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

NantwichBlue said:
hamad138 said:
FFP is neccesary to the sport or else we would see Tom Clevery go for 100Million and Sterling would go for 300Million. The market would be destroyed

giphy.gif

Saving this one :)
 
hamad138 said:
FFP is neccesary to the sport or else we would see Tom Clevery go for 100Million and Sterling would go for 300Million. The market would be destroyed

200.gif
 
Damocles said:
LoveCity said:
Some of those sanctions were conditional and some were fixed. The spending restriction appeared to be fixed: Manchester City agrees to significantly limit spending in the transfer market for 2014-15 and 2015-16. Yet City insisted that meeting the settlement terms means they'll be free from this restriction and, this week, UEFA confirmed to ESPN FC that this is indeed the case.

Nope, powerwanking starting.

kkJIv9F.gif
 
hamad138 said:
FFP is neccesary to the sport or else we would see Tom Clevery go for 100Million and Sterling would go for 300Million. The market would be destroyed

745.gif
 
If you're going to support the principle of FFP, and remove any blue tinted specs, then I believe you have to take two approaches:

1) Introduce measures that TRULY pay heed to the financial welfare of ALL clubs and give fans a fair share of rewards of financial prudence.
2) Reduce the gap between the 'haves and have nots' so that the outcome of 11men vs 11 men is far less influenced by the depths of a club's pockets.

FFP as it stands is a total misnomer, as it was supposedly introduced for reason 1) and yet bears the name 'fair play' which hoodwinks people into believing they are getting some sort of equality on the pitch.

The principle of 1) and 2) is fine, but that's not what we have today. We have precisely the opposite.
 
PSG are limited to the same spending as last summer, but we aren't...

Guess they didn't brush up on their negotiation skills enough.
 
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.espnfc.co.uk/club/manchester-city/382/blog/post/2444370/manchester-city-get-financial-fair-play-boost-from-uefa" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.espnfc.co.uk/club/manchester ... -from-uefa</a>.

I think I like what they are saying, not sure :-)
 
squirtyflower said:
leech said:
PSG are limited to the same spending as last summer, but we aren't...

Guess they didn't brush up on their negotiation skills enough.
That could see them out of the race for Pogba

They might take the cheaper option being Yaya Toure. But I honestly see them going for Di Maria who they anted last year and they were the prefered club for Di Maria as well.
 
PSG still under sanction will practically mean they cannot sign Pogba without letting go of Cavani or someone else for big money and that takes time to sort - I think they will now try to make a move for Yaya because Inter are also facing sanction and an acceptable transfer fee from Inter will probably not turn up. I certainly would not accept below £25M for Yaya and I doubt we will get anywhere near that from Inter with the wages they will also have to cough up.

With Barcelona under a transfer ban our biggest threat to this signing has to be United or Madrid. Madrid will likely sign De Gea for a considerable amount and that will line United's pockets for a move on Pogba although he probably wouldn't fancy going back. The danger is though if Bale fancies a move to United, they could very easily put the money back in Madrid's pocket who are then free to go for Pogba and I certainly think he would take that kind of move.

If I was City, I would be pushing Yaya as a makeweight to Juventus and going full steam ahead to get a swap+cash deal done before the other clubs start thinking of summer moves. We need to get it done before all these other factors start coming into play.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top