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

[Prestwich_Blue]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Looking at that, if we have been adjudged to have failed FFP due to not being allowed to exclude pre-2010 contracts (around 80m), we're definitely going to fail again next year unless this year's accounts (which end May 31?) can make up for it. However, this is not going to happen given that the expected increase in revenue (up 60m from 270m to 330m - as per Soriano's UAE presentation - and and any decrease in wages - no managerial pay offs) will be eaten up by last summer's net transfer spend (Negredo et al)


So, all in all, those pre-2010 contracts are going to act like a ball and chain until after next year's break even point when the 2011-2012 no longer applies.

Is this correct?

Not necessarily. Let's assume we break-even this year, and have £20m of allowable expenditure we can add back. That would give us an FFP surplus of £20m. We don't know what exactly we had disallowed this year but it could have been as little as £5m as the numbers would have been tight. That £20m surplus, when added to the deficits, might be enough to allow us to use the £80m and pass.

 

[ElanJo]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Ok, just so I can get my head round FFP...

http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/resources/Monitoring%20Periods.jpg[/img

Looking at that, if we have been adjudged to have failed FFP due to not being allowed to exclude pre-2010 contracts (around 80m), we're definitely going to fail again next year unless this year's accounts (which end May 31?) can make up for it. However, this is not going to happen given that the expected increase in revenue (up 60m from 270m to 330m - as per Soriano's UAE presentation - and and any decrease in wages - no managerial pay offs) will be eaten up by last summer's net transfer spend (Negredo et al)


So, all in all, those pre-2010 contracts are going to act like a ball and chain until after next year's break even point when the 2011-2012 no longer applies.

Is this correct?[/quote]

Do we plan to sell IP stuff again next year too? Because if not, that is around 50m less income. So basically we would need 110m more to get to 330m income. If these IP things and image rights thing was a one off income, we have to make that amount up trough other channels.
Certainly PL tv deal will help and less spent on wages as Mancini and his staff cost us a lot per year not mentioning their whole pay off.

But if we win the league lot of bonuses can be paid out on top of the wages so dont really expect huge decrease (like 20% or more) in last year wages.
It was around 230m I am sure it wont be under 200 this season.[/quote]

Pure speculation but I've based us not being allowed to exclude pre-2010 contracts on them either devaluing or disqualifying our IP deals

 

[ElanJo]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Looking at that, if we have been adjudged to have failed FFP due to not being allowed to exclude pre-2010 contracts (around 80m), we're definitely going to fail again next year unless this year's accounts (which end May 31?) can make up for it. However, this is not going to happen given that the expected increase in revenue (up 60m from 270m to 330m - as per Soriano's UAE presentation - and and any decrease in wages - no managerial pay offs) will be eaten up by last summer's net transfer spend (Negredo et al)


So, all in all, those pre-2010 contracts are going to act like a ball and chain until after next year's break even point when the 2011-2012 no longer applies.

Is this correct?

Not necessarily. Let's assume we break-even this year, and have £20m of allowable expenditure we can add back. That would give us an FFP surplus of £20m. We don't know what exactly we had disallowed this year but it could have been as little as £5m as the numbers would have been tight. That £20m surplus, when added to the deficits, might be enough to allow us to use the £80m and pass.

Ah, yea, that makes sense. Cheers.

Guessing we won't spend much (net) this summer -if we accept the sanctions on offer from these cunts

 

[stevemcgarry]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Here's an interesting article that expands on the grounds on which City's lawyers may fight the case in the courts:
http://www.euractiv.com/sections/eu...e-eu-competition-law-beat-financial-fair-play

 

[Sunny Coast Blue]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

What would the Arsenhole position be if they charged the same ticket prices as we do for the same number of fans we can currently accommodate.
As I see it they couldn't pass ffp either if they were actually striving to compete with the big boys ;-) which they have failed miserably at for the last two decades or so.

 

[Skashion]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Guessing we won't spend much (net) this summer

There's no reason at all why we couldn't.

 

[St Helens Blue (Exiled)]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Im just waiting to see next year..liverpool,monaco to name but 2 who will clearly fail..
Goalposts moving all the time.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

I'm not having a go mate, but no fucker on here knows what's going on. You really think the top people at the club, would talk about this with anyone who post's on Bluemoon? As Jim Royle would say, ITK my ARSE!!

You clearly don't realise that a club director posts on here every now and again.

I've seen MPs, civil servants in extremely high positions, directors at City, executives from other Prem clubs, recognisable names from Abu Dhabi in powerful positions, a bunch of media from almost every paper people can imagine, old players, current players, youth players and many many more post on here.

I was never impressed by ITK people until I joined the team and was able to see what was coming from where

You forgot to mention Alan Rickman.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Ok, just so I can get my head round FFP...

[bigimg]http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/resources/Monitoring%20Periods.jpg[/bigimg]

Looking at that, if we have been adjudged to have failed FFP by a hefty amount, due to not being allowed to exclude pre-2010 contracts (around 80m), we're definitely going to fail again next year unless this year's accounts (which end May 31?) can make up for it. However, this is not going to happen given that the expected increase in revenue (up 60m from 270m to 330m - as per Soriano's UAE presentation - and and any decrease in wages - no managerial pay offs) will be eaten up by last summer's net transfer spend (Negredo et al)


So, all in all, those pre-2010 contracts are going to act like a ball and chain until after next year's break even point when the 2011-2012 no longer applies.

Is this correct?

If so, I could see us being excluded from the 2015/2016 Champions League because the noise to chuck us out, having failed 2 break even points in a row, will be deafening

It surely depends on what view is taken on the Etihad deal. That holds the key.

 

[willipp]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Ok, just so I can get my head round FFP...

[bigimg]http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/resources/Monitoring%20Periods.jpg[/bigimg]

Looking at that, if we have been adjudged to have failed FFP by a hefty amount, due to not being allowed to exclude pre-2010 contracts (around 80m), we're definitely going to fail again next year unless this year's accounts (which end May 31?) can make up for it. However, this is not going to happen given that the expected increase in revenue (up 60m from 270m to 330m - as per Soriano's UAE presentation - and and any decrease in wages - no managerial pay offs) will be eaten up by last summer's net transfer spend (Negredo et al)


So, all in all, those pre-2010 contracts are going to act like a ball and chain until after next year's break even point when the 2011-2012 no longer applies.

Is this correct?

If so, I could see us being excluded from the 2015/2016 Champions League because the noise to chuck us out, having failed 2 break even points in a row, will be deafening

It surely depends on what view is taken on the Etihad deal. That holds the key.

If we have failed this year, does that mean we have zero chance of passing next year then as its the same 2 years accounts plus this years added on? Unless we make a profit I guess.