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

[Vienna_70]

Want a laugh?

They are desperate for UEFA to come down hard on City.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.redcafe.net/threads/so-these-financial-fair-play-rules-then.329050/page-18" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.redcafe.net/threads/so-these ... 50/page-18</a>

There's at least one poster on there with a bit of sense:

I wouldn't get your hopes up. All the millions they're ploughing into their academy seems to be geared towards showing UEFA that they're putting effort into being sustainable in the future and UEFA seem to value effort even if it's contrived.

 

[r.soleofsalford]

Want a laugh?

They are desperate for UEFA to come down hard on City.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.redcafe.net/threads/so-these-financial-fair-play-rules-then.329050/page-18" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.redcafe.net/threads/so-these ... 50/page-18</a>

There's at least one poster on there with a bit of sense:

I wouldn't get your hopes up. All the millions they're ploughing into their academy seems to be geared towards showing UEFA that they're putting effort into being sustainable in the future and UEFA seem to value effort even if it's contrived.

you have to laugh at these deluded cunts wanting to take their ball home,

 

[i kne albert davy]

Want a laugh?

They are desperate for UEFA to come down hard on City.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.redcafe.net/threads/so-these-financial-fair-play-rules-then.329050/page-18" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.redcafe.net/threads/so-these ... 50/page-18</a>

To be honest the realists know we ain't in the shit with this and the dopier rags dream about City being kicked out of Europe and let their shitty team in because they're called Manchester United, well bad news for the dreamers it isn't going to happen.

 

[jrb]

Want a laugh?

They are desperate for UEFA to come down hard on City.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.redcafe.net/threads/so-these-financial-fair-play-rules-then.329050/page-18" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.redcafe.net/threads/so-these ... 50/page-18</a>

To be honest the realists know we ain't in the shit with this and the dopier rags dream about City being kicked out of Europe and let their shitty team in because they're called Manchester United, well bad news for the dreamers it isn't going to happen.

True.

I was going to put that, but I thought I'd pimp my post up a bit. :-)

Even they've got some sensible posters. The rest are just typical Rags who haven't got a clue.

 

[I'm With Stupid]

They're hilarious. Ignoring the "direction of travel" guidelines (halved losses for 2 consecutive years), exclusion from competitions is the last resort of about 8 possible sanctions, the first being a warning, the second being a fine (brilliant logic from UEFA that one - this club isn't managing its finances properly, so we're going to put it right by giving them an extra bill to pay). Obviously the established clubs are desperate for UEFA to be tough on new money, but you can't have 8 possible punishments and the jump straight to the harshest one for a first offence (assuming that we'll have committed any offence).

 

[Bluemoon115]

They're hilarious. Ignoring the "direction of travel" guidelines (halved losses for 2 consecutive years), exclusion from competitions is the last resort of about 8 possible sanctions, the first being a warning, the second being a fine (brilliant logic from UEFA that one - this club isn't managing its finances properly, so we're going to put it right by giving them an extra bill to pay). Obviously the established clubs are desperate for UEFA to be tough on new money, but you can't have 8 possible punishments and the jump straight to the harshest one for a first offence (assuming that we'll have committed any offence).

It certainly wouldn't stand up in any court.

I'm still unsure the overall theory of FFP is legal by European Law, it just takes someone to challenge it to find out.

It's like we've got a monster truck, so someone put a tiny speed bump in the way. It's nothing our suspension can't handle.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

They're hilarious. Ignoring the "direction of travel" guidelines (halved losses for 2 consecutive years), exclusion from competitions is the last resort of about 8 possible sanctions, the first being a warning, the second being a fine (brilliant logic from UEFA that one - this club isn't managing its finances properly, so we're going to put it right by giving them an extra bill to pay). Obviously the established clubs are desperate for UEFA to be tough on new money, but you can't have 8 possible punishments and the jump straight to the harshest one for a first offence (assuming that we'll have committed any offence).

It certainly wouldn't stand up in any court.

I'm still unsure the overall theory of FFP is legal by European Law, it just takes someone to challenge it to find out.

Strictly speaking it almost certainly breaches EU Competition Law (Article 101 off the top of my head). However UEFA would probably argue that it improves football overall so 101 shouldn't apply. It's an argument that they might win.

