Wilfried Bony

[Newman Noggs]

Sky asking if the world has gone mad when we spend £30M on a player because we have an injury crisis lol.

Sky, yours and your armchair fans tears taste fucking delicious!

In fairness, the guests to whom he said that, Robert Green and someone whose name I didn't catch, absolutely destroyed the suggestion. So SSN can have it's viewpoint but people in the game know better.

 

[aguero93:20]

How are bonuses not part of FFP - thats surely nonsense. Otherwise it would be easy to get round - Aguerro gets minimum wage a week but a £1m bonus for saying hello on the website

Also I doubt Nastasic is on £75k a week??

I think it's at their discretion John

If it wasn't then we could pay the players a quid a week and everything else be bonus related...

Brushing your teeth = 20,000
Having a poo = 40,000
Etc Etc

Let's hope we never sign that Van Gaal fellow then, he's full of shit.

 

[SWP's back]

I'm of the same mind, but don't get too carried away, the FFP "fine" for want of a better word was not expected, they dropped a bollock there, that not only cost us money and reduced our CL squad, but damaged our reputation.

They dropped no bollock. The rules changed AFTER the accounts were filed.

If if that is true and I expect it was probably down to "interpretation" of the rules, rather than being changed, it doesn't matter, in business what matters is outcomes.

No. They were changed.

No bollocks were dropped as stated.

 

[bobmcfc]

We can put messi on a YTS wage then ? ;)

 

[raymondkl92]

for the majority of premiership games , we will play 2 strikers , jovetic and aguero pick up their fair share of injuries , so bony is a great signing to assist dzeko . As far as the champs league squad goes , i would consider leaving navas out , and although he has been playing decent recently , his final ball and goalscroring record is not good enough against top european sides . With nasri,milner,silva and zabs and clichy bombing forward we have good cover for wide positions.

there's a bigger chance of us signing messi in this window than Navas being left out of the CL squad.

 

[IanBishopsHaircut]

Fucking hell, I was just about to say I don't think he is particularly overpriced in the current market. All players are arguably overpriced but 30 million for a proven Premier League goal scorer isn't ridiculous. But SSN have just said that we are close to agreeing a 50 million quid fee with Swansea. Wow, if that's true then that is overpriced.

You should know by now that SS include everything when it comes to us...wages, christmas presents...easter eggs...everything...didn't we pay twentyethgazzilion quid for Tevez?

I'm not taking anything they say as gospel by any means but he said that he had just speaking to people at Swansea and the fee is going to be 50 million. He clarified it a couple of times as the fee. He could well be talking bollocks but he wasn't talking about a package including wages, he was talking about it from the Swansea angle of how much they were holding out for.

Lancet dear boy... City won't pay 50 million clams so it's likely complete bollocks

If it wasn't, then the club would not even be in discussion with Swansea at that price

 

[Graceyboy]

I'm very optomistic about this signing (if it goes through). He has great power and scoring ability in the prem. However, there have been recent history of top strikers going from one prem club to another with outstanding scoring track records, then flopping at their new club. I hope this isn't going to happen. As long as we play Bony in the same way as he is utilised with swansea, im ure we will be ok. What we do know is he will have plenty of supplies from Silva, Nasri, Kolorov, Milner, Lampard, Zabman, Navas. Good Luck Wilf Man.

 

[prestonibbo_mcfc]

Fucking hell, I was just about to say I don't think he is particularly overpriced in the current market. All players are arguably overpriced but 30 million for a proven Premier League goal scorer isn't ridiculous. But SSN have just said that we are close to agreeing a 50 million quid fee with Swansea. Wow, if that's true then that is overpriced.

You should know by now that SS include everything when it comes to us...wages, christmas presents...easter eggs...everything...didn't we pay twentyethgazzilion quid for Tevez?

I'm not taking anything they say as gospel by any means but he said that he had just speaking to people at Swansea and the fee is going to be 50 million. He clarified it a couple of times as the fee. He could well be talking bollocks but he wasn't talking about a package including wages, he was talking about it from the Swansea angle of how much they were holding out for.

It's Manchester City, they're buying a very good player at a reasonable price in todays market.
But we can't have that so lets bluster and exagerate, so we can make them look amateur and mugs.
That's not aimed at you, just the statements coming out of wherever.

 

[blueinsa]

Sky asking if the world has gone mad when we spend £30M on a player because we have an injury crisis lol.

Sky, yours and your armchair fans tears taste fucking delicious!

In fairness, the guests to whom he said that, Robert Green and someone whose name I didn't catch, absolutely destroyed the suggestion. So SSN can have it's viewpoint but people in the game know better.

They did mate but yet again it shows the editorial bias they have when reporting on anything City.

 

[blueparrot]

Is he overpriced = Yes
Is he better than current options = Yes
Will he score goals = Yes
If City win the league will his addition and price tag be worth it = Yes

Fucking hell, I was just about to say I don't think he is particularly overpriced in the current market. All players are arguably overpriced but 30 million for a proven Premier League goal scorer isn't ridiculous. But SSN have just said that we are close to agreeing a 50 million quid fee with Swansea. Wow, if that's true then that is overpriced.

Sure it wasn't 50 mil DEAL, which would be 30 mil fee plus 75000 / week over 5 years.

 

[bobmcfc]

Is he overpriced = Yes
Is he better than current options = Yes
Will he score goals = Yes
If City win the league will his addition and price tag be worth it = Yes

Fucking hell, I was just about to say I don't think he is particularly overpriced in the current market. All players are arguably overpriced but 30 million for a proven Premier League goal scorer isn't ridiculous. But SSN have just said that we are close to agreeing a 50 million quid fee with Swansea. Wow, if that's true then that is overpriced.

