel pmsl.
How fucking dumbed down are we to the shite the written and visual media feed us these days?
Speak for yourself, mate ;-)
B
B
blueinsa
Guest
gordondaviesmoustache said:We?blueinsa said:gordondaviesmoustache said:It's unbelievable, isn't it?
More worrying is the fact that Millions of our population take it as gospel pmsl.
How fucking dumbed down are we to the shite the written and visual media feed us these days?
Speak for yourself, mate ;-)
Bad error, well spotted pmsl.
SilverFox2
Well-Known Member
blueinsa said:gordondaviesmoustache said:It's unbelievable, isn't it?blueinsa said:Us top and its evidence of everything wrong in football, rags top and its proof they are the biggest sporting club in the world pmsl.
More worrying is the fact that Millions of our population take it as gospel pmsl.
How fucking dumbed down are we to the shite the written and visual media feed us these days?
Like everything else associated with FFP most have to get used to the fact that City have moved on.
If all the media can do is regurgitate old as new then maybe that is indicative of the way things are changing.
I look forward to the day when City are paying the highest wages because they have attracted the best players to the best team. We should not be sensitive about our wage bill if our team is worth it.
Incidentally, is this an Agenda item ?
I'm no cynic but...
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 22 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 4,000
- Location
- True friends stab you in the front.
- Team supported
- The one and only City
I look forward to the day that Etihad becomes the main sponsor of the Champions League. That would cause more than a few UEFA worms to turn.
BlueAnorak said:Sergi0 Na5r1 said:Paris St-Germain topple Manchester City in wage list
"Paris St-Germain topple Manchester City in wage list
Paris St-Germain have replaced Manchester City as the best paid sports team in the world.
A survey by the Sporting Intelligence website has revealed the Ligue 1 champions have an average first-team salary of £101,898 per week.
City topped the poll last year but their average of £96,445 has seen them fall to third place behind Real Madrid.
Manchester United are sixth in the list, Chelsea are eighth, Arsenal are at 10 and Liverpool come in at 14." - BBC
Hmmmm...
Man U overtook us with there splurge so how can they suddenly be 6th?
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.espnfcasia.com/paris-saint-germain/story/2456012/psg-pay-sports-highest-wages-as-football-dominates-top-10" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.espnfcasia.com/paris-saint-g ... tes-top-10</a>
Heres the complete info on the wage bill thing for the last year. It seems Man City and Yankees are the only 2 clubs in the top 10 who've spent less on their wages than the year before. Bayern Munich have spent the same amount as their previous year. While it's true that ManUre is only 6th it is also important to note that they've jumped from 8th to 6th. Liverpool meanwhile have jumped 6 places from 20th to 14th.
Well, so much for "City ruining football" I guess.
Yet another fine piece of journalism from who I consider to be the most "enlightened" scribe in... Fleet Street (as was), namely Martin Samuel. I appreciate the tabloid bashes will want to have a moan, especially as it's from shhhhh.....The Daily Mail
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3088434/I-told-Michel-Platini-destroying-football-finally-seen-it.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... en-it.html</a>
Here is today’s question. Why is it that whatever is good for the two Milan clubs also happens to be what is best for football, according to UEFA? Ever wondered that? Whatever the Milan clubs want, they get. When they wanted FFP, in it came; now they want more financial freedom, they get that, too.
Don’t be mistaken. The relaxation of UEFA’s wrecking ball regulation is a mighty positive for football, particularly if it ensures that, from here, owner investment must be a gift. UEFA should also consider simultaneously closing loopholes such as Roman Abramovich’s £1billion loan to Fordstam, the company through which he owns Chelsea. This would prevent another Portsmouth from occurring.
Yet there are plenty of clubs and recent developments that could be cited as highlighting the need for change in FFP rules. Bayern Munich’s stockpiling of the best domestic talent in Germany; the summer plundering of Southampton; nine consecutive title wins for BATE Borisov in Belarus; the failure to find a buyer for Everton; the fine of roughly £50m for Manchester City, despite their wonderful regeneration project in east Manchester.
Yet the name that is said to have provoked this rethink at UEFA is that of AC Milan. Silvio Berlusconi wants to sell his club, but can’t, because a new owner would need to spend heavily to move Milan from midtable torpor, and UEFA rules do not allow that. So now it’s all change.
When Platini introduced FFP, he cited the wishes of the club bosses as high onhis list of considerations. ‘It is mainly the owners who asked us to do something,’ he said before the Champions League draw in 2009. ‘Abramovich, Berlusconi and Massimo Moratti at Inter. They do not want to fork out any more.’
Not much of a philosophy, then, was it? I don’t want to spend my money, so you can’t either. I’ve got what I want, so let’s just pull up this drawbridge.
Abramovich, we know, was a turncoat. Having bought his way into the elite, he crossed the floor because he didn’t want other new owners matching his spending power and challenging Chelsea’s supremacy. These are the principles that Jose Mourinho now espouses as if they are (a) noble and (b) his own.
