johnmc said:How can the french ffootball league make Monaco pay money to the French goverment that they dont have to.
I appreciate it might give Monaco an advantage if they dont have to pay as much tax as other clubs but thats not a football issue is it.
And I know Monaco is not technically in France so the football league could banish them otherwise but would the french goverment take taxes off someone from who it is not due?
It doesnt make sense
BillyShears said:johnmc said:How can the french ffootball league make Monaco pay money to the French goverment that they dont have to.
I appreciate it might give Monaco an advantage if they dont have to pay as much tax as other clubs but thats not a football issue is it.
And I know Monaco is not technically in France so the football league could banish them otherwise but would the french goverment take taxes off someone from who it is not due?
It doesnt make sense
<a class="postlink" href="http://sports.yahoo.com/news/soccer-monaco-pay-french-super-tax-104300556--finance.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://sports.yahoo.com/news/soccer-mon ... nance.html</a>
dasblues said:All the information points to passing the first monitoring period and therefore complinance with FFP.
The problem is we only pass due to a couple of clauses ie disallowable expenses (Academy / community spend) and wages on contracts signed before June 2010.
The headline figure will probably be around £150m loss over the two years, which is what the press will jump on.
Like others have said, this needs to be managed very carefully in terms of the negative press coverage that it will generate.
Chelsea buried their results in releasing on New years eve, perhaps we are waiting for a big enough news story to limit the damage?
BluessinceHydeRoad said:I don't see any reason for the fears of a UEFA conspiracy against City, or Chelsea for that matter. Football is facing enormous problems across the world: FIFA accused of corruption almost every day, the world cup reduced to a scandalous shambles, the European commission - not UEFA - investigating Spanish clubs, including Real Madrid and Barcelona, for illegal stated aid, These investigations are to be carried out by a body with no particular love of football and could well ruin several Spanish clubs to add to the financial chaos afflicting most of them already. Platini would be mad to risk attacking two French teams who actually spend their own money, or alienate City and Chelsea who do the same and are part of the reason English clubs are such a cash cow in the form of TV rights. Football needs investment, City are making it and the TV companies love it.
BluessinceHydeRoad said:I don't see any reason for the fears of a UEFA conspiracy against City, or Chelsea for that matter. Football is facing enormous problems across the world: FIFA accused of corruption almost every day, the world cup reduced to a scandalous shambles, the European commission - not UEFA - investigating Spanish clubs, including Real Madrid and Barcelona, for illegal stated aid, These investigations are to be carried out by a body with no particular love of football and could well ruin several Spanish clubs to add to the financial chaos afflicting most of them already. Platini would be mad to risk attacking two French teams who actually spend their own money, or alienate City and Chelsea who do the same and are part of the reason English clubs are such a cash cow in the form of TV rights. Football needs investment, City are making it and the TV companies love it.
cibaman said:dasblues said:All the information points to passing the first monitoring period and therefore complinance with FFP.
The problem is we only pass due to a couple of clauses ie disallowable expenses (Academy / community spend) and wages on contracts signed before June 2010.
The headline figure will probably be around £150m loss over the two years, which is what the press will jump on.
Like others have said, this needs to be managed very carefully in terms of the negative press coverage that it will generate.
Chelsea buried their results in releasing on New years eve, perhaps we are waiting for a big enough news story to limit the damage?
The problem is that, until City's results are announced, 90% of the media will have been unaware of the exemption for pre June 2010 contracts. They will find it completely incredible that a club could make losses totalling £150m over 2 years and still comply with FFPR. UEFA really should have managed expectations better, stressed that FFPR is being phased in, that there are unlikely to be draconian punishments in the first couple of years. They've allowed the perception to develop that FFPR will be tough from the outset.
There's actually a very good story for UEFA to tell about how FFPR has impacted on City. The club is on the verge of profitability, a few years earlier than it would have been without FFPR. All that talk immediately after the takeover about City recruiting a Worlds best Fantasy Football team didn't materialise. Yes, we've bought some very good players but, since the Kaka fiasco, we have been focusing on getting good value rather just writing mega cheques. And we've spent money on youth development and infrastructure which is what UEFA have been trying to encourage via FFPR. UEFA could make a very strong argument that FFPR has worked as far as City are concerned. But they probably wont.