Mr Ed (The Stables) said:Just found this article on the net regarding FFP:
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.uefa.org/protecting-the-game/club-licensing-and-financial-fair-play/news/newsid=2114180.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.uefa.org/protecting-the-game ... 14180.html</a>
"Serbian champions FK Crvena zvezda have been excluded from the 2014/15 UEFA Champions League for breaching UEFA Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations.
The Adjudicatory Chamber of the UEFA Club Financial Control Body (CFCB), chaired by José Narciso da Cunha Rodrigues, has taken its decision in the case of FK Crvena zvezda. The CFCB chief investigator referred this case to the Adjudicatory Chamber in early April after becoming aware of the existence of overdue payables as a result of a complaint.
The CFCB Adjudicatory Chamber determined that the club were in breach of a number of provisions of the UEFA Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations. Accordingly, Crvena zvezda are excluded from participating in the 2014/15 UEFA Champions League for which they had qualified on sporting merit.
The club have ten days to appeal this decision before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).
An investigation against the Football Association of Serbia (FSS) might be opened within the coming days by the chief investigator for alleged breaches of the club licensing regulations in relation to the granting of the licence to the same club". (Dated Friday 6th June 2014)
It will be interesting to see how this pans out!!
I think Red Star Belgrade got done also a couple of days earlier. I did read something a few weeks back that there would be vacancies in the CL and Europa, and it was possible that England's position in the UEFA coefficient system meant that Everton would be close to gaining a place in the CL, with the rags being entered into the Europa. It will be interesting to see how that might go, but it could also be a bit of wishful thinking on the part of a tabloid journalist.john@staustell said:Mr Ed (The Stables) said:Just found this article on the net regarding FFP:
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.uefa.org/protecting-the-game/club-licensing-and-financial-fair-play/news/newsid=2114180.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.uefa.org/protecting-the-game ... 14180.html</a>
"Serbian champions FK Crvena zvezda have been excluded from the 2014/15 UEFA Champions League for breaching UEFA Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations.
The Adjudicatory Chamber of the UEFA Club Financial Control Body (CFCB), chaired by José Narciso da Cunha Rodrigues, has taken its decision in the case of FK Crvena zvezda. The CFCB chief investigator referred this case to the Adjudicatory Chamber in early April after becoming aware of the existence of overdue payables as a result of a complaint.
The CFCB Adjudicatory Chamber determined that the club were in breach of a number of provisions of the UEFA Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations. Accordingly, Crvena zvezda are excluded from participating in the 2014/15 UEFA Champions League for which they had qualified on sporting merit.
The club have ten days to appeal this decision before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).
An investigation against the Football Association of Serbia (FSS) might be opened within the coming days by the chief investigator for alleged breaches of the club licensing regulations in relation to the granting of the licence to the same club". (Dated Friday 6th June 2014)
It will be interesting to see how this pans out!!
This isn't unusual mate. Debt to other clubs is a big no-no. Real Mallorca were excluded a few years ago and they'd finished 4th I think.
I'm no cynic said:I think Red Star Belgrade got done also a couple of days earlier. I did read something a few weeks back that there would be vacancies in the CL and Europa, and it was possible that England's position in the UEFA coefficient system meant that Everton would be close to gaining a place in the CL, with the rags being entered into the Europa. It will be interesting to see how that might go, but it could also be a bit of wishful thinking on the part of a tabloid journalist.john@staustell said:Mr Ed (The Stables) said:Just found this article on the net regarding FFP:
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.uefa.org/protecting-the-game/club-licensing-and-financial-fair-play/news/newsid=2114180.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.uefa.org/protecting-the-game ... 14180.html</a>
"Serbian champions FK Crvena zvezda have been excluded from the 2014/15 UEFA Champions League for breaching UEFA Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations.
The Adjudicatory Chamber of the UEFA Club Financial Control Body (CFCB), chaired by José Narciso da Cunha Rodrigues, has taken its decision in the case of FK Crvena zvezda. The CFCB chief investigator referred this case to the Adjudicatory Chamber in early April after becoming aware of the existence of overdue payables as a result of a complaint.
The CFCB Adjudicatory Chamber determined that the club were in breach of a number of provisions of the UEFA Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations. Accordingly, Crvena zvezda are excluded from participating in the 2014/15 UEFA Champions League for which they had qualified on sporting merit.
The club have ten days to appeal this decision before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).
