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

[CityStu]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

But the transfer cap is for 2 seasons that's got to be bad news.

Think about the transfer kitty we'll have accumulated for season 3 tho! 50m + money generated from sales, not exactly poverty stricken are we.

I was just about to post about our 2016/17 transfer budget!

Soriano's said things that suggest we will pretty much break even this year (13/14) and we spent around £90m last summer. In the next two seasons we're allowed to spend about £50m in each on top of what we bring in from sales. That suggests that we'll be making healthy profits in the 2014/15 and 2015/16 seasons. So, when we go back to following the normal FFP procedure in 2016/17 we'll be able to spend those profits and any profits we'd make during the season itself (as we only have to break even). That could be a £200m window!

Of course, there's a lot that I've ignored. I'm sure that amortised fees would make the maths a bit more quirky, our owners might fancy having a profitable, self sustaining club in 3 years time and won't want to splurge on transfers and FFP might have been kicked out by then.

 

[ElanJo]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Given that we're expected to post a profit in the 14/15 accounts, "significantly limit" could mean more than 50m net for the 15/16 season.

eg. 50m net + whatever profit we make (as well as player sales)

 

[jimbo101]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

ALL sanctions will be lifted for the season 2015/16 as long as we don't post an FFP loss of more than 20m euros for this season.
Club statement clearly states we expect to operate free of sanctions for 2015/16 season.

 

[MeatHunterrr]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

ALL sanctions will be lifted for the season 2015/16 as long as we don't post an FFP loss of more than 20m euros for this season.
Club statement clearly states we expect to operate free of sanctions for 2015/16 season.

+1

 

[Ducado]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

It is, I don't know where people are getting their information from, it would help if they actually read the Club Statement

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.mcfc.co.uk/News/Club-news/2014/May/Club-statement-16-May" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.mcfc.co.uk/News/Club-news/20 ... ent-16-May</a>

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.uefa.org/MultimediaFiles/Download/OfficialDocument/uefaorg/ClubFinancialControl/02/10/69/00/2106900_DOWNLOAD.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.uefa.org/MultimediaFiles/Dow ... WNLOAD.pdf</a>

-Manchester City agrees to significantly limit spending in the transfer market for
seasons 2014/2015 and 2015/2016. Manchester City further accepts a calculated
limitation on the number of new registrations it may include within their “A” List
for the purposes of participation in UEFA competitions. This calculation is based
on the clubs net transfer position in each respective registration period covered by
this agreement.

Thanks I keep telling them its for 2 seasons.

Not if we comply!

 

[Ducado]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

18.08 & 18.12 specifically state that clubs have to have 8 places reserved for locally trained players. All examples in the Annexes are based on 25 man maximum squad sizes there is nothing in the rules that states you can have fewer than eight places reserved for locally trained players if your squad size is reduced as a punishment.
We may have negotiated a reduction as part of the negotiations but until I hear otherwise personally I am assuming we must have eight places reserved for locally trained players as specified in the rules,

As I posted last night this is a key part of the UEFA attack. The question is whether our transfer plans have actually been badly disrupted in spite of what we say on the OS . It crucially depends if UEFA reduce our foreign trained contingent by 4 to 13 by insisting on 8 association/club trained players in the 21. That would mean that 3 of our current 16 foreign trained players (or their direct replacements) weren't eligible for CL next season. In practice Pantilimon could be replaced by Willy but there would be no room for Mangala, Sagna or Fernando in that situation, so by signing all of them it would be six top players out of the CL. The best we can hope for it seems is that it would be a pro-rata reduction - 2 foreign-trained and 2 association-trained places but even then 4 would be excluded. We've taken a real beating on this one.

So you are doubting what the club have said, and would rather make up some prophesy of doom

The Club’s expenditure on new players for the upcoming summer transfer window, on top of income from players it might sell, will be limited to 60m euros. This will have no material impact on the Club’s planned transfer activity.

 

[ElanJo]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

ALL sanctions will be lifted for the season 2015/16 as long as we don't post an FFP loss of more than 20m euros for this season.
Club statement clearly states we expect to operate free of sanctions for 2015/16 season.

Forgot about that

The nature of conditions that will result in the lifting of sanctions means that the Club expects to be operating without sanction or restriction at the commencement of the 2015-16 season.

The problem is that both the UEFA pdf and City's statement are pretty vague so you end up having to compare both to find out the heart of the matter

 

[Ducado]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

ALL sanctions will be lifted for the season 2015/16 as long as we don't post an FFP loss of more than 20m euros for this season.
Club statement clearly states we expect to operate free of sanctions for 2015/16 season.

Thanks,

I do wish other people would actually read what has been written rather than making it up as they go along

 

[Rammyblues]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

purposes of participation in UEFA competitions.

Thats the important bit, we can spend as much as we want without restriction on players who will not take part for two years in CL. So if we want to spend 100m on Shaw, Barkley etc as long as we don't put them on the A list we will be fine.

 

[Cityfan]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.uefa.org/MultimediaFiles/Download/OfficialDocument/uefaorg/ClubFinancialControl/02/10/69/00/2106900_DOWNLOAD.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.uefa.org/MultimediaFiles/Dow ... WNLOAD.pdf</a>

-Manchester City agrees to significantly limit spending in the transfer market for
seasons 2014/2015 and 2015/2016. Manchester City further accepts a calculated
limitation on the number of new registrations it may include within their “A” List
for the purposes of participation in UEFA competitions. This calculation is based
on the clubs net transfer position in each respective registration period covered by
this agreement.

Thanks I keep telling them its for 2 seasons.

Not if we comply!

Maybe

The UEFA statement has no mention of lifting of transfer and player registration sanctions for the following season and the clubs statement is:

''The nature of conditions that will result in the lifting of sanctions means that the Club expects to be operating without sanction or restriction at the commencement of the 2015-16 season.''

Nothing about the transfer window leading up to 2015/16