Serious question relating to us and FFP(update P17)

[bluscuba]

Re: Serious question relating to us and FFP

Is there anything in FFP that prevents a player having an individual sponsorship deal with a related party? For example an Abu Dhabi company may choose to sponsor falcao or cavani 10 million per year on a season by season basis ( with the wages being paid by City consequently being much lower). Its obviously illegal to restrict an individual's earnings so I can't see how this would not work. It's not in the 'spirit' of FFP but then again the rules are made to protect the elite so why would newcomers care.

A player can sign sponsorship deals with whoever they like, if UEFA tried to tie these earnings with a football club it would be impossible to enforce and the players would not stand for it anyway. Players aren't required to divulge earnings to anyone other than HMRC.

 

[SWP's back]

Re: Serious question relating to us and FFP

Not at all.

If you believe the rumours, we where in for RVP. He picked United instead. We still spent close to £50mill in the Summer. Unfortunately on poor buys.(minus Nasty)

Mario's sale had nothing to do with FFPR. I'm sure Mansour, Khaldoon, Soriano and Mancini decided to sell Mario due to his lacklustre dispalys and the circus that followed him.

This Summer we will be in a strong position to spend again. Increased TV/PL money, increased season ticket money, the Etihad Money, the Nike Money, and the Mario transfer money, etc. Not to mention a reduced wage bill, etc.

FFPR maybe affecting City, but it's not as bad as some people are making out.

That's just my opinion though.

Thanks for saving me the trouble. FFPR affects everyone. Never has worried me. A lot of gloom mongers and Rags about on BM today, just best ignored.

Well if there was no such thing as FFP we would not have had to reduce the wage bill, and would have improved the squad in the summer and January. Call me a rag all you want, I'll call you a simpleton if you don't understand that, you simpleton.

Yes but you are talking shite

 

[QuickSilva]

Re: Serious question relating to us and FFP

how can uefa assess a fair value for our etihad deal, which is so different and broader than any other sponsorship in the past?

 

[jrb]

Re: Serious question relating to us and FFP

Not at all.

If you believe the rumours, we where in for RVP. He picked United instead. We still spent close to £50mill in the Summer. Unfortunately on poor buys.(minus Nasty)

Mario's sale had nothing to do with FFPR. I'm sure Mansour, Khaldoon, Soriano and Mancini decided to sell Mario due to his lacklustre dispalys and the circus that followed him.

This Summer we will be in a strong position to spend again. Increased TV/PL money, increased season ticket money, the Etihad Money, the Nike Money, and the Mario transfer money, etc. Not to mention a reduced wage bill, etc.

FFPR maybe affecting City, but it's not as bad as some people are making out.

That's just my opinion though.

Thanks for saving me the trouble. FFPR affects everyone. Never has worried me. A lot of gloom mongers and Rags about on BM today, just best ignored.

Well if there was no such thing as FFP we would not have had to reduce the wage bill, and would have improved the squad in the summer and January. Call me a rag all you want, I'll call you a simpleton if you don't understand that, you simpleton.

Not calling you a Rag.

A club can't keep on buying players and paying those kind of wages. That includes City. There are only so many players a club can buy and field. We had 4 strikers at the start of this season. If we had signed RVP we would have sold either Tevez, Dzeko, or Mario. The only reason why one of those strikers stayed at City was because City missed out on RVP.

As it is City have 2 players for every position. The playing staff is maxed out. There will be a clear out of players at the end of this season which will free up player places and spending money. In essence the team/squad will be rebuilt again, regardless if we win the title or not.

 

[Thenumber1blue]

Re: Serious question relating to us and FFP

Thanks for saving me the trouble. FFPR affects everyone. Never has worried me. A lot of gloom mongers and Rags about on BM today, just best ignored.

Well if there was no such thing as FFP we would not have had to reduce the wage bill, and would have improved the squad in the summer and January. Call me a rag all you want, I'll call you a simpleton if you don't understand that, you simpleton.

Yes but you are talking shite

We were never going to carry on spending like that or giving out them kind of wages whatever the financial situation.

 

[Shaelumstash]

Re: Serious question relating to us and FFP

Thanks for saving me the trouble. FFPR affects everyone. Never has worried me. A lot of gloom mongers and Rags about on BM today, just best ignored.

Well if there was no such thing as FFP we would not have had to reduce the wage bill, and would have improved the squad in the summer and January. Call me a rag all you want, I'll call you a simpleton if you don't understand that, you simpleton.

Not calling you a Rag.

A club can't keep on buying players and paying those kind of wages. That includes City. There are only so many players a club can buy and field. We had 4 strikers at the start of this season. If we had signed RVP we would have sold either Tevez, Dzeko, or Mario. The only reason why one of those strikers stayed at City was because City missed out on RVP.

