FFPR in a nutshell

[CheethamHillBlue]

You missed a critical point regards income though. It clearly states that you can include income from non-footballing operations, as follows:

• Operations based at, or in close proximity to, a club’s stadium and
training facilities such as a hotel, restaurant, conference centre, business
premises (for rental), health-care centre, other sports teams; and
• Operations clearly using the name/brand of a club as part of their
operations.

To me, this latter point is an enormous loophole. All ADUG has to do is to rename Abu Dhabi Airport, "Manchester City Abu Dhabi Airport" and basically the whole thing would be sorted.

What grade did you achieve in Geography at School :-)

 

[S04]

What income is allowed?
The usual match-day, commercial & media income counts as well as profit on disposal of assets and players. In addition, we can count any non-football income from operations in or near to CoMS or that use the club branding as part of their operations. So income from any hotels or other leisure/commercial facilities in Eastlands owned by the club can count.

Good summary.

You missed a critical point regards income though. It clearly states that you can include income from non-footballing operations, as follows:

• Operations based at, or in close proximity to, a club’s stadium and
training facilities such as a hotel, restaurant, conference centre, business
premises (for rental), health-care centre, other sports teams; and
• Operations clearly using the name/brand of a club as part of their
operations.

To me, this latter point is an enormous loophole. All ADUG has to do is to rename Abu Dhabi Airport, "Manchester City Abu Dhabi Airport" and basically the whole thing would be sorted.

I find it surprising this coach-and-horses loophole has slipped through. I can only assume it's been deliberately added to accommodate one of Twatini's chosen clubs.

But they will never renamn their airports just for a footy club..

The "loophole" you mention is because several clubs, like say Fenerbahce run clothes chains under their name and depend on that income.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

What income is allowed?
The usual match-day, commercial & media income counts as well as profit on disposal of assets and players. In addition, we can count any non-football income from operations in or near to CoMS or that use the club branding as part of their operations. So income from any hotels or other leisure/commercial facilities in Eastlands owned by the club can count.

Good summary.

You missed a critical point regards income though. It clearly states that you can include income from non-footballing operations, as follows:

• Operations based at, or in close proximity to, a club’s stadium and
training facilities such as a hotel, restaurant, conference centre, business
premises (for rental), health-care centre, other sports teams; and
• Operations clearly using the name/brand of a club as part of their
operations.

LOL! You quoted something I'd posted then told me I'd missed it! I wanted to keep it concise so didn't quote chapter and verse but I think I got the sense across.

Some examples of such operations from the Premiership would include the income from Chelsea Harbour Village, the Highbury property development and the hotel at the Reebok.

But in my opinion you are right that this is the clause that will eventually allow us to laugh at FFPR. I believe that UEFA have been told of ADUG's plans for the area so as long as we put them into action, I don't believe there is any danger of FFPR being used against us.

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

I wonder if the club has sought assurances on the branding regulations etc., as we've seen the not so subtle pushing of Blue Moon as an entity(if the new home kit design whispers are to be believed also), maybe brands related to the club can be used as naming rights as well...

e.g. we don't have to have Manchester City resort in Abu Dhabi, but we could have the "Blue Moon Resort", quizas...

 

[fbloke]

What income is allowed?
The usual match-day, commercial & media income counts as well as profit on disposal of assets and players. In addition, we can count any non-football income from operations in or near to CoMS or that use the club branding as part of their operations. So income from any hotels or other leisure/commercial facilities in Eastlands owned by the club can count.

Good summary.

You missed a critical point regards income though. It clearly states that you can include income from non-footballing operations, as follows:

• Operations based at, or in close proximity to, a club’s stadium and
training facilities such as a hotel, restaurant, conference centre, business
premises (for rental), health-care centre, other sports teams; and
• Operations clearly using the name/brand of a club as part of their
operations.

LOL! You quoted something I'd posted then told me I'd missed it! I wanted to keep it concise so didn't quote chapter and verse but I think I got the sense across.

Some examples of such operations from the Premiership would include the income from Chelsea Harbour Village, the Highbury property development and the hotel at the Reebok.

But in my opinion you are right that this is the clause that will eventually allow us to laugh at FFPR. I believe that UEFA have been told of ADUG's plans for the area so as long as we put them into action, I don't believe there is any danger of FFPR being used against us.

Although the 'on-site' developments are pretty important for income re:ffpr there is a finite amount of land for development and so its the 'brand' income that will be significantly more important.

City have no doubt seen the advantage of the ESPN (Disney) tie-in as they expert in global branding.

The first tiny step towards those incomes have been taken with Kitbag and the AD City Store.

 

[Blue Si O.B]

so could you in a nutshell explain how and why in gods name is the word "FAIR" included in the title of this bullshit ruling?

 

[fbloke]

so could you in a nutshell explain how and why in gods name is the word "FAIR" included in the title of this bullshit ruling?

For the same reason that the Champions League is so named.

"misnomer nights dream" by M Platini?

 

[Irwell]

Although the 'on-site' developments are pretty important for income re:ffpr there is a finite amount of land for development and so its the 'brand' income that will be significantly more important.

You think so? Lets say it's something equivalent to Ferrari World but for football, which is entirely feasible. Ferrari World is about 50 acres. So let's say that they are aiming for the same kind of entry fees and same kind of visitor numbers. Ferrari World entry fees for standard entry are £35 or thereabouts. They were talking about topping the British Museum, which has almost 5 million visitors a year, but let's be conservative and say 2 million. That's an additional £70 million a year in turnover with absolutely no other revenue streams included at all.

If they develop the site right, including all the extra scraps of land they are picking up on the sly, the visitor attractions around Eastlands alone could eclipse most other clubs' turnovers.

 

[fbloke]

Although the 'on-site' developments are pretty important for income re:ffpr there is a finite amount of land for development and so its the 'brand' income that will be significantly more important.

You think so? Lets say it's something equivalent to Ferrari World but for football, which is entirely feasible. Ferrari World is about 50 acres. So let's say that they are aiming for the same kind of entry fees and same kind of visitor numbers. Ferrari World entry fees for standard entry are £35 or thereabouts. They were talking about topping the British Museum, which has almost 5 million visitors a year, but let's be conservative and say 2 million. That's an additional £70 million a year in turnover with absolutely no other revenue streams included at all.

If they develop the site right, including all the extra scraps of land they are picking up on the sly, the visitor attractions around Eastlands alone could eclipse most other clubs' turnovers.

But its still very much finite - the world however is a very big place.

 

[Irwell]

But its still very much finite - the world however is a very big place.

Indeed it is, but if we managed over £100m a year from developments around the stadium it would be more than any other club's overseas revenues. Yes, those revenues will grow as time goes on, but do you honestly see City sitting still and not buying more adjacent land if the developments are a success?