Bazzmand Show
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 5,049
I'd be happy with a salary cap across Europe, but it will never happen. But FFP has always smacked of protectionism.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Martin Samuel: The plot to shackle City & Chelsea
- Thread starter LoveCity
- Start date
blueinsa said:Its been mentioned before i know but we should team up with Chelsea and the other clubs sympathetic to our cause and start the debate rolling about seat prices caps, shared match day receipts.....fight fire with fire.
Why does anyone think our owners would even want this?
B
B
blueinsa
Guest
adrianr said:blueinsa said:Its been mentioned before i know but we should team up with Chelsea and the other clubs sympathetic to our cause and start the debate rolling about seat prices caps, shared match day receipts.....fight fire with fire.
Why does anyone think our owners would even want this?
They wont but due to their financial strength, its not something that would unduly worry them unlike the Rags, Arsenal etc who milk it in, giving them huge income streams compared to the vast majority.
Look, i say it very much tongue in cheek fella and i know it will never happen.
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 89,064
That's a silly idea, why would that be part of any FFP in the Prem?Manx Blue said:Good evening....I'd like to raise a point. I did comment on the early exchanges of this thread, but havent read the rest of the replies over the last few days so I apologise if i'm going over old ground.
I take it as the "Filthy Four" are advocating FFP, they and the premier league will be more than happy to relinquish the megabucks television deals they currently hold with both British an International media organisations, and open the whole thing up and make it fair for media suppliers?
Opening the whole thing up to as many Television or radio companies as possible and not keep it as a close shop to the highest bidder. IE...live games on the BBC which would be part of our license fee.
johnny crossan
Well-Known Member
that's it then - we're finished
Arsenal and others will go to court to get Financial Fair Play
By Tony Attwood
A small group of top clubs is willing to take legal action if nothing is done to stop Chelsea, Man City and possibly others evading Uefa’s financial fair play system.
Having put their concerns in writing to the League, Arsenal, Liverpool, Man U and Tottenham, are now openly stating that the full financial fair play rules should be introduced into the League. And that if Uefa is seen to be issuing minor fines of no significance to clubs that break FFP, the Group of 4 will go to court.
The grounds of the G4′s proposed action is that club owners have taken business decisions based on Uefa’s clear statements that it will be rigorous in introducing FFP, and if they don’t they will be guilty of having misled investors.
John W Henry, owner of Liverpool, has said that he bought Liverpool in 2010 on the basis that FFP would change the way football works and levels out the finances of clubs. He and others have been encouraged by the fact that the transfer dealings among top clubs had been in decline since the period of the initial run up to full FFP introduction.
Arsenal are in a similar position, with the club’s entire financial system based on the existence of FFP – a system which largely generates a profit for Arsenal. Meanwhile Man City are willing to lose around £100m a year at a time when FFP allows only a total of £38m loss over this season and last season.
The notion that Man City will make a profit of £62m this season in order to balance the loss is extremely unlikely, and so it looks as if Man City think they have found the loophole in the plans. All they have done so far is halved the insane losses of the previous year.
The notion that clubs are going to get around FFP and that Uefa will treat FFP avoidance as they treat racism, is given a boost by the fact that we have seen clubs counting the accounts in strange ways – such as with intellectual property rights sales being counted as income.
For Man C the centre of everything is Ethiad airlines which now spends hundreds of millions each year on promoting itself – and yet never once makes a profit.
Chelsea are doing the same, introducing £18m “exceptional share profit” into their accounts, as revealed on the <a class="postlink" href="http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">www.financialfairplay.co.uk</a> website.
The same oddities are showing up everywhere as PSG have put up a deal with the Qatar Tourism Authority as a source of income. Qatar is of course a prime destination for Parisians each summer. Or perhaps it is just the owner of PSG.
Nasser Al-Khelaifi knows that Uefa has to show that this deal is between two organisations that are related. If they can’t prove what we all know – the Qatar owns football clubs – or if the fine is measly then FFP is shot, and the G4 will be the first group to take renegade Uefa to court.
<a class="postlink" href="http://blog.emiratesstadium.info/archives/26776" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://blog.emiratesstadium.info/archives/26776</a>?
Arsenal and others will go to court to get Financial Fair Play
By Tony Attwood
A small group of top clubs is willing to take legal action if nothing is done to stop Chelsea, Man City and possibly others evading Uefa’s financial fair play system.
Having put their concerns in writing to the League, Arsenal, Liverpool, Man U and Tottenham, are now openly stating that the full financial fair play rules should be introduced into the League. And that if Uefa is seen to be issuing minor fines of no significance to clubs that break FFP, the Group of 4 will go to court.
The grounds of the G4′s proposed action is that club owners have taken business decisions based on Uefa’s clear statements that it will be rigorous in introducing FFP, and if they don’t they will be guilty of having misled investors.
