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

[Atypical]

So no mention of City just more artistic license from hacks.

 

[SilverFox2]

So no mention of City just more artistic license from hacks.

Perhaps that includes the French article from 'Goal' as well ?
I don't see any reference back to UEFA for its comments.

 

[80s Shorts]

Why couldn't we do it?

I have not read anywhere that the limits on spending have been scrapped. The rules may be being watered down (falling apart) but where does it say
we can now spend as we like. It's all a little opaque to me atm.

 

[HelloCity]

I have not read anywhere that the limits on spending have been scrapped. The rules may be being watered down (falling apart) but where does it say
we can now spend as we like. It's all a little opaque to me atm.

We can spend what we want in terms of income etc, hence the bids for Pogba and Sterling.

We couldn't go and buy Messi and Ronaldo for £500 million though due to the FFP restrictions that every club has.

As a club, we have no individual restriction now.

 

[80s Shorts]

Some people just dont understand how much revenue messi brings do they? Not just shirt sales but general exposure, more tv matches and bigger sponsorship!

Maybe Messi was a bad choice but that is not the point that was being made. People seem to be suggesting that now we can go out and spend what we
want and that all limits have been removed. Doesn't look that way to me at the moment. Although the rules do seem to be disintegrating somewhat.

 

[MCFCTrick]

Maybe Messi was a bad choice but that is not the point that was being made. People seem to be suggesting that now we can go out and spend what we
want and that all limits have been removed. Doesn't look that way to me at the moment. Although the rules do seem to be disintegrating somewhat.

I reckon following recent developments, that any kind of punishment that they tried to impose, would now crumble under the slightest resistance ....

 

[halfcenturyup]

Both have new owners maybe? Although Inter are currently under sanctions if they do qualify for Europe.

It can't be an allowance only for new owners, that wouldn't make any sense. It must surely be applied to existing owners who wish to invest as well ...

 

[halfcenturyup]

I reckon following recent developments, that any kind of punishment that they tried to impose, would now crumble under the slightest resistance ....

An FFP regime that was appropriate and legal wouldn't have any issues at all. UEFA aren't stupid enough to get it wrong a second time are they?

 

[SWP's back]

Maybe Messi was a bad choice but that is not the point that was being made. People seem to be suggesting that now we can go out and spend what we
want and that all limits have been removed. Doesn't look that way to me at the moment. Although the rules do seem to be disintegrating somewhat.

We have the same limits as anyone else, but are now in profit and will have an income in the top 3-5 in the world for the season just gone.

 

[BluessinceHydeRoad]

At the moment the only thing which is clear is that UEFA are still applying their regulations and punishing clubs which do not "break even". Beyond that the situation is even more confused than ever. Our chairman gave the impression that FFP does not even enter into consideration when planning transfer policy for the summer but PSG appear still to be under sanctions and some elements of the French press are concerned that PSG will be unable to compete for another year. Platini says that the regulations will be "relaxed" probably at the end of June, but has also insisted that FFP is "here to stay" and has given no real clue as to what changes may be made. The press are confused to the point where Martin Samuel talks of a humiliating climb down by Platini and a removal of all limits on owner investment at the end of June whereas Marcotti paints an even more confused picture where the overspend lits are actually made more severe but clubs such as AC Milan will be allowed to invest what they want but other clubs (?!) will have to get the permission of yet another UEFA committee! Meanwhile Platini assures us that FFP is working because overall club debt has fallen. Unfortunately though the figures show that the debt levels of Real Madrid, Chelsea and Manchester United - three clubs FFP allowed to spend freely last August - have risen significantly over the last year. We are told as well that no fewer than 18 challenges to the legality of the regulations, and notably the "break even" requirement, are presently before the courts. It sounds a mess and it is. Hopefully, the courts will soon end Platini's agony by declaring his FFPR regulations unlawful from first word to last.