Financial Fair Play/Financial Report (merged)

[fbloke]

Re: Financial Fair Play will not affect us.

Wow, another FFPR thread and I didnt start it ;-)

Some of you may remember that I have been talking (positively) about FFPR for quite sometime and I must say that this forum has been one of the better places to find reasoned and balanced debate on the subject almost from day one.

In response to an early post about contacting UEFA about FFPR I actually did way back in the mists of time I called them and asked some simple but important questions.

I was provided with answers which made it clear that ANY income deemed legal within a club's host country would be allowed under the terms of FFPR.

That is a very important and specific statement as you can extrapolate from that the fact that the Etihad deal for example is perfectly acceptable to UEFA because it is signed off by City's auditors.

After my conversation with UEFA however they brought in the next stage of the loop hole closing which talked about 'fair market value' - this is to be judged by a group of UEFA experts and if they feel that a deal is above fair market value they will discount the mount above 'their' figure for FFPR purposes.

Once this fair market value test was introduced then FFPR as a threat to City and PSG etc died.

They cannot offer an opinion on fair market value that would stand up in court as the people who pay for the deals will simply stand up and say that they thought it was fair and reasonable to pay price X for sponsorship Y.

UEFA have in short tried to fix a market for sponsorships in their own image which the EU will find rather intriguing for a start.

Further to that UEFA in ignoring debt as an issue (when the whole world has debt repayment as its focus) can legitimately be accused of creating a cartel and being anti-competitive in a number of ways. The biggest one of course is that in stopping a business owner from investing his/her money in his/her own business in order to reach a level where income can be significantly increased via UEFA's own payment schedules/structures ( which are based on achievement ) could be argued is designed solely to stop any new companies from achieving the required levels of achievement.

The first question that would be asked by any crap lawyer would be which clubs benefit from FFPR most and is there any evidence of a relationship between those clubs and the people who drew up the rules that could be seen as anti-competitive?

Have you there mobile number?

Not their mobile - <a class="postlink" href="http://www.uefa.com/news/newsid=409267.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.uefa.com/news/newsid=409267.html</a>

 

[Cobwebcat]

Re: Financial Fair Play will not affect us.

You know the only thing I still don't understand is why, given that the Etihad deal cannot be challenged as a related party and hence FMV, why did we not pay ourselves a lot more money and buy the best players we could get last transfer window? I take it this is what PSG has done.

 

[S04]

Re: Financial Fair Play will not affect us.

You know the only thing I still don't understand is why, given that the Etihad deal cannot be challenged as a related party and hence FMV, why did we not pay ourselves a lot more money and buy the best players we could get last transfer window? I take it this is what PSG has done.

Because despite what everyone thinks Etihad is not a company controlled by Sheikh Mansour in any way.
Rather, the idea of buying City was partly to promote companies like Etihad, not bleed them for money.

 

[EricBrooksGhost]

Re: Financial Fair Play will not affect us.

You know the only thing I still don't understand is why, given that the Etihad deal cannot be challenged as a related party and hence FMV, why did we not pay ourselves a lot more money and buy the best players we could get last transfer window? I take it this is what PSG has done.

This has been covered earlier in the thread. They are not classed as a related party under accounting rules and UEFA mimic these for their definition. As PB has stated the auditors of the accounts would have pulled us up under FRS8 way before the campus deal due to earlier sponsorships .

 

[Marvin]

Re: Financial Fair Play will not affect us.

Given the value of recent deals, and the success of MCFC, the Etihad deal represents good value for Etihad.

At the time it was argued that City had used influence to negotiate a preferential deal. Doesn't look that way now. (Thank you Arsenal and Man Utd). The FFP regs and clubs efforts at compliance is very much a live and pressing issue, but the Etihad deal is no longer questionable, and no one is discussing it but us.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Re: Financial Fair Play will not affect us.

Given the value of recent deals, and the success of MCFC, the Etihad deal represents good value for Etihad.

At the time it was argued that City had used influence to negotiate a preferential deal. Doesn't look that way now. (Thank you Arsenal and Man Utd). The FFP regs and clubs efforts at compliance is very much a live and pressing issue, but the Etihad deal is no longer questionable, and no one is discussing it but us.

Not true Marvin. It still gets mentioned with tiresome predictability by the likes of Wenger, although it is decreasing in frequency, although I'm sure their indignation won't stop Arsenal using it as a reference point whenever they re-negotiate their commercial deals.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Re: Financial Fair Play will not affect us.

Given the value of recent deals, and the success of MCFC, the Etihad deal represents good value for Etihad.

At the time it was argued that City had used influence to negotiate a preferential deal. Doesn't look that way now. (Thank you Arsenal and Man Utd). The FFP regs and clubs efforts at compliance is very much a live and pressing issue, but the Etihad deal is no longer questionable, and no one is discussing it but us.

Not true Marvin. It still gets mentioned with tiresome predictability by the likes of Wenger, although it is decreasing in frequency, although I'm sure their indignation won't stop Arsenal using it as a reference point whenever they re-negotiate their commercial deals.

They got £30m a year from Emirates for shirt and stadium naming rights recently.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Re: Financial Fair Play will not affect us.

Given the value of recent deals, and the success of MCFC, the Etihad deal represents good value for Etihad.

At the time it was argued that City had used influence to negotiate a preferential deal. Doesn't look that way now. (Thank you Arsenal and Man Utd). The FFP regs and clubs efforts at compliance is very much a live and pressing issue, but the Etihad deal is no longer questionable, and no one is discussing it but us.

Not true Marvin. It still gets mentioned with tiresome predictability by the likes of Wenger, although it is decreasing in frequency, although I'm sure their indignation won't stop Arsenal using it as a reference point whenever they re-negotiate their commercial deals.

They got £30m a year from Emirates for shirt and stadium naming rights recently.

So they did. They should be thanking us the ungrateful fuckers.

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

Re: Financial Fair Play will not affect us.

It's affecting us every day, unfortunately.

The margins are such, transfers, contracts, the manager's long term prospects, all interlinked.

The irony being, it's most welcome to a large degree for our owner and Khaldoon.

Sure, they would love to be afforded the luxury of dropping an extra £100m as and when the time is required, but if they had their way, a salary cap would suit them just fine.

We've had our momentum reduced, the rules are serving its purpose. UEFA thought we wished to dominate.

They underestimate this club and our owners, we just want to be allowed to compete.

After all, what's the point of sport if it is not a competition?

 

[pennypennytannerbob]

Re: Financial Fair Play will not affect us.

It's affecting us every day, unfortunately.

The margins are such, transfers, contracts, the manager's long term prospects, all interlinked.

The irony being, it's most welcome to a large degree for our owner and Khaldoon.

Sure, they would love to be afforded the luxury of dropping an extra £100m as and when the time is required, but if they had their way, a salary cap would suit them just fine.

We've had our momentum reduced, the rules are serving its purpose. UEFA thought we wished to dominate.

They underestimate this club and our owners, we just want to be allowed to compete.

After all, what's the point of sport if it is not a competition?

Nice-one Tolm, my sentiments too. I am eternally grateful to HH Sheikh Mansour for putting City in the frame; us at the top-table is all I need.