What's new

Platini unveils plan for clubs to live within means!

CrazyConrad

Viking Yiddo
Aug 22, 2003
720
632
MONACO - UEFA president Michel Platini revealed his plans for financial reforms in European football on Thursday which could signal the end of "sugar daddies" buying into the game and transforming the fortunes of a club.
The key to Platini's vision of what he has called "financial fair play" is for all clubs to be made to only spend what they earn in football revenues and he says he has the backing of Chelsea owner Roman Abramovich and other rich club owners.
The rules, which UEFA is still formulating and which will not be in place at least until 2012, would also mean owners such as Manchester City's Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed al Nahyan would not be able to make huge gifts of cash to their clubs.
The clubs would, according to Platini, "have to live within their means instead."
Platini told a news conference: "We have everyone on board with this, the owners, the players, the leagues, the national associations.
"If a club can get loans from a bank to buy players and is able to pay back bank loans then it is not a problem. But if a club gets a lot of money or subsidies from a big backer and is still in deficit in two years then it is a problem and we don't want that."
Platini added that an independent panel would be set up to judge whether clubs had broken the rules.
"The panel will refer any matter to the disciplinary committee and sanctions will be taken from a reminder to a fine to expulsion from the Champions League," he said.
Many of Europe's top clubs have huge debts, with Real Madrid having an estimated debt of 563 million euros up to the end of the 2007-08 season.
Financial experts have estimated Real's current debt could run to around 900 million euros following their close season spending spree.
Premier League club Chelsea reported losses of 65.7 million pounds up to June last year while Red Football, Manchester United's parent company owned by the Glazer family, recorded a 21-million-pound loss last year and has a total debt of 575 million pounds.
FORK OUT
Platini said he had the backing of club owners. "It's mainly the owners that asked us to do something - Roman Abramovich, (AC Milan's) Silvio Berlusconi, (Inter Milan's) Massimo Moratti. They do not want to fork out from their pockets any more," he said.
"I have told Mr Abramovich about this and he said nothing against it." UEFA would also look at losses incurred by clubs' parent companies who have to service loans, said Platini.
Sanctions - if implemented - would depend on the size of a club's losses, said UEFA deputy general secretary Gianni Infantino, who is in charge of the detailed planning process.
He said around 20 clubs had been sanctioned in the past few seasons and not given a UEFA licence because their finances were not in order.
"The potential sanction will have to be in proportion - it will be different if you make a loss of one million every two years or 100 million every year," Infantino said.
He said the new rules would not stop clubs like Manchester City breaking up the domination of the Big Four in the Premier League - as long as they were run on the right lines.
"We think that the opposite will happen because if you have a rich sugar daddy coming in and throwing money around this is unhealthy in the medium and long-term," he said.
"For the club to be healthy it has to live on its own means and generate income and this is not impossible. Clubs have generated revenues by investing in stadiums otherwise it is an artificial bubble which inflates the system and is unhealthy and unsustainable."

http://fourfourtwo.com/news/restofeurope/35808/default.aspx



About time UEFA do something about this!
 

animal

Active Member
Mar 16, 2005
578
196
I guess this is a good idea. It will certainly help put a stop to crazy money transfers and help to bring down ridiculous player wages too.

How will clubs like Man City and Chelsea who are being bankrolled survive with such a restriction? Surely they don't actually make any profit due to excessive player wages and would therefore not be able to buy new players and basically be fooked.

Or would they just have to sell to buy? Like a normal club!
 

Cozzie

Large Member
Jan 7, 2009
400
1
I can't see how Abramovic would back this if it was going to be detrimental to Chelsea. Bearing in mind he has stopped throwing money all over the place, they must be stable. Overall, i think this is a good move. We will do well out of it, as we generally live within our means, and already have an unofficial policy of getting players in young and making a profit down the line on them.

