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

[Andrew___K]

@aguero93:20 could you explain, what are the stages of approval this plan should pass to be implemented? Who's going to be involved in voting etc.?

 

[Metalartin]

Blatantly trying to move the goal posts to suit faltering clubs who had success in yesteryear is nothing short of anti-competitive, needs someone from UEFA to come out and say as much before rubbishing the idea completely to prove they aren't in anyone's pocket.

 

[Andrew___K]

Once you start down this route, you are doomed and you will finish having rules governing every line in the P&L.
So far, there are restrictions on:
Owner capital investment, sponsorship, total spend versus costs, roster make up and size, etc. etc. Each new rule just gives rise to new practices which in turn lead to another new rule. It's like the tax code, it just gets more complex every year. And it solves nothing. Adam Smith, author of The Wealth of Nations, said all this type of regulation leads to shady deals in smoke filled back rooms. We have quite enough of them, already. Just another attempt by the failing old guard to prop themselves up. They pretend it's about competition, so why introduce more anti competitive rules?
Note that the only rules that make sense are those limiting debt....wonder why the G14 refused to accept those?!
City should resist this strongly through the European Clubs Association. The French and Germans love regulation, much of which is self seeking, and they hate what they call "the anglo saxon economic model".We tend to favour free markets, with sensible regs. This proposal is bonkers.

It makes sense for Italian and English clubs to unite against this nonsense, doesn't it? The bastards are going too far this time. City, United, Pool, Arsenal, Milan, Inter - all will suffer if the plan comes to life.

 

[Metalartin]

So this would in fact affect United as it would be just a net -£100m net spend.

Still though...
Where do United fans believe their revenue comes from? Do they picture overseas fans emptying their pockets? That's not where the money comes from, they don't go to the games, they don't have to pay anything towards the club to watch them on TV... the TV money is split and if anything we deserve more being the most watched club out there from recent figures. We all know the deal with shirt sales too nike, adidas pay a set amount regardless of how many shirts sold over the duration of their contract. So where does this notion they all have that they are somehow "earning" it more so than us, come from? It's certainly not backed up with any facts from what I can see.

As for the 30% revenue from a related party limit.
Even if Etihad was a related party, which they are not apparently(taking those in the knows word on that), if we did want to open our sponsorship up are these united plebs deluded enough to think we aren't in a position to attract even better deals than we currently have? It's pure delusion to think otherwise, they'd be lining up for a piece of what City can offer right now.

 

[BlueAnorak]

Once you start down this route, you are doomed and you will finish having rules governing every line in the P&L.
So far, there are restrictions on:
Owner capital investment, sponsorship, total spend versus costs, roster make up and size, etc. etc. Each new rule just gives rise to new practices which in turn lead to another new rule. It's like the tax code, it just gets more complex every year. And it solves nothing. Adam Smith, author of The Wealth of Nations, said all this type of regulation leads to shady deals in smoke filled back rooms. We have quite enough of them, already. Just another attempt by the failing old guard to prop themselves up. They pretend it's about competition, so why introduce more anti competitive rules?
Note that the only rules that make sense are those limiting debt....wonder why the G14 refused to accept those?!
City should resist this strongly through the European Clubs Association. The French and Germans love regulation, much of which is self seeking, and they hate what they call "the anglo saxon economic model".We tend to favour free markets, with sensible regs. This proposal is bonkers.

It is - and does nothing to remove dangerous debt - which is supposed to be the prime motive for FFP.
Can't see it affecting us much as we're already in the golden trough - Though it will hammer the myriad of clubs that use transfer money to stay afloat.

 

[aguero93:20]

@aguero93:20 could you explain, what are the stages of approval this plan should pass to be implemented? Who's going to be involved in voting etc.?

Had to be approved by the executive board at UEFA before it goes for a vote, they'll generally have a mediation process with the clubs at this stage. Then the ECA vote on it.

 

[aguero93:20]

but how can that work if the players don't want it. the players are greedy ones and need the clubs like manchester city and PSG like i said its a money go round somebody gets a very nice deal from selling a player it means that money will be spent on new players and selling clubs are happy the player is happy

uefa and football must be daft if they think stopping the money men will be good for the game just like the premier league it got stale back in the 1990s when united was winning it every season the the money was invited into the game come and buy a football club and take on united come and shake up the game and bring in the best players from all over the world was setup the biggest show on earth the premier league needed new money and better players to promote it

It's fuck all to do with the players.

 

[BlueAnorak]

It makes sense for Italian and English clubs to unite against this nonsense, doesn't it? The bastards are going too far this time. City, United, Pool, Arsenal, Milan, Inter - all will suffer if the plan comes to life.

As I see it the only thing that affects us the 25 man squad rule and how it makes academy investment a waste of time.
That said we can come to an arrangement with associate clubs to sell for a £1 and buy back for £2 with those clubs able to make money on those we don't want back.

 

[Andrew___K]

As I see it the only thing that affects us the 25 man squad rule and how it makes academy investment a waste of time.
That said we can come to an arrangement with associate clubs to sell for a £1 and buy back for £2 with those clubs able to make money on those we don't want back.

City won't be able compete with the likes of Bayern and Madrid who hoover players from domestic leagues [almost] for free. English clubs will lose the advantage of the rich TV deal. What's the point of earning money if you can't spend it?

 

[super_city_si]

when are they going to regulate agents? I still don’t understand how it is a player who employs an agent yet when a transfer takes place the club has to pay a ridiculous fee to the agent. Surely any agent fees are the responsibility of the player?