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

Esteban de la Sexface said:
regulating debt blocks investment

they need to regulate salaries and transfers to make a fair and sustainable competition. Investment in facilities etc can be at the behest of the owner or the club but if clubs didn't have to spend 100's of millions a year on wages or 200m on transfer fees the debt would be regulated anyway. It's out of control. Regulating debt based on revenue is just FFP mark 2 and anti competition.
Click to expand...
Clubs don't "have" to spend 100's of millions on wages, they have a choice
They can say "no" and if enough of them draw the line, as City has, then what's the player going to do!
 
Kazzydeyna said:
But that is life. It’s unfair but in life the richest DO often prevail. Nobody minds Tesco prevailing over the local corner shop because it is richer.

It would encourage smart thinking and good club management. Build a youth team, nurture your talent, good coaching and you can compete with the big boys.
Smarten up your processes and make your club an attractive investment opportunity.
Live within your means, be financially prudent and survive and thrive.

I’ll say it again, no club has ever gone bust from too much investment. Every defunct club has gone bust from too much debt.

Why don’t we tell Tesco, or BT, or Warner Bros how much they can spend on staff wages? Why should football be more highly regulated in that regard? It’s an entertainment business and entertainment thrives on the best people producing the best entertainment. Football is no different from any other business in that regard.

Investment should be totally unimited. Debt should be manageable. That way the game will still be here in another 100 years and most of the clubs will still be playing it.

If Doncaster Rovers get a benefactor who wants to inject a trillion quid into them and ten years from now they’re playing us in a champs leg semi final I’d say that was brilliant.
If united were languishing in the bottom half because they couldn’t afford to sign top players because they’d over indebted themselves chasing artificial success with money that wasn’t the clubs to begin with I’d say that was sensible and prudent.

If you reduce debt in the game you ensure its sustainability.

Clubs should no longer be allowed to dope themselves up on money that isn’t their own. It’s immoral and disgusting and i am glad City have never done so long term.
Click to expand...
Again it's all very anti competition - you can only spend what you earn - in terms of debt. Here's your box and you stay in it.

At least with something like a Salary cap all 20 clubs in the premier league have say 100mil to spend on salaries for 1st team players and can distribute as they see fit. The salary cap is moving year on year based on the leagues revenue. All teams have the same salary budget.

The transfer system is more difficult as there is no real nursery system to feed the leagues and is a feeding ground for corrupt agents. That'll be difficult.

The rich do prevail - but at what cost. If two clubs can simply outbid everyone for everything, what becomes of football?
 
Esteban de la Sexface said:
Again it's all very anti competition - you can only spend what you earn - in terms of debt. Here's your box and you stay in it.

At least with something like a Salary cap all 20 clubs in the premier league have say 100mil to spend on salaries for 1st team players and can distribute as they see fit. The salary cap is moving year on year based on the leagues revenue. All teams have the same salary budget.

The transfer system is more difficult as there is no real nursery system to feed the leagues and is a feeding ground for corrupt agents. That'll be difficult.

The rich do prevail - but at what cost. If two clubs can simply outbid everyone for everything, what becomes of football?
Click to expand...
You’ve just described the situation every business and indeed every individual on earth faces every day. You can only spend what you earn plus a relatively small amount in borrowings.

Tesco aren’t told ‘you can only spend X amount per year on staff costs as it is unfair that you have more money than the Co-Op’ They have a huge financial advantage over every other UK food retailer but guess what? There are still loads of places to go buy your food and lots of companies are making a nice butty from it. As they should. Why should football be any different?

And with respect you’re incorrect in your assumption that only one or two clubs would thrive. They would still only have space for a certain amount of playing staff, realistically 25 each.

There are more than 50 top players going around.

What would happen is EVERY club would thrive as EVERY club would have a manageable level of debt. Clubs would be more attractive to potential purchasers as they wouldn’t be buying a tonne of debt on top of the cost of the club to begin with = more investment, but sustainable investment = a better product long term, a more sustainable product long term and a healthier and more attractive and competitive game.

It’d just mean those clubs that have financially doped their way to success and prominence would have to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century in order to save them from themselves and what sensible person would argue against that?
 
GoatsDomeWax said:
First rule change should be to stop Leveraged Buyouts.
Thankfully too late for the Rags, but a potential blight on the future of smaller clubs in future.
If you need to borrow money to buy a club, then by definition you are an unfit owner.
Click to expand...

And stop buyouts of deeply indebted clubs for a nominal £1 Without proper due diligence and evidence of funds to clear debts.
 
Esteban de la Sexface said:
Hang on? What line have City drawn?
Click to expand...
www.goal.com

Alexis Sanchez transfer news: Manchester City pull plug as Manchester United close in | Goal.com UK

Manchester City have pulled the plug on their pursuit of Alexis Sanchez, leaving rivals Manchester United with a clear run at tying up a shock transfer
www.goal.com


Man City 'pull out of Maguire race'

Manchester City reportedly withdraw their interest in Leicester
www.sportsmole.co.uk www.sportsmole.co.uk


There's two examples, plus Eden Hazzard (went to Chelsea) Isco (Real Madrid)
If it doesn't work financially for City, the club will walk away
I have never heard of united, Real Madrid or Barcelona missing out on a player due to wage demands or a fee being too high
Barcelona made a fortune when Neymar moved to PSG and then they spunked the money away on shite
 
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.