Financial Fair Play/Financial Report (merged)

[fbloke]

Re: Financial Fair Play will not affect us.

And you know this how?

Not a dig btw :-)

The ONLY allowance for FFP to disregard revenues is if they are A) deemed a related party deal B) above fair market value

Only the value above any fair market price is disregarded BTW.

It is REALLY important to note that it is not in the gift of UEFA or the PL to decide what is a 'related party' deal is a separate and legal definition that auditors decide on.

None of the deals City have done are deemed to be related party deals.

With regards to related party transactions and fair market value, you are correct. To be fair to UEFA (which is difficult admittedly), all the rules are really saying is "you can't cheat by including bent revenue or dodgy deals, and you must conform to normal legal accounting requirements".

However, they also exclude revenue from non-footballing activities that are not directly related to the club. Obviously this is beyond normal accounting restrictions which allow you to include any revenue you like.

Interestingly the very fact that united, real etc panicked and forced UEFA to allow revenues

A) That used the club name

B) Were derived from near the stadium

has provided City, PSG (and any other club) so much wiggle room as to render the rules impotent against truly wealthy owners.

Th big losers are the Evertons and Stokes of the footballing world and they voted for the thing too.<br /><br />-- Fri Nov 01, 2013 7:48 pm --<br /><br />

He was talking about PSG's deal, not City's.

OK, well the same applies to PSG's deals and their accounts.

If they get signed off using the internationally recognised 'related party' rules by a kosher auditing firm UEFA can huff and puff but wont ever blow that house down.

I know FB, I was asking Brendan 110 because his comment seemed to be a bit of a casual and throw away remark.

Hope that quantifies fella :-)

What was that middle bit again?

 

[BluessinceHydeRoad]

Re: Financial Fair Play will not affect us.

Isn't the responsibility for identifying a related party transaction a legal one placed on the auditors? Doesn't this end Platini's ambitions more the the "Frenchness" of PSG, or any involvement his son might have? I believe that this is not actually a sponsorship deal (!!!) - the club and the Qataris claim it is a fee for services with the club using its "infrastructure" to advertise Qatar as a tourist location....

 

[abu13]

Re: Financial Fair Play will not affect us.

Out of interest, is there anything in the regulations to prevent a player's wages, or his transfer fee for that matter, from being paid by an outside source rather than a club directly? As long as a club is the registered holder of that player's registration, and the monies are duly paid, in full and on time to the recipients, it would certainly make a huge difference to the books of the clubs who choose to work in this way.

This is something i have wondered to, it wasn't too long ago that the rags believed they were going to re sign the ladyboy and there were all sorts of stories that Nike may fund a large portion of his wages. Obviously he is one of their worldwide figure heads and they would want to keep him playing for a club who wear Nike kits, but surely there must be something to stop this. I understand that there can not be any third party ownership of players but what would happen if we went for Messi on the basis we pay him 50k per week and our good sheik said he wanted him to head up an advertising campaign for Abu Dhabi tourism board for which he would be paid a further 300k per week?

Could this be stopped?

 

[fbloke]

Re: Financial Fair Play will not affect us.

Out of interest, is there anything in the regulations to prevent a player's wages, or his transfer fee for that matter, from being paid by an outside source rather than a club directly? As long as a club is the registered holder of that player's registration, and the monies are duly paid, in full and on time to the recipients, it would certainly make a huge difference to the books of the clubs who choose to work in this way.

This is something i have wondered to, it wasn't too long ago that the rags believed they were going to re sign the ladyboy and there were all sorts of stories that Nike may fund a large portion of his wages. Obviously he is one of their worldwide figure heads and they would want to keep him playing for a club who wear Nike kits, but surely there must be something to stop this. I understand that there can not be any third party ownership of players but what would happen if we went for Messi on the basis we pay him 50k per week and our good sheik said he wanted him to head up an advertising campaign for Abu Dhabi tourism board for which he would be paid a further 300k per week?

Could this be stopped?

3rd party ownership is not allowed in the PL.

 

[abu13]

Re: Financial Fair Play will not affect us.

