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

Re: City & FFP (continued)

ColinLee said:
GeekinGav said:
i just have one childish thing to say ....
FU-UEFA_zpsf11c60a0.png
Perhaps the fans should make a statement at the first CL home game next season? Booing throughout the CL anthem? Or turning our backs on it?

us turning our backs ... isnt that us celebrating it? just singing bluemoon as its playing and try and drown it out.
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

I have a question, not sure if it's been mentioned as I've only been flicking through the pages.

If UEFA have not allowed the IP rights because they say they are basically in house transactions. Does that mean if the other teams (NYC & MH ) create their own revenue streams through sponsorship and other means, will we be able to transfer those profits onto our books. As UEFA have said we're one and the same.
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

bluegray said:
I have a question, not sure if it's been mentioned as I've only been flicking through the pages.

If UEFA have not allowed the IP rights because they say they are basically in house transactions. Does that mean if the other teams (NYC & MH ) create their own revenue streams through sponsorship and other means, will we be able to transfer those profits onto our books. As UEFA have said we're one and the same.
It wasn't the IP mate, see the other FFP thread.
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

GeekinGav said:
ColinLee said:
GeekinGav said:
i just have one childish thing to say ....
FU-UEFA_zpsf11c60a0.png
Perhaps the fans should make a statement at the first CL home game next season? Booing throughout the CL anthem? Or turning our backs on it?

us turning our backs ... isnt that us celebrating it? just singing bluemoon as its playing and try and drown it out.
Winning the thing then have the whole team piss in the trophy? Too much?
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

bluegray said:
I have a question, not sure if it's been mentioned as I've only been flicking through the pages.

If UEFA have not allowed the IP rights because they say they are basically in house transactions. Does that mean if the other teams (NYC & MH ) create their own revenue streams through sponsorship and other means, will we be able to transfer those profits onto our books. As UEFA have said we're one and the same.

No, the other clubs are completely separate entities and therefore income cannot be transferred because it is not classed as matchday income, sponsorship or anything similar. The IP rights is simply City selling to NYCFC the name and image rights but obviously NYCFC was created by us which makes it all a bit cheeky. In accounting terms it still doesn't really matter because it is a separate company with it's own books and any turnover will be under those books.
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

George Hannah said:
Ducado said:
George Hannah said:
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.
whatever
Clause 18.1.2 allows for a reduction from 8 in the number of 'local' players. You don't have to have eight. Any reduction in the 8 has to result in a corresponding reduction in the 25 max squad number. So for a squad of 21, a composition of 17+4 locals is quite valid - see the '21 man squad thread' on this forum.
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

"UEFA will distribute money from financial contributions by making solidarity payments to other European clubs."

Read more at <a class="postlink" href="http://www.fourfourtwo.com/news/uefa-plan-distribution-ffp-funds#EzEGvkfSKmQPV62W.99" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.fourfourtwo.com/news/uefa-pl ... mQPV62W.99</a>

Eh?
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

Cobwebcat said:
"UEFA will distribute money from financial contributions by making solidarity payments to other European clubs."

Read more at <a class="postlink" href="http://www.fourfourtwo.com/news/uefa-plan-distribution-ffp-funds#EzEGvkfSKmQPV62W.99" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.fourfourtwo.com/news/uefa-pl ... mQPV62W.99</a>

Eh?

They will increase the prize money in the CL, because it's not a fine as such
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

Thaksinssoldier said:
Okay, I've just sent this on to a Dipper fan who's had this weird obsession with us and FFP, like it would be life changing or something.

I've borrowed liberally from here, no plagiarism or credit on my part for lots of this, but it's a good summation to spread and share around, or look at from layman's terms if you aren't keeping up to speed:

Just having a dig around ffp sanctions this morning. They are pretty much non existant tbh.




A few points on it to justify this:




On the reduction of our CL squad size:




Having read the regulations
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Dow" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Dow</a> ... WNLOAD.pdf

Specifically parts 18-12 and 18-08
Basically it's pro rata'd down
25 -8 HG
24-7
23-6
22-5
21-4




So essentially they've done us a favour here, as we would have struggled to come up with 8 HG players within a 25 man squad, however 4 within a 21 man squad is within our existing squad. (this doesn't include academy kids who go on your "B" list, and Karim Rekik will go on this(in the dutch world cup squad after a great season at PSV) and Marcos Lopes will stay in here(3 goals last year in the senior team in league and FA Cup).




The fine:




It's kind of to our advantage. By accepting it, FIFA change us from being monitored on an average over the 3 years to monitoring us on a year by year basis. This essentially wipes all the big money transfers from 2012 off our FFP monitoring going forward.




The fine itself is prize money won from UEFA for Champions League and they basically hold from paying it. However, and this is both big and stupid, you can declare it in your revenue going forward against FFP, so on paper its still your money.




If City hit the agreed figures the actual fine is only something like 16m, with the rest of the fine being released back to the club if we hit the agreed figures.




The salary cap:




Again, looks like it wont affect us. 60million plus what ever we make from sales. Looks like the 3 players City are tying up will cost 30mil at most(Sagna free/Fernando and either Mangala or a lad from Roma). Not to mention its only for 12 months, so there's nothing stopping City taking a player on loan for 12 months with an agreement to buy at the end of it(not that I can see us doing it,unless its a player for player swap).




Wage cap:




With Barry & Lescott off the books this month, we're well in line with it, plus a lot of the new deals have the lads coming down from 150,000 per week or whatever to 80,000 per week with huge incentives..so another non issue.




The key thing was UEFA only had a problem with the selling of services to New York City,City's womens team and Melbourne, but came back giving the Etihad deal a clean bill of health..so there's nothing stopping City re-negotiating this now that the related party nonsense on it has been cleared via ffp.




In City's statement it was announced that we've actually broken even this year(well will do by end of may which is the end of the financial period), so it looks like 2012 was the only issue, and by accepting the fine the aggregate from 2012 now wont carry over onto 2013's aggregate.




So at the end of it all UEFA look like they've given City a load of punishments, but City have come out of it pretty much unaffected if the claim in the City statement that we broke even this year is accurate. With the BT money, we'll be in major profit country going forwards, so this was the worst that can happen to us as long as we stay in the Champs league for the next couple of years.




Meanwhile, good luck to anyone that has had to invest last year or this year to break in or stay in(United/Spurs...Liverpool were quite frugal, but the Dalglish era would have killed you had you been in CL this season). United and Spurs cannot buy a squad to get into the CL AND make FFP...so they are screwed eitherway in their efforts. Looks like Liverpool got in just at the right time, as from next season the cartel doors will well and truly close once that BT deal starts giving money to ensure Champs league teams meet FFP.



Anyways, in the time it took me to jot this down, Sheikh Mansour has made 16M interest..fine paid :-)
As an aside, Sheikh Mansour does earn interest as it is against Islamic law.
 

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.