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

Re: City & FFP (continued)

gordondaviesmoustache said:
aguero93:20 said:
Chippy_boy said:
Remember that the FFP rules exlude infrastructure investment in the calculations. Someone can take over Burnley and spend £500m on a new stadium and training facilities and that is perfectly allowable under FFP.
Yep, he can also borrow £500m to spend on a new stadium that Burnley will never have any chance of filling and leave the club to be crippled by the interest payments, wait until they enter administration and fold, ceasing to exist as a club and buy the stadium for one-tenth of it's worth through a subsidiary company and that's perfectly fine under FFP too.
Yeah, but at least they have the consolation that they did it "the right way".

...or the United way, as it's better known nowadays.
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

Looks like the announcement may be imminent:

Daniel Geey ‏@FootballLaw · 1m
BREAKING: Hearing there will be a UEFA press conference at 3pm UK time. Likely to be FFP announcement.

EDIT - though maybe not:

Rob Harris ‏@RobHarris · 2m
@FootballLaw it's just a post-ExCo presser
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

petrusha said:
Looks like the announcement may be imminent:

Daniel Geey ‏@FootballLaw · 1m
BREAKING: Hearing there will be a UEFA press conference at 3pm UK time. Likely to be FFP announcement.

EDIT - though maybe not:

Rob Harris ‏@RobHarris · 2m
@FootballLaw it's just a post-ExCo presser
decisions.jpg
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

Just on the Portsmouth issue, I've just been having a look. They failed to pay player wages for the first time in October 2009 although there had been rumours of financial problems for a while by then.

Had they been assessed for FFP at the start of the 09/10 season they would have shown a loss of £20.86m (04/05, 05/06 & 06/07 seasons) before any deductions for infrastructure and youth spending (would have been minimal as their ground was a shithole and I don't believe they had an academy at the time). So they would have passed fairly comfortably.

Had they been assessed for FFP the following season they would have shown a loss of £41.24m (05/06, 06/07 & 07/08) before deductions. So still would have passed FFP.

So next time Platini talks about FFP saving the likes of Portsmouth and Leeds you know he is talking bollocks.
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

gordondaviesmoustache said:
petrusha said:
Looks like the announcement may be imminent:

Daniel Geey ‏@FootballLaw · 1m
BREAKING: Hearing there will be a UEFA press conference at 3pm UK time. Likely to be FFP announcement.

EDIT - though maybe not:

Rob Harris ‏@RobHarris · 2m
@FootballLaw it's just a post-ExCo presser
decisions.jpg

:)

It's a false alarm:

Daniel Geey ‏@FootballLaw · 2m
Thanks to @RobHarris for pointing out today's UEFA press conference is the normal ExCo discussion. FFP not yet scheduled. #extratime
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

aguero93:20 said:
Chippy_boy said:
Dribble said:
This.

The good thing is that we quickly kicked him and his loads a money bullshit to the kerb. We are still trying to recover from that damage in the eyes of many and I fear irrespective of what we do in the future, that assumption about us will follow us around for years to come like 'same old Arsenal, always cheating'.

Every opportunity opposing managers get to mention money in relation to us, they take. Will we ever shake this assumption off? I don't know but it seriously pisses me off when it constantly gets mentioned.

Yes, I agree. The £100m Kaka bid was another catalyst imho. It was too big, too audacious for us at our stage of our development. Now perhaps as double league champions with an established squad and CL progress. But back then it was like a red rag to a bull. Platini mentioned it repeatedly as being totally wrong and although that was hypocritical given the similar sized deals that are done by other clubs, in a way I can see his point.

For all they knew at the time, we were going to just blow the whole of the establishment out of the water with a £1bn superteam that would render all competition null and void for the foreseeable. The fact that we were on a track to produce a solid, self-sustaining business, investing in the community etc perhaps sounded like hollow promises.

Perhaps we could have handled it better in hindsight, with a more softly softly approach. Dunno.
I think you're all attaching too much importance to a couple of events early on in the take-over, if they wanted a reason to come after us it's that we're going to permanently take one of Arsenal/Chelsea/Liverpool/Scum's place in the Champions League, even though we'll match any of them for global viewing figures soon enough. In fact, I reckon plan B could well be a 5th champions league spot for the Spanish and English Leagues and maybe 4th spot back in Italy (also makes the Bundesliga's 4th spot safe so it'll keep them happy too)
People's perception of us had to start somewhere, and who amongst us wasn't shocked when it was suddenly announced that we'd been taken over again and we were now the richest club in sporting history. Add to that 24 hours after the takeover, we blew Chelsea out of the water with a £31m winning bid for Robinho, I think that alone shocked the shit out of the football world let alone what was to come.

I recall at the time similar sized clubs complaining that we were cherry picking their best players and they were forced to sell because their players wanted the riches on offer. Yes the club's all took the kings shilling and paid the price later, but what could they do? Lescott, Barry, Milner all made it clear they wanted to leave their respective clubs, so all that was left to do was for their club's to price the player's out of the market, so what did we do? We paid what was required so we got the players we needed and that process has created the Man City we see today.