John W Henry, owner of Liverpool, has said that he bought Liverpool in 2010 on the basis that FFP would change the way football works and levels out the finances of clubs. He and others have been encouraged by the fact that the transfer dealings among top clubs had been in decline since the period of the initial run up to full FFP introduction.
Arsenal are in a similar position, with the club’s entire financial system based on the existence of FFP – a system which largely generates a profit for Arsenal. Meanwhile Man City are willing to lose around £100m a year at a time when FFP allows only a total of £38m loss over this season and last season.
The notion that Man City will make a profit of £62m this season in order to balance the loss is extremely unlikely, and so it looks as if Man City think they have found the loophole in the plans. All they have done so far is halved the insane losses of the previous year.
The notion that clubs are going to get around FFP and that Uefa will treat FFP avoidance as they treat racism, is given a boost by the fact that we have seen clubs counting the accounts in strange ways – such as with intellectual property rights sales being counted as income.
For Man C the centre of everything is Ethiad airlines which now spends hundreds of millions each year on promoting itself – and yet never once makes a profit.
Chelsea are doing the same, introducing £18m “exceptional share profit” into their accounts, as revealed on the <a class="postlink" href="http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">www.financialfairplay.co.uk</a> website.
The same oddities are showing up everywhere as PSG have put up a deal with the Qatar Tourism Authority as a source of income. Qatar is of course a prime destination for Parisians each summer. Or perhaps it is just the owner of PSG.
Nasser Al-Khelaifi knows that Uefa has to show that this deal is between two organisations that are related. If they can’t prove what we all know – the Qatar owns football clubs – or if the fine is measly then FFP is shot, and the G4 will be the first group to take renegade Uefa to court.
<a class="postlink" href="http://blog.emiratesstadium.info/archives/26776" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://blog.emiratesstadium.info/archives/26776</a>?
BlueAnorak
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 31 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 27,833
Quality - THEY want to go to court. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.
Re: Martin Samuel: The plot to shackle City & Chelsea
All they haven't done yet is stamp there feet and wave there arms! its obvious and SO Childish what these clubs are doing I think UEFA FFP will bite the dust but the premier one is a worry if these clubs get duped into voting for it!
All they haven't done yet is stamp there feet and wave there arms! its obvious and SO Childish what these clubs are doing I think UEFA FFP will bite the dust but the premier one is a worry if these clubs get duped into voting for it!
BlueAnorak
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 31 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 27,833
I posted this. I wonder if it will get published...
I should have posted how clueless the Rag who runs <a class="postlink" href="http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/</a> is. But four points were enough.
(Note: I am not Mr-Ed on here)This article makes me laugh sooo much.
First of all Etihad Airways made a substantial profit of $137m in 2011 and will show far larger profits in the 2012 accounts. Indeed, one of their most profitable routes is Manchester to Abu Dabhi.
Secondly FFP is illegal under Chapter One of the Competition Act, which prohibits agreements that “limit or control production, markets, technical development or investment”. There may be a case for saying that the scale of “investment” by Chelsea & City break the spirit of competition law however this is far outweighed by the anti-competitive effect of Champions League revenue which hands each qualifier £20m a year more than the rest of the league(£30m+ from 2015 onwards). This additional money is about as anti-competitive as you can get in maintaining a cartel. It also allows the top clubs to cherry pick players from other teams in the league – for less than they are worth as players want CL football! (Plenty of examples from Man U alone). Indeed a strong case could be made for clubs having to spend double this amount over multiple years to bridge the gap and the effect on Player Amortisation of multiple player purchases over the short term is horrific (the main reason why Manchester City may possibly fail FFP criteria next season – they won’t fail the season after).
Thirdly it’s also highly likely to be illegal under the EU’s competition directives. If tested in court it will almost certainly be outlawed. No matter what Joaquín Almunia may say. I suspect PSG will be the ones to fight this battle.
Fourthly, you are clueless as to what a “Related Party” is. It is everything to do with EU/UK accountancy law and under these rules Etihad Airways and MCFC are simply not related parties – no matter how much you stamp your feet and insist they are.
Perhaps you should read Martin Samuels comments on why FFP sucks.
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2261817/Arsenal-Manchester-United-financial-fair-play-plot-ruin-Premier-League" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... ier-League</a>–Martin-Samuel.html
And his response to the critics:
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2263835/MARTIN-SAMUEL" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... TIN-SAMUEL</a>–DEBATE-How-dare-Manchester-United-Arsenal-try-deny-club-chance-success.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490
If you wanted a shared revenue model (50% outside gate revenue shared) with salary caps like the NFL then I might have some sympathy with little old Arsenal but you don’t you want to cement your place in the golden trough forever.
See you in court.
I should have posted how clueless the Rag who runs <a class="postlink" href="http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/</a> is. But four points were enough.