An investigation against the Football Association of Serbia (FSS) might be opened within the coming days by the chief investigator for alleged breaches of the club licensing regulations in relation to the granting of the licence to the same club". (Dated Friday 6th June 2014)
It will be interesting to see how this pans out!!
This isn't unusual mate. Debt to other clubs is a big no-no. Real Mallorca were excluded a few years ago and they'd finished 4th I think.
BringBackSwales said:Can anyone confirm, as I have read conflicting views on here, is our transfer limit for this window only, provided we break even this year, or does it extend into January 2015, summer 2015?
That's nonsense mate. How we pay for the transfers has no bearing on anything. The club statement said "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."Neville Kneville said:BringBackSwales said:Can anyone confirm, as I have read conflicting views on here, is our transfer limit for this window only, provided we break even this year, or does it extend into January 2015, summer 2015?
Nobody knows, as with most of the detail but Jan would count as this season I presume, (but don't know!).
We will just have to wait & see. City seem to have a different idea than UEFA on that.
Some people on here are claiming that the transfer limit goes on the full sum of transfers, not on the amount actually paid by City during the period. Where has it been stated that UEFA see a transfer spend as the total price of the eventual sum, rather than the price actually paid per season ?
I have seen no evidence of that anywhere. Where are you who are claiming that to be the case, getting the info from ?
If we spread a deal for DiMaria for example over 5 years at 10 mil per year, then I would expect this year's spend would be down as 10 mil, not 50.
Prestwich_Blue said:That's nonsense mate. How we pay for the transfers has no bearing on anything. The club statement said "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."Neville Kneville said:BringBackSwales said:Can anyone confirm, as I have read conflicting views on here, is our transfer limit for this window only, provided we break even this year, or does it extend into January 2015, summer 2015?
Nobody knows, as with most of the detail but Jan would count as this season I presume, (but don't know!).
We will just have to wait & see. City seem to have a different idea than UEFA on that.
Some people on here are claiming that the transfer limit goes on the full sum of transfers, not on the amount actually paid by City during the period. Where has it been stated that UEFA see a transfer spend as the total price of the eventual sum, rather than the price actually paid per season ?
I have seen no evidence of that anywhere. Where are you who are claiming that to be the case, getting the info from ?
If we spread a deal for DiMaria for example over 5 years at 10 mil per year, then I would expect this year's spend would be down as 10 mil, not 50.
Give it up mate. Transfer expenditure, as the club's statement makes quite clear, is based on the top line fee, not instalments. I'm 100% sure of that. The only thing I'm not sure about is how any conditional fee would be dealt with. So if we bought him for £25m with up to £10m in add-ons depending on various factors, then it's not clear whether that counts as £25m or £35m.Neville Kneville said:Prestwich_Blue said:That's nonsense mate. How we pay for the transfers has no bearing on anything. The club statement said "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."Neville Kneville said:Nobody knows, as with most of the detail but Jan would count as this season I presume, (but don't know!).
We will just have to wait & see. City seem to have a different idea than UEFA on that.
Some people on here are claiming that the transfer limit goes on the full sum of transfers, not on the amount actually paid by City during the period. Where has it been stated that UEFA see a transfer spend as the total price of the eventual sum, rather than the price actually paid per season ?
I have seen no evidence of that anywhere. Where are you who are claiming that to be the case, getting the info from ?
If we spread a deal for DiMaria for example over 5 years at 10 mil per year, then I would expect this year's spend would be down as 10 mil, not 50.
So you are saying then that you know for sure that if we do a deal for say DiMaria for 50 mil payable over 5 years, that it will count as a full 50 mil in this summer transfer window ? And that if we sell Rodwell for 10 mil payable to us over 5 years, that it will count as 10 mil received in this transfer window ?
You have looked into it & discovered this to be the case ?
Prestwich_Blue said:Give it up mate. Transfer expenditure, as the club's statement makes quite clear, is based on the top line fee, not instalments. I'm 100% sure of that. The only thing I'm not sure about is how any conditional fee would be dealt with. So if we bought him for £25m with up to £10m in add-ons depending on various factors, then it's not clear whether that counts as £25m or £35m.Neville Kneville said:Prestwich_Blue said:That's nonsense mate. How we pay for the transfers has no bearing on anything. The club statement said "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."
So you are saying then that you know for sure that if we do a deal for say DiMaria for 50 mil payable over 5 years, that it will count as a full 50 mil in this summer transfer window ? And that if we sell Rodwell for 10 mil payable to us over 5 years, that it will count as 10 mil received in this transfer window ?
