What's new

Man City FFP Cat and Mouse

Pellshek

Pellshek

Well-Known Member
Dec 30, 2015
2,533
7,334
Excellent article. I'd bet the accountants and lawyers have pushed the numbers as far as they'll go without breaking the rules, but it still stinks to high heaven.
 
tommo84

tommo84

Proud to be loud
Aug 15, 2005
6,194
11,231
robertgoulet said:
Interesting breakdown. You'd think this would catch up to them at some point, right?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/bobbym...on-to-new-york-city-fc-and-melbourne-city-fc/
Click to expand...

Sadly I don't see how it will 'catch up with them'. FIFA/Uefa don't seem interested in trying to fully enforce FFP and the owners can continue to accommodate losses in the tens of £millions for many more years.

But it is a very good article which pisses on Man City's claim that they are now profitable. Based on that article and the numbers for 2016/17, they're really just hiding losses of £70m per annum elsewhere in the group.
 
fridgemagnet

fridgemagnet

Well-Known Member
Jan 18, 2009
2,416
2,867
FFP a great idea and a great thing to plan your business/football club dealings around; right up until no bugger enforces anything or the penalty is a cash fine :banghead: at which point FFP is dead long live the king etc.
 
Gassin's finest

Gassin's finest

C'est diabolique
May 12, 2010
37,580
88,367
FFP was only ever lip service from UEFA/FIFA. Two corrupt NGO's trying to prevent money ruining the game? Lol.
 
Lilbaz

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Apr 1, 2005
41,363
74,893
tommo84 said:
Sadly I don't see how it will 'catch up with them'. FIFA/Uefa don't seem interested in trying to fully enforce FFP and the owners can continue to accommodate losses in the tens of £millions for many more years.

But it is a very good article which pisses on Man City's claim that they are now profitable. Based on that article and the numbers for 2016/17, they're really just hiding losses of £70m per annum elsewhere in the group.
Click to expand...

It's why ffp 2.0 is being voted on may 24th. After the neymar deal the big clubs want it and uefa are asking it to be fully supported by the eu so that it will be able to withstand legal challenges.
 
Lilbaz

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Apr 1, 2005
41,363
74,893
Riandor said:
The cynic in me might argue that FFP was brought in to ensure fewer Billionaires upset the top tier Monopoly of the "glory" Clubs.
Click to expand...

It was brought in because 40% of euuropean clubs faced bankruptcy. Since it was introduced debt across europe has been reduced by over €700m and clubs are far more financially healthy. Ffp 2.0 is going to attack the sugar daddies.
 
Last edited:
Riandor

Riandor

COB Founder
May 26, 2004
9,418
11,627
Lilbaz said:
It was brought in because 40% of euuropean clubs faced bankruptcy. Since it was introduced debt across europe has been reduced by over €700m and clubs are far more financially heavy. Ffp 2.0 is going to attack the sugar daddies.
Click to expand...
Yeah I know why it was brought in, and whilst it has stabilised those smaller clubs, it does sometimes feel as though it protects the super rich clubs even more, increasing the divide. But I was just being cynical...
 
Tucker

Tucker

Shitehawk
Jul 15, 2013
31,344
146,878
We all know City stink to high heaven of financial doping. But it’s good to see some journalists actually speaking about it. Regular sports journos usually sycophantically ignore the doping and just talk about what a wonderful team they’ve assembled.
 
Lilbaz

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Apr 1, 2005
41,363
74,893
Riandor said:
Yeah I know why it was brought in, and whilst it has stabilised those smaller clubs, it does sometimes feel as though it protects the super rich clubs even more, increasing the divide. But I was just being cynical...
Click to expand...

Hence why they are bringing in ffp 2.0.
 
Riandor

Riandor

COB Founder
May 26, 2004
9,418
11,627
Lilbaz said:
Would you prefer they did nothing?
Click to expand...
I would prefer it of the powers that be didn't suddenly do this as a result of poor Barcelona, Real Madrid and Bayern getting their knickers in a twist because they are no longer the biggest fish in the pool.

If PSG had taken Kane for 250m, you can bet your last pennies that said trio, or at least the spanish giants wouldn't have bleated one iota.

This 2.0 does "almost" nothing to fix the issue and is a plaster over an open wound. City, PSG already have feeder clubs and this will just mean they put different payments though the books and sell Players to their feeder clubs for inflated prices. This is NOT how you go about fixing the issue, because Clubs like City and PSG etc... are so rich, they don't give a toss. What it will do is overinflate the value of average players AGAIN.

The ONLY good ruling out of this is the squad size and loans ruling. This stops the russian traficking issue which to me is more harmful than a rich mega Club blowing stupid Money on one or two players.
 
Last edited:
midoNdefoe

midoNdefoe

the member formerly and technically still known as
Mar 9, 2005
3,107
3,166
Riandor said:
I would prefer it of the powers that be didn't suddenly do this as a result of poor Barcelona, Real Madrid and Bayern getting their knickers in a twist because they are no longer the biggest fish in the pool.

If PSG had taken Kane for 250m, you can bet your last pennies that said trio, or at least the spanish giants wouldn't have bleated one iota.

This 2.0 does "almost" nothing to fix the issue and is a plaster over an open wound. City, PSG already have feeder clubs and this will just mean they put different payments though the books and sell Players to their feeder clubs for inflated prices. This is NOT how you go about fixing the issue, because Clubs like City and PSG etc... are so rich, they don't give a toss. What it will do is overinflate the value of average players AGAIN.

The ONLY good ruling out of this is the squad size and loans ruling. This stops the russian traficking issue which to me is more harmful than a rich mega Club blowing stupid Money on one or two players.
Click to expand...


Well said! That's hitting the nail on the head, for me!
The Chelsea loan situation is farcical! Hard to understand how it was't tackled sooner...
 
Lilbaz

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Apr 1, 2005
41,363
74,893
Riandor said:
I would prefer it of the powers that be didn't suddenly do this as a result of poor Barcelona, Real Madrid and Bayern getting their knickers in a twist because they are no longer the biggest fish in the pool.

If PSG had taken Kane for 250m, you can bet your last pennies that said trio, or at least the spanish giants wouldn't have bleated one iota.

This 2.0 does "almost" nothing to fix the issue and is a plaster over an open wound. City, PSG already have feeder clubs and this will just mean they put different payments though the books and sell Players to their feeder clubs for inflated prices. This is NOT how you go about fixing the issue, because Clubs like City and PSG etc... are so rich, they don't give a toss. What it will do is overinflate the value of average players AGAIN.

The ONLY good ruling out of this is the squad size and loans ruling. This stops the russian traficking issue which to me is more harmful than a rich mega Club blowing stupid Money on one or two players.
Click to expand...

They are harmonising the accounting principles for all clubs so that city should be unable to use feeder clubs to boost their finances. It will also mean they can react a lot faster as it takes roughly 18 months at the moment to investigate.

The net spend cap of €100m should also mean that they are limited on their spending.

The powers that be really have very little power other than that granted to them by the eca (the clubs). Unless they get agreement from the clubs they can't implement anything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

mawspurs
How Spurs and Man City have reacted to Kane shock move and what comes next
2
Replies
20
Views
2K
SPURSLIFE
S
Bulletspur
  • Poll
Match Threads Man City vs Spurs - Match Thread - Day 23
128 129 130
Replies
3K
Views
99K
1966
1
Saoirse
"Man Utd and Liverpool driving 'Project Big Picture' - football’s biggest shake-up in a generation"
15 16 17
Replies
326
Views
31K
southlondonyiddo
southlondonyiddo
Top