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

[Balti]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Absolutely this. What the fuck are people moaning about ? People keep going on about us signing these 'top' players.

Ffs, we just won the league & have been targeting certain players since Christmas. That didn't include Ronaldo, it was centre backs, def mids & maybe Sagna, plus the odd kid. Sheikh Mansour doesn't want to spend 100 fucking mil on players every year.

We are in line to sign exactly who we want.

Would it not have been good to get Isco if we wanted to? Or Fabregas perhaps? And we can forget any dreams of Messi or other galacticos for the forseeable future. Not sure how realistic that was anyway. But now we have a situation where other clubs with greater worldwide revenues - scum, real, barca, bayern etc - could spend more than us on transfers and wages. Now we are burdened even further. They can spend even more than us than previously, and they don't have squad restrictions either.

There is no way to dress this up as anything other than a kick in the teeth. Will we live? Yes. But it's still a kick in the teeth.

We will have just as much money as the others to spend. Our revenue is over 400m Euros. Our wages will be around 50-60% of income.

We have Soriano.

is he as good as Messi ?

 

[Balti]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

City should register the EDS and treat the CL like the League Cup. Let them know that they need City more than City needs them.

spot on

build build build domestic dominance first and fuck them

 

[lancs blue]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

This is essentially an out of court settlement .
The wording of the club's statement makes that clear.
We could have gone to all sorts of legal actions , dragging the whole thing out for years and spending a load of dosh ( not one of the sheikh's serious problems ) but losing sympathy and judging by the statement , potentially losing sponsors , who don't really want to be associated with legal battles . Remember , they are not sponsors because they love this club or are life - long City fans , they are sponsors for purely commercial reasons , and long drawn out legal battles with us being painted as villains would be horrific. Where would our plans for the future be then?
We have compromised , sure , but so have they - we have agreed to disagree and we can all walk away relatively unscathed. That's the real world I'm afraid , not always what you want , but often just what you can get.
Hopefully this whole scam will unravel after the current action , and we will reap the benefit without taking any of the flak.
I think they call that a "win, win " situation.

Spot on. The club's statement is really quite withering towards UEFA and the "G14", I also read it as warning UEFA that if they try moving the goalposts again in future we'll see them in court and I think the same will apply if any club appeals and gets the sanctions increased.

 

[Tim of the Oak]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Would it not have been good to get Isco if we wanted to? Or Fabregas perhaps? And we can forget any dreams of Messi or other galacticos for the forseeable future. Not sure how realistic that was anyway. But now we have a situation where other clubs with greater worldwide revenues - scum, real, barca, bayern etc - could spend more than us on transfers and wages. Now we are burdened even further. They can spend even more than us than previously, and they don't have squad restrictions either.

There is no way to dress this up as anything other than a kick in the teeth. Will we live? Yes. But it's still a kick in the teeth.

We will have just as much money as the others to spend. Our revenue is over 400m Euros. Our wages will be around 50-60% of income.

We have Soriano.

is he as good as Messi ?

We need the Sopranos!

 

[ElanJo]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

City should register the EDS and treat the CL like the League Cup. Let them know that they need City more than City needs them.

Nope, we should go out and win it and then have the parade around UEFA headquarters

 

[lancs blue]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

City should register the EDS and treat the CL like the League Cup. Let them know that they need City more than City needs them.

I'm sick of seeing this crap - think about the EDS players will you? What fucking good will it do their careers to get hammered 10-0 by Barca, they are the future of City after all.

 

[gh_mcfc]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

At least we are supporting the underdogs again .

More reason to generate that siege mentality

 

[gymshoe]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Perhaps City are sharing some "intellectual property" with Jean-Louis Dupont, and fighting this battle in a much more covert way?

And what happens if a favorable ruling is issued in that case? Perhaps City risking everything, with the other FFP case decision looming, is unnecessary?

 

[Tron Coltrane]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Mr Wenger and his pals are well happy tonight

We just escaped with a £16.2m fine. Wherever Wenger is tonight, he's breaking things against the wall and calling lawyers to prepare for an appeal. Couldn't have gone worse for him. We won.

Football lost.

That I will certainly agree with. Hoping for the right verdict in 2015 regarding the ruling. Otherwise a dark day for football.

 

[Balti]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

It seems clearer what has transpired now and why we were upset with UEFA. We had been working on the basis of being able to exclude £80m of player wages in order to comply. That figure always looked high to me but Kieran Connor (aka Swiss Ramble) told me that UEFA had clarified the pre-2010 wages figure by saying that although FFP says that renegotiated contracts were not included, we could exclude any wages paid under those renegotiated contracts in 2011/12 that we would have paid under the old contract.

As an example, if we paid Player A £70k a week and renegotiated that up to £90k a week on or after June 1st 2010, we could still exclude the £70k. The statement seems to imply that they have back-tracked on that, hence we aren't allowed to exclude the £80m but a lesser amount. So that's why we believe they've gone back on their word.

To me, it looks like a catastrophic PR failure from our club. Again.

I'm not going to quote the rest of your ludicrous and idiotic rant again but you come over as a fully paid-up member of the foaming-at-the-mouth, green-ink using brigade who actually understands fuck-all about PR and strategic objectives. There's no PR failure from the club but if you read the club statement, the key part says:

At the heart of those discussions is a fundamental disagreement between the Club’s and UEFA’s respective interpretations of the FFP regulations on players purchased before 2010. The Club believes it has complied with the FFP regulations on this and all other matters.

What that means is that we were given guidance by UEFA (as were others) about the treatment of the wages paid to players signed on contracts prior to June 1st 2010 in the 2011/12 financial year. That led us to believe that we could exclude a certain amount for this and that excluding our figure would have caused us to escape without sanction. UEFA have done a u-turn it would seem and have not allowed the amount which we thought they said they would. And I had confirmation from an independent and highly respected source that this higher figure would be accepted by UEFA, which he'd got from the Club Licensing Panel itself at UEFA HQ in Nyon.

The outcome is that, at the last moment, we've been shafted and I know the club were furious over this. However, you have to pick your battles carefully and they've decided that this isn't a battle worth fighting and dying for. There are two reasons for this. The first is that the sanctions barely affect us in any practical way, apart from maybe the CL squad size. If we don't have to meet the 8 home-grown minimum requirement then it's probably not an issue at all. The fine is minimal if we comply with the conditions and all the indicators are that we will, and would have done anyway.

Also, by accepting such a settlement, it may make us look bad but it actually has benefits plus it helps UEFA out of their predicament as well. The club might actually be pleased if we get a bad press ironically as it makes UEFA look tough and that we've been forced to comply with something we were always going to comply with anyway but at minimal inconvenience to ourselves. It's what's known as a win-win situation. If we go into battle, we could well win but the cost to us might be a lot higher as we'd be painted as the villains far worse than we would this way. It will all have blown over once the World Cup starts and we've effectively paid the entrance fee to the G14 cartel.

G15?