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

M18CTID said:
From the Caf ;)

"Such a flawed concept anyway, it's stupid to stop a rich owner from spending his own money on new players. I'm all for stopping clubs spending money they haven't got, but if an investor is bankrolling everything then what's the problem.

It's not like the guy at City is there for the short term, you only have to see what he has done and how much he has invested to know he has the clubs best interests at heart. They won the lottery let them do what they want, we can still compete with them, especially that it now seems we have lost Fergie's obsession with shopping in the bargain bin."
Click to expand...


The rag bastards can't seem to grasp that their 'Hard earned' money is money they have gotten by prostituting their brand out to all and sundry whilst telling everyone willing to listen that it's money that is hard earned and is therefore better than the money our owner has put into our club and the surrounding area.

Prostituting your whore of a club out for cash = Acceptable.

Using wealth to invigorate an inner city without acting like you've got your proverbial legs open for a tenner = Ruining football.
 
Years of earning money off the dead whilst kicking their families into the streets class club...
 
waspish said:
well Harris has tweeted
city not in the clear completely as still will be subject to strict FFP monitoring & must meet break-even targets next yr
Click to expand...

You mean like every other club that has qualified for Europe?
What a fecking idiot he is, for the sanctions to have been relieved as they have we must have broken even. If not we would still be under sanction for transfers.
 
BlueAnorak said:
You mean like every other club that has qualified for Europe?
Click to expand...
City and PSG are under more of a microscope having failed before, just like any other team who has failed and will try to break even to get the sanctions lifted, they too will then be under strict monitoring until the entire punishment is up.

So as long as we continue to break even or turn profit, everything will be 100% back to normal.
 
cibaman said:
Is any of this any different to what we were expecting?
Click to expand...
For City no, for PSG - I'm rather shocked. They must have found around £42.5m of non Quatari Tourist Board revenue from somewhere in season 2014-15 as only £100m of the £142,5m a season was stated as fair value.
 
Last edited:
Prestwich_Blue said:
I assume the 2016 sanction is that we still have to meet a €10m maximum allowable loss.
Click to expand...
That is our settlement Colin.
As I see it although the settlement sanctions have been lifted, the settlement must still apply as if we go back to the standard FFP order we would immediately fail next summer as the 2010 wage deduction for season 2012-13 would not be allowed so we would fail by £90+m again.
Indeed, the fact that the sanctions that went with the settlement have been lifted mean we must have broken even FFP wise in season 2014-15. (Clause 17 in FFP FAQ and that hasn't been changed).
 
aguero93:20 said:
Which is for the season gone's accounts and has already been met.
Click to expand...
Not quite as UEFA requires audited accounts and those are not going to be available for a few months yet. I assume there is a formal timetable for doing these things so our 2013/14 accounts have presumably just been officially approved by the relevant panel.

That €10m sanction is very important to us as, without it our very large 2011/12 losses get dragged back into the equation as Blue Anorak mentioned and we certainly don't want that.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
Not quite as UEFA requires audited accounts and those are not going to be available for a few months yet. I assume there is a formal timetable for doing these things so our 2013/14 accounts have been officially approved by the relevant panel.

That €10m sanction is very important to us as, without it our very large 2011/12 losses get dragged back into the equation as Blue Anorak mentioned and we certainly don't want that.
Click to expand...

So, essentially, despite commentators talking about City "being under the microscope" and "still having some restriction" in actual fact those restrictions (the €10m sanction) are actually HUGELY beneficial to us, all things considered? If we weren't under the sanction then we'd need to include a HUGE loss in our break even calculations, which means we'd not break even, instead we just need to lose no more than €10m in a specific season to "break even".
 
MillionDollarDream said:
City and PSG are under more of a microscope having failed before, just like any other team who has failed and will try to break even to get the sanctions lifted, they too will then be under strict monitoring until the entire punishment is up.

So as long as we continue to break even or turn profit, everything will be 100% back to normal.
Click to expand...

yep but The way Harris tweets we will be under STRICT(he likes putting that word in) for ever because we failed once! he's a bit of clown
 
Matty said:
So, essentially, despite commentators talking about City "being under the microscope" and "still having some restriction" in actual fact those restrictions (the €10m sanction) are actually HUGELY beneficial to us, all things considered? If we weren't under the sanction then we'd need to include a HUGE loss in our break even calculations, which means we'd not break even, instead we just need to lose no more than €10m in a specific season to "break even".
Click to expand...
Spot on Matty. Losing the baggage of a huge loss was incredibly beneficial to us.
 
Last edited:
We restart on the 3 year rolling assessment basis next summer, starting with the 2012/13 accounts, which showed a £52m loss. But thinking about it, weren't they the ones where we included the inter-company transactions? Didn't we agree to exclude them from future FFP calculations or was that just future transactions?

If it's the former then we could possibly be in trouble again but if the latter (with that £52m loss being the accepted figure by UEFA) then we should be fine.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
We restart on the 3 year rolling assessment basis next summer, starting with the 2012/13 accounts, which showed a £52m loss. But thinking about it, weren't they the ones where we included the inter-company transactions? Didn't we agree to exclude them from future FFP calculations or was that just future transactions?

If it's the former then we could possibly be in trouble again but if the latter (with that £52m loss being the accepted figure by UEFA) then we should be fine.
Click to expand...

Just to exclude them from future FFP calculations IIRC PB.
 
Blue_Rossy said:
Excellent (In a Mr burns voice)
Click to expand...
giphy.gif
 
I don't know if this has been mentioned previously, but I am sure I read somewhere that if FFP got over turned after we were forced to pay the corrupt lot of greedy thunder c@nts, then they would have to return the money to City? Does anyone know anything about this or was it just a dream....(also I've been on this board for a while but never commented), so if I break any rules....sanction me lol
 
joeyh123 said:
I don't know if this has been mentioned previously, but I am sure I read somewhere that if FFP got over turned after we were forced to pay the corrupt lot of greedy thunder c@nts, then they would have to return the money to City? Does anyone know anything about this or was it just a dream....(also I've been on this board for a while but never commented), so if I break any rules....sanction me lol
Click to expand...

Article 101 prohibits any agreement to limit investment, unless they meet certain clearly defined aims, and then it goes on to state that

"Any agreements or decisions prohibited pursuant to this Article shall be automatically void."

This can only mean that the witholding of CL rewards imposed on City in 2014 was an agreement prohibited by the Article, is automatically void and the money must be paid to City.
 
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