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

[Esteban de la Sexface]

No, you don't. You can run at a profit while massively increasing debt and you can run at a loss while reducing it over any period, but especially a shorter one. Looking at 3 year snapshots of the P&L has no impact on debt levels. Burnley would have flown past FFP every year since it's introduction but thanks to a leveraged buyout they're now in negative equity - they owe more money than the club is worth. We've been in profit every year for the last 5 or 6 years but our net debt position has grown. Spurs haven't lost money in the last decade but their debt has increased by £500m.

How do you regulate debt without regulating p and l?

 

[aguero93:20]

How do you regulate debt without regulating p and l?

By limiting the reasons new debt can be created to investment related ones - ie stadium and training infrastructure. By banning owners from lending their clubs money and forcing them to buy equity instead to put money in. By limiting gross debt to a % of club value. By banning leveraged takeovers. By forcing owners that want to invest in the playing squad to cover the cost of fees and new contracts up front. There's plenty of ways but none of them touch on the clubs P&L as at the end of the day the P&L and the balance sheet are 2 different things - to the point that the same accounts staff don't work on both, they have separate teams.

 

[malg]

Bloody hell, are we banned again?

 

[Decepticon]

The fallout on the "cafe" and "RAWK" is epic.

Well done @M18CTID (if you're the same poster on here that's posted on the cafe). They just don't get it at all...

We are still guilty of breaking financial rules in their eyes, even when proven NOT in front of a judicial panel.

Inflated sponsorship - even when that has been proven NOT to be the case.

The best comment of the day was on RAWK.

"We should have a proper Independant commission looking into sponsorships, like how can Etihad be worth 100 million a year when the country it operates from only has a population of 9 million people".... They are thick as fuck. Waves and waves of pure salty tears on every page. Lol

Imbeciles, do they actually know how the world of finance work?

 

[Esteban de la Sexface]

By limiting the reasons new debt can be created to investment related ones - ie stadium and training infrastructure. By banning owners from lending their clubs money and forcing them to buy equity instead to put money in. By limiting gross debt to a % of club value. By banning leveraged takeovers. By forcing owners that want to invest in the playing squad to cover the cost of fees and new contracts up front. There's plenty of ways but none of them touch on the clubs P&L as at the end of the day the P&L and the balance sheet are 2 different things - to the point that the same accounts staff don't work on both, they have separate teams.

None of them touch the clubs p&l? Seriously. You're making the mistake of thinking every club has a sugar daddy that's willing to pump in his personal wealth regardless. Football would simply cease to exist with the measures you mentioned. Access to money is necessary in every single industry

Regulating salaries and transfer fees, basically regulating agents would go a long way to removing the need for a lot of debt.

"By limiting clubs debt to a % of revenue " Again, seriously. You're just repackaging FFP

 

[Centurions]

Imbeciles, do they actually know how the world of finance work?

Half of them don't know how Tom & Jerry's world works.

 

[aguero93:20]

None of them touch the clubs p&l? Seriously. You're making the mistake of thinking every club has a sugar daddy that's willing to pump in his personal wealth regardless. Football would simply cease to exist with the measures you mentioned. Access to money is necessary in every single industry

Regulating salaries and transfer fees, basically regulating agents would go a long way to removing the need for a lot of debt.

If you stop a club from taking on debt, then only with investment can they live outside their current means. There's nothing wrong with investment. Regulating agents does not mean regulating salaries or fees.

 

[Parisian]

So no regulation because we happen to be rich at the moment.

Shortsighted enough. Football as an industry needs regulation, badly. Its crooked and corrupt, root and branch. Head to toe.

But that's ok, City have a few Bob

Do it like in France. Regulatory body checks if the owners (or the club itself) cover the expense of the club each season. If not, you aren't allowed to join the competition.

I bet Tebas is having a meltdown

Tebas is probably one of those who have been lobbying for his Real and Barça sweethearts. He must be happy they are going to be able to pull some money out of somewhere to compete.

 

[Esteban de la Sexface]

If you stop a club from taking on debt, then only with investment can they live outside their current means. There's nothing wrong with investment. Regulating agents does not mean regulating salaries or fees.

So the owner says fuck that and puts them up for sale. Sure fire crash and burn except for the super wealthy.

What you're touting is racketeering from the other side, the sugar daddy side

You said only allow debt as a percentage of revenue. FFP 2.0

 

[BobbyBoy]

It'll have to affect existing contracts if they directly target salary, otherwise its discriminatory.

It can't involve existing contracts, it will be future contracts only. It wouldn't get through otherwise.

Reading between the lines of this report and the last one about non transfers between CL clubs it appears to me there is a recognition that costs have gotten out of control and the source of the funding is no longer as reliable as it was.
Madrid and Barcelona have the highest revenues in the sport but one of them can't pay their wages. Something is broken if that's the case.

The game needs to do something. It can't continue as is where 95% of teams in the championship pay more in wages than they take in revenue, that is seriously fucked up but seemingly acceptable. In no other industry does so much of the money make its way into the hands of the workers. I'm not advocating starving the players but equally their value needs to be realigned. I watched the Sunderland documentary recently and you have league one players driving 150k cars and wearing 2k jackets. League one is the equivalent of your local theatre, its not Hollywood.

A cap on pay based on a strict % of turnover seems fair to me and apply a luxury tax (paid in advance) to those rich enough and willing to pay it. That way outside money isn't blocked off and smaller clubs (like Bury) and bigger clubs (like Barcelona) are protected from themselves or more accurately the shysters that seem to always end up owning and destroying them. Debt is obviously the other issue but if you're managing the finances correctly this will take care of itself.