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

[dren]

Hi friends, I am an Italian Juventus fan, What Inter have done in the past years, in previous financial years with the Chinese marketing agencies and with Suning is configurable in a violation of financial fairplay worse than that which was attributed to manchester city because etihad owned by the reference shareholder of the city in the first years of management, being a related party, essentially put more money than allowed in the coffers of the manchester company to allow the city to respect the ffp and the blue club not collaborated on UEFA's requests. This he did, however, together with the company Aabar, one of the local sovereign wealth funds, and Etisalat among the largest telephone groups in the Middle East, sponsor of Manchesterr City in those years.

And inter did not do the same thing with suning (which sponsors the Inter sports center for 15 million euros, a cirrus that does not even take Juve from Allianz) and advertising agencies that in the history of recent European football have not have they ever sponsored clubs? I also point out that in England, after the revelations to denounce the city, other English clubs were also responsible for the violation, Juve and Milan, Roma, Napoli, the latter three in particular, Rome is an injured party . The agencies they did not even appear on the official website of inter as a sponsor. Agencies that magically disappeared, after putting the accounts in order, in the following financial year 2019.2020.

Why Gazzetta and other italian newspapers or even SkItalyy do not therefore report the possible indeed almost certain given the facts, an infringement of financial fairplay by Inter in the 2018-2019 budget in which 3 Chinese marketing agencies: Fullshare, King Down Investments, Beijing Imedia Advertising Co Ltd. poured 45 million into the Inter coffers in the 2018-2019 financial year to disappear in the following financial year? In fact, these Chinese agencies were fundamental for Inter rto comply with the financial fairplay terms in 2018-2019 and to register to the UEFA Champions League.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Can I ask, why were Saracens punished?
I know they broke the wage cap for two seasons but is a wage cap in any industry legal!

Wage caps are absolutely fine if everyone agrees.
If someone wants to challenge one in the court, they're often cancelling a spending rule as a lever, but not as the end goal.

 

[Blue Feather]

In all this I really resent the influence of Bayern Munich, an absolute **** of a club whose vague 'history' is based on being bailed out financially on at least 2 x occasions. Whether they paid off the ref against Leeds in the 75 European Cup Final is of course just a matter of opinion...… add convicted fraudster and all round dodgy mouthpiece Uli Hoeness and it just adds insult to injury. I hope we can turn it around against these fuckers more than anyone

 

[BluessinceHydeRoad]

Agreed. At the very least they should seek assurances from the regulators that their plans are on the right lines. The problem is these new clubs like Preston have no history

Ha!Ha! Great stuff You wouldn't trust UEFA's "regulators" to buy a loaf of bread! Failed bankers. Rejected politicians. Executives of the most heavily indebted clubs in the world. And all working for a body that hasn't had its accounts signed off in years. And a president banned for corruption! Excellent post mrbelfry, brief and straight to the point. How did football survive before Platini?!

 

[nmc]

Can I ask, why were Saracens punished?
I know they broke the wage cap for two seasons but is a wage cap in any industry legal!

Interestingly there’s a wage cap in the WSL - that wouldn’t stand a chance if someone contested it - direct sex discrimination on the part of the FA.

 

[WRicko]

So every club could agree on June 1st for a wage cap buy Preston get taken over by a billionaire on August 1st and suddenly something that was legal in July now becomes illegal in August because someone wants to go a spending spree?

I think you're comparing apples with oranges in your examples, you are using restrictions of trade and general employment laws from the past where we are speaking about agreements in advance of registering in a league or cup.

At the end of the day the law of the land trumps the law of a league look at discrimination legislation

take it to the extreme UEFA could say that before each game a player can be beheaded does not make it legal

 

[BluessinceHydeRoad]

Can I ask, why were Saracens punished?
I know they broke the wage cap for two seasons but is a wage cap in any industry legal!

