The only way to get around Platini's anti-City stance

kramer said:
Cobwebcat said:
Yes, I know I've posted this on the Platini thread on the main board but I make no apology for a new thread here because this is really important and people seem to think everything will be ok and we will be fine.

------------------------------

Guys I think you all need to actually read the proposal because every "get out" that has been put forward will not be permitted.

The idea that we can sponsor ourselves etc is not allowed. We will not be able to get around this with obvious back door tricks. Neither can we loan the money to ourselves.

The rule is specifically aimed at us. Do you think UEFA don't know the loopholes? They have 9 months to close every one of them.

We will go from the most powerful club in the world back down to about 20th (see link)

<a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forbes%27_list_of_the_most_valuable_football_clubs" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forbes%27_ ... ball_clubs</a>

Clubs like United and Real Madrid are not in trouble in fact they are laughing. It's nothing to do with debt It's purely football generated turnover and being able to spend a percentage of that.

I've also seen some posters think we will be OK because we will have spent loads by then so don't have to buy anyone else. Wrong! We will always need to replace people and as the years go by we will not be allowed to get to the better players. Also wage cost count as expenditure. We are already paying over £100 million a year and players contracts have to be honoured over the next 5 years or whatever the contract lengths are.

In short we are fecked unless something can be done that's way different to the ideas put forward so far.

The only one I can come up with is that (luckily) The Premiership don't agree with UEFA and we can spend what we like for them. So we have to be prepared to go on spending and do as well as we can in the Prem but if/when we get into the top four we have to be accept that we will not be allowed in the CL.... but that's not the end of the story.

Other than to protect the status quo UEFA want to control our spending so we don't artificially inflate prices but if we ignore this, despite the ban, then UEFA's threat doesn't work. The clubs that need the CL reduce their spending but we don't and snap up the best players. Eventually UEFA will have to come up with something else.

The only way to win in the long term is to carry on spending before and after we get into the top 4 and accept in the short term we can't play in Europe.


Questions for you
What is counted as turnover?
How will the differences in exchange rates be catered for?
How will the differences in tickets prices between countries be calculated?
How will regional variations in tickets prices be calculated?


All the income raised from TV, gate receipts, sponsorship and prize money. Money that comes from sponsorship from anthing connected with our owners doesn't count.

Yet to be decided

Not really relevant it's all turnover.. the club charge what it likes.

As above.
 
avoidconfusion said:
No offense Cobwebcat, but I think you are being overly paranoid. Platini's proposal will cause such a backlash I can't ever see it actually happen.

That proposal would make the Status Quo permanent, no other club will ever get into the top 4 in the Premier League, let alone win it and I truly believe that will be the case in every league. I sincerely doubt that the majority of the clubs will NOT agree to this.

I also sincerely doubt that the EU have agreed to this, sorry, I think you're just making assumptions here.

Besides, come 2012 we should be established enough not to have to buy more than 1-2 players per window and I pretty sure our turnover will be much higher than it is now as well. I honestly think even IF this rule would actually come true - which I don't believe it will - we will be fine.

I didn't say it had been agreed I said he had got some EU support for this.

I really hope I am being paranoid!

I'm guessing you put "NOT" in by mistake!
 
If (and thats a big if) Platinis brainchild is actually put into place by 2012 the only thing he will achieve will be the mirror image of what the CL league created when it was started.

Basically the teams in qualifying positions the year this would start are set for the immediate future because they would be generating all the cash via the top European competitions and the snowball effect would mean more turnover, more money, better players etc.

That has already happened once so the French wanker will have to come up with something else and just as fucking stupid because the route he's taking is so obviously biased towards his bum boys.

And with us hopefully being in the top 4 by 2012, really pissing on his chips, the daft twat will probably try a different tactic to protect his 'big' clubs who are more than likely paying him a fucking fortune.
 
Project said:
Out of interest cobwebcat


1. where are you getting the information about the ECJ/Commission supporting this? Care to share a link?

2. likewise, where is the information about plugging these "loopholes"? Are you presuming this is the case because i've read nothing of the sort.

3. from what I have read the proposals it's about breaking even. of course the bigger clubs will be able to spend more due to a higher turnover but they still need to break even. saying it's not about debt is not really accurate. It's almost all about debts. The sticking point is that sugar daddies are in effect classed as debt/living beyond your natural means to Platini and co.

I'm of the belief that this is simply unworkable and will never be implemented. Who will monitor the finances of every single club in European football? And under what remit? How do you establish a fair and equal baseline when there are 50+ different countries, laws and economies at play?


1. I read it but I admit I can't remember where!

2. As above I'm afraid. It will take UEFA 9 months to make it "fiddle proof"

3. The phrase breaking even is used a lot granted but the actual idea is only to limit spending to around 60% of turnover. A club can have as much debt as they like which is why United Chief Exec and Chelsea are in favour (BBC)

I hope it is unworkable to and if it is brought in we ignore it!
 
All the income raised from TV, gate receipts, sponsorship and prize money. Money that comes from sponsorship from anthing connected with our owners doesn't count.
Yet to be decided

Not really relevant it's all turnover.. the club charge what it likes.

As above.

a) Why wouldnt it count if it's sponsorship?
b) We start our own sky channel and show City 24/7 and pay the club £200m per season for the rights to air it.
c) We increase the stadium and the owner buys any empty seats creating additional cash, these seats could be ultra exclusive and £10,000 per game. 1000 always happen to be empty. seats at £10,000 = £10,000,000 x 19 games (roughly) = £190,000,000 problem solved.
d) We will be winning things in three years time so additional money there too. Income what around £60m per season?

So in all we would generate around £270,000,000 per season throught authorised means! ;0)
 
]


All the income raised from TV, gate receipts, sponsorship and prize money. Money that comes from sponsorship from anthing connected with our owners doesn't count.

Yet to be decided

Not really relevant it's all turnover.. the club charge what it likes.

As above.[/quote]

How is it 'not really relevant' if on the one hand their saying it's too expensive for the common man/kids to go to the match, the prats can't (or shouldn't) have it both ways
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.