Serious question relating to us and FFP(update P17)

[fbloke]

Re: Serious question relating to us and FFP

As we dont know what had been voted for I would say most of what we say matters too much but from what I have read, including Gold's nonsensical ramblings we can say that

1. *IF* unanimous we voted for it.

2. Its is a 'broad agreement' which as loose an anyone can talk in terms of

3. No rules have yet been agreed - so we are no nearer detailed proposals yet that will take a further vote.

C. Its not a wage cap, as that would be a restraint of trade from what I understand.

iii) Its will 'encourage restraint' Its not gonna be punishable if you dont restrain yourself?

§ The PFA will be very interested in what is proposed because if it does limit wages then there may be a strike in future.

4. The limit on increased wages is directly linked to a clubs increase in revenues which plays to City's strengths ahead of all other clubs

9c. No mention of profit/break even/loss which suggests thats why its been voted through at this stage.

 

[giza]

Re: Serious question relating to us and FFP

You seriously think our turnover will surpass United's in 3 years? I hope it's true but I seriously doubt that will happen, particularly as it looks like they are likely to win more trophies than us during that period.

You seriously doubt it will happen?

Our commercial revenue is already up with them, despite prostituting themselves to over 30 companies over the last 12 months.

United are maxed-out, we are within striking distance of turnover, already. That's despite United winning silverware for 20 years and us only getting investment four years ago.

Regardless of what they win, and they certainly haven't won more trophies than us in the last two years, you need to factor in what you cannot yet see.

A campus and series of developments that are akin to printing money hand-over-fist.

Soon, everyone will see and it will seriously blow minds, as well as any concerns over FFPR.

I'm always bemused by people envisaging our owners are sat on their hands, waiting to be put back in their corner.

Nobody puts City in the corner.

Maxed out ? How would you possibly know this ? Have you forgotten about our up coming shirt deal with Nike? Maybe we should take a page out of your book and sell the naming rights to Old Trafford.

 

[fbloke]

Re: Serious question relating to us and FFP

The 20 Premier League clubs have agreed to the imposition of new financial regulations which will come in to force from the start of the 2013-14 season.
They will not be allowed to make a loss above £105m, aggregated across the 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16 campaigns.
The clubs have also agreed to limit the amount they can spend on player salaries from central Premier League funding - essentially TV income.
Uefa have already introduced financial rules for European competitions.

Losses at a level City would want to hit and limits on wages based around TV revenues.

Thats about as weak as it comes really.

No wonder it was voted through at this stage.

 

[cookster]

Re: Serious question relating to us and FFP

From what I have read there is no "related party" nonsense so nothing to worry about.

We have to comply for UEFA and this is a watered down version, piece of piss!

 

[LoveCity]

Re: Serious question relating to us and FFP

Points deductions if you lose more than £105million over three years. A gigantic stitch-up if you ask me even though we'll probably avoid that.

 

[I'm no cynic but...]

Re: Serious question relating to us and FFP

If clubs think they will be winners, they can think again. These measures will have an immediate effect on the transfer market with clubs being unwilling to exceed their budgets on incoming players, and clubs which heavily depend on finding players cheaply, such as Wigan and Arsenal, before selling them on at a nice profit will find this latter option closed out to them.

Meanwhile, the players will have a lot to lose over this. I don't see the PFA standing idly-by while clubs go on a either a forced contract renewal strike, or at least enter a program of contract renewals at lower income levels only. There have been historic fights between the PFA and the game's ruling body ever since George Eastham won his case in the early 60's and I can foresee the natives stirring again.

 

[cookster]

Re: Serious question relating to us and FFP

Points deductions if you lose more than £105million over three years. A gigantic stitch-up if you ask me even though we'll probably avoid that.

That's a 35M loss each season, UEFA's is much tighter so why are you worried?

 

[sir baconface]

Re: Serious question relating to us and FFP

The first rule of negotiation is to let the other party think they are still getting the better end of any deal.

In my opinion the first rule of negotiation is to aim high and ask for more than you believe you will get.

 

[LoveCity]

Re: Serious question relating to us and FFP

Points deductions if you lose more than £105million over three years. A gigantic stitch-up if you ask me even though we'll probably avoid that.

That's a 35M loss each season, UEFA's is much tighter so why are you worried?

I'm not really worried for us, but there is no hope for most Premier League clubs of ever having their "moment" now. That's why it's a giant stitch up, it's a dream killer.

 

[sir baconface]

Re: Serious question relating to us and FFP

This deal effectively prevents external investment in those clubs who do not have global revenues. Anyone wanting to invest money in a club like Everton will not now be able to invest in the product (ie the squad). Without investment in any product it is impossible to grow revenues. Simply pumping money into infrastructure is not enough. It is success on the field that fuels growth. This means that football will not be an attractive prospect to external investors and guarantees that only the clubs with the biggest revenues (including City) can succeed. It does nothing to tackle debt and makes it easy for the owners of clubs like Arsenal to keep ripping off their fans. They will justify it by saying they have to maximise revenues to compete. It plays into the hands of the corrupt few who do not care about football but are driven purely by self-interest. It defies all business logic. It is impossible to grow any business without going through a period of investment when you have to make a loss (one of the best examples of this is SKY TV). In the long term this will destroy football in England and lead rapidly to a European super league.

Very good post. It's in good company too. Much of the comment in his thread has been absolutely top notch.