Sure it wasn't 50 mil DEAL, which would be 30 mil fee plus 75000 / week over 5 years.

I hope they haven't said that, it annoys me when they do that

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

How are bonuses not part of FFP - thats surely nonsense. Otherwise it would be easy to get round - Aguerro gets minimum wage a week but a £1m bonus for saying hello on the website

Also I doubt Nastasic is on £75k a week??

They would be included in the wage figure in the accounts normally and included for FFP. However it was reported as being part of the settlement with UEFA (although this wasn't specified in the publicly issued statement) that for the purpose of the sanction only, we could exclude certain performance-related bonuses from our wage calculation.

 

[SWP's back]

Goal.com are reporting him to of agreed "a cut price deal of £75k a week".

Probably with lower basic + very high bonuses as with our other players.

How do we get around FFP using this method ? Anyone explain if this is workable regarding low wages high bonuses

Very straightforward. Performance bonuses aren't part of the break even calculation.

 

[Lancet Fluke]

You should know by now that SS include everything when it comes to us...wages, christmas presents...easter eggs...everything...didn't we pay twentyethgazzilion quid for Tevez?

I'm not taking anything they say as gospel by any means but he said that he had just speaking to people at Swansea and the fee is going to be 50 million. He clarified it a couple of times as the fee. He could well be talking bollocks but he wasn't talking about a package including wages, he was talking about it from the Swansea angle of how much they were holding out for.

Lancet dear boy... City won't pay 50 million clams so it's likely complete bollocks

If it wasn't, then the club would not even be in discussion with Swansea at that price

I agree it's likely to be bollocks, I think 30 seems about right in today's market, just reporting what he said. If he was including wages then it was incredibly disingenuous reporting either that or it was blatant lies. I know I am naive but I still expect better than a reporter on a national TV station to go on and literally make something up.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Probably with lower basic + very high bonuses as with our other players.

How do we get around FFP using this method ? Anyone explain if this is workable regarding low wages high bonuses

Very straightforward. Performance bonuses aren't part of the break even calculation.

Not true. See above.

 

[aguero93:20]

I'm not taking anything they say as gospel by any means but he said that he had just speaking to people at Swansea and the fee is going to be 50 million. He clarified it a couple of times as the fee. He could well be talking bollocks but he wasn't talking about a package including wages, he was talking about it from the Swansea angle of how much they were holding out for.

Lancet dear boy... City won't pay 50 million clams so it's likely complete bollocks

If it wasn't, then the club would not even be in discussion with Swansea at that price

I agree it's likely to be bollocks, I think 30 seems about right in today's market, just reporting what he said. If he was including wages then it was incredibly disingenuous reporting either that or it was blatant lies. I know I am naive but I still expect better than a reporter on a national TV station to go on and literally make something up.

?

£30m rumoured fee
£5m reported yearly wage x 4 = £20m

£50m total.

They always do this, was it SSN that tried to claim we'd spent over £50m on Negredo and Navas when Sevilla had published the transfer fees as around £32m for both?

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Good to see the return of free-spending, moneybags City.

 

[Lancet Fluke]

Fucking hell, I was just about to say I don't think he is particularly overpriced in the current market. All players are arguably overpriced but 30 million for a proven Premier League goal scorer isn't ridiculous. But SSN have just said that we are close to agreeing a 50 million quid fee with Swansea. Wow, if that's true then that is overpriced.

Sure it wasn't 50 mil DEAL, which would be 30 mil fee plus 75000 / week over 5 years.

I hope they haven't said that, it annoys me when they do that

100% he said 50 million pound fee not deal. If he'd said deal I wouldn't have batted an eyelid. I have just rewound it and he said "City and Swansea are close to agreeing a 50 million pound fee." That more than merely implies that it is the fee being paid to the club. He later said that he had been talking to top officials at Swansea.

 

[Uptop]

Lancet dear boy... City won't pay 50 million clams so it's likely complete bollocks

If it wasn't, then the club would not even be in discussion with Swansea at that price

I agree it's likely to be bollocks, I think 30 seems about right in today's market, just reporting what he said. If he was including wages then it was incredibly disingenuous reporting either that or it was blatant lies. I know I am naive but I still expect better than a reporter on a national TV station to go on and literally make something up.

?

£30m rumoured fee
£5m reported yearly wage x 4 = £20m

£50m total.

They always do this, was it SSN that tried to claim we'd spent over £50m on Negredo and Navas when Sevilla had published the transfer fees as around £32m for both?

Yep, and had Fernandinho up at £40m+

 

[Matty]

They dropped no bollock. The rules changed AFTER the accounts were filed.

If if that is true and I expect it was probably down to "interpretation" of the rules, rather than being changed, it doesn't matter, in business what matters is outcomes.

No. They were changed.

No bollocks were dropped as stated.

Technically (and this was how they got away with it) the rule didn't actually change at all, what changed was the interpretation of the rule, and specifically the guidance on how the rule would be interpreted. City, alongside the rest of the clubs in Europe, were given guidance on how the rules, where ambiguous, would be interpreted. We based our financial reporting upon this UEFA guidance, and then when it came to actually assess our finances UEFA changed the way in which they interpreted the rules, so the guidance we were given was now completely inaccurate. If we'd been willing I'm convinced we could have challenged this legally, and we'd have won, but the time, cost and reputational impact of doing so was deemed to be too great by our owners, somthing UEFA probably banked upon.