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

[Big Dave Watson]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

What happens if we don't qualify for Champions League 2015-16 season?

These rulings seem to be under the assumption we are a shoe-in ;)

well spotted

and if we don't can we go on a huge spending spree as teams out of the CL are not monitored, ie Liverpool

I will be more interested to see what happens to United when they spend £200m and either do or don't qualify for Champions League next year.

They are fucked either way.

Any idea how Liverpool will fare next season when they are monitored?

 

[Groke]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

well spotted

and if we don't can we go on a huge spending spree as teams out of the CL are not monitored, ie Liverpool

I will be more interested to see what happens to United when they spend £200m and either do or don't qualify for Champions League next year.

They are fucked either way.

Any idea how Liverpool will fare next season when they are monitored?

I wouldn't hold your breath that the same rules will apply. Uefa corrupt to the core.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

I think we are all being played, it smacks of Uefa and City being in bed over this all along?

All window dressing, keeps the G14 from turning on Uefa, plastic enough sanctions for City to more than work around them.

Possibly but the issue seems to be that we have effectively publicly accused UEFA of reneging on their own published guidance regarding the pre-June 2010 contracts. Otherwise it looks like we would have escaped sanction-free. If that's the case then it appears UWEFA had to find an excuse to screw us. If we'd been playing along then we'd have surely just failed?

 

[Bill]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Just woke up to this.

No surprise. Very brief summary from what I can see from the BBC site and which seems a decent summary, relying upon the club's own statement.

The club were always going to do a deal [as I have said for several days now]. It is not in the Arab nature to engage in litigation and, in this instance, it makes no business sense. Better to have a cut off now and move on. Winning the PL was probably the cherry on the cake and will, overall, cover the net euro 17m fine.

it seems highly likely that MCFC will break even for next season.

Of this Euro 49 m fine, 32m is suspended. Presumably, not payable if we play along from now on [which we will].

The club say they were only going to use 21 players in the LC anyway.

They also say that wages were not going to increase in any event.

Finally, MCFC say that the net 49m on transfers was all they were planning to spend this summer as a maximum!

So, I think that AUDG will be quietly happy about all this and, as others have said, FFP will ultimately benefit MCFC more than any other club. You will look back and see how FFP is now dead in the water from our perspective.

Just think how Platini will be crying today, He tried his best for the cartel but it's all over now.

Therefore, for me, excellent news! Now can we move back to football matters. Cheers. CTID

I have to disagree with that statement, from personal experience.

OK mate. Everyone has a different story. It's my overall view. I also apologise for any facts that I have got wrong. However, my view remains the same. I leave the conspiracy theories to de niro and the paranoia gang!

the fact that ffp suddenly exists proves it is rotten to the core. not a fucking peep until we crashed the party with all our dosh.

call it fear, call it jealousy, call it anything you like but its as corrupt as fuck.

no paranoia just the truth, besides we will still fuck with them.

 

[Blue Is the Opposite of Blue]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

We're already on it.

Mangala, Fernando and Sagna will cost us about £40m overall so that's below our net spend allowance. Having thought about it, given how much they both missed last season, Aguero and Jovetic will be like new signings.

We're lowering the weekly wage bill by offering bonus-based contracts to Nasri, Milner, Dzeko, Kolarov and Hart. We were already decreasing both per season anyway. And we'll breakeven and start to turn profit in about 12 months.

The only issue is the squad restrictions but the guidelines being reported aren't clear yet. Some are saying 8 homegrown players have to be in our squad, some are saying 4 homegrown. We'll just have to wait and see.

I think we'll be fine in all honesty. We've got the best people in charge to deal with this situation and, yeah, pretty much that. I can see us maybe not getting out of the group stages of the Champions' League at a push but even that's a tiny worry.

 

[Citysmith]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Anyone else feel that it's like in the movies where the guy gets taken into the cell next door for a kicking and it's actually someone he knows so the gaurd kicks the crap out of the chair and makes all the rights noises whilst the G14 smoke cigars and think the whole thing has been sorted.

Everyone walks away happy (ish)

Exactly. A bit like this:

[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7avWjBmRXu0&t=0m44s[/video]

Show the pain City, Show it

 

[Tommy_Catons_Perm]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Since nothing anything like this has happened to other clubs, and you'd hope (esp if Rags) they got hammered if it did......i read the sanctions as if about them and wanting them to be severe and crippling them, i then read the club statement

....and Guess what? If you look at it from that perspective you'd be well pissed and this forum would be in meltdown about how 'they' had got away with murder.

It's nearly all 'hot air' that looks imo to be almost a joint 'how do we make it look like were really punishing you to save face since were not very confident winning a court battle,whilst you don't have to drag it through courts for years'

Everyone trying to 'see the bigger picture' i think have overlooked the smaller picture which is we havebasically been given nothing more than a '£20m slap on the wrist' whilst the list of sanctions makes it look like we are getting hammered.

As for PR, the more the media dissect the sanctions and imply were actually getting hammered the better......since i (and City) can't see much punishment in it in real terms ;)

Hmm. You might be talking sense here. Only thing is could it be construed as "bad publicity". Might people think "Champions via Financial Doping" ? Could look at the whole thing anyway up I suppose >

 

[S04]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

City's official statement says 10m Euro will be lost from it's share of income from UEFA for in 2013-14 & 10m Euro for 2014-15. Does anybody know if this equates to the £49m fine of which £32m is suspended as reported by the BBC ?. Thus £17m fine = 20m Euro lost in UEFA income ?

The City statement make no mention of a suspended fine.

Generally the fine is reported as £50m in the media. This seems more severe and bad publicity than the way it actually
is ?

Read it again will you..

I did. The City statement does not explicitly say we have been fined £49m. Simple question. How does one deduce a fine of £49m using the figures in the City Statement ?

It´s from the Uefa statement..

 

[Thaksinssoldier]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Expect all contracts to be re-done, and significantly lowered, with heavy performance laden bonuses. This is the NFL model, where players regularly re-negotiate their contracts in order to facilitate a clubs wiggle room in a salary cap environment.

If we really want a player, expect us to do loan swaps with a view to a permanent signing. Clubs will play along as they know we are good for the money in one chunk next year.

Rekik & Lopes will be integrated more into the squad next year, so the squad cap really shouldnt affect us too bad.

If we announce break even in June, the football world will collectively crap their pants.

All we need to do next season is be sure to still be a champs league club and there will be no stopping us, and the suits know it.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

My concern is this:

As I understand UEFA did not recognise all our revenue income from the Etihad deal and some other soursces.
We are "only" breaking even even with those deals, do UEFA continue to not recognise the full amount in the next years too? As we are not allowed to spend more than we earn, I struggle to see how we could even spend the 50m we are allowed to spend this window without falling foul on their rules again when they judge us again next season?

Your understanding is not correct. There is no problem with the Etihad deal and we can continue to use the income from it. The only issue with our revenue is that we have agreed not to include the sale of club assets to other parts of the group in future break-even calculations but, as these were probably one-offs, then that won't be a problem.

If we spend £50m on players, that doesn't go through the accounts in one go but is spread over the life of the contracts. So if we give those players 5 year contracts it costs us £10m a year. I can't believe people still don't understand this the number of times it's been talked about on here.

Are you sure on the transfer cap PB?
I know the amortisation goes through the P&L, but surely a 60m euro limit is for the amount we actually pay in transfers. Otherwise we'd just put new Messing on a 10 year deal.
Might be wrong, but I think the 60m is a cash limit.

It is a cash limit but he was saying that spending £50m would put us in danger next season, which I took to mean that he thought we would have to put the whole amount through the accounts.