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

They're hilarious. Ignoring the "direction of travel" guidelines (halved losses for 2 consecutive years), exclusion from competitions is the last resort of about 8 possible sanctions, the first being a warning, the second being a fine (brilliant logic from UEFA that one - this club isn't managing its finances properly, so we're going to put it right by giving them an extra bill to pay). Obviously the established clubs are desperate for UEFA to be tough on new money, but you can't have 8 possible punishments and the jump straight to the harshest one for a first offence (assuming that we'll have committed any offence).

It certainly wouldn't stand up in any court.

I'm still unsure the overall theory of FFP is legal by European Law, it just takes someone to challenge it to find out.

Strictly speaking it almost certainly breaches EU Competition Law (Article 101 off the top of my head). However UEFA would probably argue that it improves football overall so 101 shouldn't apply. It's an argument that they might win.

surely not if the opposition comes up with a far more fair and sensible proposal as an example model that UEFA should implement as opposed to their FPPR structure?

 

[Cobwebcat]

They're hilarious. Ignoring the "direction of travel" guidelines (halved losses for 2 consecutive years), exclusion from competitions is the last resort of about 8 possible sanctions, the first being a warning, the second being a fine (brilliant logic from UEFA that one - this club isn't managing its finances properly, so we're going to put it right by giving them an extra bill to pay). Obviously the established clubs are desperate for UEFA to be tough on new money, but you can't have 8 possible punishments and the jump straight to the harshest one for a first offence (assuming that we'll have committed any offence).

It certainly wouldn't stand up in any court.

I'm still unsure the overall theory of FFP is legal by European Law, it just takes someone to challenge it to find out.

Strictly speaking it almost certainly breaches EU Competition Law (Article 101 off the top of my head). However UEFA would probably argue that it improves football overall so 101 shouldn't apply. It's an argument that they might win.

They would have to prove it was the best solution to stop clubs going bust and was proportionate. UEFA likely to lose I'd say but the law can be a funny thing. They've slipped up mentioning break even in their rules.

 

[Balti]

Want a laugh?

They are desperate for UEFA to come down hard on City.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.redcafe.net/threads/so-these-financial-fair-play-rules-then.329050/page-18" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.redcafe.net/threads/so-these ... 50/page-18</a>

There's at least one poster on there with a bit of sense:

I wouldn't get your hopes up. All the millions they're ploughing into their academy seems to be geared towards showing UEFA that they're putting effort into being sustainable in the future and UEFA seem to value effort even if it's contrived.

fucking rag hypocrites crack me up

 

[jrb]

Some of you might find this interesting?

Business Desk North West.

Losses widen at Liverpool FC as costs rise

LIVERPOOL FC have reported an increase in losses to £49.8m, despite a 9% hike in turnover, driven by improved commercial revenues.

The US-owned club said it had made "solid progress" despite the increased loss which was up from £40,5m in a 10 month period in 2012, and pointed to the hike in revenues and a cut in debt as signs it is moving in the right direction.

Although hurt by an absence of revenues from the lucrative UEFA Champions League competition, turnover in the year to the end of May 2013 was £206.1m. Commercial revenues, reflecting higher sponsorship and royalty incomes, rose to £97.7m, from £63.7m in the previous 10 month period.

Administrative expenses - including player wages - were more than the total income, and rose to £213.1m, compared with £176.5m in the 10 month peiod to May 31 2012.

External debt decreased by 29% to £45.1m.

In a statement Liverpool said that since the Boston-based Fenway Sports Group acquired the club in October 2010, revenue has steadily increased year-on-year and external debt has decreased overall by nearly £200m.

Managing director Ian Ayre said: "These results demonstrate that the financial health of the club continues to make good progress as we continue our journey to transform the club on and off the pitch.

"Over the past four or five years, revenue has been consistently increasing from around £170m in 2009 to over £200m today, and external debt has decreased significantly to less than £50m.

"With a hugely supportive ownership group, we have taken a measured approach to bring back financial stability to this great club by ensuring it is properly structured on and off the pitch."

Mr Ayre added: "These financial results are now up to 18 months old and we have continued to make further progress since this reporting period. Our strong links remain with our existing partners, signing new deals with Standard Chartered, Garuda and Carlsberg, and we have recently announced five new partnerships which endorses the global appeal of the LFC brand."

He said "good progress" was being made on the proposed redevelopment of the Anfield Stadium - which will be crucial for future revenue growth.