However, i fear that clubs at the bottom of the chain will struggle if they start to become insolvent, as surely nobody will be allowed to save them, as the money wont have come from the clubs football dealings, i.e the deal to save Notts County wouldnt be allowed.
 

spursandbarca

Well-Known Member
Jul 18, 2008
3,972
446
stop florentino perez.

they were 400 million euros in debt when he take over and he borrows anoher 200 million.
 

Pringle

Well-Known Member
Dec 25, 2006
3,580
516
i think thats a great idea!!

i miss the days of european football where you could be drawn against a team from Romania or Hungary and actually face a tough team. These days the rich clubs are just monopolising football and making it quite boring!
 

Dr Know

SC Supporter
Aug 21, 2008
11,612
9,430
Talk about closing the door after the horse has bolted. £80m for a diving little shit and not to mention the way Man Shitty are turning players heads with big wages! thats whats killing football. We got managers saying how Eduado (sp?) diving for a penalty is wrong and its showing bad sportsmanship but their is no sport any more, its all pure business, its all about the money.
 

Samson

Well-Known Member
May 14, 2007
1,154
304
Surely all Mansour would need to do is buy one ticket for 300 million pounds?

Silly proposal. I'm no free marketer, but surely UEFA should be encouraging what Man City are doing. It shows the folly of all the debt accrued by other clubs, secure in their European Super League, and the egotism of Abramovich in supposing he was the only one capable of spending hundreds of never-to-be-recouped millions on a football team. And don't get me started on Perez (and Laporta is no angel).

Liverpool, Man United, Real Madrid won't go bust, but someone else (anyone else!) might get a turn.
 

Pringle

Well-Known Member
Dec 25, 2006
3,580
516
what is worse man city or florentino perez?

Man City by a mile imo! aint R Madrid government owned? so for example if they get a new president, it wont affect their spending power? Where as Man City are only going to be rich whilst the current guy is in charge. As soon as he walks away they are in huge danger of going bust surely?
 

Krafty

Well-Known Member
May 26, 2004
4,781
2,108
It sounds good, but it cant and wont happen.

Funny how all those 'big club', 'sugar daddy' owners behind it have already splashed all their money and made their clubs big (and guaranteed big revenues in the future).

Clubs like Real and Barca, owned by the supporters and financed by huge bank loans, can get round it very easily.

I do think something can be done to stop people buying clubs by taking out huge mortgages (in effect), saddling the club with debt simply because the owner doesnt have the money, or doesnt want to risk his own money
 

spursandbarca

Well-Known Member
Jul 18, 2008
3,972
446
not owned by the government, owned by the fans.

madrid were 400 mil euros in debt before perez, and he took out loans for 200 million more, to be paid off within 3 years. 14% interest on the loans.(hope noone within the banking industry is reading this)
 

Pringle

Well-Known Member
Dec 25, 2006
3,580
516
providing they can pay off the loan then there is no issue. I have no doubt they can as they are the biggest club in the world with huge income as well. I remember reading that after 1 of there big money transfers they were expecting to have the money recouped from the merchandising from the player! R Madrid have so much going for them that they can afford to borrow this kind of money!

btw - is it fact that the loan is 14% or just rumour?

Man city are very different - they are a far far smaller club who are being bankrolled by 1 man. As soon as he goes, they are in deep doo doo!
 

Andy

Staff
Mar 21, 2005
7,833
418
can't see it happening, if for example someone buys charlton after this date and they wish to buy players(it's not the buying clubs fault for the price of player, it's their fault for paying it though...), how on earth can they say no you can't buy this player or that player and offer this wage, the answer will be given as but chelsea, man city, real madrid and many other are and have done it, why can't we?
plus who is going to be checking on every penny recieved and laid out by every club?
 

MR_BEN

Well-Known Member
Aug 5, 2005
3,153
1,549
i dont have any problem with the man city situation - they wont spend like this year in year out, and there is no debt. People keep saying what if the guy gets bored ? Why would he? He hasnt got bored of any of his other ventures, and even if he did, someone else would buy them.

i dont think what uefa are suggesting is workable. its rediculous.
 
Top