One rule for one, another for the rest of us- FFP again

[Hamann Pineapple]

People are looking at FFPR far too seriously. It isn't working, it wont work, clubs are spending and will always do so.

There are three reasons that we haven't signed anyone yet:
1. We aren't a club from the city of Paris (most would rather live in Paris than Manchester, like Thiago Silva)
2. We aren't a club from the city of London (most would rather live in London than Manchester, like Eden Hazard)
3. Players don't think they'll get into our team, or don't want to fight for a place and want the easier option of slotting stright into a side.

None of them reasons are FFPR related. At some point in the next 561 hours we will sign someone (could end up being plural) and probably spend a fair bit of money.

Tell it like it is kid.

 

[MadchesterCity]

People are looking at FFPR far too seriously. It isn't working, it wont work, clubs are spending and will always do so.

There are three reasons that we haven't signed anyone yet:
1. We aren't a club from the city of Paris (most would rather live in Paris than Manchester, like Thiago Silva)
2. We aren't a club from the city of London (most would rather live in London than Manchester, like Eden Hazard)
3. Players don't think they'll get into our team, or don't want to fight for a place and want the easier option of slotting stright into a side.

None of them reasons are FFPR related. At some point in the next 561 hours we will sign someone (could end up being plural) and probably spend a fair bit of money.

Tell it like it is kid.

we are yet to show our hand, I'm going for

Agger, Alves, Fellaini

 

[ancoats]

fuck uefa and the champions league crap that played midweek

just give me the bread and butter of winning english premier league and the fa cup
league cup each season and am happy

let uefa sell the world tv rights without the best team in england in there cups
and lets see who wins that fight

Yep me too but players won't be happy they want champs league footy

yep true but money talks and if your winning silverware each season then that could sell the club to them

uefa are going to piss on there own chips
how many clubs in the top seeds pot 1 in the champions league draw are debt free

chelsea nope
utd hahahhahahahha
arsenal nope

dont know about the other 5 clubs but debt free will never happen

 

[waspish]

fuck uefa and the champions league crap that played midweek

just give me the bread and butter of winning english premier league and the fa cup
league cup each season and am happy

let uefa sell the world tv rights without the best team in england in there cups
and lets see who wins that fight

Yep me too but players won't be happy they want champs league footy

yep true but money talks and if your winning silverware each season then that could sell the club to them

uefa are going to piss on there own chips
how many clubs in the top seeds pot 1 in the champions league draw are debt free

chelsea nope
utd hahahhahahahha
arsenal nope

dont know about the other 5 clubs but debt free will never happen

Read some where it's as many as 12 to 15 clubs who wouldn't pass FFP that includes Real Madrid and Barcelona so threaten a break away super European league with these clubs who don't pass FFP to Platini and he'll shit his pants

 

[jake28]

fuck uefa and the champions league crap that played midweek

just give me the bread and butter of winning english premier league and the fa cup
league cup each season and am happy

let uefa sell the world tv rights without the best team in england in there cups
and lets see who wins that fight

Yep me too but players won't be happy they want champs league footy

yep true but money talks and if your winning silverware each season then that could sell the club to them

uefa are going to piss on there own chips
how many clubs in the top seeds pot 1 in the champions league draw are debt free

chelsea nope
utd hahahhahahahha
arsenal nope

dont know about the other 5 clubs but debt free will never happen

Financial rules have absolutely nothing to do with debt...it's all turnover to expenditure thus keeping clubs with the highest turnover at the top forever...simple...

 

[mcfc1632]

Do not undertsand this thread - but it shows how many fans seem to totally misunderstand FFP

FFP is a set of regulations introduced to tie spend to revenue - the scum IPO is totally irrelevant - as is what the scum do with any funds raised. And if we were to sell shares and raise funds that would again have nothing to do with any FFP calculation as it would not increase our revenue

Their revenue is already at levels that will excced any possible spending that they could embark on.

No i fully understand FFP regs, the point you are missing is what is the difference to pumping in funds from a benefactor or sole shareholder ie sheikh mansour and pumping in funds via an IPO? Why is one method of funding deemed acceptable ie an IPO and another not? Either one is money generated outside of revenue.

Irrespective of what is done with the money whether that is used to supplement transfers or reduce debt it is not money that is generated by revenue from the football club.