Liverpool currently lie second in the Barclays Premier League, leaving the club well-place to return to the Champions League.

 

[Bodicoteblue]

Some of the stuff on sad cafe is hilarious.
Some of them seem to think slashing your losses , wiping out debt , and increasing revenues to the level City have amounts to "token" and "contrived" efforts to comply with FFP! Geniuses.
Some of them though , seem to realise the game is up and the years of them rigging the market and stomping all over everyone else financially , are over.

 

[St Helens Blue (Exiled)]

Want a laugh?

They are desperate for UEFA to come down hard on City.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.redcafe.net/threads/so-these-financial-fair-play-rules-then.329050/page-18" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.redcafe.net/threads/so-these ... 50/page-18</a>

They were clinging on the hope that they would qualify by winning the champs league. Now that is looking increasingly unlikely, they are clinging on to the hope that we will be booted out because of ffp.
Desperate times at the swamp.

hahahah so what make sthe rgas automatic gainers of our slot if we were to be kicked out hyperthetically of course!! I think Spurs and Everton may have a little say in that!! :-)
desperate times at the swamp

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Some of you might find this interesting?

Business Desk North West.

Losses widen at Liverpool FC as costs rise

LIVERPOOL FC have reported an increase in losses to £49.8m, despite a 9% hike in turnover, driven by improved commercial revenues.

The US-owned club said it had made "solid progress" despite the increased loss which was up from £40,5m in a 10 month period in 2012, and pointed to the hike in revenues and a cut in debt as signs it is moving in the right direction.

Although hurt by an absence of revenues from the lucrative UEFA Champions League competition, turnover in the year to the end of May 2013 was £206.1m. Commercial revenues, reflecting higher sponsorship and royalty incomes, rose to £97.7m, from £63.7m in the previous 10 month period.

Administrative expenses - including player wages - were more than the total income, and rose to £213.1m, compared with £176.5m in the 10 month peiod to May 31 2012.

External debt decreased by 29% to £45.1m.

In a statement Liverpool said that since the Boston-based Fenway Sports Group acquired the club in October 2010, revenue has steadily increased year-on-year and external debt has decreased overall by nearly £200m.

Managing director Ian Ayre said: "These results demonstrate that the financial health of the club continues to make good progress as we continue our journey to transform the club on and off the pitch.

"Over the past four or five years, revenue has been consistently increasing from around £170m in 2009 to over £200m today, and external debt has decreased significantly to less than £50m.

"With a hugely supportive ownership group, we have taken a measured approach to bring back financial stability to this great club by ensuring it is properly structured on and off the pitch."

Mr Ayre added: "These financial results are now up to 18 months old and we have continued to make further progress since this reporting period. Our strong links remain with our existing partners, signing new deals with Standard Chartered, Garuda and Carlsberg, and we have recently announced five new partnerships which endorses the global appeal of the LFC brand."

He said "good progress" was being made on the proposed redevelopment of the Anfield Stadium - which will be crucial for future revenue growth.

Liverpool currently lie second in the Barclays Premier League, leaving the club well-place to return to the Champions League.

It seems all those dodgy sponsorship deals (from the owners' own country) could not mask this club's eye watering losses. I only hope that clubs such as this, which clearly cannot survive without the indulgent largesse of their foreign owners, are suitably punished by the footballing powers that be. It is, at the end of the day, a form of cheating, and mealy-mouthed and trite statements about 'moving in the right direction' will surely hold little water with supporters of proper football clubs.

 

[SkyBlueCanuck]

Some of you might find this interesting?

Business Desk North West.

Losses widen at Liverpool FC as costs rise

LIVERPOOL FC have reported an increase in losses to £49.8m, despite a 9% hike in turnover, driven by improved commercial revenues.

The US-owned club said it had made "solid progress" despite the increased loss which was up from £40,5m in a 10 month period in 2012, and pointed to the hike in revenues and a cut in debt as signs it is moving in the right direction.

Although hurt by an absence of revenues from the lucrative UEFA Champions League competition, turnover in the year to the end of May 2013 was £206.1m. Commercial revenues, reflecting higher sponsorship and royalty incomes, rose to £97.7m, from £63.7m in the previous 10 month period.

Administrative expenses - including player wages - were more than the total income, and rose to £213.1m, compared with £176.5m in the 10 month peiod to May 31 2012.

External debt decreased by 29% to £45.1m.

