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

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

I couldn't give a fuck to be honest; UEFA can do what they like, I'll still be supporting City whatever they do and wherever we find ourselves in the future. What they can't take away is the sheer joy I've experienced these last few years, made so much sweeter by it all being totally unexpected.

Fuck that. Go back to obscurity and I'll call it a day I reckon.

Oh, I don't know; winning every year could get boring!

Agreed. If we win it too much or not at all, I'll call it a day.

Every other year is perfect, so hopefully Chelsea will win it next season.

 

[MSP]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Can't believe the flapping here..

At best, if SM decide to not fight it, this can slow us for year or two, after that we'll have a revenue enough to never bother about this shit.

 

[mancunial]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Could it be argued at the CAS that if the Etihad deal is deemed to be a related party transaction, then we should be entitled to reevaluate it in an upwards direction as well as downwards for the purposes of FFP?

. This is the one

 

[yeah whatever !!]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

I couldn't give a fuck to be honest; UEFA can do what they like, I'll still be supporting City whatever they do and wherever we find ourselves in the future. What they can't take away is the sheer joy I've experienced these last few years, made so much sweeter by it all being totally unexpected.

Fuck that. Go back to obscurity and I'll call it a day I reckon.

Oh, I don't know; winning every year could get boring!

yeah...who needs glory anyway??

we could be the real Inglorious basterds..

 

[goat boy]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Could it be argued at the CAS that if the Etihad deal is deemed to be a related party transaction, then we should be entitled to reevaluate it in an upwards direction as well as downwards for the purposes of FFP?

. This is the one

I think Uefa would also have a case to answer on the acceptable level of loss. Why 45m? Is there an inflationary ladder? Why isn't it a ratio of turnover? Or related to some sort of cross-industry average metric?For a rich CL club you might as well call it break-even.

 

[higgi1p]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

We all know that people within the club occasionally read Bluemoon.
I wonder if this thread is being followed and people's opinions on it are being passed on to the decision makers within the club
as a gauge of overall fan opinion? I'd say that the majority on here have advocated fighting this issue
and aren't too bothered (from a purely fan's perspective) if there is no CL football next season.
I'm not saying that our views count for much but I would imagine it must be reassuring to the club that we think that
it's all a stitch up, we've done nothing wrong and are with them if they decide to fight.

very well said i agree fight them if we need to be out of it for next year so be it the fight in court would embarrass them no end.

Could not agree more, stuff UEFA lets go all the way to court on this.

 

[bellsouth]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

I say pull out of CL next year. Go on and win Premier League by Easter, which will piss off Sky as it won't give them any title challenging games after that. Win the Cups too which will piss off fans of Arsenal, rags, pool etc. And finally set up our own invitation only event for clubs from S America, USA, Asia and maybe even teams that haven't qualified for any UEFA comp including big clubs from Championship etc, create a potential rival comp and really f*** UEFA off

 

[Henkeman]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Could it be argued at the CAS that if the Etihad deal is deemed to be a related party transaction, then we should be entitled to reevaluate it in an upwards direction as well as downwards for the purposes of FFP?

. This is the one

I think Uefa would also have a case to answer on the acceptable level of loss. Why 45m? Is there an inflationary ladder? Why isn't it a ratio of turnover? Or related to some sort of cross-industry average metric?For a rich CL club you might as well call it break-even.

The acceptable loss thing is interesting. Since its lower than (in England at any rate) the earnings from CL football, by quite some margin, then I'd have thought you could make a very strong case that it's effectively protectionist in its nature, as it is impossible for clubs outside to bridge that financial gap. By definition it reinforces an elite.

 

[Tbilisi]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

We all know that people within the club occasionally read Bluemoon.
I wonder if this thread is being followed and people's opinions on it are being passed on to the decision makers within the club
as a gauge of overall fan opinion? I'd say that the majority on here have advocated fighting this issue
and aren't too bothered (from a purely fan's perspective) if there is no CL football next season.
I'm not saying that our views count for much but I would imagine it must be reassuring to the club that we think that
it's all a stitch up, we've done nothing wrong and are with them if they decide to fight.

very well said i agree fight them if we need to be out of it for next year so be it the fight in court would embarrass them no end.

Could not agree more, stuff UEFA lets go all the way to court on this.

Well said Wilf,worth missing Champs League to fight this shit.........not just for us but all other clubs that may be lucky enogh to get an owner like us in the future.

IF we win tomoz & are Champions imagine the Premier League Champions not being in the competition...sign Messi and see what some of the sponsors do then!

 

[Silva Citizen]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Can't believe the flapping here..

At best, if SM decide to not fight it, this can slow us for year or two, after that we'll have a revenue enough to never bother about this shit.

In SM I trust,

He has invested not only on the playing side of the club, but in the infrastructure, the community around the club, the marketing and the facilities. He has brought our club from being spectators to being the main event.
If SM decided to sell our name I would back him, after all we have been St Marks, Gorton and Ardwick in the past, if the future says we are named Etihad City then so be it... It would still be my club, just a different name with a benefit to the club. He is probably the best sports team owner in the World.

The point I am trying to make is not that I want a name change, but that SM should be allowed to invest as he wishes. He is an intelligent man, and is investing not out of the same love we have for city, but for a future financial return. UEFA cannot be allowed to stall his vision, to hinder his return on investment or to deter future investors in football. Its not a case of "flapping" its a case of encouraging SM to do what is right, fight for justice, and conveying the message the fans are behind him.

If UEFA discourage him from doing it in Europe, then whats to stop him making us a secondary project and concentrating his resources wholly on (say NYCFC).

SM has been fantastic for us, he should fight, we should SUPPORT whatever his decision.

In the meantime our support should be shown by EVERYONE (not only blue moon users but every City fan) emailing a protest to there MP, MEP, FIFA, and UEFA... instead of moaning on here we should agree a plan of action and be heard at a level where our efforts can be turned into real actions.