UEFA FFP investigation - CAS decision to be announced Monday, 13th July 9.30am BST

[JGL07]

Not quite, UEFA did investigate Liverpool, they were allowed to write off a fair amount of their losses as allowable expenditure (think they said it was for their stadium)

That was a season later if I recall correctly.

 

[Metalartin]

Not quite, UEFA did investigate Liverpool, they were allowed to write off a fair amount of their losses as allowable expenditure (think they said it was for their stadium)

I don't think that's quite right either, as someone else said above.

Monitoring Periods

UEFA believe that it would be unfair to asses a club's Break Even results over just one season and has therefore introduced the concept of Monitoring Periods. Initially clubs will be assessed over two seasons (2011/12 and 2012/13) combined to see if they have made an acceptable level of loss. All other Monitoring Periods other than the first one cover three seasons - the reason for this will become clear when we look at the permitted levels of loss that clubs are able to make during each Monitoring Period.

For the season of 2013/14 they did not even qualify for any European football, in which case they were not required to submit their accounts. In other words, the first review included the last two seasons of every team competing and calculated their losses over that time, every other review is for a clubs last 3 seasons.

For Liverpool fans, there is a new worry: recently released club accounts showing a combined loss of over £90 million for the 2011/12 and 2012/13 seasons combined—as per The Telegraph.

This figure is well above UEFA’s maximum permitted loss over two seasons of €45 million (£37 million). So could participation be snatched from Liverpool’s grasp?

The good news for Liverpool is that their entry into next year’s Champions League is essentially saved by the fact that they have not qualified for the UEFA competitions taking place this season (2013/14). All of the 231 clubs taking part this season had to provide UEFA with their accounts for the two previous years (2011/12 and 2012/13)

Is it really that cynical to believe Rodgers was told to make sure Liverpool finished outside the European places, to essentially buy Liverpool an extra year to balance their books, for the next review? i.e 2015(which would include seasons 2011/12, 2012/13 and 2013/14) which is the one you referenced with the stadium costs excuse. I'm not sure the stadium costs were needed to be included because it was financed by an interest free loan from their owners Fenway Sports Group(Doesn't that mean they can pay that back whenever they like?). Also by that time, if I remember right they had also sold off Suarez, for a hefty fee in the summer of 2014.

So if they still failed it after giving themselves an extra year to balance the books, with a sale as big as Suarez' to help, that would have been a massive bollock dropped.

edit: Added the correct info on monitoring periods, wasn't quite sure on the exact details of it before a quick google.

 

[meltonblue]

No, it was from the 2011/12 accounts. The 2013/14 year was a slight profit for them. This is what the guardian reported at the time:

“Liverpool made a loss of £49.8m for the 2012-13 season, and £40.5m for the 10-month period before that but have been able to write off a big chunk of those losses as allowable stadium expenditure - the 2011-12 accounts reported that £49.6m was associated with Liverpool’s stadium costs, £35m coming from the former co-owner Tom Hick’s aborted plan to build a new stadium on Stanley Park which new owners Fenway Sports Group had to scrap”

 

[mat]

UEFA To open an investigation into Raheem Sterlings celebrations tonight saying his gesture incited the racist chanting.

If found guilty City will be banned from European football for 20 years.

 

[Jazzman]

I read that today and tomorrow there is a big ECA meeting in Amsterdam. Is City taking an active part in this organisation? One agenda point is apparently how to reshape the Champions League, so it would seem the ECA clubs are also discussing how to position themselves in the power struggle between UEFA and FIFA about international club football (which they have to off course).

 

[Neville Kneville]

No, it was from the 2011/12 accounts. The 2013/14 year was a slight profit for them. This is what the guardian reported at the time:

“Liverpool made a loss of £49.8m for the 2012-13 season, and £40.5m for the 10-month period before that but have been able to write off a big chunk of those losses as allowable stadium expenditure - the 2011-12 accounts reported that £49.6m was associated with Liverpool’s stadium costs, £35m coming from the former co-owner Tom Hick’s aborted plan to build a new stadium on Stanley Park which new owners Fenway Sports Group had to scrap”

It's good that ffp protects clubs by allowing owners to spunk 50 million quid of their money down the drain, whilst protecting others by preventing owners from putting 50 million quid in to help with transfers.

 

[TonyM]

Rich owner should mean cheaper tickets for fans but FFFFFFP don’t like that. Cants!

 

[meltonblue]

It's good that ffp protects clubs by allowing owners to spunk 50 million quid of their money down the drain, whilst protecting others by preventing owners from putting 50 million quid in to help with transfers.

I agree, it shows it was clearly never about protection of clubs. Spending on infrastructure was always exempt though.

 

[Gray]

UEFA would be better employed kicking out Clubs and Nations that continually practise racial abuse of visiting footballers.

Instead they would rather go on a witch hunt on trumped up charges involving money when the club concerned does not owe a penny to anybody.

 

[Neville Kneville]

I agree, it shows it was clearly never about protection of clubs. Spending on infrastructure was always exempt though.

I know, but they didn't spend it on that in the end, they chucked it down the shitter due to being useless.

FFP, was originally supposed to be protecting clubs from bad financial management. Until the cartel got hold of it.