Out of interest, is there anything in the regulations to prevent a player's wages, or his transfer fee for that matter, from being paid by an outside source rather than a club directly? As long as a club is the registered holder of that player's registration, and the monies are duly paid, in full and on time to the recipients, it would certainly make a huge difference to the books of the clubs who choose to work in this way.

This is something i have wondered to, it wasn't too long ago that the rags believed they were going to re sign the ladyboy and there were all sorts of stories that Nike may fund a large portion of his wages. Obviously he is one of their worldwide figure heads and they would want to keep him playing for a club who wear Nike kits, but surely there must be something to stop this. I understand that there can not be any third party ownership of players but what would happen if we went for Messi on the basis we pay him 50k per week and our good sheik said he wanted him to head up an advertising campaign for Abu Dhabi tourism board for which he would be paid a further 300k per week?

Could this be stopped?

3rd party ownership is not allowed in the PL.

i understand that, what i was implying is would it be possible for an owner of a club such as ourselves to to buy a player and then offer the player an additional embassadoral (sp) role with a huge wage attached to it. The club would own the player outright but the player would have an additional income from a separate employment.

 

[Brendan110_0]

Re: Financial Fair Play will not affect us.

He was talking about PSG's deal, not City's.

OK, well the same applies to PSG's deals and their accounts.

If they get signed off using the internationally recognised 'related party' rules by a kosher auditing firm UEFA can huff and puff but wont ever blow that house down.

I know FB, I was asking Brendan 110 because his comment seemed to be a bit of a casual and throw away remark.

Hope that quantifies fella :-)

I meant that UEFA, if they think the deal is above "fair value" then the "unfair" bit wont go into the FFP calculations - for PSG that is :P, we're safe for certain after some of the deals this year!

 

[fbloke]

Re: Financial Fair Play will not affect us.

This is something i have wondered to, it wasn't too long ago that the rags believed they were going to re sign the ladyboy and there were all sorts of stories that Nike may fund a large portion of his wages. Obviously he is one of their worldwide figure heads and they would want to keep him playing for a club who wear Nike kits, but surely there must be something to stop this. I understand that there can not be any third party ownership of players but what would happen if we went for Messi on the basis we pay him 50k per week and our good sheik said he wanted him to head up an advertising campaign for Abu Dhabi tourism board for which he would be paid a further 300k per week?

Could this be stopped?

3rd party ownership is not allowed in the PL.

i understand that, what i was implying is would it be possible for an owner of a club such as ourselves to to buy a player and then offer the player an additional embassadoral (sp) role with a huge wage attached to it. The club would own the player outright but the player would have an additional income from a separate employment.

From what UEFA has said such a deal would be looked at very closely and more than likely cause problems.

I'm also a tad doubtful that any player would sign a deal like that.

Of course there are likely to be loan deals to and from other MCFC 'franchises' to allow player costs to be offloaded and for those without EU clearance to gain it whilst the costs of that are not loaded on the MCFC books.

 

[kippax81]

Re: Financial Fair Play will not affect us.

OK, well the same applies to PSG's deals and their accounts.

If they get signed off using the internationally recognised 'related party' rules by a kosher auditing firm UEFA can huff and puff but wont ever blow that house down.

I know FB, I was asking Brendan 110 because his comment seemed to be a bit of a casual and throw away remark.

Hope that quantifies fella :-)

I meant that UEFA, if they think the deal is above "fair value" then the "unfair" bit wont go into the FFP calculations - for PSG that is :P, we're safe for certain after some of the deals this year!

Ah, ok fella. Thanks for explaining :-)

 

[Falastur]

Re: Financial Fair Play will not affect us.

More fuel on the fire - due to BT Sport's offer for CL rights blowing the previous Sky deal out of the water, from 2015 the CL is worth £25m a season more to every English club.

 

[Mr Ed (The Stables)]

Re: Financial Fair Play will not affect us.

More fuel on the fire - due to BT Sport's offer for CL rights blowing the previous Sky deal out of the water, from 2015 the CL is worth £25m a season more to every English club.

And there are some that still think that FFP will help with no disrespect intended to the Villa's, Newcastle, and the Burnleys of this world. The notion that they can compete on a level playing field, which is bollocks as we all know.

Thank goodness we got into the Castle before the drawbridge was drawn up!!