In a statement Liverpool said that since the Boston-based Fenway Sports Group acquired the club in October 2010, revenue has steadily increased year-on-year and external debt has decreased overall by nearly £200m.

Managing director Ian Ayre said: "These results demonstrate that the financial health of the club continues to make good progress as we continue our journey to transform the club on and off the pitch.

"Over the past four or five years, revenue has been consistently increasing from around £170m in 2009 to over £200m today, and external debt has decreased significantly to less than £50m.

"With a hugely supportive ownership group, we have taken a measured approach to bring back financial stability to this great club by ensuring it is properly structured on and off the pitch."

Mr Ayre added: "These financial results are now up to 18 months old and we have continued to make further progress since this reporting period. Our strong links remain with our existing partners, signing new deals with Standard Chartered, Garuda and Carlsberg, and we have recently announced five new partnerships which endorses the global appeal of the LFC brand."

He said "good progress" was being made on the proposed redevelopment of the Anfield Stadium - which will be crucial for future revenue growth.

Liverpool currently lie second in the Barclays Premier League, leaving the club well-place to return to the Champions League.

It seems all those dodgy sponsorship deals (from the owners' own country) could not mask this club's eye watering losses. I only hope that clubs such as this, which clearly cannot survive without the indulgent largesse of their foreign owners, are suitably punished by the footballing powers that be. It is, at the end of the day, a form of cheating, and mealy-mouthed and trite statements about 'moving in the right direction' will surely hold little water with supporters of proper football clubs.

great stuff, that GDM

 

[Chris in London]

Some of you might find this interesting?

Business Desk North West.

Losses widen at Liverpool FC as costs rise

LIVERPOOL FC have reported an increase in losses to £49.8m, despite a 9% hike in turnover, driven by improved commercial revenues.

The US-owned club said it had made "solid progress" despite the increased loss which was up from £40,5m in a 10 month period in 2012, and pointed to the hike in revenues and a cut in debt as signs it is moving in the right direction.

Although hurt by an absence of revenues from the lucrative UEFA Champions League competition, turnover in the year to the end of May 2013 was £206.1m. Commercial revenues, reflecting higher sponsorship and royalty incomes, rose to £97.7m, from £63.7m in the previous 10 month period.

Administrative expenses - including player wages - were more than the total income, and rose to £213.1m, compared with £176.5m in the 10 month peiod to May 31 2012.

External debt decreased by 29% to £45.1m.

In a statement Liverpool said that since the Boston-based Fenway Sports Group acquired the club in October 2010, revenue has steadily increased year-on-year and external debt has decreased overall by nearly £200m.

Managing director Ian Ayre said: "These results demonstrate that the financial health of the club continues to make good progress as we continue our journey to transform the club on and off the pitch.

"Over the past four or five years, revenue has been consistently increasing from around £170m in 2009 to over £200m today, and external debt has decreased significantly to less than £50m.

"With a hugely supportive ownership group, we have taken a measured approach to bring back financial stability to this great club by ensuring it is properly structured on and off the pitch."

Mr Ayre added: "These financial results are now up to 18 months old and we have continued to make further progress since this reporting period. Our strong links remain with our existing partners, signing new deals with Standard Chartered, Garuda and Carlsberg, and we have recently announced five new partnerships which endorses the global appeal of the LFC brand."

He said "good progress" was being made on the proposed redevelopment of the Anfield Stadium - which will be crucial for future revenue growth.

Liverpool currently lie second in the Barclays Premier League, leaving the club well-place to return to the Champions League.

It seems all those dodgy sponsorship deals (from the owners' own country) could not mask this club's eye watering losses. I only hope that clubs such as this, which clearly cannot survive without the indulgent largesse of their foreign owners, are suitably punished by the footballing powers that be. It is, at the end of the day, a form of cheating, and mealy-mouthed and trite statements about 'moving in the right direction' will surely hold little water with supporters of proper football clubs.

It's financial doping, nothing more nothing less. And what will happen when Mr Henry gets bored with playing at being a football club owner, answer me that?

Still, at least they wouldn't play the final of a major tournament without a single English player in the starting XI.

 

[jrb]

Another absolute cracker by Red Dreams on Red Café.

good point about selling ourselves to a shiek. If Fred truly loves the club, he must know that would be the end of United as a club.....a top manager and sensible rebuilding. thats all we need.