As it is City have 2 players for every position. The playing staff is maxed out. There will be a clear out of players at the end of this season which will free up player places and spending money. In essence the team/squad will be rebuilt again, regardless if we win the title or not.

Yeh it wasn't you who called me a rag, it was the other guy. I agree we had 4 strikers at the start of the season, and that we pretty much have 2 players for every position.

However, if there was no such thing as FFP I believe we would have signed Van Persie, and I believe Scott Sinclair wouldn't be at the club, and neither would Javi Garcia. We would have had whoever was Mancini's first choice for those positions, and we would have had them at the start of the summer to allow them time to bed in.

Instead, we bought our 3rd and 4th choice back up players on the last day of the window because Marwood believed that would give us the best chance of getting the best deal financially to comply with FFP. And we are now left with 3 strikers for the rest of the season, and allowed De Jong to leave to be replaced by a far inferior player on far lower wages.

There is no doubt in my mind that without the impending threat of FFP, none of these things would have happened and we'd be in a far better position today if the regulations had never been brought in.

 

[M18CTID]

Re: Serious question relating to us and FFP

I love the way the articles mention our deal and PSG's in the same breath - cleverly making ours at 400mil sound like it's worse than PSG's whereas there's is 200mil per year as opposed to ours being over 10 years.

Wankers, the lot of them.

Ours is looking, if anything, a bit thin as things stand tbh. If a declining club like Arsenal, who have been trophyless for the better part of a decade, are worth £30 million per season without an equivalent to the Etihad Campus, what price City after the eighteen or so months since the Etihad deal was announced and all that has occurred in that time?

I sincerely hope we've got our best people working on the next re-negotiation....

Maybe we should bring in the people who negotiated the Warrior kit deal on behalf of Liverpool.

Speaking of which, did John W Henry ever reveal what the losing bid was?

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Re: Serious question relating to us and FFP

Well if there was no such thing as FFP we would not have had to reduce the wage bill, and would have improved the squad in the summer and January. Call me a rag all you want, I'll call you a simpleton if you don't understand that, you simpleton.

Not calling you a Rag.

A club can't keep on buying players and paying those kind of wages. That includes City. There are only so many players a club can buy and field. We had 4 strikers at the start of this season. If we had signed RVP we would have sold either Tevez, Dzeko, or Mario. The only reason why one of those strikers stayed at City was because City missed out on RVP.

As it is City have 2 players for every position. The playing staff is maxed out. There will be a clear out of players at the end of this season which will free up player places and spending money. In essence the team/squad will be rebuilt again, regardless if we win the title or not.

Yeh it wasn't you who called me a rag, it was the other guy. I agree we had 4 strikers at the start of the season, and that we pretty much have 2 players for every position.

However, if there was no such thing as FFP I believe we would have signed Van Persie, and I believe Scott Sinclair wouldn't be at the club, and neither would Javi Garcia. We would have had whoever was Mancini's first choice for those positions, and we would have had them at the start of the summer to allow them time to bed in.

Instead, we bought our 3rd and 4th choice back up players on the last day of the window because Marwood believed that would give us the best chance of getting the best deal financially to comply with FFP. And we are now left with 3 strikers for the rest of the season, and allowed De Jong to leave to be replaced by a far inferior player on far lower wages.

There is no doubt in my mind that without the impending threat of FFP, none of these things would have happened and we'd be in a far better position today if the regulations had never been brought in.

Putting Van Persie to one side Mancini's other widely reported main targets were Hazard and De Rossi. The former went for the bright lights of London, the latter wanted to stay at his boyhood club. Neither opted to come to City for differing reasons.

If money was the only factor then Messi and Ronaldo would both be playing for us. Life is much more complex than that, which based on your post you seem to fail to appreciate.

 

[coleridge]

Re: Serious question relating to us and FFP

Yeah, the simpleton of the other guy called you a Rag for being so negative. ADUG have considered everything. So have the other 'Arabs' at PSG.

Beckham stopped the traffic in Marbella the day after he signed for PSG whilst doing an Addidas ad. It's all over for the FFPR police. Get a grip of yourself.

 

[rastus]

Re: Serious question relating to us and FFP

And if it hasn't already been mentioned, perhaps clubs who fail to pay their tax demands should also face sanction.

Malaga have been treated with disgust, just try breaking into the top 2 and see what happens:
UEFA's club finance judicial body also fined Malaga €300,000 (NZ$481,000).

The club can appeal the sanctions direct to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, and Malaga spokesman Vicente Casado said it would do so when it "receives documentation from UEFA about the decision".

Late on Friday Casado said the club "did not know why" it had been banned, adding that "as of today all our players have been paid their wages for this year and previous years."

He added that Malaga had paid off all its pending debts for transfers and was suffering a "campaign of harassment" from European football's governing body.