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

Re: City & FFP (continued)

A genuinely superb article here regarding MCFC & FFP.
Every football supporter / fan should read it and take it in:

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.thedaisycutter.co.uk/2014/05/ffp-wrong-name-wrong-game-wrong-plan/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.thedaisycutter.co.uk/2014/05 ... rong-plan/</a>
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

Prestwich_Blue said:
FanchesterCity said:
Prestwich_Blue said:
You're getting two things mixed up here. City felt they had a good case to take the decision to CAS on the grounds that there had been an abuse of process over the way UEFA changed their rules after the event, which meant we failed one of the key tests needed to be able to use the pre-2010 player wage exemption. That wouldn't be a challenge to FFP but to the way the assessment was applied. A full challenge to FFP could take years to go through the European justice system so would have had no impact in the short term.

But they had to balance a number of considerations in thinking about that, including how it would affect our image and brand among other things and what the consequences of challenging UEFA would have meant in other ways. I have it on very good authority that this was carefully thought through and the threat of action may have been used to our advantage in agreeing a settlement. I can also assure you that Sheikh Mansour and Khaldoon al-Mubarak are not people you double-cross with impunity and currently they feel they have been betrayed. That will not pass without a reaction and there will be consequences collectively and individually. Watch this space.

Poppycock.

You're suggesting that City never fancied the big fight, and the small fight (over interpretation / assessment) simply wasn't worth the hassle in the end.
The considerations about the big fight would have been ongoing since we were notified on FFP being on the horizon. So if we chose not to fight that battle, fair enough, but it would have been decided some time ago.

The 'considerations' that City had to balance have always been there. IF we had to battle with UEFA, how would what affect our image, the views on the sponsors, the fans etc etc. That's been the case for the last 4 or 5 years, not the last few months, and therefore surely there was a strategy already at hand for whatever eventuality transpired with UEFA.

But this 'don't mess with the Sheik' claim sounds great... but it's not right. This isn't The Godfather! There is no fight to be had, that's why we're not fighting. He's not going to get his revenge in some grand way. The club will ride out the fairly minimal punishment, and then comply. Effectively we've club onto the drawbridge being raised and managed to scramble in before it's closed, And that's mission accomplished for this stage of City's plan.

Nobody with an ounce of sense would believe we've been betrayed by UEFA. The whole world knew they weren't keen on the likes of us and PSG!
I don't see that as betrayal... it's just highly predictable from UEFA.

Maybe you're right though. The Sheik is deeply upset by UEFA's betrayal. We'll see. But I'd not hold my breath for some amazing showdown. There's no reason for it. Our passage into the Euro Elite is virtually done, all UEFA did was delay us in customs.
You've made some good contributions to this debate but you really do not know what you're talking about above. Sorry to be so blunt but that's the only way I can say it. You're guessing whereas I know. We have documentary evidence of assurances given by UEFA that weren't upheld when the crunch came. The fact that they changed the rule regarding the wage exemption in a way that if you passed it in 2012, you failed in 2013 should be evidence enough. There's a long game to be played regarding the future of FFP (and you are quite right it won't disappear completely) but there's things that may happen in the short term where the connection may not be immediately apparent.

You cannot pull out a wildcard like 'but I just happen to know secret stuff'.
Nor can you be surprised than UEFA might choose to interpret or change some rules to work against us - not after we've essentially been the focus of their attentions for so long. It's incredulous that anybody could feel betrayed by UEFA. Did City really think they were going to be our friends? We've been in their sights from day one.

No amount of City inside information will change the fundamental difference of opinion between us. You claim FFP is clearly illegal, I claim it 'might' be, but don't share your certainty.
Until a judgment is made, neither of us knows.
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

FanchesterCity said:
Prestwich_Blue said:
FanchesterCity said:
Poppycock.

You're suggesting that City never fancied the big fight, and the small fight (over interpretation / assessment) simply wasn't worth the hassle in the end.
The considerations about the big fight would have been ongoing since we were notified on FFP being on the horizon. So if we chose not to fight that battle, fair enough, but it would have been decided some time ago.

The 'considerations' that City had to balance have always been there. IF we had to battle with UEFA, how would what affect our image, the views on the sponsors, the fans etc etc. That's been the case for the last 4 or 5 years, not the last few months, and therefore surely there was a strategy already at hand for whatever eventuality transpired with UEFA.

But this 'don't mess with the Sheik' claim sounds great... but it's not right. This isn't The Godfather! There is no fight to be had, that's why we're not fighting. He's not going to get his revenge in some grand way. The club will ride out the fairly minimal punishment, and then comply. Effectively we've club onto the drawbridge being raised and managed to scramble in before it's closed, And that's mission accomplished for this stage of City's plan.

Nobody with an ounce of sense would believe we've been betrayed by UEFA. The whole world knew they weren't keen on the likes of us and PSG!
I don't see that as betrayal... it's just highly predictable from UEFA.