You have looked into it & discovered this to be the case ?
Sorry then. It's just that we've covered this ground before a number of times. I've probably got a formal UEFA definition of transfer fee somewhere in all the FFP stuff I've got bookmarked so I'll dig it out later.Neville Kneville said:Prestwich_Blue said:Give it up mate. Transfer expenditure, as the club's statement makes quite clear, is based on the top line fee, not instalments. I'm 100% sure of that. The only thing I'm not sure about is how any conditional fee would be dealt with. So if we bought him for £25m with up to £10m in add-ons depending on various factors, then it's not clear whether that counts as £25m or £35m.Neville Kneville said:So you are saying then that you know for sure that if we do a deal for say DiMaria for 50 mil payable over 5 years, that it will count as a full 50 mil in this summer transfer window ? And that if we sell Rodwell for 10 mil payable to us over 5 years, that it will count as 10 mil received in this transfer window ?
You have looked into it & discovered this to be the case ?
What do you mean give it up ? I was asking you the question because I DON'T KNOW !
The club's statement doesn't make it clear to me at all ,but if you are used to dealing with such things & are 100% sure that's what they meant I'm fully willing to take your word for it.
Prestwich_Blue said:Give it up mate. Transfer expenditure, as the club's statement makes quite clear, is based on the top line fee, not instalments. I'm 100% sure of that. The only thing I'm not sure about is how any conditional fee would be dealt with. So if we bought him for £25m with up to £10m in add-ons depending on various factors, then it's not clear whether that counts as £25m or £35m.Neville Kneville said:Prestwich_Blue said:That's nonsense mate. How we pay for the transfers has no bearing on anything. The club statement said "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."
So you are saying then that you know for sure that if we do a deal for say DiMaria for 50 mil payable over 5 years, that it will count as a full 50 mil in this summer transfer window ? And that if we sell Rodwell for 10 mil payable to us over 5 years, that it will count as 10 mil received in this transfer window ?
You have looked into it & discovered this to be the case ?
That would be a good find given the way that transfer payments are normally transacted. Apparently, according to today's rumours, Moreno's move to the dippers has hit a snag because Sevila want more money up front. It seems to me that FFP is redefining all sorts of processes at the moment without general agreement and what constitutes the 'headline transfer fee' is another example. Regarding conditional payments in future years as part of this year's spend is perverse.Prestwich_Blue said:Sorry then. It's just that we've covered this ground before a number of times. I've probably got a formal UEFA definition of transfer fee somewhere in all the FFP stuff I've got bookmarked so I'll dig it out later.Neville Kneville said:Prestwich_Blue said:Give it up mate. Transfer expenditure, as the club's statement makes quite clear, is based on the top line fee, not instalments. I'm 100% sure of that. The only thing I'm not sure about is how any conditional fee would be dealt with. So if we bought him for £25m with up to £10m in add-ons depending on various factors, then it's not clear whether that counts as £25m or £35m.
What do you mean give it up ? I was asking you the question because I DON'T KNOW !
The club's statement doesn't make it clear to me at all ,but if you are used to dealing with such things & are 100% sure that's what they meant I'm fully willing to take your word for it.
George Hannah said:That would be a good find given the way that transfer payments are normally transacted. Apparently, according to today's rumours, Moreno's move to the dippers has hit a snag because Sevila want more money up front. It seems to me that FFP is redefining all sorts of processes at the moment without general agreement and what constitutes the 'headline transfer fee' is another example. Regarding conditional payments in future years as part of this year's spend is perverse.Prestwich_Blue said:Sorry then. It's just that we've covered this ground before a number of times. I've probably got a formal UEFA definition of transfer fee somewhere in all the FFP stuff I've got bookmarked so I'll dig it out later.Neville Kneville said:What do you mean give it up ? I was asking you the question because I DON'T KNOW !
The club's statement doesn't make it clear to me at all ,but if you are used to dealing with such things & are 100% sure that's what they meant I'm fully willing to take your word for it.
Prestwich_Blue said:Give it up mate. Transfer expenditure, as the club's statement makes quite clear, is based on the top line fee, not instalments. I'm 100% sure of that. The only thing I'm not sure about is how any conditional fee would be dealt with. So if we bought him for £25m with up to £10m in add-ons depending on various factors, then it's not clear whether that counts as £25m or £35m.Neville Kneville said:Prestwich_Blue said:That's nonsense mate. How we pay for the transfers has no bearing on anything. The club statement said "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."
