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

[Centurions]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Apologies if this question has already been asked. How realistic is it that a "directly affected" club will appeal these sanctions? I'd have thought that on balance it isn't worth doing because an appeal won't necessarily lead to greater sanctions being applied (it could even go the other way and we get a more lenient penalty), plus any club appealing could well piss us off to the extent that we refuse to do any future business with them.

Not sure on the UEFA definition of "directly affected" but seeing as we've complied with Premier League FFP, which both Everton and Arsenal voted for, it's difficult to see either of those two clubs mounting a successful challenge. Surely, if it was to come from anywhere it would be CSKA Moscow or Pilsen as they are (or were, rather) "directly affected" by our putative non-compliance with FFP in the years to which our "non-compliance" applied. If we undisputedly abided by the rules of the Premier League last season how could anyone be "directly affected" by that? In that sense Arsenal may be hoisted by their own petard.


Arsenal and Everton have been 'indirectly affected' by our "non-compliance" with UEFA FFP imo.

Very good point GDM - perhaps UEFA should clearly define what constitutes a "directly affected" party.

Don't be silly, UEFA will never clearly 'define' anything. That would stop them from moving the goalposts later on to suit the shadowy cartel looking over their shoulder.

 

[oppa gangnam style]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

MCFC statement says wages cant improve from 13-14 to 14-15.

What can be our 13-14 wages tho?

Certainly we were happy earlier to say that Mancini pay off wont have an effect in 13-14, or players like Barry, Kolo, Tevez etc wages all come off. All this could effect a lower wage bill for 13-14.

But now that lower wage list is the one that cant be higher. Wouldnt it be better if its little bit higher? So we can have higher next year too?:)

In 12-13 our wages were around 230m.

Lets say we brought it down to 200m to 13-14.

Now we cant go higher than 200m in 14-15. Many teams around us, rivals especially will surely raise their wage lists with all the extra tv income and all...

Of course on the other side we could fail again in next years FFP calculations if we didnt lower our wages from 12-13 to 13-14.

Probably we will do some tricks trough bonuses...

 

[Rob J]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Regarding wages...........

If the club sent a letter out to every employee, whether they are kitchen staff, office staff, ground staff and said "sorry, no cost of living wage rise because of UEFA" would City's employees have a legal case and the potential to mount a challenge to the ruling?

 

[oppa gangnam style]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Other thing is the fines, 60m€ in two years, they only hold onto 20m€ if we dont break their rules from now on.

Is there any info on these amounts will mean less income for us in next FFP period? Or they calculate like we would have earnt these incomes?

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

MCFC statement says wages cant improve from 13-14 to 14-15.

What can be our 13-14 wages tho?

Certainly we were happy earlier to say that Mancini pay off wont have an effect in 13-14, or players like Barry, Kolo, Tevez etc wages all come off. All this could effect a lower wage bill for 13-14.

But now that lower wage list is the one that cant be higher. Wouldnt it be better if its little bit higher? So we can have higher next year too?:)

In 12-13 our wages were around 230m.

Lets say we brought it down to 200m to 13-14.

Now we cant go higher than 200m in 14-15. Many teams around us, rivals especially will surely raise their wage lists with all the extra tv income and all...

Of course on the other side we could fail again in next years FFP calculations if we didnt lower our wages from 12-13 to 13-14.

Probably we will do some tricks trough bonuses...

however the MCFC statement said it didn't include bonuses, which I'm assuming our accounts do, thus we have plenty of wiggle room?

 

[M18CTID]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

So are we genuinely on target to break even this season (and therefore meeting UEFA's requirement for allowable losses as defined in the list of sanctions) as the club suggests? Well, on the face of it turning round a £51 million loss plus finding another £48 million or so to cover those one-off transactions in the last accounts seems like a tall order but even a non-expert like me can come up with the following off the top of my head:

*An extra £40 million earned from PL TV and prize money compared to 2012-13

*At least £30 million knocked off the wage bill (assuming the figure for Mancini and his staff's payout is correct), possibly more due to the likes of Tevez and others being off our books and the incoming players being on more modest wages

*Money earned from several sponsorship deals (I think there were 5 or 6 in all) that were announced last summer, including BT's sponsoring of City Square - those deals will presumably be worth at least a million quid each, perhaps more

*Match-day revenue up due to an increase in season-ticket, match-day ticket, and hospitality prices plus extra home games in the cup competitions compared to last season - the Barca home game in particular probably netted close to £2 million in match-day income

*Amortisation costs down as a result of new contracts for the likes of Aguero

Anything else?

 

[Citizen of Legoland]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Regarding wages...........

If the club sent a letter out to every employee, whether they are kitchen staff, office staff, ground staff and said "sorry, no cost of living wage rise because of UEFA" would City's employees have a legal case and the potential to mount a challenge to the ruling?

I don't think so. For permanant employees, their grievance(s) would still be against their employer. The employer isn't being prevented by UEFA in increasing an individual or group of individuals' wages in line with cost of living or even above it. Deterred maybe, but not prevented.

 

[Jacks77]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

So are we genuinely on target to break even this season (and therefore meeting UEFA's requirement for allowable losses as defined in the list of sanctions) as the club suggests? Well, on the face of it turning round a £51 million loss plus finding another £48 million or so to cover those one-off transactions in the last accounts seems like a tall order but even a non-expert like me can come up with the following off the top of my head:

*An extra £40 million earned from PL TV and prize money compared to 2012-13

*At least £30 million knocked off the wage bill (assuming the figure for Mancini and his staff's payout is correct), possibly more due to the likes of Tevez and others being off our books and the incoming players being on more modest wages

*Money earned from several sponsorship deals (I think there were 5 or 6 in all) that were announced last summer, including BT's sponsoring of City Square - those deals will presumably be worth at least a million quid each, perhaps more

*Match-day revenue up due to an increase in season-ticket, match-day ticket, and hospitality prices plus extra home games in the cup competitions compared to last season - the Barca home game in particular probably netted close to £2 million in match-day income

*Amortisation costs down as a result of new contracts for the likes of Aguero

Anything else?

Incomes will surely improve but not sure outcome will be smaller...

We spent 90m on new players. Also lot of money on their wages. Also lot of bonuses paid out for winning the league.

Maybe we will break even in FFP calculations but dont think we will breakeven in normal accounting yet.
(we can lose up to 20m€ in 13-14 in FFP calcs for not to be punished again.)

Anyway these infos will come out probably between November and February somewhere so its pretty far...

 

[inchy14]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Asked this question earlier in the thread and haven't seen a reply;


If we buy 5 players at £25 million each, all on 5 year contracts, does this only count as spending £25 million in total? Or is amortisation of contracts different?

Anybody know?

Or is it, player x costs £25 million and thats off the £50 million or so we're allowed to spend.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Asked this question earlier in the thread and haven't seen a reply;


If we buy 5 players at £25 million each, all on 5 year contracts, does this only count as spending £25 million in total? Or is amortisation of contracts different?

Anybody know?

Or is it, player x costs £25 million and thats off the £50 million or so we're allowed to spend.

The £50m limit relates to the transfer fees, not the amortised amounts we would take to the p&l.

So in your example, we would have spent £125m and be £75m over the allowance.