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

[Matty]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

But how much detail about these deals will City have disclosed to UEFA? I ask, because if City are saying to UEFA that these deals are sound, but that they are unable or unwilling to disclose the nature of them, then could this be partly what the disagreement is about?

Or is that unlikely, and City will have disclosed the details of the deal to UEFA, on a non disclosure basis?

If it's confidential then they almost certainly won't disclose it and therefore I strongly suspect it's what this is about. They certainly wouldn't want people like David Gill getting his hands on it.

UEFA's got more leaks than the Welsh valleys so there's surely no way we'd be entrusting them with highly confidential details of commercial deals involving City.

I can see why, if we are unable/unwilling to disclose who the "third party" is that we sold the IP to, UEFA may well want to discount it from our revenue, for all they know the "third party" could be an RPT and the value of the sale may be grossly inflated. However, given we will have to eventually disclose the identity (once the deal comes to fruition) a huge fine and squad reduction seems highly disproportionate, surely a suspended sentence until such time as the third party is disclosed and an assessment of them with regards to their RPT status can be undertaken would make more sense? What would UEFA, or City, do if we did end up fined hugely over this and it turns out to be perfectly legitimate revenue? Do we sue UEFA for our money back? What about the impact a reduced squad would have on our Champion's League prospects? How do we get recompense for that?

 

[nmc]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

What if I need a new bucket to go with my ladders and I have £2,000 profit but my ladders cost £2,000 and the bucket £7.99 - am I going to fail the Window Cleaning Fair Play Regulations? Effectively I'm going into debt but is that okay?

 

[aguero93:20]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Or window cleaning fluid! Don't mind me DD, spent the entire morning waiting round, a bit bored :)

 

[aguero93:20]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

What if I need a new bucket to go with my ladders and I have £2,000 profit but my ladders cost £2,000 and the bucket £7.99 - am I going to fail the Window Cleaning Fair Play Regulations? Effectively I'm going into debt but is that okay?

No mate, you're grand, debt is brilliant.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

I gather it's a slow news day....

 

[nmc]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

I gather it's a slow news day....

No not at all Stan Ogden and Eddie Yates have been giving us an insight into the accounting precision deployed in modern day window cleaning - fascinating.

 

[M18CTID]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

I gather it's a slow news day....

No not at all Stan Ogden and Eddie Yates have been giving us an insight into the accounting precision deployed in modern day window cleaning - fascinating.

I'm eagerly awaiting Sinbad's input

 

[nmc]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

I gather it's a slow news day....

No not at all Stan Ogden and Eddie Yates have been giving us an insight into the accounting precision deployed in modern day window cleaning - fascinating.

I'm eagerly awaiting Sinbad's input

He's signed off on the 'social' and has got a 'no win no fee' personal injury lawyer pursuing his case.

 

[Henkeman]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Since it is a slow news day, I'll lob in something which might grab some attention. It's a blog piece talking about transfer inflation, and trying to use a methodology to apply a modern value to past transfers. It's an interesting thing when dealing with the whole question of City supposedly spunking money indiscriminately.

http://tomkinstimes.com/2014/01/transfer-records-and-why-they-mata/

The table is also interesting in terms of seeing how City's spending on individual when put into the wider context is rather lower than the usual suspects:

 

[Ducado]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/how-are-bigspending-manchester-city-set-to-pass-uefas-financial-fair-play-rules-9097609.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/foot ... 97609.html</a>

That article shows you how much of our revenue is actually fudged.

I think we have to hold our hands up as supporters and recognise that City have been indulging in 'creative' accounting practices. However I would offset that by saying that I believe we are not the only club doing this kind of thing, and that ultimately there would be no need for these questionable revenue streams if it wasn't for FFP.

UEFA's accountants have obviously decided that they want to single us out for punishment, I believe our only course of action will be challenging FFP legally on the grounds that it is anti-competitive.

Eh? You know all this as fact? Or are you speculating that all the above is true? Its an important distinction, do you know what UEFA have said?