For Berlusconi and Moratti, however, it was different. Their clubs were part of the establishment, but maintaining that status with men like Abramovich around was becoming a huge financial drain. Tie spending power to revenue and that was the problem solved, they thought. The new owners from the east would be shackled and the status quo maintained.
What they had not anticipated was the parlous financial state of Italian football. Poor matchday revenues, underdeveloped commercial opportunities with many clubs not owning their stadiums and a TV deal which paled into insignificance beside the sums on offer in England and Spain. Suddenly committed to spending what they earned, the influence of the Milanese clubs collapsed.
In 2012, AC Milan sold their two best players, Zlatan Ibrahimovic and Thiago Silva, and the current squad is a pale imitation of the glory days. Inter were largely jettisoned by Moratti in 2013 — he retained a stake of 28.1 per cent — but new owner Erick Thohir has been unable to move forward, saddled with the demands of FFP and huge debt.
So now the protectionist, exclusionist plan A has failed to work, the Milan clubs have advanced plan B: back to the future. The principles they demanded threatened to ruin the pair of them. But, don’t worry, they’ve got some new ones over here.
That is likely to be the stance of the English elite, too. They will need to find a fresh position on the moral high ground, because the old sermons won’t convince any more.
Financial Fair Play, we were so often told, came from a desire to prevent another implosion such as the one at Portsmouth or Leeds United. That is why Manchester City should be banned from Europe, or, as Mourinho suggested, docked points.
Yet if UEFA rules now prevent owners or third parties from loaning clubs huge sums of money — and then just as airily demanding arbitrary repayment — these financial catastrophes will no longer be possible.
So what will be the case for FFP then? The elite will be forced into the open to admit it is not Portsmouth who are being protected, but the financial and political supremacy of Manchester United, Chelsea, Liverpool or Arsenal. David Gill, former chief executive of United, was among those who helped frame FFP. Amazingly, what was best for the European game appeared to correspond precisely with what was best for his old club. It was the same for Karl-Heinz Rummenigge at Bayern Munich, too.
But not for the rest of Europe. As Arsene Wenger pointed out yesterday, the Premier League’s new television deal is the other vehicle for change, terrifying the continent with its enormity. If English clubs have so much additional revenue then they can spend accordingly and blow their rivals away. This was always a complication.
In FFP terms, one size could never fit all. How can clubs be tethered to turnover if Barcelona and Real Madrid’s television deal is constructed in an entirely different way from that of the rest of Europe?
How can clubs all work under the same financial regulation when each country has different laws on, for instance, taxation — meaning at one stage it would have cost Paris Saint-Germain roughly 30 per cent more to pay Wayne Rooney the same salary he earns at Manchester United.
How can there be one rule for a league that routinely receives forms of state aid, when others do not? The only way FFP could ever have been fair was if UEFA took into account the variables in different domestic competitions, and addressed issues of wealth distribution in the Champions League.
Once the size of the Premier League’s television deal became apparent, however, it was plain that parts of continental Europe were simply going to become uncompetitive. Milan, for example. Now those clubs are back in the game, and so are a lot of others — which is just as it should be.
So Platini got the right result, eventually, but perhaps for the wrong reasons. Next time, he shouldn’t try so hard to please the entitled elite. ‘It’s not easy,’ said Wenger of FFP yesterday. ‘There are very intelligent people at UEFA who have worked for a few years now on that problem.’ Really? They should have worked harder then.
Any negative that can be seen from eight years out by a bloke with an E grade maths O level sitting in his front room, really shouldn’t have been too much for Europe’s brains trust to compute. Fair play didn’t have to be rocket science; it just had to be fair.
Read more: <a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3088434/I-told-Michel-Platini-destroying-football-finally-seen-it.html#ixzz3ai2U00sg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... z3ai2U00sg</a>
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3088434/I-told-Michel-Platini-destroying-football-finally-seen-it.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... en-it.html</a>
Here is today’s question. Why is it that whatever is good for the two Milan clubs also happens to be what is best for football, according to UEFA? Ever wondered that? Whatever the Milan clubs want, they get. When they wanted FFP, in it came; now they want more financial freedom, they get that, too.
Don’t be mistaken. The relaxation of UEFA’s wrecking ball regulation is a mighty positive for football, particularly if it ensures that, from here, owner investment must be a gift. UEFA should also consider simultaneously closing loopholes such as Roman Abramovich’s £1billion loan to Fordstam, the company through which he owns Chelsea. This would prevent another Portsmouth from occurring.
Yet there are plenty of clubs and recent developments that could be cited as highlighting the need for change in FFP rules. Bayern Munich’s stockpiling of the best domestic talent in Germany; the summer plundering of Southampton; nine consecutive title wins for BATE Borisov in Belarus; the failure to find a buyer for Everton; the fine of roughly £50m for Manchester City, despite their wonderful regeneration project in east Manchester.
