• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Emirates Marketing Project FFP & New York/Melbourne

T

tw12yid

Anthony Gardner
Having seen David Villas signing for New York City FC quickly becoming to a loan to Melbourne City FC and realising they are both owned by the same company that owns Emirates Marketing Project this got me thinking.

Would it be possible for New York/Melbourne to buy a player and then loan him straight to Emirates Marketing Project therefore to keep the transfer off of the books of Emirates Marketing Project also maybe subsidise the wages? I know this is a bit of a random throw away comment/conspiracy to make but just wondering why they would have brought two teams which are not exactly in leagues which are the best, ok i know the growth of the MLS is there but the A League is hardly a footballing hotbed. The only thing i know is that both are not answerable to uefas FFP, although as both are in franchise style leagues i assume there is some stipulations.
 
The fact the A-League has attracted David Villa, after Alessandro del Piero shows just how quickly the league is growing here. Very smart to invest here for a number of reasons.

There no way they would sign a player to loan them to City - both the MLS and A-League have salary caps, and even if you were to use a designated / marquee player slot, it would greatly hinder the teams. I can't see why they would need to do that.
 
Matthew Syed explains his opinion on why these guys spending so much on footy teams generally.

[video=youtube;GmCtci6cen8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GmCtci6cen8[/video]
 
Last edited:
tommysvr said:
The fact the A-League has attracted David Villa, after Alessandro del Piero shows just how quickly the league is growing here. Very smart to invest here for a number of reasons.

There no way they would sign a player to loan them to City - both the MLS and A-League have salary caps, and even if you were to use a designated / marquee player slot, it would greatly hinder the teams. I can't see why they would need to do that.
Click to expand...

The Salary would be taken over at the City end.. the transfer fee would be taken on by the two clubs. It could be done.. a bit like any loan player here, we would cover his wages and the parent club could take it off theres, unless they needed to supplement like Adebayor and City.
 
I don't think there are overall budget restrictions in MLS, just the salary cap. So the Sheikh can put in money for transfer fees in NY without salary cap implications. [I'm sure I'll be corrected if wrong]. So the loan to City would work as long as the wages could be kept off the salary cap number for the NY club.

Another way City could exploit it would be by selling an excess player to the NY or Melbourne clubs at an inflated price. Say they sell Barry to NY for £50m. The £50m transfer fee would help balance the books for FFP at City and I don't think it would be a factor in the salary cap at NY, so the owners could put in the money in NY and it would be transferred to City without FFP or salary cap implications.
 
In the end City could pay a player £1/week and get him a part time ambassador "job" at Etihad Airways paying £1m/week.
 
Bullet said:
In the end City could pay a player £1/week and get him a part time ambassador "job" at Etihad Airways paying £1m/week.
Click to expand...

this and all the other bending of the rules such as the one mentioned by the op are not allowed under current rules. but no doubt about it, teams like Emirates Marketing Project will look to get away with as much as possible. and although it may not be as obvious as these examples, they will find ways of bending the rules just enough so that they aren't legally compromised. which is why ffp is so so bad for football. the honest clubs will be the ones punished the most by the rules.
 
Frank Lampard is solely a Emirates Marketing Project player - and never signed a formal contract with New York City after leaving Chelsea

The Premier League has confirmed that Frank Lampard is registered as a player solely with Emirates Marketing Project.

The league is also satisfied that the Premier League champions have not broken any rules over their signing of the former England midfielder.

Lampard, 36, was expected to join City's sister club New York City full-time this month having apparently been on loan in Manchester from the American outfit.

But now it seems that Lampard, despite being announced as a New York signing last summer, has never signed any formal contract with the Major League Soccer newcomers.

Lampard had actually been on a short-term, full-time deal with City for the first half of the season and that was extended to the end of the campaign on New Year's Eve.

It means confusion remains over what exactly Lampard had agreed with NYCFC, who had publicly announced they expected the player to join up with them on January 1, while Lampard also fronted their season ticket marketing campaign.

There have been suggestions that Lampard might actually have signed with the City Football Group - the parent company for both clubs - but the Premier League has indicated there is no provision for a move to NYCFC.

The league has looked into the matter, feeling it needed to ascertain who owned Lampard's contract to safeguard the integrity of its competition.

And, despite the confusion, it has concluded nothing untoward has occurred.

A Premier League statement read: "Frank Lampard is registered with Emirates Marketing Project FC until the end of the 2014-15 season.

"The Premier League has sought and received assurances from Emirates Marketing Project that there is no agreement in place between the club or City Football Group with New York City FC relating to the player."

City have not yet responded to requests to clarify the situation.

New York City said on December 31 they were unsure when Lampard would now join them.

"His exact starting date with New York City FC will be confirmed as the EPL and MLS seasons unfold," a statement read.

