But, but, but every club in the world wants their players to eventually play for nytid so Shirley they shouldn’t be expecting any kind of financial remuneration its just not fairSo over on Sad cafe some can't understand why transfer debt is included in the overall debt figure !!!! It's because you owe clubs money for players you have bought, and haven't payed any/ or the full amount of agreed transfer fee for said players, hence a debt owed . Hope that's simple enough for scum lurkers to understand.
Possibly TeamViewer buying out of the deal?What the fuck is a 'one off sponsorship credit' that the club won't reveal ??
If ever there was a fact which confirms that FFP is a nonsense, then this is it. It doesn't really protect anyone but the jealous few who came up with the idea of safeguarding their own interests.Yep they could be 10b in debt but as long as they can pay of the interest and don’t lose more than 105m over a 3 year period it’s all hunky dory..
We all know that FFP was nothing to do with protecting clubs from financial ruin. UEFA are like that Hans Christian Andersen story about the King and his new clothes, everybody fawning over the red scum but only the poor little urchin city pointing out they are completely naked.If ever there was a fact which confirms that FFP is a nonsense, then this is it. It doesn't really protect anyone but the jealous few who came up with the idea of safeguarding their own interests.
It means (imo) TeamViewer have bought themselves out of the deal and at the time of publishing the rags hadn't managed to find a replacement at anywhere near the same money and don't want to publicise it, as "sponsorship income due to fall **% from next quarter/season onwards" doesn't make a nice headline.What the fuck is a 'one off sponsorship credit' that the club won't reveal ??