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

Wilf Wild 1937 said:
Materially FFP2 or complete abolition may or may not worry us, given previous club statements about achieving self sufficiency.

Where people feel indignant is the discriminatory nature of FFP2, in particular the restrictions 3 years after the Settlement has expired.
It's a bit like being given a harsh sentence for a crime that isn't a crime, seeing the courts subsequently rule that it's not a crime,
being forced to serve the full sentence anyway and then being placed on parole after serving the full sentence for the non crime.
Not quite fair is it?
Click to expand...

Of course you are right but surely we must expect this from UEFA who are seemingly responding to G14 requests ?

My point is that ADUG are not trying to convert UEFA to their way of thinking.
Historically the collective 'Barrier to entry' that FFP presented polarised the two sides but was surely expected and has been overcome by accepting a 'pinch' which ADUG are now presumably happy that its detailed content is legally enforceable because of our distrust of UEFA.

We as supporters see FFP2 as unfairness and are outraged by it whereas ADUG expect it and are prepared for it.
The obvious way it seems to be 'relaxed' can be stored as evidence should actual legal action be necessary if the watertight 'pinch' agreement be contravened.

Of course Mr K. will refer to the FFP 'pinch' compromise as 'professional' because frankly they needed absolutely nothing less for them to be anything other than be legally enforceable. A business agreement rather than a gentleman's agreement that UEFA previously reneged on.

I think there is no contest between the business acumen of Sheik M. and his Team compared with the deceitful cartel preserving behaviour of UEFA who must consider all its G14 members who still see FFP as their main weapon against a foe that has proved them wrong.
 
Last edited:
Dribble said:
To a degree, but I think this is an over simplistic and optimistic representation of our situation. A wise man once told the one thing worse than death is revenge as death is certain but with revenge you don't know when or where it will happen only that at some point it will, and that is no way for a man to live.

All Manchester City want to do is go about our business as all other football clubs in history have been allowed to but without having to look over our shoulder keeping one eye on the G14 and the other on where we're going. I'd rather a situation whereby our whole concentration was on our way forward and not having to waste time, effort and resources legislating for whatever the corrupt bastards want to throw at us next.

That's the perfect world view, but the reality is we complied last year, but then the G14/UEFA moved the goal posts and fucked us over. I'm absolutely 100% positive that if it were not for 'What are the G14/UEFA going to come with next' that our reported targets of Sterling, KDB, Pogba etc would already be in the bag.

Whether we're going to be effected by FFP v1 or FFP 2.0 going forward or not, I think it is still having a major effect on us even if it is just Manchester City having to hold back our recruitment plans this summer until we're sure of the G14's next move. Either way, they still have a hold on us. Admittedly as time goes by I believe this hold will evaporate away like a dog's piss puddle on a hot summers day, but as it stands, I think it naive to think we can relax & just get on with business as usual and not make keeping a firm glare on what the G14/UEFA have planned for us next a major priority.

If anything illustrates this perfectly, FFP 2.0 is a case in point.....................
Click to expand...

I am relaxed in believing that ADUG understand UEFA are unlikely to be friendly towards them and will continue to use it with various versions but surely the best chance UEFA had is now a thing of the past. The same wise man you recall may also be responsible for suggesting that you should keep your friends close and your enemies closer.
Sure they may be delaying things but that is all.
Our owner has worked miracles to already break even bearing in mind his investment, he is the one funding the future of MCFC and if his right hand man Mr K. is relaxed then so am I, if that is naive then so be it.

In a way I think our outrage has been fanned by a press that wants to believe we will be hurt more by speculation of its impact rather than its actual effect. Its usual readership wants to believe this so spreading alarm and even renewed hope about FFP and City may be what we react to ?
 
Last edited:
SilverFox2 said:
In a way I think our outrage has been fanned by a press that wants to believe we will be hurt more by speculation of its impact rather than its actual effect. Its usual readership wants to believe this so spreading alarm and even renewed hope about FFP and City may be what we react to ?
Click to expand...

A million times this.

Khaldoon Al Mubarak said we're over it and to expect big spending.

David Fucking McDonnell said we're in trouble.

This isn't a hard choice in terms of credibility
 
M18CTID said:
Our old friend Tony Attwood and his sidekick Walter Broeckx are still peddling the ludicrous idea that the City Football Group model is purely and simply a way of fudging FFP. Anyway, I couldn't resist making this comment:

Walter, I thought you’d might have been switched on enough to know that that last comment was tongue in cheek. Anyway, the point I’m making is that City aren’t buying stakes in clubs situated in some of the world’s biggest cities just to get round FFP but if you and Tony want to believe that then by all means do. I said it on here some months back but what City are doing is effectively going for world domination and you can bookmark that comment in 5 years time when we’re posting the biggest turnover in world football and annual profits of £100 million-plus
1f609.png


http://untold-arsenal.com/archives/44461
Click to expand...
This is a chapter of innuendos , veiled accusations and lots of ifs buts and maybes.
But the big giveaway is his final paragraph - he , like so many others , is still clinging forlornly to the notion that someday the sheik will get bored and walk away.
All that pseudo "investigative journalism" style ,and the pretence at being a well researched article, and he ends up looking like what he is - a jealous , biased buffoon.
 
SilverFox2 said:
I am relaxed in believing that ADUG understand UEFA are unlikely to be friendly towards them and will continue to use it with various versions but surely the best chance UEFA had is now a thing of the past. The same wise man you recall may also be responsible for suggesting that you should keep your friends close and your enemies closer.
Sure they may be delaying things but that is all.
Our owner has worked miracles to already break even bearing in mind his investment, he is the one funding the future of MCFC and if his right hand man Mr K. is relaxed then so am I, if that is naive then so be it.

