Financial Fair Play/Financial Report (merged)

[gmckennasell]

Re: Financial figures appear to be somewhat late.

ive seen the accounts for last year , weve made a tenner , hopefully there will now be a reduction in the price of the pies

 

[Chancy Termites]

Re: Financial figures appear to be somewhat late.

Thanks for that PB.

It's seems the collar Site plans could be announced/revealed just in time for the visit of our Friends from Barcelona.

Obviously it still doesn't make up for the FA Cup final farce of last season, and Barcelona's role in that, but it might go someway to show them that their underhand games won't derail our on-going project.

1.Financial results.(let's hope it's good news)
2. The new training academy.
3. The stadium expansion.
4. The collar site proposal.
5. Manchester thanks Sheikh Mansour.

6. City sign Messi

7. Messi relegates the scum in 14/15 season with a double hat-trick at the swamp.

... with a couple of back-heels for good measure.

 

[aguero93:20]

Re: Financial figures appear to be somewhat late.

6. City sign Messi

7. Messi relegates the scum in 14/15 season with a double hat-trick at the swamp.

... with a couple of back-heels for good measure.

it said with a back-heel and then I thought we'd already done that!

 

[mad4city]

Re: Financial figures appear to be somewhat late.

ive seen the accounts for last year , weve made a tenner , hopefully there will now be a reduction in the price of the pies

I heard a story once about the AGM of a local pigeon-racing club. The treasurer hadn't a scrap of paperwork with him, so there was great interest when he was called upon to give his report.
"Great year, lads!" he declared, clapping his hands together, "we broke even!"
Oddly enough, he wasn't re-elected.

 

[Kinkys Left Foot]

Re: Financial figures appear to be somewhat late.

Am I being right in thinking that last financial year reflects the first investment instalment of the Etihad Deal secured some time ago? Now I know that the figure was undisclosed at the time and we were given to understand it was 400 million over 10 years incorporating Kit sponsorship deal, Training Complex Naming sponsorship and the Sponsorship of the Stadium. That figure was never confirmed (as nobody outside MCFC knows what it was). There have been some increasingly mega sized deals since by other clubs in relation to kit sponsorship alone. If the deal was based on a moving goalposts scenario allowing for increasing sponsorship with associated progress in the CL or success in competitions or enabled to be front end weighted then some fuckers are going to be surprised at our commercial income when its released this year. Their ghasts may even be flabbered!
That may not be the case but would anyone be surprised and if PSG can have 164 million handed out like confetti by the Quatari tourist board and UEFA not bat an eyelid regarding the size of that deal then this would be an opportunity to do likewise.
What very clever people we have in charge of our finances!

 

[eversince 76]

Re: Financial figures appear to be somewhat late.

City (like PSG) has become too much a powerhous in the moneybrand called football. We need not to worry about the FFPR. It's also become impossible within the FA for the old top 4, even with the addition of Spurs, to bend the rules to scupper our march to the top. FFPR in England and worldwide will only stop the smaller clubs to do what we have been doing over the last 5 years. And that is in fact a sad conclusion. Hopefully the PL will keep having 6-8 teams challenging for top 4 places with 3 or 4 challenging for the title. It better be 3 or 4 different teams every year to stop creating another "top 4" like the PL had for too long in the classless bunch being Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool and United.

 

[BoyBlue_1985]

Re: Financial figures appear to be somewhat late.

City (like PSG) has become too much a powerhous in the moneybrand called football. We need not to worry about the FFPR. It's also become impossible within the FA for the old top 4, even with the addition of Spurs, to bend the rules to scupper our march to the top. FFPR in England and worldwide will only stop the smaller clubs to do what we have been doing over the last 5 years. And that is in fact a sad conclusion. Hopefully the PL will keep having 6-8 teams challenging for top 4 places with 3 or 4 challenging for the title. It better be 3 or 4 different teams every year to stop creating another "top 4" like the PL had for too long in the classless bunch being Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool and United.

I always find it funny how we always says this about the old top 4 while they all call us it along with what with the other 3 they dont support. Classless is losing its meaning as a word in football these days

 

[moomba]

Re: Financial figures appear to be somewhat late.

With the new CL deal, I wonder how close we could get to the rags revenue figures if they start missing out (and we don't).

 

[oppa gangnam style]

Re: Financial figures appear to be somewhat late.

I think we still will be 50-80m in the red closer to 80, and its more than we can lose in two years dictated by FFP.

So actually the club thinks if they never publish it maybe Uefa will forget it with time.

:)

Certainly there is big danger we cant comply with FFP rules just yet, also we are going in the right direction, Uefa will see that that we care to make the losses smaller, but you know most other clubs waiting for Uefa to punish some of the big spenders, maybe Platini will come up with something, not ban us from CL, but maybe we cant sign players in 2015/2016 summer, like a transfer window ban.
I can see this happening either to us or PSG or Monaco, maybe even to Chelsea. And Bolton, they have huge losses too.:)

Also will be really interesting to see how our revenues went up.

Of course for FFP these reported losses are different, because they dont count many things as losses like spnet money on stadium, youth tc.
Last year we had a loss of 99m but who knows according to FFP calculation how big loss that was in that way. Maybe only 60 or 70m.

 

[BoyBlue_1985]

Re: Financial figures appear to be somewhat late.

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.

I've said before on here that I don't think Platini is quite as bad as many fellow blues think. I feel that, while I'm sure he was in favour of some kind of FFPR, he has been pushed into a corner by the elite clubs regarding the shape the regs have taken as their primary concern is maintaining the status quo. His interview with Martin Samuel several months ago was a bit of a car crash overall but one thing that jumped out at me was him recognising that City have made "big efforts" to try and comply with the regs.

3 rows of empty seats every game to allow for advertising.

no alcohol allowed although advertising alcohol.

euro away tickets are adult prices for children.

3 reasons why i hate platini and i will openly admit,i would hate him anyway because he heads uefa.

None of the above is anything to do with Platini