Is it true about him promising his vote to the USA?
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
Prestwich_Blue
Well-Known Member
That's what the USA believed. Butthen England was promised votes for their bid that never materialised when it mattered.Is it true about him promising his vote to the USA?
BluessinceHydeRoad
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 26 Mar 2012
- Messages
- 2,562
Is it true about him promising his vote to the USA?
Platini says he "may" have promised to vote for the USA, but I suspect he was too busy forgetting what the disloyal payment of 2 million Swiss francs was for at the time. Or was it in the same envelope which arrived from Qatar?
BluessinceHydeRoad
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 26 Mar 2012
- Messages
- 2,562
Great, great post BluesinceHydeRoad. Platini is indeed a whore.
Platini promises his vote to the USA then Qatar come calling with fistfuls of gold and suddenly he's a Qatari.
Platini threatens to run against Blatter and suddenly a couple of million dollars find their way into his pocket and he's happy to let Blatter have a free run.
Platini wants to end the problem of excessive debt among European football clubs but the G14, among whose members are the most indebted but who bring UEFA vast swathes of cash come calling and it's suddenly all about rich owners rather than crippling debt.
On a separate track, I'm just formulating an article for KOTK and the premise is that a combination of FFP and escalating domestic TV deals have virtually killed competition in the PL. It's already clear that owners like the Glazers, FSG and Kroenke aren't prepared to take any sort of financial risk to win trophies and even clubs like West Ham and Newcastle reject the idea of doing well in European competition because it potentially impacts their league future and the reward isn't worth the risk. So a combination of FFP, which virtually forces them to make a profit, and huge TV revenues, which fill their coffers, effectively smother competition.
These revenues are so great that they will dwarf the revenues fron the CL, which themselves used to make the (financial) difference between the elite and the rest and were worth taking a risk for (as Leeds did).
Your article will be of enormous interest, PB, because most have simply marvelled at the size of the deal but few have given any attention to the way the game might change. German fans have waved banners proclaiming the moral superiority of their "model" and the Milan clubs pushed Platini into changing his beloved FFPR, but what are the likely consequences?
I think they will vary from club to club. Sheikh Mansour is interested in a profitable club but is a genuine investor and creator -the TV deal is important but will be less so as a proportion of City's revenue as the collar site and the CFG develop. The Sheikh wants the glory of winning trophies. Chelsea are similar but Abramovich has the problem of footing the bill for the expansion of SB, and sanctions will make money tight without the complication of high transfer fees. The there are the "American" clubs, who find football expensive to start with and who aim to make big profits year after year. Then there is "the rest" who have problems of debt and long for the stability Platini promised but which FFPR seems to have made permanent
The fear throughout Europe that the best players will be swallowed by predatory PL clubs may never happen. As you say, clubs may decide that the rewards from Sky and the Pl offer security, though the money from coverage of the CL may have an influence. But the real fear is that English clubs don't become better and more competitive but less interested in competition in UEFA tournaments because it is costly. English football may become much more insular and the national team even worse than now.
I hope you can be more optimistic than I am, PB!
BlueAnorak
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 31 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 27,869
Why? City have got over the rising drawbridge and under the portcullis and into the FFP castle. Now we can swim in the golden trough of cash with the rest of them. Our chairman said it was a pinch and it is. Now we're in, why on earth should we want to benefit Spurs, Liverpool, Everton etc by helping to get rid of FFP?Not officially, but I wouldn't mind betting the current legal proceedings against the ffp rules are being funded from somewhere within the UAE.
Don't get me wrong as a fan I think it stinks. But the clubs opinion will be totally different.
BlueAnorak
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 31 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 27,869
Great, great post BluesinceHydeRoad. Platini is indeed a whore.
Platini promises his vote to the USA then Qatar come calling with fistfuls of gold and suddenly he's a Qatari.
Platini threatens to run against Blatter and suddenly a couple of million dollars find their way into his pocket and he's happy to let Blatter have a free run.
Platini wants to end the problem of excessive debt among European football clubs but the G14, among whose members are the most indebted but who bring UEFA vast swathes of cash come calling and it's suddenly all about rich owners rather than crippling debt.
