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

[Prestwich_Blue]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

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.

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.

It must be why MCFC accepted this 'limitation' as they already knew that who they wanted would fit into their budget.

It could ironically have helped deflate the expectations of some agents and clubs and saved MCFC some money.

Thanks UEFA ;-)

The sanctions have been helpful in other ways as well, particularly only having to meet a one year financial target for this and the previous financial year.

 

[fbloke]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

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.

It must be why MCFC accepted this 'limitation' as they already knew that who they wanted would fit into their budget.

It could ironically have helped deflate the expectations of some agents and clubs and saved MCFC some money.

Thanks UEFA ;-)

The sanctions have been helpful in other ways as well, particularly only having to meet a one year financial target for this and the previous financial year.

Exactly.

Also the fact that UEFA made the point only that 2nd tier deals with Abu Dhabi companies should be carefully considered ignored the obvious and glaring fact that City's deals for the last couple of years have been non-AD based.

 

[George Hannah]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

I know it helps to think positively when under attack but you two sound as if you actually believe what you are posting. lol

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

I know it helps to think positively when under attack but you two sound as if you actually believe what you are posting. lol

At least we can quote properly. ;-)

I think people completely underestimate how important the resetting of the break-even targets was. That far outweighs any negative aspects of the other sanctions.

 

[fbloke]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

I know it helps to think positively when under attack but you two sound as if you actually believe what you are posting. lol

At least we can quote properly. ;-)

I think people completely underestimate how important the resetting of the break-even targets was. That far outweighs any negative aspects of the other sanctions.

Allowing City the opportunity to cut themselves loose from the worst financial results in English football history is a bad thing if you happen to have George's mindset ;-)

 

[andyhinch]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

I know it helps to think positively when under attack but you two sound as if you actually believe what you are posting. lol

At least we can quote properly. ;-)

I think people completely underestimate how important the resetting of the break-even targets was. That far outweighs any negative aspects of the other sanctions.

George is usually such an optimist :)

 

[George Hannah]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

I know it helps to think positively when under attack but you two sound as if you actually believe what you are posting. lol

At least we can quote properly. ;-)

I think people completely underestimate how important the resetting of the break-even targets was. That far outweighs any negative aspects of the other sanctions.

What would they have been if they hadn't been re-set?

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

I know it helps to think positively when under attack but you two sound as if you actually believe what you are posting. lol

At least we can quote properly. ;-)

I think people completely underestimate how important the resetting of the break-even targets was. That far outweighs any negative aspects of the other sanctions.

What would they have been if they hadn't been re-set?

We'd have had to meet a 3-yr aggregate maximum break-even allowable deficit of €45m, which included those two years losses of £150m again, plus the 2013/14 result. And as we wouldn't have been able to use the £80m wage exemption then we'd have certainly failed again if, as stated by the CEO, we break-even in 2013/14. So that £150m loss has been wiped off the slate and we only have to better a €20m deficit for the year just ended, when we should be reporting a break-even surplus. That's why it's so advantageous to us.

 

[George Hannah]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

At least we can quote properly. ;-)

I think people completely underestimate how important the resetting of the break-even targets was. That far outweighs any negative aspects of the other sanctions.

What would they have been if they hadn't been re-set?

We'd have had to meet a 3-yr aggregate maximum break-even allowable deficit of €45m, which included those two years losses of £150m again, plus the 2013/14 result. And as we wouldn't have been able to use the £80m wage exemption then we'd have certainly failed again if, as stated by the CEO, we break-even in 2013/14. So that £150m loss has been wiped off the slate and we only have to better a €20m deficit for the year just ended, when we should be reporting a break-even surplus. That's why it's so advantageous to us.

Much appreciated, I'm feeling very positive too now!

 

[southstandblue27]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

@martynzeigler: Boost for Man City: UEFA gen sec has confirmed to me FFP rule-breakers City/PSG will only need 5 home-grown players in 21-man CL squad not 8

 

[Mr Ed (The Stables)]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

@martynzeigler: Boost for Man City: UEFA gen sec has confirmed to me FFP rule-breakers City/PSG will only need 5 home-grown players in 21-man CL squad not 8

Thats very welcome news.

 

[BlueCityfan]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

@martynzeigler: Boost for Man City: UEFA gen sec has confirmed to me FFP rule-breakers City/PSG will only need 5 home-grown players in 21-man CL squad not 8

Hahahahaa!!! This means that it won't affect us since we can still name 17 foreign players in our first-team squad since Nastasic along with Lopes will be on the B-list.

 

[The Fat el Hombre]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Hahahah easy peasy. Fuck you ben rumsby

ITV sport running with an article on this too. Happy days

 

[moomba]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Excellent. Can see a few people not too happy with that, haha.

 

[Ducado]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Hahahah easy peasy. Fuck you ben rumsby

ITV sport running with an article on this too. Happy days

Also one in the eye to one particular poster on this subject, we know where you're hiding George ;-)

 

[Matty]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

@martynzeigler: Boost for Man City: UEFA gen sec has confirmed to me FFP rule-breakers City/PSG will only need 5 home-grown players in 21-man CL squad not 8

Hahahahaa!!! This means that it won't affect us since we can still name 17 foreign players in our first-team squad since Nastasic along with Lopes will be on the B-list.

Not strictly true.

Lets say those 5 home grown players actually equates to 4 club trained and 1 association trained.

Now, name you're squad, remembering that we can only include 1 out of Hart, Clichy, Milner, Wright and Rodwell in the "5 home grown players" quota as they are all association trained and not club trained.

Until we know the exact split of the "5 home grown players" we can't really assess the impact it has on us.

 

[chris85mcfc]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Hahahah easy peasy. Fuck you ben rumsby

ITV sport running with an article on this too. Happy days

Also one in the eye to one particular poster on this subject, we know where you're hiding George ;-)

Hasn't had much look with his posts/threads recently has he, our George :)

 

[LoveCity]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Seems we have well and truly weathered the storm, assuming everything is on track as expected to comply next year. There really could be no more ideal time for spending limits than now, with a squad largely in its prime and only needing a few additions (two of them are already sealed for just £12m, leaving us £37m + any money made from sales to sign a defender and keeper).

 

[FrankSwift1]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/manchester-city-need-five-homegrown-7252479" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/ ... wn-7252479</a>

Good news.

 

[TueartsOHK]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Not strictly true.

Lets say those 5 home grown players actually equates to 4 club trained and 1 association trained.

Now, name you're squad, remembering that we can only include 1 out of Hart, Clichy, Milner, Wright and Rodwell in the "5 home grown players" quota as they are all association trained and not club trained.

Until we know the exact split of the "5 home grown players" we can't really assess the impact it has on us.

If it came to this worst case scenario of having 4 club trained players do we have anyone (who we would name in a CL squad) that would qualify as club trained? Who are these players or would we simply play a smaller squad and take it on the chin?