So you are saying then that you know for sure that if we do a deal for say DiMaria for 50 mil payable over 5 years, that it will count as a full 50 mil in this summer transfer window ? And that if we sell Rodwell for 10 mil payable to us over 5 years, that it will count as 10 mil received in this transfer window ?
You have looked into it & discovered this to be the case ?
I'm pretty certain they wouldn't include them anyway as they are contingent liabilities and therefore not due until the conditions have been fulfilled.fbloke said:Prestwich_Blue said:Give it up mate. Transfer expenditure, as the club's statement makes quite clear, is based on the top line fee, not instalments. I'm 100% sure of that. The only thing I'm not sure about is how any conditional fee would be dealt with. So if we bought him for £25m with up to £10m in add-ons depending on various factors, then it's not clear whether that counts as £25m or £35m.Neville Kneville said:So you are saying then that you know for sure that if we do a deal for say DiMaria for 50 mil payable over 5 years, that it will count as a full 50 mil in this summer transfer window ? And that if we sell Rodwell for 10 mil payable to us over 5 years, that it will count as 10 mil received in this transfer window ?
You have looked into it & discovered this to be the case ?
Didnt they make a particular point of excluding any bonus payments from FFP calcs for wages?
It would seem very odd, indeed counter intuitive to disregard bonus payments in wages but then include such escalator payments on the transfer fee for the self-same player.
Prestwich_Blue said:I'm pretty certain they wouldn't include them anyway as they are contingent liabilities and therefore not due until the conditions have been fulfilled.fbloke said:Prestwich_Blue said:Give it up mate. Transfer expenditure, as the club's statement makes quite clear, is based on the top line fee, not instalments. I'm 100% sure of that. The only thing I'm not sure about is how any conditional fee would be dealt with. So if we bought him for £25m with up to £10m in add-ons depending on various factors, then it's not clear whether that counts as £25m or £35m.
Didnt they make a particular point of excluding any bonus payments from FFP calcs for wages?
It would seem very odd, indeed counter intuitive to disregard bonus payments in wages but then include such escalator payments on the transfer fee for the self-same player.
That's the way I'd see it, as long as it wasn't seen as an obvious dodge. So if we're offering £20m and the selling club want £25m, then we pay them the £20m upfront and offer them an extra £5m after two seasons as long as he's played 50 games or something. Or we could do a sell-on percentage.fbloke said:Prestwich_Blue said:I'm pretty certain they wouldn't include them anyway as they are contingent liabilities and therefore not due until the conditions have been fulfilled.fbloke said:Didnt they make a particular point of excluding any bonus payments from FFP calcs for wages?
It would seem very odd, indeed counter intuitive to disregard bonus payments in wages but then include such escalator payments on the transfer fee for the self-same player.
So it would be easier enough to structure a deal that limited the financial outlay in season 1 but still made certain that the selling club were confident that they would be paid what they agreed at the outset?
Any deal could be sweetened with the initial fee being paid in full, at the signing of the deal.
Prestwich_Blue said:That's the way I'd see it, as long as it wasn't seen as an obvious dodge. So if we're offering £20m and the selling club want £25m, then we pay them the £20m upfront and offer them an extra £5m after two seasons as long as he's played 50 games or something. Or we could do a sell-on percentage.fbloke said:Prestwich_Blue said:I'm pretty certain they wouldn't include them anyway as they are contingent liabilities and therefore not due until the conditions have been fulfilled.
So it would be easier enough to structure a deal that limited the financial outlay in season 1 but still made certain that the selling club were confident that they would be paid what they agreed at the outset?
Any deal could be sweetened with the initial fee being paid in full, at the signing of the deal.
UEFA would probably regard anything we did as a dodge but if it is common practice to spread payments over several years, which it is, how could they object in terms of FFP?Prestwich_Blue said:That's the way I'd see it, as long as it wasn't seen as an obvious dodge. So if we're offering £20m and the selling club want £25m, then we pay them the £20m upfront and offer them an extra £5m after two seasons as long as he's played 50 games or something. Or we could do a sell-on percentage.fbloke said:So it would be easier enough to structure a deal that limited the financial outlay in season 1 but still made certain that the selling club were confident that they would be paid what they agreed at the outset?
Any deal could be sweetened with the initial fee being paid in full, at the signing of the deal.