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

Prestwich_Blue said:
They're still trying so we shouldn't drop our guard. Two more little gems were sneaked in when they made the big announcement last summer that clubs could arrange to breach FFP with UEFA's agreement (something we got sanctioned for).

The first was that any income arising from an entity or person with links to the same person or government would be regarded as a related party transaction if the total revenue from that person or government accounted for 30% or more of the club's overall revenue. So, to take a hypothetical example, let's say there's a country where a member of the government owned a football club and where the club received income from entities connected to that country or person. Even if that person had no direct influence over those companies, and wasn't a related party in the generally accepted sense of the word, then they could all still be deemed by UEFA to be related parties if their aggregate contribution was 30% or more of the club's total revenue. And therefore they could be subjected to the fair market value test and the value of the deal written down for FFP purposes.

The other re-defined what the parameters of the "reporting entity" were for FFP purposes. Let's say you had a holding company, which we'll call CFG for the sake of simplicity, which had a football club as a subsidiary (which we'll call MCFC) and also had other football-related operating subsidiaries (which for the sake of argument we'll call CFS and CMS). Previously only MCFC would be included in the reporting entity but now, both CFS and CMS have to be included if they're engaged in football-related activities, even if they've charged MCFC for those services on an arms-length, commercial basis.

While that snake Gill is responsible for financial control matters, they'll always be looking for a way to trip us up.
Click to expand...

Didn't know they had been screwing with the related party definition. They really are desperate scum. City just have to be smarter than them.
 
taleofbluehalves said:
I find it bizarre that they'd rather go after a club and owner that has done all that we have, than owners who have bled the club dry by loading their debt on. Look at the state of Villa, Liverpool previously and Utd with their
ownership model.
Click to expand...
And one of these ownerships, it is reported, is demanding up to 15% cuts in their own business model. Mr Gill should be addressing this little issue as he is much closer to it than most others are.
 
I'm no cynic but... said:
And one of these ownerships, it is reported, is demanding up to 15% cuts in their own business model. Mr Gill should be addressing this little issue as he is much closer to it than most others are.
Click to expand...

Maybe the scum are the vanguard in this matter. Gill will be pushing new legislation through UEFA's FFP that all clubs have to make such cuts, but as the rags have been so brave in being the first club so to do, they are let off the sweeping 50% that will be mandatory.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
It's nothing to do with EU Law, at least as far as I'm aware. Accounting standards on the subject have been around for years though.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't these (proposed?) changes put UEFA in a sticky position, legally, then?
I mean can they construct and apply their own arbitrary standards that contradict international standard practice and actually get away without being taken to court?
 
The regulations are clearly contrary to law and are hopelessly compromised by the rôle of our friend Gill in drawing them up. The new ideas for "reform" of the CL (what we know of them) do not allow for competition on an equal basis, which would be of concern to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, and the granting of automatic qualification to some clubs, qualification through success to others and no qualification to others would inflict financial damage on some clubs but also allow some clubs unfair access to a market while denying others access completely. These ideas would clearly devalue the PL, reduce the value of the PL TV deal and sponsorship of clubs - the FA would have to give serious consideration to withdrawing from UEFA and expelling clubs wishing to join the new CL.
 
Just saw Madrid is getting three quarters of a billion for their new kit deal with Adidas..... Is it true were only pulling in 15 million from Nike?! How long is this deal for such quality apparel?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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.