Kylian Mbappe

[CityInWashingtonState]

Hmm..Could you post the link to Marcotti's article, please? Struggling to find it.

With regard to which point?

FFP or the crazy Neymar signing making no sense.

The later is from an ESPNFC episode - not sure if I can find a rebroadcast for this - it was about 3 or 4 days ago.

The former - with regard to FFP - you should be able to find this - this is from an article that Gab published online - and which he also defended on ESPNFC.

 

[blueparrot]

Yup - once again you're spot on.

'sound like'

 

[Chippy_boy]

Suddenly I'm an opposing fan with no knowledge of PSG's situation because I disagree with you. Um... OK. Maybe you're a supporter of the Scum - by this same logic - because you disagree with me.

Here's the thing - FFP sucks. PSG and City both would love to see FFP go away - defeated in a court of arbitration if necessary. Both clubs are pursing Mbappe in spite of the potential FFP risks - of the two clubs I think that PSG are more likely to risk running afoul of FFP.

But who knows - all of the above - including your own speculation - is just that - speculation. I have my beliefs and you yours - let's wait a week or two and see just where Mbappe ends up.

FFP does not suck. It sucked when we were a small club, trying to break into the elite. Now we have broken in, and we are in the elite. Now, it doesn't suck (for us).

What it does is keeps transfer fees from rocketing out of any and all control, and means we can compete for transfers with pretty much anyone in world football. We have the 5th highest revenues in the world, do we not. Ahead of PSG incidentally. So we can spend more on transfers and wages than PSG can, all other costs being equal.

If FFP was to disappear, then PSG could and probably would simply blow everyone else out of the water, including us. We have never demonstrated a willingness to spend ridiculous money; we have always been prudent and sensible. Other clubs have not. Without FFP, we would again be disadvantaged.

I am sure our owners are quite happy for FFP rules to continue to apply.

 

[Pubteam Lomas]

Just throwing this out there but could PSGs interest be to drive the price up?
They know he's a player we're interested in and given the rivalry between the financial backers of the clubs, could they be seeing if we've got the balls?
Almost like a game of poker.

 

[Phil1]

Has Dax got a brother who lives in Washington?

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

Just throwing this out there but could PSGs interest be to drive the price up?
They know he's a player we're interested in and given the rivalry between the financial backers of the clubs, could they be seeing if we've got the balls?
Almost like a game of poker.

Nah. I'm nearly sure the advertisement in the paper said no time wasters or tyre kickers.

 

[ancoats]

PSG are gambling with the FFP knowing players needed to be sold after the signing of neymar the buying clubs are not daft and have PSG by the balls

i don't think manchester city can speed big on Mbappe after the summer spending and with very little coming back other than £25 million for iheanacho and bits and bobs in others yes the wage bill is far better shape and looking at what else is valuable to spend i think manchester city could buy one more player at around the £50 million mark and be well on par with the uefa FFP of under £30 million of turn over spend

but you never know and a couple of players could leave man city that could shock a couple of people before the window and 4 or 5 need to leave and loans look the best bet for them so nothing is final and knowing the owners we could have something up our sleeves and sanchez will be my bet and on the last hour of the window just like RVP to united

 

[CityInWashingtonState]

FFP does not suck. It sucked when we were a small club, trying to break into the elite. Now we have broken in, and we are in the elite. Now, it doesn't suck (for us).

What it does is keeps transfer fees from rocketing out of any and all control, and means we can compete for transfers with pretty much anyone in world football. We have the 5th highest revenues in the world, do we not. Ahead of PSG incidentally. So we can spend more on transfers and wages than PSG can, all other costs being equal.

If FFP was to disappear, then PSG could and probably would simply blow everyone else out of the water, including us. We have never demonstrated a willingness to spend ridiculous money; we have always been prudent and sensible. Other clubs have not. Without FFP, we would again be disadvantaged.

I am sure our owners are quite happy for FFP rules to continue to apply.

FFP does actually suck.

The intent of the rule was to prevent clubs from overspending and thus going into bankruptcy.

A set of rules actually implementing that intent would be great - but a rule that prevents massively wealthy owners from buying whomever they want - that's another kettle of fish entirely - City would no be where they are today if ownership was barred from big spending.

As currently codified - FFP prevents new clubs from spending big in spite of the fact that they're backed by wealthy owners - that should change.

New ownership in top clubs - ownership that can spend - makes world football exciting. FFP as currently constituted just cements league and UCL titles for Bayern/Real/Barca/United.

 

[Chippy_boy]

With regard to which point?

FFP or the crazy Neymar signing making no sense.

The later is from an ESPNFC episode - not sure if I can find a rebroadcast for this - it was about 3 or 4 days ago.

The former - with regard to FFP - you should be able to find this - this is from an article that Gab published online - and which he also defended on ESPNFC.

The Neymar signing may or may not make sense from a footballing persective, but from a financial perspective, there's nothing at all wrong with it other that to question whether the money is spent wisely, or would have been better spend on alternatives.

Clearly PSG judge that the footballing advantage, combined with the marketing opportunities and potential for increased commercial revenue, warranted the investment. That's their judgement and whereas others might have a different opinion, that's all they can have. No-one who is not party to PSG's detailed management accounts can have anything other than an opinion.

 

[Chippy_boy]

FFP does actually suck.

The intent of the rule was to prevent clubs from overspending and thus going into bankruptcy.

A set of rules actually implementing that intent would be great - but a rule that prevents massively wealthy owners from buying whomever they want - that's another kettle of fish entirely - City would no be where they are today if ownership was barred from big spending.

As currently codified - FFP prevents new clubs from spending big in spite of the fact that they're backed by wealthy owners - that should change.

New ownership in top clubs - ownership that can spend - makes world football exciting. FFP as currently constituted just cements league and UCL titles for Bayern/Real/Barca/United.

I suggest you download and have a read of the FFP rules if you want to engage in debate. The effect of FFP making investing in small clubs less attractive to potential wealthy outside owners, was recognised as a shortcoming of the rules by UEFA, hence the modifications to the rules.

So your comments above are misinformed.