If the rags use the money to reduce debt whichever way you look at it that is then money that is then freed up to that can then be used to fund transfers which otherwise would have to come out of their revenues and reduce their ability to spend on transfers.

I want to know why one source of additional funding ie an IPO is ok but another source ie external investment from a sole owner is not?

If you can answer the rationale behind that then I will go back in my box.

Sorry - you are not making much sense on this and are clearly confusing a number of issues in a desire to have a pop at the rags - I have no problem with this as I look for every chance to slag off the rags.

Your OP repeatedly refers to FFP and as I have explained the IPO is entirely irrelevant to any constraints introduced by FFP

If you now saying your point is to with the introduction of funds for use by the club then the reality is that the Sheikh can introduce as many billions as he likes – there is no constraint on that because of FFP. IT is just that CITY would not be allowed to use this money for transfers beyond the level that FFP deem appropriate to our revenue level. The point I am making is that the rags revenue levels are already so high they have no issue in this regard – no matter where they generate funds from

There are lots of issues with FFP and there have been many threads to discuss this – that it is designed to stop clubs like CITY and support clubs like the scum is clear – points worth debating, but this thread just seems a muddled way of rag bashing – I am all for that but feel it is important not to confuse posters re FFP which is a serious issue

 

[BoyBlue_1985]

People are looking at FFPR far too seriously. It isn't working, it wont work, clubs are spending and will always do so.

There are three reasons that we haven't signed anyone yet:
1. We aren't a club from the city of Paris (most would rather live in Paris than Manchester, like Thiago Silva)
2. We aren't a club from the city of London (most would rather live in London than Manchester, like Eden Hazard)
3. Players don't think they'll get into our team, or don't want to fight for a place and want the easier option of slotting stright into a side.

None of them reasons are FFPR related. At some point in the next 561 hours we will sign someone (could end up being plural) and probably spend a fair bit of money.

Tell it like it is kid.

we are yet to show our hand, I'm going for

Agger, Alves, Fellaini

If we sign alves I will lick a rusty razor blade

 

[mcfc1632]

People keep pointing to PSG abd Chelsea spending as evidence that FFP will not work.

I hope that is the case but another way of lookng at things is that they are taking FFP very seriously and are following the CITY model.

They recognise the need to secure CL qualification and are pumping money in big at the start to secure that and hoping to then spend less and show a 'road to improvement......' just that our clever management were a couple of years ahead

 

[roypaulknewmyfather]

Listening to the radio this morning when a financial consultant was analysing the share float in the USA. He thought they weren't an attractive proposition. The BBC man said wasn't it a buy in for the future given FFP would limit teams like City and Chelsea? The reply was if you have to limit your opposition to get competitive you are not in a strong position to be an attractive investment. Good point I think.

 

[[MU]Prodigy]

I believe a lot of you have misunderstood the idea behind FFP. It's as simple as this - its there to prevent clubs spending more than they generate in revenue (only allowed to spend part of their revenue). It's not there to financially aid anyone, it's there to stop clubs (e.g. Rangers, Leeds etc) from generating (not actual figures) £50m of revenue a year - then spending £80m on player transfers and wages yearly. It's there to make sure clubs don't run over their means and are sustainable.

Some of you are right - United, we will most likely benefit more than other teams because we generate a very high amount of revenue commercically and from sponsors etc. How it hinders City? It just means you can't keep having your sugar daddy pumping money into your transfers. And of course because of the high paid deadwood you're even more limited on your transfer budget - but offloading them will fix it. I'd also estimate you have decent revenue and that's only increasing as you grow more as a team - it won't really affect anything except preventing you from spending some of the ridiculous amounts you have spent in one summer, with either smarter buying or more spread out spending. Which, in our defence, is what we've always done. We spend big, but it's normally one big transfer a summer.

Any who, as for other clubs growing, they still can. If they overspend it just means they won't be eligible for Europe - but with that growth will come higher revenue and it should equate itself out as long as they were sensible in their budgeting. It makes things more complex but not by that much.

Also, in terms of IPO - it doesn't affect FFP simply because those funds won't be used to buy players it'll be used to pay off debt. It has nothing to do with our wage structure or transfer proceedings. As long as we spend within our revenue we're fine. IPO also doesn't come towards that revenue "budget". Just like everyone else, we cannot pump in funds from elsewhere.

Seems fair to me.