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

[Bozzie]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Preventing another Leeds, Portsmouth, Rangers and almost a Liverpool is a nice concept. Unfortunately, shit owners will always be just that, shit owners. Those that put money into clubs as loans rather than equity and who see the club as a financial investment on which they want a return will always put the club at risk. That's why Man U will be sold when the Glazers either need the money or feel as though they've milked everything they can out of it. Liverpools owners FSG didn't buy the club out of some misguided sense of altruism towards Sousers. They've 'invested' money in the club and will want to see a return on that investment at some point. I could say "we don't know how lucky we are" having our owners, but that would be wrong, we do know how lucky we are.

On a separate note, should we win the PL this season it will surely raise both our global and domestic profile. Are we then able to renegotiate some, or all, of our sponsorship deals or, will they have bonus clauses in them to reward achievement. Failing that could we legally buy ourselves out of them and pursue other sponsors.

 

[ForzaMancini]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

presume it's been posted before but this is a great interview with Platiini for anyone who's not read it...

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2329745/Martin-Samuel-meets-Michel-Platini--read-FULL-transcript-interview-UEFA-president.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... ident.html</a>

Seems his original vision for FFP was very different from the one which has been forced on him by the big Euro clubs

And I destroy the G14 but one of the conditions of this stop is that we are not looking for the distribution of money from the clubs for some years.


By this does he mean he disbanded the G14 but only after agreeing to not alter the uneven distribution of Champions League money to the top clubs?

 

[aguero93:20]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

presume it's been posted before but this is a great interview with Platiini for anyone who's not read it...

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2329745/Martin-Samuel-meets-Michel-Platini--read-FULL-transcript-interview-UEFA-president.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... ident.html</a>
Seems his original vision for FFP was very different from the one which has been forced on him by the big Euro clubs

And I destroy the G14 but one of the conditions of this stop is that we are not looking for the distribution of money from the clubs for some years.
By this does he mean he disbanded the G14 but only after agreeing to not alter the uneven distribution of Champions League money to the top clubs?

I think UEFA can change the solidarity payments (paid to clubs not in europe) in 2020? The only problem is that the smaller clubs have adjusted to the status quo and probably won't realise that they should be fighting for it and UEFA won't do it on their own.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

The most laughable thing about FFP is the way Platini genuinely cited the examples of Portsmouth and Rangers as a reason for its introduction. Because we can all imagine the UEFA bigwigs gathered round a table, on the brink of tears, wracking their brains as to how they could stop the demise of such beloved clubs like Portsmouth.

An insistence that CL money gets filtered down the domestic leagues would go some way to militate against scenarios like Portsmouth have endured.

If you were to ask Platini which league Portmouth currently reside in, he almost certainly wouldn't know the answer, such is his overwhelming concern for their plight.

 

[St Helens Blue (Exiled)]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

I know what you're saying, we do look a bit short changed on some of the deals, but the way I saw it explained was this;

The likes of Liverpool might not have ever won the PL (the famous 'famine'), but they still sell a load of shirts (and other merchandise) to the 563ish million fans. Nike aren't interested in whether Liverpool won the league as such, just how many shirts they sell. Hence, Liverpool can get bigger deals than us or even Chelsea, a more successful club over the past decade or so. It turns out 'isteree does count for something.

I get that but 12m is codswallope IMO.

It will go up in time.

Also if you look at the stadium expansion thread..last few pages..on the pdf re the stadium we are gonna be looking for sponsors for the outside spaces i believe.

 

[unexpected item]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

What UEFA say is FFP will stop another Portsmouth, what UEFA mean is FFP will stop another City.

 

[Rammyblues]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

What UEFA say is FFP will stop another Portsmouth, what UEFA mean is FFP will stop City.

Edited for accuracy

 

[fbloke]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

It takes less than 3 years to bankrupt a club.

 

[aguero93:20]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

It takes less than 3 years to bankrupt a club.

Especially if the owners are asset-stripping (pompey) or loading the club with debt (scum) neither of which are addressed by ffp.

 

[Manchester_lalala]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Financial Fair Play is just a shoddy way of saying the ambitious cannot enter the select elite club Champions League. Imagine if Fleetwood or Morecambe had a billionaire who invested in their academy, ground and playing staff... as well as kick starting the economy locally and nationally, it'd be a positive move for football. the tax man would be happy too, then the EU would have more pennies for the bailouts.

This sums up ffp.