Serious question relating to us and FFP(update P17)

[Prestwich_Blue]

Will we not be buying new players on big wages? I would certainly hope the summer would see us buy a top quality centre forward, a centre half and a pacy Willian type midfielder. How realistic would a bid for Cavani be for example, in terms of FFP compliance?

We spent £200m on wages, NI, etc last year. Let's say it's the same this year. I reckon we'll get rid of about £35m of that by the start of the 2013/14 season before we add anyone else. If the new rules are applied then we can spend at least £204m in 2013/14, meaning we can add at least £40m to the wage bill or the equivalent of four world class players.

Are we going to have to rely on sales in order to bring in world class talent at 30/35m or so in the future?

Partly yes. We can only pay an extra £4m a year from TV money but can use as much additional money we make from ticket sales, merchandise and commercial sponsorship as we like. As ticket and commercial income will be our two growth areas then it shouldn't be any problem.

 

[Skashion]

I'm not even slightly concerned. Congratulations though to the turkeys who voted for Christmas.

 

[GXCity]

Will we not be buying new players on big wages? I would certainly hope the summer would see us buy a top quality centre forward, a centre half and a pacy Willian type midfielder. How realistic would a bid for Cavani be for example, in terms of FFP compliance?

We spent £200m on wages, NI, etc last year. Let's say it's the same this year. I reckon we'll get rid of about £35m of that by the start of the 2013/14 season before we add anyone else. If the new rules are applied then we can spend at least £204m in 2013/14, meaning we can add at least £40m to the wage bill or the equivalent of four world class players.

Balo already having gone, Tevez will be gone within 18 months, all the historical high earners such as Ade/RSC/Bridge etc will be a distant memory.

Factor in the aim to ave 15 -18 real first team players, a la Barca, and you have far more than we need to save on wages.

Plus we can spend any increase in commercial revenue on transfers and wages? Plus 4m extra from TV revenue? So as you say that's 204m per year on wages plus whatever extra sponsorships/partnerships and non TV related income we can bring in between now and then

Something tells me we are going to piss it

 

[GXCity]

How thick are they on Rag Cafe

"What worries me isn't that clubs like City or PSG fail the FFP - rather that they will find creative ways to get around it. No topteam in Europe can afford to be without CL - so my guess is, they will find creative ways to solve the problem. For instance - if they sign players, they will divide the costs over longer periods of time. I would assume that if they sign a player for £30 million -they can divide the costs into maybe 6 years - and only have a yearly transfer cost on that player by £5 million - rather than get the full £30 in a year. etc etc"

They really don't get how things work do they!

 

[LoveCity]

tariq panja ‏@tariqpanja
Counting the increase in foreign broadcast rights the 20 Premier League clubs will be sharing in region of £5bn over next three seasons

£83million per team per season on average and being near the top we'll get more you'd have to think.

 

[Tevez City]

The club has voted against the rule for a reason, which means the new rule will stop the club from improving faster than the rest.

If City are willing to sign a player that United wants, then he will end up there because City can't stretch their muscles.

 

[Anonymous]

the beginning of the end of the premiership as numero uno.


some turkey`s do vote for christmas

 

[RandomJ]

How thick are they on Rag Cafe

"What worries me isn't that clubs like City or PSG fail the FFP - rather that they will find creative ways to get around it. No topteam in Europe can afford to be without CL - so my guess is, they will find creative ways to solve the problem. For instance - if they sign players, they will divide the costs over longer periods of time. I would assume that if they sign a player for £30 million -they can divide the costs into maybe 6 years - and only have a yearly transfer cost on that player by £5 million - rather than get the full £30 in a year. etc etc"

They really don't get how things work do they!

They are fucking idiots. They're all celebrating thinking this will make us go away but they forget it's too late we've already arrived and our commercial revenue will only continue to increase. Pretty much sums up the rag fans though. They don't want to win fair and square by being the better team they want to win by making sure no other team can outspend them. Cunts of the highest order.

 

[BertTrautmann'sParachute]

How thick are they on Rag Cafe

"What worries me isn't that clubs like City or PSG fail the FFP - rather that they will find creative ways to get around it. No topteam in Europe can afford to be without CL - so my guess is, they will find creative ways to solve the problem. For instance - if they sign players, they will divide the costs over longer periods of time. I would assume that if they sign a player for £30 million -they can divide the costs into maybe 6 years - and only have a yearly transfer cost on that player by £5 million - rather than get the full £30 in a year. etc etc"

They really don't get how things work do they!

They are fucking idiots. They're all celebrating thinking this will make us go away but they forget it's too late we've already arrived and our commercial revenue will only continue to increase. Pretty much sums up the rag fans though. They don't want to win fair and square by being the better team they want to win by making sure no other team can outspend them. ***** of the highest order.

Despicable cunts.

 

[moomba]

The club has voted against the rule for a reason, which means the new rule will stop the club from improving faster than the rest.

If City are willing to sign a player that United wants, then he will end up there because City can't stretch their muscles.

Today doesn't change a thing for us.