FFP - Why I believe we failed

Prestwich_Blue said:
It talks about the deficit over the acceptable deviation (€45m) but to be honest I tried to do the sums in my head and couldn't so had to write it all down. It's really not too clear in the earlier version so the later version is actually easier to understand, although it works against us.
It talks about the acceptable deviation, but it only seems to do so initially:

If a licensee reports an aggregate break-even deficit that exceeds the
acceptable deviation and it fulfils both conditions described below then this
would be taken into account in a favourable way.

Then again after the rules are applied:

This means that a licensee that reports an aggregate break-even deficit that
exceeds the acceptable deviation but that satisfies both conditions described
under i) and ii) above should in principle not be sanctioned.

I found it quite odd that they would explicitly mention acceptable deviation at both those points, but then make no mention of it whatsoever in the conditions themselves:

i) It reports a positive trend in the annual break-even results (proving it has
implemented a concrete strategy for future compliance); and
ii) It proves that the aggregate break-even deficit is only due to the annual
break-even deficit of the reporting period ending in 2012 which in turn is
due to contracts with players undertaken prior to 1 June 2010 (for the
avoidance of doubt, all renegotiations on contracts undertaken after such
date would not be taken into account).

These things are usually very carefully worded and I personally find it interesting that the conditions make no mention of the acceptable deviation. If they don't mention it you'd imagine there is a reason why. I'd have thought that if they are seeking absolute clarity in their definitions, which they seem to be given some other explicit clarifications given, they would explicitly mention the application of acceptable deviation in the break-even deficit comparison if it was applicable.
 
Rascal said:
Ive got a Bsc in Economics with a lot of the course being accounts based, albeit 20 years ago.

In reply to previous posters, I dont take anything posted as sacrosanct but what is posted allows me to look at the subject with my knowledge set. And that has to be a good thing for us all. Im not supporting PB here because I think he is always right, but I do know him personally and he is a man of real integrity and his posts wether they are right or wrong challenge me to use my quickly deteriorating mental capacity.

I do think some of the posts in this thread have been very disrespectful.

This Muppet agrees with your post.
 
I've tried to keep up with the posts on this thread about claws this and that, interpreters and acceptable deviants.

But no one has yet come up with a definitive answer to whether Jo is cup tied or not.
 
jimbo101 said:
But no one has yet come up with a definitive answer to whether Jo is cup tied or not.
Ah, Jo... Where is he these days? Alan and Fred too... None of them will ever quite live up to the legend that is Berti though.
 
hgblue said:
de niro said:
its all bollocks, we failed ffp because we are Manchester city. they have been after us from the off. lying cheating mard arse cunts. "fair play" ? protecting the cartel more like. they are fooling no one.

Actually, it never ceases to amaze me how many people they've fooled. I'd love to be there when the likes of Villa, Everton, Newcastle and others, realise that they've been consigned to mediocrity without a hope in hell of attracting a serious investor, due to these financial constraints on investing the amount of cash it takes to break into the elite. I'm sure we'll be ok, but this has got to be bad for the decent fans of clubs all over the country who want to dream that what happened to us will happen to them. It won't.

Villa will find this out sooner than most, now they are looking for a new owner.
Randy has seen the future and thought fuck this for a game of conkers.
 
I wish the sheikh would loan city an interest free loan of £1 billion to be paid back over 100 years. The Uefa people don't mind massive debts on balance sheets but hate rich blokes spending their own hard cash.
 
Ducado said:
de niro said:
Rammyblues said:
Whats the betting that they will change the regs to make us fail again?

of course they will.

how anyone anywhere cannot see that this is an out and out agenda is beyond me.

please city go and win the fucking thing. never thought I'd say this but fuck all other cups off, take top 4 and this trophy. they would fucking squirm.

They won't
I don't think they can change anything as we have entered into a settlement agreement
 

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.