Can anyone on here please explain why they think being owned by a Billionaire Sheikh or Billionaire Oligarch, is different to being owned by a Billionaire American?

Apart from the fact our owner invests in the club and doesn't bleed it dry like theirs does.

And when and where did the *MORAL HIGH GROUND* come from?

As in, proper clubs are run by revenue generated by the fans, and only the fans. While a club owned and bank rolled by a Billionaire is, erm..... *unethical*!(arf!)

Yet I seemed to recall when the Qataris were linked with United, they were all falling over themselves making player lists, and telling us how United would outspend City in the transfer market once again.

 

[squirtyflower]

Some of you might find this interesting?

Business Desk North West.

Losses widen at Liverpool FC as costs rise

LIVERPOOL FC have reported an increase in losses to £49.8m, despite a 9% hike in turnover, driven by improved commercial revenues.

The US-owned club said it had made "solid progress" despite the increased loss which was up from £40,5m in a 10 month period in 2012, and pointed to the hike in revenues and a cut in debt as signs it is moving in the right direction.

Although hurt by an absence of revenues from the lucrative UEFA Champions League competition, turnover in the year to the end of May 2013 was £206.1m. Commercial revenues, reflecting higher sponsorship and royalty incomes, rose to £97.7m, from £63.7m in the previous 10 month period.

Administrative expenses - including player wages - were more than the total income, and rose to £213.1m, compared with £176.5m in the 10 month peiod to May 31 2012.

External debt decreased by 29% to £45.1m.

In a statement Liverpool said that since the Boston-based Fenway Sports Group acquired the club in October 2010, revenue has steadily increased year-on-year and external debt has decreased overall by nearly £200m.

Managing director Ian Ayre said: "These results demonstrate that the financial health of the club continues to make good progress as we continue our journey to transform the club on and off the pitch.

"Over the past four or five years, revenue has been consistently increasing from around £170m in 2009 to over £200m today, and external debt has decreased significantly to less than £50m.

"With a hugely supportive ownership group, we have taken a measured approach to bring back financial stability to this great club by ensuring it is properly structured on and off the pitch."

Mr Ayre added: "These financial results are now up to 18 months old and we have continued to make further progress since this reporting period. Our strong links remain with our existing partners, signing new deals with Standard Chartered, Garuda and Carlsberg, and we have recently announced five new partnerships which endorses the global appeal of the LFC brand."

He said "good progress" was being made on the proposed redevelopment of the Anfield Stadium - which will be crucial for future revenue growth.

Liverpool currently lie second in the Barclays Premier League, leaving the club well-place to return to the Champions League.

It seems all those dodgy sponsorship deals (from the owners' own country) could not mask this club's eye watering losses. I only hope that clubs such as this, which clearly cannot survive without the indulgent largesse of their foreign owners, are suitably punished by the footballing powers that be. It is, at the end of the day, a form of cheating, and mealy-mouthed and trite statements about 'moving in the right direction' will surely hold little water with supporters of proper football clubs.

It's even worse when you consider the new foreign owners were gifted the club by the government and the banks after stealing it from the previous owners and their massive unpaid debts

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Some of you might find this interesting?

Business Desk North West.

It seems all those dodgy sponsorship deals (from the owners' own country) could not mask this club's eye watering losses. I only hope that clubs such as this, which clearly cannot survive without the indulgent largesse of their foreign owners, are suitably punished by the footballing powers that be. It is, at the end of the day, a form of cheating, and mealy-mouthed and trite statements about 'moving in the right direction' will surely hold little water with supporters of proper football clubs.

It's even worse when you consider the new foreign owners were gifted the club by the government and the banks after stealing it from the previous owners and their massive unpaid debts

They were days away from going into administration too, the small-time fuckers.

 

[squirtyflower]

It seems all those dodgy sponsorship deals (from the owners' own country) could not mask this club's eye watering losses. I only hope that clubs such as this, which clearly cannot survive without the indulgent largesse of their foreign owners, are suitably punished by the footballing powers that be. It is, at the end of the day, a form of cheating, and mealy-mouthed and trite statements about 'moving in the right direction' will surely hold little water with supporters of proper football clubs.

It's even worse when you consider the new foreign owners were gifted the club by the government and the banks after stealing it from the previous owners and their massive unpaid debts

They were days away from going into administration too, the small-time fuckers.

And pulled out of the shit by some very dodgy practices