On a separate track, I'm just formulating an article for KOTK and the premise is that a combination of FFP and escalating domestic TV deals have virtually killed competition in the PL. It's already clear that owners like the Glazers, FSG and Kroenke aren't prepared to take any sort of financial risk to win trophies and even clubs like West Ham and Newcastle reject the idea of doing well in European competition because it potentially impacts their league future and the reward isn't worth the risk. So a combination of FFP, which virtually forces them to make a profit, and huge TV revenues, which fill their coffers, effectively smother competition.
These revenues are so great that they will dwarf the revenues fron the CL, which themselves used to make the (financial) difference between the elite and the rest and were worth taking a risk for (as Leeds did).
The CL gives ikle City an extra £38m a season from now on - another £10m on top for United. That's £114m over 3 seasons or £88m more than the £26m you can invest in a 3 year time frame without putting an investment plan to UEFA. UEFA will chuck out any investment plan from a Premier League club not called United or Arsenal (maybe Chelsea) - because the new system is NOT rule based - the FFP management committee under the auspices of Woodward and Rummenigge can decide what is reasonable investment!
They're just a bunch of crooks running a cartel. so:
Booooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
Last edited:
SilverFox2
Well-Known Member
Your article will be of enormous interest, PB, because most have simply marvelled at the size of the deal but few have given any attention to the way the game might change. German fans have waved banners proclaiming the moral superiority of their "model" and the Milan clubs pushed Platini into changing his beloved FFPR, but what are the likely consequences?
I think they will vary from club to club. Sheikh Mansour is interested in a profitable club but is a genuine investor and creator -the TV deal is important but will be less so as a proportion of City's revenue as the collar site and the CFG develop. The Sheikh wants the glory of winning trophies. Chelsea are similar but Abramovich has the problem of footing the bill for the expansion of SB, and sanctions will make money tight without the complication of high transfer fees. The there are the "American" clubs, who find football expensive to start with and who aim to make big profits year after year. Then there is "the rest" who have problems of debt and long for the stability Platini promised but which FFPR seems to have made permanent
The fear throughout Europe that the best players will be swallowed by predatory PL clubs may never happen. As you say, clubs may decide that the rewards from Sky and the Pl offer security, though the money from coverage of the CL may have an influence. But the real fear is that English clubs don't become better and more competitive but less interested in competition in UEFA tournaments because it is costly. English football may become much more insular and the national team even worse than now.
I hope you can be more optimistic than I am, PB!
This is what I like on this thread, informed posts that are not afraid to express their opinions regarding the future.
Thanks BSHR for stimulating my own view regarding the future.
Whatever form this takes for football generally I am of the opinion that our owner knows exactly where he is going and has invested on many fronts to achieve it despite the temptations to be content that Sky / BT money has influenced.
I look forward to CFG development and Collar Site investment with eager anticipation hoping that the fears that caused cartels forming by G14 were well founded and our owner will be less than magnanimous in victory.
Prestwich_Blue
Well-Known Member
No, I think you've echoed my thinking there. I first saw it with Newcastle, when they were in the EL and nearly got relegated. Clearly Ashley made the decision that staying in the PL was a far higher priority than risking winning a cup or getting in the top six. Sad if you're a fan but sadly logical if you're an owner. But that was the EL and are teams even going to bother spending to go for the CL places now?I hope you can be more optimistic than I am, PB!
We should be alright as I suspect winning the CL and joining the European elite is very much part of our owner's plans.
Why? City have got over the rising drawbridge and under the portcullis and into the FFP castle. Now we can swim in the golden trough of cash with the rest of them. Our chairman said it was a pinch and it is. Now we're in, why on earth should we want to benefit Spurs, Liverpool, Everton etc by helping to get rid of FFP?
Don't get me wrong as a fan I think it stinks. But the clubs opinion will be totally different.
Do you think our owners like being branded as "cheats" and accused of "financial doping"? If UEFA lose this court case and ffp gets thrown out then we will have been proved right and the corrupt cabal will be exposed for what it is. Our name will be cleared. If not, we will forever be tarnished and called "cheats". People have long memories and football fans in particular never forget anything. That's why the fact that Arsenal buying their way into the top flight still gets mentioned today. Fighting it ourselves would have seriously damaged our relationship with UEFA and within the game. It would also have hampered our progress as a club. This way we have stayed in their good books and seemingly gone along with it. If it does get thrown out we will have won twice.