Maybe you're right though. The Sheik is deeply upset by UEFA's betrayal. We'll see. But I'd not hold my breath for some amazing showdown. There's no reason for it. Our passage into the Euro Elite is virtually done, all UEFA did was delay us in customs.
You've made some good contributions to this debate but you really do not know what you're talking about above. Sorry to be so blunt but that's the only way I can say it. You're guessing whereas I know. We have documentary evidence of assurances given by UEFA that weren't upheld when the crunch came. The fact that they changed the rule regarding the wage exemption in a way that if you passed it in 2012, you failed in 2013 should be evidence enough. There's a long game to be played regarding the future of FFP (and you are quite right it won't disappear completely) but there's things that may happen in the short term where the connection may not be immediately apparent.

You cannot pull out a wildcard like 'but I just happen to know secret stuff'.
Nor can you be surprised than UEFA might choose to interpret or change some rules to work against us - not after we've essentially been the focus of their attentions for so long. It's incredulous that anybody could feel betrayed by UEFA. Did City really think they were going to be our friends? We've been in their sights from day one.

No amount of City inside information will change the fundamental difference of opinion between us. You claim FFP is clearly illegal, I claim it 'might' be, but don't share your certainty.
Until a judgment is made, neither of us knows.
What I think is that our owners thought they were dealing with honourable people. They know differently now. I agree they had us in their sights from day one.

And I've never claimed "FFP is clearly illegal" so I don't know where you've got this "fundamental difference of opinion between us" from. I'm not a lawyer for one thing but I do know enough to know that there is rarely any certainty where the law is concerned. Again, you've confused the FFP appeal process, which is about the process of applying the rules, with a more fundamental legal challenge to the concept and framework of FFP. There's little doubt from what I've been told that we had a decent chance of being successful in the former but that had to be set against the impact. You can win a battle but lose the war. You can also lose a battle but win the war.

I've agreed with you that FFP probably won't go away altogether but the way in which it operates to control spending might well have to change.

The Striani case, as I understand it, was not against the concept of regulation as such but they way UEFA had gone about it. I'm not against regulation as such, as you'll see if you go through my posts. I believe ownership should be regulated far more strenuously than it is and I believe in the concept of financial self-sufficiency.
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

Prestwich_Blue said:
FanchesterCity said:
Prestwich_Blue said:
You've made some good contributions to this debate but you really do not know what you're talking about above. Sorry to be so blunt but that's the only way I can say it. You're guessing whereas I know. We have documentary evidence of assurances given by UEFA that weren't upheld when the crunch came. The fact that they changed the rule regarding the wage exemption in a way that if you passed it in 2012, you failed in 2013 should be evidence enough. There's a long game to be played regarding the future of FFP (and you are quite right it won't disappear completely) but there's things that may happen in the short term where the connection may not be immediately apparent.

You cannot pull out a wildcard like 'but I just happen to know secret stuff'.
Nor can you be surprised than UEFA might choose to interpret or change some rules to work against us - not after we've essentially been the focus of their attentions for so long. It's incredulous that anybody could feel betrayed by UEFA. Did City really think they were going to be our friends? We've been in their sights from day one.

No amount of City inside information will change the fundamental difference of opinion between us. You claim FFP is clearly illegal, I claim it 'might' be, but don't share your certainty.
Until a judgment is made, neither of us knows.
What I think is that our owners thought they were dealing with honourable people. They know differently now. I agree they had us in their sights from day one.

And I've never claimed "FFP is clearly illegal" so I don't know where you've got this "fundamental difference of opinion between us" from. I'm not a lawyer for one thing but I do know enough to know that there is rarely any certainty where the law is concerned. Again, you've confused the FFP appeal process, which is about the process of applying the rules, with a more fundamental legal challenge to the concept and framework of FFP. There's little doubt from what I've been told that we had a decent chance of being successful in the former but that had to be set against the impact. You can win a battle but lose the war. You can also lose a battle but win the war.

I've agreed with you that FFP probably won't go away altogether but the way in which it operates to control spending might well have to change.

The Striani case, as I understand it, was not against the concept of regulation as such but they way UEFA had gone about it. I'm not against regulation as such, as you'll see if you go through my posts. I believe ownership should be regulated far more strenuously than it is and I believe in the concept of financial self-sufficiency.
What I don't get, is what punitive (for want of a better phrase) action our owner could take, if as seems to be the case that we've ruled out any legal challenge
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

TGR said:
A genuinely superb article here regarding MCFC & FFP.
Every football supporter / fan should read it and take it in:

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.thedaisycutter.co.uk/2014/05/ffp-wrong-name-wrong-game-wrong-plan/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.thedaisycutter.co.uk/2014/05 ... rong-plan/</a>

This report seems to have nailed it, UEFA FFP wouldn't be tolerated in the business world and like it or not football is big business, UEFA are calling the shots, but they lose more money than the Clubs they sanction, so what make them qualified to administer FFP?
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

TGR said:
A genuinely superb article here regarding MCFC & FFP.
Every football supporter / fan should read it and take it in:

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.thedaisycutter.co.uk/2014/05/ffp-wrong-name-wrong-game-wrong-plan/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.thedaisycutter.co.uk/2014/05 ... rong-plan/</a>
Fucking hell!