Saracens chose not to take the case to court. I can only assume that this was for the same reason that we "took the pinch" in 2014 - that it is a time consuming distraction from the club's core business. Saracens considered it but I believe major factors in their decision is that they appear to have retained the internationals in the team, who have agreed contracts within he cap and I suspect that, given these circumstances, they believe that in one season they believe they'll be back at the top. I don't know though because I don't follow rugby closely but I do remember seeing a discussion with Eddie Jones and Martin Johnson, both of whom were angry because they said the cap was something introduced by organisations which were Saracens rivals and which forced Saracens to follow policies which were in the interests of their rivals, and that, in a nutshell, is the anti FFP argument; in no sphere of economic activity would an organisation's rivals be allowed to regulate its spending plans, its investment plans, its wage bill and even its relations with sponsors. I don't believe the wage cap in rugby goes anywhere near that far, but any interference with wages would be considered intolerable in any other business. I don't think a wage cap is actually illegal because the Combination Laws of 1799-1800 were repealed in 1825 and the Combination Laws made combinations of employers for the purpose of reducing wages illegal, though this had been ignored in practice. So I think employers may agree informally not to exceed certain wage levels. The problem would come if one club then opted out of the agreement and paid more. I think the other clubs who wished to maintain "the cap" would not be able to enforce it because they were not a party which was directly involved in the wage contract Does this sound familiar? It seems similar to the Striani case)

 

[cheekybids]

A salary cap means everyone has to abide by the same spend FFP is very different & if they really wanted it to be fair it would be an obvious choice for UEFA.

 

[KS55]

take it to the extreme UEFA could say that before each game a player can be beheaded does not make it legal

But I can think of a few for whom that would be justice.

 

[BluessinceHydeRoad]

Hi friends, I am an Italian Juventus fan, What Inter have done in the past years, in previous financial years with the Chinese marketing agencies and with Suning is configurable in a violation of financial fairplay worse than that which was attributed to manchester city because etihad owned by the reference shareholder of the city in the first years of management, being a related party, essentially put more money than allowed in the coffers of the manchester company to allow the city to respect the ffp and the blue club not collaborated on UEFA's requests. This he did, however, together with the company Aabar, one of the local sovereign wealth funds, and Etisalat among the largest telephone groups in the Middle East, sponsor of Manchesterr City in those years.

And inter did not do the same thing with suning (which sponsors the Inter sports center for 15 million euros, a cirrus that does not even take Juve from Allianz) and advertising agencies that in the history of recent European football have not have they ever sponsored clubs? I also point out that in England, after the revelations to denounce the city, other English clubs were also responsible for the violation, Juve and Milan, Roma, Napoli, the latter three in particular, Rome is an injured party . The agencies they did not even appear on the official website of inter as a sponsor. Agencies that magically disappeared, after putting the accounts in order, in the following financial year 2019.2020.

Why Gazzetta and other italian newspapers or even SkItalyy do not therefore report the possible indeed almost certain given the facts, an infringement of financial fairplay by Inter in the 2018-2019 budget in which 3 Chinese marketing agencies: Fullshare, King Down Investments, Beijing Imedia Advertising Co Ltd. poured 45 million into the Inter coffers in the 2018-2019 financial year to disappear in the following financial year? In fact, these Chinese agencies were fundamental for Inter rto comply with the financial fairplay terms in 2018-2019 and to register to the UEFA Champions League.

I think what interests us more than any of this is the deal between Juve and Jeep to increase Jeep's sponsorship of Juve's shirts by 25 million euros a year, even though the then current deal had only run half its course. The increased deal seemed to make the club's 100 million euro purchase of Ronaldo possible without breaching FFP. Interestingly Jeep is owned by Fiat, which is owned by the Agnellis, who also run Juve. This makes the deal a related parties deal in UEFA's eyes and yet UEFA have not so much as raised a question mark about the "fair market value" of the deal. In the light of City's "difficulties" with UEFA over sponsorship, maybe you could explain this too us, to assure us that it has nothing to do with Agnelli's presence on UEFA's executive committee. Just so we know everything with UEFA is honest and above board.