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

[FanchesterCity]

They all think that sponsors want to buy into 'heritage' and 'prestige' (some sponsors do).
They can't grasp that other sponsors want precisely the opposite and want a refreshing new vibrant image that City offers and those clubs can't.

We've got some top players, great stadium, exciting football, Champions League exposure and we're serious PL title challengers. We're a sponsor's dream.

 

[M18CTID]

Let's say Etihad decided they were going to end their sponsorship of the shirt & stadium. Do people not think that, as a leading PL club which is successful and regularly features in the CL, we'd get a shirt and stadium sponsor that at least matched what Etihad pay us?

Exactly. Even worse than not getting a sponsor that matched the deal, some talk about it as though we wouldn't get any sponsorship deal whatsoever!

 

[The slaughtered lamb]

They all think that sponsors want to buy into 'heritage' and 'prestige' (some sponsors do).
They can't grasp that other sponsors want precisely the opposite and want a refreshing new vibrant image that City offers and those clubs can't.

We've got some top players, great stadium, exciting football, Champions League exposure and we're serious PL title challengers. We're a sponsor's dream.

It's a good point. Most fans, understandably, focus on the football side and totally ignore the sponsor's motives. The importance of winning trophies on a regular basis can't be overemphasised.

 

[lazza]

Although it's probably the case that our sponsorship linked to Abu Dhabi is less than 30% of revenue, it's still a move designed to hold us back. Clearly, City are an attractive prospect for any AD company to be involved with as we have a high global visibility and, I would guess, a very high local presence in the Gulf states. And although we may currently meet requirements, new regulations limiting our revenue from a particular region is restrictive on potential future growth. Who knows, maybe every large company headquartered in AD wants a piece of City, potentially doubling our revenue from there, while renegotiation on stadium and sponsorship rights with existing partners could also add 50% more to the revenue generated in that region. But under new guidelines, this wouldn't be acceptable?

 

[Blueknows]

It's all too late. We dine at the top table so no need to worry.

not only are we dining at the top table , we will soon own the restaurant

 

[Centurions]

Although it's probably the case that our sponsorship linked to Abu Dhabi is less than 30% of revenue, it's still a move designed to hold us back. Clearly, City are an attractive prospect for any AD company to be involved with as we have a high global visibility and, I would guess, a very high local presence in the Gulf states. And although we may currently meet requirements, new regulations limiting our revenue from a particular region is restrictive on potential future growth. Who knows, maybe every large company headquartered in AD wants a piece of City, potentially doubling our revenue from there, while renegotiation on stadium and sponsorship rights with existing partners could also add 50% more to the revenue generated in that region. But under new guidelines, this wouldn't be acceptable?

Under 20% according to PB (who's much better qualified than myself to comment on that), even if they brought this in there'd be no way to enforce IMHO. Surely the dreaded word 'racism' would raise it's head even in our blinkered press? Would Liverpool's and United's USA deals come under the same scrutiny?

PSG would be more concerned about this than ourselves.

 

[I'm no cynic but...]

If UEFA were really interested in the development of the game rather than the little problem of 'wealthy' clubs 'buying trophies' which is, let's face it, all they are really bothered about, then all they have to do is to switch their attention into sporting matters rather than partaking in financial gymnastics. To do this, all they would have to do is to re-jig the squad system so that a higher proportion of players are developed by clubs instead of resorting to the transfer market. Bigger clubs with better facilities than the rest will still be in a better position to bring young players through but at least the hypocrisy will be wiped away.

 

[WRicko]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...-leave-Manchester-City-and-move-to-China.html

This could help bring in some extra revenue if we are going for the expensive star names we are linked with also need some other clubs to bid for some of our other players.

Possible work around FFP not that we needed it is a club in china buying Yaya at an inflated price before becoming a related party then us buying them at an inflated price which would surely be exempt as its infrastructure and paid for by our parent company CFG not us MCFC. Thaksin after all got money off ADUG before the actual take over to buy players. So its the same but in reverse

 

[john@staustell]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...-leave-Manchester-City-and-move-to-China.html

This could help bring in some extra revenue if we are going for the expensive star names we are linked with also need some other clubs to bid for some of our other players.

Possible work around FFP not that we needed it is a club in china buying Yaya at an inflated price before becoming a related party then us buying them at an inflated price which would surely be exempt as its infrastructure and paid for by our parent company CFG not us MCFC. Thaksin after all got money off ADUG before the actual take over to buy players. So its the same but in reverse

We need to buy that club first!

i dont think we'll get much for Yaya. It will be mutually beneficial if we save his wages for a year. Similarly I wouldn't believe any players we are linked with as they've just made them up.

If any of Messi, Suarez or Neymar will be sold at any price I'll be very surprised indeed. Only possibility is Ronaldo but it would be against the club's policy because of his age now.

He is also an arse.

 

[Ric]

I don't think we need to worry about FFP too much, certainly not to the extent of hatching elaborate but obvious schemes such as that!