Game, set and match..... We should get the author to join forces with the lawyer who's challenging FFP. This is by far the best and most complete analysis of FFP I've read. Well done sir.
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

TGR said:
A genuinely superb article here regarding MCFC & FFP.
Every football supporter / fan should read it and take it in:

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.thedaisycutter.co.uk/2014/05/ffp-wrong-name-wrong-game-wrong-plan/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.thedaisycutter.co.uk/2014/05 ... rong-plan/</a>

It's ok, I wouldn't call it genuinely superb. Desperately needs an editor firstly, though I appreciate its a fan website.
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

It's a decent article but just tells us what we already know, that UEFA are a bunch of corrupt hypocritical f***ers
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

FanchesterCity said:
Prestwich_Blue said:
FanchesterCity said:
Poppycock.

You're suggesting that City never fancied the big fight, and the small fight (over interpretation / assessment) simply wasn't worth the hassle in the end.
The considerations about the big fight would have been ongoing since we were notified on FFP being on the horizon. So if we chose not to fight that battle, fair enough, but it would have been decided some time ago.

The 'considerations' that City had to balance have always been there. IF we had to battle with UEFA, how would what affect our image, the views on the sponsors, the fans etc etc. That's been the case for the last 4 or 5 years, not the last few months, and therefore surely there was a strategy already at hand for whatever eventuality transpired with UEFA.

But this 'don't mess with the Sheik' claim sounds great... but it's not right. This isn't The Godfather! There is no fight to be had, that's why we're not fighting. He's not going to get his revenge in some grand way. The club will ride out the fairly minimal punishment, and then comply. Effectively we've club onto the drawbridge being raised and managed to scramble in before it's closed, And that's mission accomplished for this stage of City's plan.

Nobody with an ounce of sense would believe we've been betrayed by UEFA. The whole world knew they weren't keen on the likes of us and PSG!
I don't see that as betrayal... it's just highly predictable from UEFA.

Maybe you're right though. The Sheik is deeply upset by UEFA's betrayal. We'll see. But I'd not hold my breath for some amazing showdown. There's no reason for it. Our passage into the Euro Elite is virtually done, all UEFA did was delay us in customs.
You've made some good contributions to this debate but you really do not know what you're talking about above. Sorry to be so blunt but that's the only way I can say it. You're guessing whereas I know. We have documentary evidence of assurances given by UEFA that weren't upheld when the crunch came. The fact that they changed the rule regarding the wage exemption in a way that if you passed it in 2012, you failed in 2013 should be evidence enough. There's a long game to be played regarding the future of FFP (and you are quite right it won't disappear completely) but there's things that may happen in the short term where the connection may not be immediately apparent.

You cannot pull out a wildcard like 'but I just happen to know secret stuff'.
Nor can you be surprised than UEFA might choose to interpret or change some rules to work against us - not after we've essentially been the focus of their attentions for so long. It's incredulous that anybody could feel betrayed by UEFA. Did City really think they were going to be our friends? We've been in their sights from day one.

No amount of City inside information will change the fundamental difference of opinion between us. You claim FFP is clearly illegal, I claim it 'might' be, but don't share your certainty.
Until a judgment is made, neither of us knows.

I am much more likely to believe PB than ANY hack from the street of shame and certainly any opinion given by you. He has a track record of excellence on FFP with sources that have been proved to be correct in the past. You on the other hand have ZERO credence.

At the end of the day City were offered a fine of €20m (subject to City being in a better than break even situation when reassed next May) with restrictions imposed for one season and a stand alone break-even calculation for next season's FFP assessment that if passed lifts all sanctions. CIty looked at the costs and damage involved in fighting the decision and the impact on the brand with City's sponsors of a court battle. They took the decision that a €20m fine was the cheaper option. I for one don't blame them.

Further If another club objects to the sanction it can still go to the adjucecary panel and from there possibly onto CAS maybe to court. But by agreeing to a sanction the club have probably put a lid on the damage. It will be interesting to see if anyone appeals. I believe they would be absolutely stupid to appeal as there would be a high likely hood of the sanction against City being thrown out.

Do we know if anyone has appealed yet?
 
Re: City & FFP (continued)

People should also not forget nor underestimate the significant "buggeration" factor of a legal battle. Not only does it involve significant cost - which frankly is perhaps the least of our concerns - more importantly it takes up time, energy and effort of those involved with it. Necessarily, Khaldoon, Soriano and others in the management team would spend countless hours on legal nonsense, that could be more productively spent on developing City.

This is one of the single most important reasons businesses reach settlements. Sometimes, even if you know you are in the right and you are certain you would win a legal battle, settling is just the much more pragmatic and sensible option, even if it does stick in the craw somewhat.
 

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.