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

[Delphacito]

If anything this will push down the crazy transfer prices. If there's a 'cap' to the spending limit for everybody then the selling club is at loss here.

 

[waspish]

Untrue. Their rules still have to be fit for the purpose of sporting competition and be applied correctly and fairly across the board as well as being in tandem with EU employment and commercial law. This isn't the NFL and the USA.

Yep the word legally covers all that

 

[OB1]

It's a bit nonsensical really, if they're doing that, they'll essentially be examining a club on 2 years of accounts and a budget for the 3rd year, budgets are nothing more than guesswork and wishful thinking. You can't do that and apply a concrete number for loss limits. If City think they're going to fail by half a million on the budget they'll revise the budget by a couple of million, same goes for any other club.

I could write an awful lot on budgets and forecasts and I will often point out that they will always be wrong (but that is a matter of degree and why you should, imo, always be re-forecasting); however, and I'm sure you know this, budgets prepared by businesses like MCFC should and will be far more than just guesswork and wishful thinking. For an established, stable football club, a large part of their budget should be forecast with a high degree of accuracy and the potential upsides and downsides to that core budget should be reasonably predictable.

That does not mean that any changes to FFP make sense.

 

[deano ou812]

Real Madrid has more debt than just $250mill but none of their net debt falls into uefa fairplay regulations,what am I missing here...

 

[Cobwebcat]

If I read this correctly City are still bound by the original ffp rules it’s just that a large net spend will initiate a speedy investigation which we may still pass. It’s aimed at PSG this.

 

[SWP's back]

It’s there competition you get invited to so they can make what ever rules up as they want legally.

Not correct mate.

 

[aguero93:20]

I could write an awful lot on budgets and forecasts and I will often point out that they will always be wrong (but that is a matter of degree and why you should, imo, always be re-forecasting); however, and I'm sure you know this, budgets prepared by businesses like MCFC should and will be far more than just guesswork and wishful thinking. For an established, stable football club, a large part of their budget should be forecast with a high degree of accuracy and the potential upsides and downsides to that core budget should be reasonably predictable.

That does not mean that any changes to FFP make sense.

I'm the management accountant for a company with revenues that might not be as high as the club's but are in a similar ballpark mate, I get it. But if a change of 0.4% to revenue and expenditure lets the business avoid sanctions that will affect them as a going concern the adjustments will be made.

 

[BlueAnorak]

To me that reads like a way for them to interfere with a club's recruitment process by slowing it down. So if you buy two players or one expensive one, unless you are Real or Barca they'll put the breaks on and take their sweet time "overseeing the financials", result = Certain clubs *cough*City*cough* not able to close any further deals until they give the go ahead.

Wouldn't work like that. In practice it would allow them to discourage clubs from recklessly gambling on new signings boosting income by immediately placing them under sanction, interfering with an individual deal's completion would be in violation of freedom of movement and labour.

@aguero93:20 - You may think it shouldn't work like @Metalartin said - but in practice it will. Only Utd, Real, Barca and the rest of the usual suspects can be allowed to spend big.

 

[SWP's back]

@aguero93:20 - You may think it shouldn't work like @Metalartin said - but in practice it will. Only Utd, Real, Barca and the rest of the usual suspects can be allowed to spend big.

It’s too late to stop us.

Our revenues are now in the elite tier but our spending room is higher as we don’t have to pay interest or loans or dividends to share/bond holders.

 

[Cobwebcat]

Seems like they're bringing forward FFP assessments for anyone spending over 100m in a season to ensure they're not breaching the existing regs (as PSG may have done this season) instead of introducing a hard cap on spend.

This. So no change to spending criteria. Not as bad as I thought. The Premier League clubs will still have the huge advantage of TV rights money.