Yet the name that is said to have provoked this rethink at UEFA is that of AC Milan. Silvio Berlusconi wants to sell his club, but can’t, because a new owner would need to spend heavily to move Milan from midtable torpor, and UEFA rules do not allow that. So now it’s all change.
When Platini introduced FFP, he cited the wishes of the club bosses as high onhis list of considerations. ‘It is mainly the owners who asked us to do something,’ he said before the Champions League draw in 2009. ‘Abramovich, Berlusconi and Massimo Moratti at Inter. They do not want to fork out any more.’
Not much of a philosophy, then, was it? I don’t want to spend my money, so you can’t either. I’ve got what I want, so let’s just pull up this drawbridge.
Abramovich, we know, was a turncoat. Having bought his way into the elite, he crossed the floor because he didn’t want other new owners matching his spending power and challenging Chelsea’s supremacy. These are the principles that Jose Mourinho now espouses as if they are (a) noble and (b) his own.
For Berlusconi and Moratti, however, it was different. Their clubs were part of the establishment, but maintaining that status with men like Abramovich around was becoming a huge financial drain. Tie spending power to revenue and that was the problem solved, they thought. The new owners from the east would be shackled and the status quo maintained.
What they had not anticipated was the parlous financial state of Italian football. Poor matchday revenues, underdeveloped commercial opportunities with many clubs not owning their stadiums and a TV deal which paled into insignificance beside the sums on offer in England and Spain. Suddenly committed to spending what they earned, the influence of the Milanese clubs collapsed.
In 2012, AC Milan sold their two best players, Zlatan Ibrahimovic and Thiago Silva, and the current squad is a pale imitation of the glory days. Inter were largely jettisoned by Moratti in 2013 — he retained a stake of 28.1 per cent — but new owner Erick Thohir has been unable to move forward, saddled with the demands of FFP and huge debt.
So now the protectionist, exclusionist plan A has failed to work, the Milan clubs have advanced plan B: back to the future. The principles they demanded threatened to ruin the pair of them. But, don’t worry, they’ve got some new ones over here.
That is likely to be the stance of the English elite, too. They will need to find a fresh position on the moral high ground, because the old sermons won’t convince any more.
Financial Fair Play, we were so often told, came from a desire to prevent another implosion such as the one at Portsmouth or Leeds United. That is why Manchester City should be banned from Europe, or, as Mourinho suggested, docked points.
Yet if UEFA rules now prevent owners or third parties from loaning clubs huge sums of money — and then just as airily demanding arbitrary repayment — these financial catastrophes will no longer be possible.
So what will be the case for FFP then? The elite will be forced into the open to admit it is not Portsmouth who are being protected, but the financial and political supremacy of Manchester United, Chelsea, Liverpool or Arsenal. David Gill, former chief executive of United, was among those who helped frame FFP. Amazingly, what was best for the European game appeared to correspond precisely with what was best for his old club. It was the same for Karl-Heinz Rummenigge at Bayern Munich, too.
But not for the rest of Europe. As Arsene Wenger pointed out yesterday, the Premier League’s new television deal is the other vehicle for change, terrifying the continent with its enormity. If English clubs have so much additional revenue then they can spend accordingly and blow their rivals away. This was always a complication.
In FFP terms, one size could never fit all. How can clubs be tethered to turnover if Barcelona and Real Madrid’s television deal is constructed in an entirely different way from that of the rest of Europe?
How can clubs all work under the same financial regulation when each country has different laws on, for instance, taxation — meaning at one stage it would have cost Paris Saint-Germain roughly 30 per cent more to pay Wayne Rooney the same salary he earns at Manchester United.
How can there be one rule for a league that routinely receives forms of state aid, when others do not? The only way FFP could ever have been fair was if UEFA took into account the variables in different domestic competitions, and addressed issues of wealth distribution in the Champions League.
Once the size of the Premier League’s television deal became apparent, however, it was plain that parts of continental Europe were simply going to become uncompetitive. Milan, for example. Now those clubs are back in the game, and so are a lot of others — which is just as it should be.
So Platini got the right result, eventually, but perhaps for the wrong reasons. Next time, he shouldn’t try so hard to please the entitled elite. ‘It’s not easy,’ said Wenger of FFP yesterday. ‘There are very intelligent people at UEFA who have worked for a few years now on that problem.’ Really? They should have worked harder then.
Any negative that can be seen from eight years out by a bloke with an E grade maths O level sitting in his front room, really shouldn’t have been too much for Europe’s brains trust to compute. Fair play didn’t have to be rocket science; it just had to be fair.
Read more: <a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3088434/I-told-Michel-Platini-destroying-football-finally-seen-it.html#ixzz3ai2U00sg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... z3ai2U00sg</a>
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Every time Twattini opens his big mouth and goes on record he is digging a bigger and bigger hole for himself and his corrupt organisation. As for FFP he is now as good as admitting what we all knew all along, that it was created to protect the cartel and stifle competition. Dupont must surely hammer these weasels in the court room now!