Man City offered a settlement by UEFA.

[beats1]

They won't be in a UEFA sanctioned club competition next season so can spend whatever they want this Summer and next January and it makes zero difference to FFP.

It actually does, as UEFA have let Man City and PSG off because its the first year and they have shown they are making cuts and on their way to breaking even.

If a club does an action that makes them fall foul of FFP after they were in line they will get a much sever penalty than City and PSG have

 

[beats1]

Not sure if it is common knowledge or not but nobody will be surprised to know or learn that PSG sponsor deal was allegedly, deemed twice what Fifa/Uefa deem as fair play and apparently from now on only half of whatever that deal was will be included as relevant income in future check's.

Ive not heard this but this is probably one of the biggest deals that has come out of the FFP. Since everyone though PSG found a way out of as their reasoning was that its a market value deal plus more for extra stuff, like promoting Qatar to the world, friendlies, improving quality of football over there as well in prep for world cup and etc.

So it shows that the lawyers(not part of Uefa) are taking this shit seriously

 

[WalkerboyUK]

How do man utd plan to spend £200m and remain within the FFP rules?

Same way as Liverpool - by not being in Europe next season they won't have to comply!

 

[Ribble]

How do man utd plan to spend £200m and remain within the FFP rules?

1) They're the most valuable sporting brand in the world.

2) They'll structure the deals to keep the outlay spread out over 5-6 years.

Is not counted in next years spending either

If they're withholding prize money it doesn't go into the club accounts in the first place.

 

[SteveH]

Not ideal but a start.

 

[Gassin's finest]

Considering that Mansour is rumoured to be prepping this latest and greatest perversion of the game, £50m is likely to be seen as little more than an admin fee: http://www.express.co.uk/sport/foot...e-164m-Lionel-Messi-in-world-record-transfer?

If this is the extent of UEFA's disciplinary procedure, then FFP is quite rightly showed up to be little more than a form of Mansion Tax...

 

[nightgoat]

Because all the latest losses have been written off and turned to equity by FSG and the released financial details are 18 months out of date.

We have increased our revenues MASSIVELY since the last accounts published through hugely increased commercial and sponsorship deals, increased TV money, increased prize money for finishing 2nd and the CL money that will be coming in for definite as were into the Group stages guaranteed. (http://www.deloitte.com/view/en_GB/.../5aa11261e7c5c310VgnVCM3000003456f70aRCRD.htm)

More importantly I thought it seemed pretty fair and clear that UEFA cannot penalise a Club that haven't taken part in a UEFA sanctioned competition in the time period that they examine. Should the PL penalise QPR under their new FFP laws for the state they're in despite being in the Championship this year?

Liverpool have done nothing wrong UEFA FFP wise so don't deserve any punishment as much as I'm sure that angers and upsets you but thats the way it is. However, I may be able to satisfy your bad feelings towards my club by informing you that we may be in trouble when it comes to the EPL's own version of FFP (although nowhere near in as much shit as City).

You don't need to worry about our finances. FSG are very fiscally sound and won't put the club in debt or jeopardy like the last lot did. Its bollocks about Barkley but we do have substantial funds for this Summer but thats only the case because FSG and our MD say were in a healthy position financially so can afford to strengthen the depth of the squad. If FSG felt we couldn't afford it, we wouldn't spend it. Simple as that really.

Its nice that you take such a keen interest in my club despite being a Spurs fan Mr Goat. Long may it continue.

According to your link, Liverpool's 'MASSIVE' revenue increase is a whopping 3% (£5m). Or is that out of date as well? Those accounts also don't cover further losses of £20m on transfers this season, Suarez' salary almost doubling to £200k per week, Sturridge's salary doubling to £140k per week and Sterling being given a new contract to improve on his previous £30k a week. No doubt Rodgers' new contract has a salary increase too. Considering their already huge wage bill rose over 10% by £13m in the previous season that's another steady and hefty increase to factor into any assessment. Of course there will be things to offset that, like you say the increased TV revenue (which every club gets) and CL revenue. Although obviously that could fluctuate wildly depending on how far you get. No doubt more transfer spending will be required, though.

I don't know why you need to remind me that Liverpool, like Monaco, won't be punished this season because they're not in Europe. I've mentioned that several times before as it is a thoroughly stupid clause to implement in a ruling which from the outset has been stated as being a measure to prevent teams from qualifying for Europe via overspending.

But it's OK, if FSG say they're doing everything right and playing by the rules then they must be, right?

 

[Lilbaz]

Man utd have a turnover of about £400m their wages are about 60% £240m. With deductions from youth, stadium not Counted and being abel to lose up to £35m. They could spend £200m and still be within the rules.
Also remember it is over 3 years. As they have made profits over the last 2 years they could spend even more.

 

[tototoner]

I can see UEFA banning Man City from next years CL if they do not accept the penalties - as all the other 8 teams have.

That would mean Everton would qualify

 

[beats1]

Same way as Liverpool - by not being in Europe next season they won't have to comply!

Thats not true though because though Liverpool don't have to be audited this season they will be next season which includes this seasons accounts.

Also the target will for Man Utd have to be less than UEFA sets. If they purposely break FFP after being breaking even they will be bigger repercussion than City faced and probably be banned

 

[Syn_13]

I can see UEFA banning Man City from next years CL if they do not accept the penalties - as all the other 8 teams have.

That would mean Everton would qualify

It'd be just our luck. The year we don't end up getting at least 5th!

 

[SpursManChris]

bunch of filthy cheats.

 

[nightgoat]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/27387616

Presumably as they're not already in Europe, this is perfectly acceptable to UEFA.

 

[beats1]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/27387616

Presumably as they're not already in Europe, this is perfectly acceptable to UEFA.

Its worth noting that the only reason the independent panel(not Uefa) did allow Liverpool and Monaco to go through is because they didnt apply for an UEFA licence therefore it is too late for them audit Liverpool and Monaco without any information as they do it in March/April.

I think what will happen is that they will work with the leagues(who will audit clubs for their own FFP) to get information earlier

If Leicester make Europe and UEFA hasn't sorted this loophole out, they wouldnt be allowed to compete for the 2 years after the first season unless they somehow increase their revenue massively

 

[Bus-Conductor]

They won't be in a UEFA sanctioned club competition next season so can spend whatever they want this Summer and next January and it makes zero difference to FFP.

But they plan to be next season presumably and FFP will look at the three year period prior to the end of next year won't they ?

 

[WalkerboyUK]

So....

£49 million fine, £32 million of which is suspended.
21 man squad next season
Net spend on transfers in the next 2 windows not allowed to be any higher than £49 million.
Wage bill to get no higher than it was this season.

Looks like City will have to shed a few players then!!!

PSG hit with similar.
Rubin, Anzhi, Zenit, Galatasary, Bursaspor, Trazonspor & Levski Sofia also broke rules, but their punishments not yet revealed.

 

[nailsy]

Have they agreed to it now then?

 

[WalkerboyUK]

Have they agreed to it now then?

Yes - that's what they accepted

 

[mpickard2087]

Could be interesting to see them try and meet these requirements. Does seem like Uefa are making up punishments as they go along though, which I think may get contested.

 

[mpickard2087]

But...

A City Statement said that they only fielded 21 players in the Champions League this season, were not planning to spend a net amount of more than £49m on players this summer and expected their wage bill to be lower next season anyway.

In other words they don't consider this much of a punishment.