Financial Fair Play/Financial Report (merged)

[BoyBlue_1985]

Re: Financial Fair Play will not affect us.

I think officially it hasn't affected us until platini wanks in our tuna sandwiches at the uefa conference

 

[Dextersmate]

Re: Financial Fair Play will not affect us.

From the very beginning,FFP was never going to stop anyone!.

It has achieved what was required,that was the slowing down of the likes of City

It will be scrapped.

 

[I'm no cynic but...]

Re: Financial Fair Play will not affect us.

No that's third party ownership

To transfer to a club in England a player can't be owned by anything other than one single football club, be that on a permanent transfer or loan

Thanks for the explanation. So let's take it one step further. Could ADUG buy a player and then immediately SELL that player on to City for a minimal fee, with ADUG having the option to buy that player back before his contract expires?

 

[LoveCity]

Re: Financial Fair Play will not affect us.

Not FFP, but Fenerbahce have apparently had a European ban from UEFA for alleged match-fixing overturned.

"CAS have blocked UEFA's decision to ban Fenerbahçe from European competition for two-seasons."

This surely bodes well for those fighting FFP?

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Re: Financial Fair Play will not affect us.

No that's third party ownership

To transfer to a club in England a player can't be owned by anything other than one single football club, be that on a permanent transfer or loan

Thanks for the explanation. So let's take it one step further. Could ADUG buy a player and then immediately SELL that player on to City for a minimal fee, with ADUG having the option to buy that player back before his contract expires?

That sounds suspiciously like third-party ownership. The selling club has to fully own the player's registration.

BTW, I think Tuesday was the day accounts had to be submitted for the first assessment.

 

[fbloke]

Re: Financial Fair Play will not affect us.

We dont need any way of cheating FFPR so why worry about such things?

Income is booming as costs fall away (relatively speaking) and as is plain by how PSG are dealing with things the idea of the 'fair market value' test - basically the opinion of UEFA employed experts (including failed banking executives etc) about what things are worth is not itself worth anything.

Take a judgement based on an opinion into court and you know you have lost the case.

 

[I'm no cynic but...]

Re: Financial Fair Play will not affect us.

No that's third party ownership

To transfer to a club in England a player can't be owned by anything other than one single football club, be that on a permanent transfer or loan

Thanks for the explanation. So let's take it one step further. Could ADUG buy a player and then immediately SELL that player on to City for a minimal fee, with ADUG having the option to buy that player back before his contract expires?

That sounds suspiciously like third-party ownership. The selling club has to fully own the player's registration.

BTW, I think Tuesday was the day accounts had to be submitted for the first assessment.

It SOUNDS like third party ownership, but we have the Carlos Tevez affair to look at. He was 'owned' by Kia Joorabchian when he signed for West Ham, and he was still 'owned' by the same agent when he signed for the rags. Both transfers were highly technical, but the authorities deemed proceedures incorrectly followed by the Hammers, yet correctly followed by the rags. Only by buying Tevez from Kia was it assumed that the full ownership issue would be settled, but the overwhelming majority of supporters would consider this ownership matter to be a failure.

Anyway, back to my query. If an agent, or his company can 'own' a player to the satisfaction of a FIFA/UEFA/FA/EPL monitoring group, as it was with the rags, then I can see no reason for ADUG being prevented from doing likewise.

But then again, what do I know?

 

[Shaelumstash]

Re: Financial Fair Play will not affect us.

No that's third party ownership

To transfer to a club in England a player can't be owned by anything other than one single football club, be that on a permanent transfer or loan

Thanks for the explanation. So let's take it one step further. Could ADUG buy a player and then immediately SELL that player on to City for a minimal fee, with ADUG having the option to buy that player back before his contract expires?

An easier way would be for ADUG to buy a club with no aspirations of playing in European competition, say Deportivo Magalúf, buy players through that club then give them all free transfers to City.

 

[Stoned Rose]

Re: Financial Fair Play will not affect us.

Very interesting debate on us and FFP over on RAWK.

A kid called 'ManchesterBlue' doing most of our talking (and really well may I add).

 

[mancity dan]

Re: Financial Fair Play will not affect us.

Very interesting debate on us and FFP over on RAWK.

A kid called 'ManchesterBlue' doing most of our talking (and really well may I add).

Link please?

-- Sun Jul 21, 2013 11:14 pm --

With the departure of players such as RSC, Bridge, Kolo, Maicon, Tevez and, earlier, Mario, our wage level will have moved dramatically towards where City want it to be, even allowing for our new recruits this summer. Now the next step is to do something about the cost of recruitment through the transfer market itself. If we succeed in recruiting Jovetic and Pepe, our net outlay for the summer will be somewhere around the £100m mark which isn't good news, but I think there could be a way of cooking the books to reduce these fees to a minimum.

I now ask someone who is knowledgeable in the rules of THIRD PARTY OWNERSHIP of players to step forward and answer a question. This is a matter that landed West Ham into trouble a few years ago with Tevez, but the practice is rife in South America and a number of European countries and it was one impediment in any attempt to sign Falcao as he was 'owned' by several agents.

So what I ask is this. Is there anything in the rules to either allow or prevent ADUG from signing a player, then LOANING that player to City for a minimal loan fee on the proviso that City paid his salary, then at the end of his loan period, City return the player to ADUG who would then free to sell him? There may be an issue with the player's registration, but if it is possible for a company to own a player in the same way that an agent can, then I see no problem with it, and such a measure would wipe out our huge transfer deficits at a stroke as ADUG would be carrying the risk instead of City.

With the savings on wages and with amortisation for transfer fees, our net increase in spending would only be roughly £5m a year. Income has gone up a hell of a lot more than that.

-- Sun Jul 21, 2013 11:14 pm --

With the departure of players such as RSC, Bridge, Kolo, Maicon, Tevez and, earlier, Mario, our wage level will have moved dramatically towards where City want it to be, even allowing for our new recruits this summer. Now the next step is to do something about the cost of recruitment through the transfer market itself. If we succeed in recruiting Jovetic and Pepe, our net outlay for the summer will be somewhere around the £100m mark which isn't good news, but I think there could be a way of cooking the books to reduce these fees to a minimum.

I now ask someone who is knowledgeable in the rules of THIRD PARTY OWNERSHIP of players to step forward and answer a question. This is a matter that landed West Ham into trouble a few years ago with Tevez, but the practice is rife in South America and a number of European countries and it was one impediment in any attempt to sign Falcao as he was 'owned' by several agents.

So what I ask is this. Is there anything in the rules to either allow or prevent ADUG from signing a player, then LOANING that player to City for a minimal loan fee on the proviso that City paid his salary, then at the end of his loan period, City return the player to ADUG who would then free to sell him? There may be an issue with the player's registration, but if it is possible for a company to own a player in the same way that an agent can, then I see no problem with it, and such a measure would wipe out our huge transfer deficits at a stroke as ADUG would be carrying the risk instead of City.

With the savings on wages and with amortisation for transfer fees, our net increase in spending would only be roughly £5m a year. Income has gone up a hell of a lot more than that.<br /><br />-- Sun Jul 21, 2013 11:14 pm --<br /><br />

Very interesting debate on us and FFP over on RAWK.

A kid called 'ManchesterBlue' doing most of our talking (and really well may I add).

Link please?