New “UEFA Financial Sustainability” rules

[trevorriley]

the more clued up fans will take a read of this and be able to understand it better than me. I bet they can dissect it.

for me it will be bending more rules, sat down with the owners of barca and real / bayern, plus bent lawyers to see how it fits in with their next 3 year business plan. Also there will be an open door for a Boris style U-turn at any point where they can change it to suit barca or cripple city

then the typical rag fan will say " its to protect the smaller clubs"

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

The new PL rules attempt to catch group transactions as related City transactions.

Do you mean PL or UEFA?

After the first iteration of FFP, when we moved out some staff and resources into separate companies, they revised the FFP rules to include a 'reporting perimeter' that brought in all subsidiaries that provided football-related services to the core reporting entity.

 

[blue b4 the moon]

Have Everton said owt yet?

They having a lie-in, just wait until they've been informed.

 

[SWP's back]

the more clued up fans will take a read of this and be able to understand it better than me. I bet they can dissect it.

for me it will be bending more rules, sat down with the owners of barca and real / bayern, plus bent lawyers to see how it fits in with their next 3 year business plan. Also there will be an open door for a Boris style U-turn at any point where they can change it to suit barca or cripple city

then the typical rag fan will say " its to protect the smaller clubs"

You can rest easy mate. We will breeze it. Barca and PSG have big issues though.

 

[blue b4 the moon]

Not had chance to read it all yet in any sort of depth but, if the 90% becomes 70% that just screams of our American owners taking more out of the club as 'dividends'?

What could possibly go wrong?

 

[KS55]

Do you mean PL or UEFA?

After the first iteration of FFP, when we moved out some staff and resources into separate companies, they revised the FFP rules to include a 'reporting perimeter' that brought in all subsidiaries that provided football-related services to the core reporting entity.

I meant PL whose new rules have a lot of guff about “groups”. Projectriver seemed to think they were specifically aimed at us. PL seemed to be setting up their own definition of related transactions. Thus, if a sponsor came from AbuDhabi, it was a related transaction even if IAS24 said it wasn’t.
Accounting not my strong suit, so I could easily be talking rubbish! I rely on such as your good self to put me right.

 

[BrianW]

If only these rules had been in place before, Bury FC would not have gone bankrupt.

Oh, wait - it would have made fuck all difference. This is about protecting the Yankee Cartel.

 

[mexico1970]

If the cartel clubs can't afford the top players then the cartel is hamstringing any other club who can afford the top players hence keeping the debt clubs in the game.

Is that about it?

 

[asahartford1]

‘Did you keep the receipt Moshiri?’

Usmanov is not really a receipt sort of guy

 

[Jesus H Gabz]

Pretty certain we could use CFG for any future infrastructure projects thus circumnavigating any new rules on investment?

I thought that, there is a large amount floating around CFG for infrastructure within the group, most notably a stadium for NYC, nothing to stop the Sheik from releasing another 5-10% and adding to it

 

[Roachy]

Hopefully United's proposed development of Old Trafford goes exactly like this. And then some! How funny would that be that they end up falling foul of these new rules?

Wouldn't surprise me if certain clubs are granted exemptions. Unlikely, but you get my drift.

 

[SilverFox2]

Hopefully United's proposed development of Old Trafford goes exactly like this. And then some! How funny would that be that they end up falling foul of these new rules?

No doubt Gov money will cover it.

 

[Taylor]

Wonder if this will hold up development of the North stand as its now accountable within FFP

I find it strange how they have altered their stance of this, surely the development of training grounds and stadiums can only be good for the game.

 

[jrb]

New infrastructure rules to make it harder and more expensive for clubs wanting to increase stadium capacity, and to improve their training facilities, if they are in UEFA competitions. What a strange rule change that is.

 

[Gazza]

EUFA continually trying to raise the drawbridge on new money clubs like City, Newcastle & PSG, what they don't realise that City are already in there sat on the throne.

 

[KS55]

If only these rules had been in place before, Bury FC would not have gone bankrupt.

Oh, wait - it would have made fuck all difference. This is about protecting the Yankee Cartel.

A load of our smaller clubs have got into difficulty over the years, often thru rogue owners. Tbf, UEFA can’t be expected to police that level. It is up to the football league, the PL and the FA to protect the sustainability of the domestic game. Sadly they make no real effort to do so. Still farting about with regulator issues and so on. Where are the rule changes that would help? Derby just the latest example of an owner being allowed to separate club from stadium, the only real asset. Nearly did for them.

 

[whipper]

I take it then, that if these rules were in place in 2015. Liverpool would have failed FFP. With reference to the £50 million spent on ground improvement that didn't exsist.

 

[KS55]

Can you put a wee bit more meat on the bones please pal as I wasn’t aware of that?

Sorry, I can’t really. You need an expert, which I deffo am not!
Start by looking up PL new rules. Google is your friend.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

As far as I can tell, infrastructure costs are just a further repayment that the club has to cover on time.
If you can get the money, you can spend it.

The rules are apparently now largely against overdue payments, and that if in negative equity, that has to be reduced by 10% year on year.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

A load of our smaller clubs have got into difficulty over the years, often thru rogue owners. Tbf, UEFA can’t be expected to police that level. It is up to the football league, the PL and the FA to protect the sustainability of the domestic game. Sadly they make no real effort to do so. Still farting about with regulator issues and so on. Where are the rule changes that would help? Derby just the latest example of an owner being allowed to separate club from stadium, the only real asset. Nearly did for them.

Generally, I agree with you on this.
The regulations state what will happen if a club breaks the financial rules.

They can't actually stop the club breaking the rules or owners playing fast and loose, such as the stadium club/owner transfers that have happened a lot recently such as the Derby one you mention.