Lampard, released by Chelsea at the end of last season, has made a positive impression at the Etihad Stadium and scored seven goals so far this term.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...-york-city-after-leaving-chelsea-9966147.html
 
This Lampard deal stinks. I think that it is time that the registration/ownership details of players were open and published.
 
it does, I agree

if city hold his reg they must surely be paying his wages, he's purely a city player, what the hell was the New York thing about and are they guilty of some kind of fraud by claiming they had signed him?
 
galeforce said:
it does, I agree

if city hold his reg they must surely be paying his wages, he's purely a city player, what the hell was the New York thing about and are they guilty of some kind of fraud by claiming they had signed him?
Click to expand...
I think that it is very suspicious that they keep changing their story. Earlier in the week they were claiming that his registration was held by the holding company, which sounds suspiciously like third party ownership to me, now they have changed their story and said that his registration has always been held by City. If that is the case why did they not say that from the off and surely the papers they submitted to the FA/Premier League must have included ownership details.
 
West Ham only got a fine didn't they?

Milo, exactly, if the current story is accurate why didn't City announce him as a free transfer rather than a loan?

Baldricks Apple Crumble
 
galeforce said:
it does, I agree

if city hold his reg they must surely be paying his wages, he's purely a city player, what the hell was the New York thing about and are they guilty of some kind of fraud by claiming they had signed him?
Click to expand...

If this is the case then surely it must be fraud, and anyone buying a season ticket must have grounds for a refund.

Its like advertising a 5-a-side tournament featuring Lionel Messi, then people turn up and its actually a load of unknown players and release a statement that as Messi is registered to Barcelona he didn't attend.
 
I kinda think Emirates Marketing Project/ city group weren't trying to do anything malicious here.

i think lampard not having signed at all with nycfc (and only holding a contract at Emirates Marketing Project) could be a purely an administrative thing. international loans (between foreign teams) are technically full transfers from an administrative perspective. this is because there are no international frameworks for loans per se, and so teams just transfer the players ownership to the player's new club and make an agreement to sign the player back (on a permanent deal) once the player's "loan" period has ended. i've explained it very poorly here. but in contrast, domestic loans within england are "actual loans" because the fa have regulations in place that enable to borrowing of players.

in lampard's case, he wouldve signed with the city group and Emirates Marketing Project. hence he plays for Emirates Marketing Project today. but since his ownership is with the city group, i can see why they didnt make him sign with nycfc in the first place. since we wouldve had to tear up that deal to sign for Emirates Marketing Project anyway. from an administrative perspective, it would be smoother to make him have a deal with Emirates Marketing Project until January, and then sign a new deal with nycfc at a later date.

as it happens, the city group have decided to keep him at Emirates Marketing Project for an extended period of time, hence all the confusion and accusations surrounding whats occured. had his time with Emirates Marketing Project ended at the originally announced time, there would be no confusion whatsoever. and i genuinely think that lampard was only at Emirates Marketing Project until now to keep fit, as he would have had no football for months otherwise (like David Villa at Melbourne City). but his performances have been so unexpectadley good, that the city group have extended his "loan". hence, i dont think anything dodgy has taken place here.

having said that, with the city umbrella group, i think there is scope for the city group to bend the rules (particularly of ffp), and i suspect they will pursue avenues here to gain sporting advantages. and i can see why "fans" who have bought nycfc tickets and merchandise are annoyed.
 
Neymar said:
I kinda think Emirates Marketing Project/ city group weren't trying to do anything malicious here.

i think lampard not having signed at all with nycfc (and only holding a contract at Emirates Marketing Project) could be a purely an administrative thing. international loans (between foreign teams) are technically full transfers from an administrative perspective. this is because there are no international frameworks for loans per se, and so teams just transfer the players ownership to the player's new club and make an agreement to sign the player back (on a permanent deal) once the player's "loan" period has ended. i've explained it very poorly here. but in contrast, domestic loans within england are "actual loans" because the fa have regulations in place that enable to borrowing of players.

in lampard's case, he wouldve signed with the city group and Emirates Marketing Project. hence he plays for Emirates Marketing Project today. but since his ownership is with the city group, i can see why they didnt make him sign with nycfc in the first place. since we wouldve had to tear up that deal to sign for Emirates Marketing Project anyway. from an administrative perspective, it would be smoother to make him have a deal with Emirates Marketing Project until January, and then sign a new deal with nycfc at a later date.

as it happens, the city group have decided to keep him at Emirates Marketing Project for an extended period of time, hence all the confusion and accusations surrounding whats occured. had his time with Emirates Marketing Project ended at the originally announced time, there would be no confusion whatsoever. and i genuinely think that lampard was only at Emirates Marketing Project until now to keep fit, as he would have had no football for months otherwise (like David Villa at Melbourne City). but his performances have been so unexpectadley good, that the city group have extended his "loan". hence, i dont think anything dodgy has taken place here.

having said that, with the city umbrella group, i think there is scope for the city group to bend the rules (particularly of ffp), and i suspect they will pursue avenues here to gain sporting advantages. and i can see why "fans" who have bought nycfc tickets and merchandise are annoyed.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I think that the whole thing appears to be dishonest and potentially fraudulent. It is the first time that I am aware of something like this occurring but I expect the rules to changes as a result.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back