Serious question relating to us and FFP(update P17)

[inbetween]

As long as we are going to keep adding sponsors, keep growing commercially, keep making money.. The FFP and the Premier Leagues version are totally irrelevant.

On current accounts which should only improve we are going to make their limits, the only slight worry is that clubs with wage bills over 52 million can only increase them by a certain amount which basically means that we more or less have to sell a player to get a better one because the new increases are quite small but we don't know if these are before or after tax values.

Obviously the United friendly rule comes into play with the matchday income increasing that wage amount but we should be able to compete on that when and if the stadium gets expanded and obviously with the new sponsors we will take on. United are obviously doing the same by plastering DHL all over everything so it is obvious clubs have known about this for some time.

 

[Blue Mooner]

Does anyone seriously think that without FFP transfer fee and wage restrictions Robin Van Persie wouldn't have been banging goals in for us this season?

This - nail on head.

No player can demand to play every game. Without FFP he would have been with us.

 

[Leyther]

Does anyone seriously think that without FFP transfer fee and wage restrictions Robin Van Persie wouldn't have been banging goals in for us this season?

This - nail on head.

No player can demand to play every game. Without FFP he would have been with us.

Re: FFP, we'd have been in a better position if we'd have gone all in on RVP than the we are with the fringe players we bought last summer?

 

[Blue Mooner]

Does anyone seriously think that without FFP transfer fee and wage restrictions Robin Van Persie wouldn't have been banging goals in for us this season?

This - nail on head.

No player can demand to play every game. Without FFP he would have been with us.

Re: FFP, we'd have been in a better position if we'd have gone all in on RVP than the we are with the fringe players we bought last summer?

But without FFP, it wouldn't have necessarily ad to have been an either or decision.

This is a stitch up by the PL designed to stop us. The limits on wages that can only be increased if match day income goes up is specifically targeted at us, as this is the one area, based on the demographics of our fan base, that we will struggle to increase dramatically to comply with the regulations.

In fact based on the recent deloitte survey it was the or area where we are still significantly lagging behind our competitors.

 

[SebastianBlue]

Something I just posted here in response to a moron's comments about Mancini's "sour grapes" and that these rules will help make for a balanced league (my comment is awaiting approval):

You do not understand these or the FFP policies at all. The only thing they do is continue the very thing you are screaming about: an unbalanced league. They are not implementing a wage or transfer fee cap or even a staggered value system. They are forcing a snapshot closing of revenue growth for all clubs. This means what you make now will generally be what you will always make barring any aberration in player sales or commercial income. It should be called the "Status Quo" rule (or "tit for tat" if you look at United and Chelsea's influence since they have already built their revenue up in the last decade to allow for these rules to benefit them). You can be absolutely sure that if the FA or UEFA were attempting to implement these rules in 2006 Chelsea would be absolutely against it and Abramovich would screaming bloody murder. Much like the austerity measures in Greece and Spain, and the bankruptcy/credit laws in the United States, these policies were drafted by those who already have the power. And these measures are meant to do the one thing that people with power always desire: help keep that power.

They are a farce and perversion of real financial controls.

 

[mad zab]

As long as we are going to keep adding sponsors, keep growing commercially, keep making money.. The FFP and the Premier Leagues version are totally irrelevant.

On current accounts which should only improve we are going to make their limits, the only slight worry is that clubs with wage bills over 52 million can only increase them by a certain amount which basically means that we more or less have to sell a player to get a better one because the new increases are quite small but we don't know if these are before or after tax values.

Obviously the United friendly rule comes into play with the matchday income increasing that wage amount but we should be able to compete on that when and if the stadium gets expanded and obviously with the new sponsors we will take on. United are obviously doing the same by plastering DHL all over everything so it is obvious clubs have known about this for some time.

I believe the limit on increased wages only applies to monies earned from the tv revenues.

You are able to use other monies raised for wages if you want to.

 

[ped]

i have just read ricki lambert "the owner is very ambitious he wants to take this club into the champs legue"HOW?

 

[jake28]

i have just read ricki lambert "the owner is very ambitious he wants to take this club into the champs legue"HOW?

In fairness Southampton did vote against it though.

 

[I'm no cynic but...]

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk</a>

Some interesting reading here. City's net spend on transfers this season is £15m. Last year it was £57m. The three years before that totalled net spending in excess of £100m annually, and the season before that [Thaksin's year], it was £59m. Our spending has been pulled in sharply over the past two years, and with a hike in turnover, the expected departure of two of our non-featuring high earners, plus the possible sale of a few others, the books are beginning to look quite healthy.

If City are confident of reaching the UEFA target, then reaching the EPL version of FFP should be quite a doddle.

 

[law74]

Our accounts have yet to take in the full value of THAT Aguero goal, with the media coverage of our last two home games last year, and especially THAT goal, will lead to a very large increase in sponsorship.