We had to do what we did, but its understandable that it led to a lot of jealousy from other club owners and fans. Some of our fans didn't do us any favours either, as I recall having to tell more than one or two of my Blue supporting mates to treat out lottery win with dignity. I explained to one, how would you feel if your next door neighbour won the lottery and started calling you a skint tramp whilst waving wads of cash under your nose. Wouldn't you want to see him waste all his dough and fall flat on his face?

All in all, we quickly learned how to show humility, but alas even this was too late for most. Even though we've gone a long way to repair that early image, in some quarters their memories of us from those brief moments and the ill-feeling it brought toward us ran long and deep, and we shouldn't underestimate this as the effects are being felt right now through FFP.
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

Dribble said:
aguero93:20 said:
Chippy_boy said:
Yes, I agree. The £100m Kaka bid was another catalyst imho. It was too big, too audacious for us at our stage of our development. Now perhaps as double league champions with an established squad and CL progress. But back then it was like a red rag to a bull. Platini mentioned it repeatedly as being totally wrong and although that was hypocritical given the similar sized deals that are done by other clubs, in a way I can see his point.

For all they knew at the time, we were going to just blow the whole of the establishment out of the water with a £1bn superteam that would render all competition null and void for the foreseeable. The fact that we were on a track to produce a solid, self-sustaining business, investing in the community etc perhaps sounded like hollow promises.

Perhaps we could have handled it better in hindsight, with a more softly softly approach. Dunno.
I think you're all attaching too much importance to a couple of events early on in the take-over, if they wanted a reason to come after us it's that we're going to permanently take one of Arsenal/Chelsea/Liverpool/Scum's place in the Champions League, even though we'll match any of them for global viewing figures soon enough. In fact, I reckon plan B could well be a 5th champions league spot for the Spanish and English Leagues and maybe 4th spot back in Italy (also makes the Bundesliga's 4th spot safe so it'll keep them happy too)
People's perception of us had to start somewhere, and who amongst us wasn't shocked when it was suddenly announced that we'd been taken over again and we were now the richest club in sporting history. Add to that 24 hours after the takeover, we blew Chelsea out of the water with a £31m winning bid for Robinho, I think that alone shocked the shit out of the football world let alone what was to come.

I recall at the time similar sized clubs complaining that we were cherry picking their best players wnd they were forced to sell because their players wanted the riches on offer. Yes the club's all took the kings shilling and paid the price later, but what could they do? Lescott, Barry, Milner all made it clear they wanted to leave their respective clubs, so all that was left to do was for their club's to price the player's out of the market, so what did we do? We paid what was required so we got the players we needed and that process has created the Man City we see today.

We had to do what we did, but its understandable that it led to a lot of jealousy from other club owners and fans. Some of our fans didn't do us any favours either, as I recall having to tell more than one or two of my Blue supporting mates to treat out lottery win with dignity. I explained to one, how would you feel if your next door neighbour won the lottery and started calling you a skint tramp and started wages wads of cash under nose. Wouldn't you want to see him waste all his dough and fall flat on his face?

All in all, we quickly learned how to show humility, but alas even this was too late for most. Even though we've gone a long way to repair that early image, in some quarters their memories of us from those brief moments and I'll feeling it brought toward us run long and deep and we shouldn't underestimate this as the effects are being felt right now through FFP
You're talking about how the likes of Villa, Everton and smaller clubs felt, but they didn't bring in FFP did they?
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

TrueBlue1705 said:
Can someone please clarify - any official news on PSG? - I read they were being fined £20 million and do they face the same squad sanctions as us? It seems PSG blatantly broke the FFP rules and if Citys £35 million sposnosrship deal is considered 'not fair' then what is the backdated sponsorship deal that PSG have, its a complete piss take!!

It sounds like we are being treated completely differently to PSG and with Platini's family links to PSG that means he is looking very corrupt indeed!!

PSG settlement sounds like a Related Party Transaction!
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

Henkeman said:
aguero93:20 said:
Chippy_boy said:
No mate, I don't buy that. The pressure has come from the G14 not the Sky 4 who at the end of the day are only 4. And Liverpool haven't been one of the 4 for a while anyway. Scum will doubtless have never even considered the possibility of not being in the CL, it won't even have been on their radar. You might say the same of Chelsea. Only Arsenal would have been really worried and that is not enough to create a knee jerk reaction that is FFP. Do you think the Germans or Spanish or Italians give a toss about which 4 English teams they have to compete with? Nope.

They were all shit scared - all of them - that we might win everything for years unless reined back in.
And you can't see the G14's motivation is to stop their Champions league places being taken is the key motivation behind this? Arsenal haven't been in a position to finish ahead of both Liverpool and Manure for a long time now, do you think they're more worried about losing the chance for a title bid or losing their top 4 spot? For the rest of the G14, the Italian clubs only method of making big bucks now is the CL due to the collapse of Serie A and the rest of them are watching each others backs. Platini has even said it himself that it was "Moratti, Berlusconi, Abramovich, Rummenigge, Gazinidis, Gill"

If it really came to it, comments like that are really damaging, as it implies very strongly the motivation has nothing to do with things like sustainability. I am frankly amazed at some of the unguarded comments from Platini, unless he's actually reasonably keen to see the thing unravel to at least some extent. You just don't say the kinds of things he has if you want to defend it legally.

Martin Samuel ran rings around Platini in his interview, imagine what an excellent barrister could do with him in court.
 

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.