In a way I think our outrage has been fanned by a press that wants to believe we will be hurt more by speculation of its impact rather than its actual effect. Its usual readership wants to believe this so spreading alarm and even renewed hope about FFP and City may be what we react to ?
Click to expand...


Excellent pay-off line and absolutely correct.

As for the Manchester Evening News, it's the summer and they have scores of pages to fill. If nothing else, it proves just how much of a disconnect these days there are between the local paper and their local club.

Strange scaremongering 'fact-based' piece, despite also admitting City are keeping their own counsel.

They can't even decide if it's two weeks or three when City might find out where we stand.

We are just fine.
 
tolmie's hairdoo said:
As for the Manchester Evening News, it's the summer and they have scores of pages to fill. If nothing else, it proves just how much of a disconnect these days there are between the local paper and their local club.

Strange scaremongering 'fact-based' piece, despite also admitting City are keeping their own counsel.
Click to expand...

Don't tell @oakiecokie , he'll have an apoplexy at the mere suggestion his beloved SB might be shit stirring.
 
tolmie's hairdoo said:
Excellent pay-off line and absolutely correct.

As for the Manchester Evening News, it's the summer and they have scores of pages to fill. If nothing else, it proves just how much of a disconnect these days there are between the local paper and their local club.

Strange scaremongering 'fact-based' piece, despite also admitting City are keeping their own counsel.

They can't even decide if it's two weeks or three when City might find out where we stand.

We are just fine.
Click to expand...

Nail on head.

Brennan makes great points on everything & is really supportive of City too, can't knock him for that, but in one of the articles his last line basically means 'let's hope City have this covered re their spending plans'. Which might as well read 'I have no idea whether City can spend the required money on transfers or not' .

What UEFA are doing with City is Blatter like in it's dodgyness, but that doesn't mean it will work.
 
FantasyIreland said:
Hopefully Mr Brennan can make an appearance on this thread to clarify his article.
Click to expand...

Think he might be at the bloggers and blaggers do mate, quaffing a free buffet and free bar at City's expense, funded by our season ticket prices.

The jammy bastard.

(And I seem to think KitBag are organising it rather than City)
 
The problem is that Sports journalist are trying to comment on issues that arent their specialised field.

Brennan is speculating what will happen based on the revised FFP rules , but the new rules haven't impacted our planned transfer activity as we now just need to comply with the allowable losses that all other clubs have to adhere to. We can prety much spend freely and still comply.

we dont need the special dispensation that is now being allowed to new investment either (which is bent as fuck btw)
 
Damocles said:
A million times this.

Khaldoon Al Mubarak said we're over it and to expect big spending.

David Fucking McDonnell said we're in trouble.

This isn't a hard choice in terms of credibility
Click to expand...

The only thing I'd say is Khaldoon can quite rightly say that we're over it under the current rules.

What we (us and Khaldoon) don't know is whether the current rules will be change retrospectively in the coming months. That's what worries me when journos start to leak stuff about FFP.

For example could UEFA rule that the wages of staff at CF Services and CF Marketing be included in our accounts (we would be able to take out the money we've paid to those companies but would still be worse off). Could they change the rules on related party transactions and sponsorships.

I just don't trust them.
 
moomba said:
The only thing I'd say is Khaldoon can quite rightly say that we're over it under the current rules.

What we (us and Khaldoon) don't know is whether the current rules will be change retrospectively in the coming months. That's what worries me when journos start to leak stuff about FFP.
Click to expand...

I hope they change the rules retrospectively. Do you have any idea how much of an offence it is under EU law to do so?
 
moomba said:
Didn't stop them last time though.
Click to expand...

That was in interpretation, big difference. If they change the rules now and try to make them apply to times gone past they're fucked beyond belief when they get to the ECJ, regardless of the rest of the case. It's a violation of a founding principle of EU law.
 
moomba said:
The only thing I'd say is Khaldoon can quite rightly say that we're over it under the current rules.

What we (us and Khaldoon) don't know is whether the current rules will be change retrospectively in the coming months. That's what worries me when journos start to leak stuff about FFP.

For example could UEFA rule that the wages of staff at CF Services and CF Marketing be included in our accounts (we would be able to take out the money we've paid to those companies but would still be worse off). Could they change the rules on related party transactions and sponsorships.

I just don't trust them.
Click to expand...

Don't be giving them ideas!
 
aguero93:20 said:
That was in interpretation, big difference. If they change the rules now and try to make them apply to times gone past they're fucked beyond belief when they get to the ECJ, regardless of the rest of the case. It's a violation of a founding principle of EU law.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, although I suspect if they were tested on the change in interpretation a court wouldn't have looked too kindly on it anyway.

I think they were banking on the hope that no-one will bite the bullet and challenge them. Dupont fucked that up for a start.
 
moomba said:
Fair enough, although I suspect if they were tested on the change in interpretation a court wouldn't have looked too kindly on it anyway.

I think they were banking on the hope that no-one will bite the bullet and challenge them. Dupont fucked that up for a start.
Click to expand...

Yep and that's why I'm not too worried, despite their bluster and bullshit in public they know Dupont's staff will be watching their every move from now until the court case and looking for anything to use against them.

Imo they were banking on the clubs being afraid to openly challenge them for fear of the sacrifices necessary to do so, they didn't see the challenge coming from fans and agents along with other parties and it's fucked their plans right up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top