• 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

Financial Fair Play

Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

SWP29 said:
Is it not good progress? We're on course to break even over the next few years, through reduced spending and higher income. We're not completely ignoring FFP like PSG, we're trying to comply with them, and initially that is all they're asking for.

The fact you mentioned the word 'business' makes it a completely different issue. If it is about the 'business', then surely the poorly managed clubs will surely fail?
Click to expand...

SWP29, I respect you as a fan and personally love to see you on this board. But please don't dig too much into this FFP thing. We all know City got lucky since the FFP was introduced too late to catch clubs like Chel$ki and City now.

PSG is just trying to play catching up, if anything I think FFP actually helps Chel$ki and City by setting a barrier of entry.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

Exactly. The FFP is to protect the elite.

The only question is who joined them in time. Unfortunately, Chelsea have, but the question is still out for City, PSG, Anzi, and Malaga (assuming they clear the current problem). All these clubs have money and expensive lawyers, so one can guess the outcome.

For newcomers it becomes more difficult.
 
City fans have never said anything different. We were very lucky to get the money when we did. Conversely, we were very unlucky to be in the position where our owner was being hunted down by UN and seeking asylum in England. I personally think we'll comply, but just by the skin of our teeth. PSG won't and they know they won't so went out and spent £40m on a defender, £30m on a striker aged over 30, £30m on a winger and £15m on a 17-year-old.

Interestingly, one of the executives of the Qatari investment company in charge of PSG is none other than Michel Platini's son.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

SWP29 said:
Is it not good progress? We're on course to break even over the next few years, through reduced spending and higher income. We're not completely ignoring FFP like PSG, we're trying to comply with them, and initially that is all they're asking for.
Click to expand...


It is progress yes. But you mention that PSG are taking the tinkle but how is spending 38m on Aguero also not taking the tinkle? Or Savic for 10m or Nasri for 24m?

Same thing really but you are too blinkered to see it.

£97m is a huge loss and in fact only Chelsea and you have ever lost more in a season which says it all. If you were serious then you wouldn't renew peoples contracts on massive salaries etc. Your wage bill is still 87% of turnover and will only keep rising, probably at the same rate as your turnover so I don't see how you are being serious at all.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

P.D. said:
It is progress yes.

£97m is a huge loss and in fact only Chelsea and you have ever lost more in a season which says it all. If you were serious then you wouldn't renew peoples contracts on massive salaries etc. Your wage bill is still 87% of turnover and will only keep rising, probably at the same rate as your turnover so I don't see how you are being serious at all.
Click to expand...

Yeah, talk about progress.

Everyone can see that the turnover is manipulated. I think when come to FFP, the way the NBA is functioning (focus on spending and not sustainable turnover) is more meaningful. But they only have 30 professional clubs all located in the same country (plus Toronto), so much easier to regulate.

World football is undoubtedly a big market, bigger than most US major professional sports. But every neutral market researchers will tell you City ain't in the category of the really really top echelon of football clubs (most influential or marketable) yet, and with all due respect, Machester is just not New York, LA, London, Paris or Milan.
 
Last edited:
P.D. said:
It is progress yes. But you mention that PSG are taking the tinkle but how is spending 38m on Aguero also not taking the tinkle? Or Savic for 10m or Nasri for 24m?

Same thing really but you are too blinkered to see it.

£97m is a huge loss and in fact only Chelsea and you have ever lost more in a season which says it all. If you were serious then you wouldn't renew peoples contracts on massive salaries etc. Your wage bill is still 87% of turnover and will only keep rising, probably at the same rate as your turnover so I don't see how you are being serious at all.
Click to expand...

That's the thing though: it won't get worse. A MASSIVE proportion of our spending went on players who weren't even bit-part. Off the top of my head, the £200m loss included players like Wayne Bridge, Roque Santa Cruz, Bellamy, Adebayor, Michael Johnson and Martin Petrov, all of whom were on disproportionately high contracts. They came when we were literally throwing money at anything which had a semi over what our club could be. We gave Gareth Barry an £80,000 contract ffs, and as much as I love Gareth Barry, he isn't worth that much. Just looking at those players mentioned above, we shed about £40m which hasn't been accounted for yet! We are taking shameful losses on these players, but are more than making up for it in the added TV revenue.

The long and short of it is this: we're respecting the FFP proposals by reeling in spending (I know, I know) while cutting costs. PSG are spending more and more and more. Only one of these teams are flouting FFP.

There will always be criticisms of how we have won the Premier League and the FA Cup, and I'll probably get dig's abuse for saying this, but: I wish that every football fan feels the way I have in the last two years about their football team at some point in the future.

And £38m for a GHod amongst men like Sergio Aguero is not taking the tinkle ;)
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

SWP29 said:
That's the thing though: it won't get worse. A MASSIVE proportion of our spending went on players who weren't even bit-part. Off the top of my head, the £200m loss included players like Wayne Bridge, Roque Santa Cruz, Bellamy, Adebayor, Michael Johnson and Martin Petrov, all of whom were on disproportionately high contracts. They came when we were literally throwing money at anything which had a semi over what our club could be. We gave Gareth Barry an £80,000 contract ffs, and as much as I love Gareth Barry, he isn't worth that much. Just looking at those players mentioned above, we shed about £40m which hasn't been accounted for yet! We are taking shameful losses on these players, but are more than making up for it in the added TV revenue.

The long and short of it is this: we're respecting the FFP proposals by reeling in spending (I know, I know) while cutting costs. PSG are spending more and more and more. Only one of these teams are flouting FFP.

There will always be criticisms of how we have won the Premier League and the FA Cup, and I'll probably get dig's abuse for saying this, but: I wish that every football fan feels the way I have in the last two years about their football team at some point in the future.

And £38m for a GHod amongst men like Sergio Aguero is not taking the tinkle ;)
Click to expand...

That is the biggest pile of rubbish i have ever read, did not realise people were still trying to protect city or chelsea, if you want peoples respect at least admit your corrupt.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

I am struggling to find decent sources for this, but: http://www.arabianbusiness.com/qatar-tourism-authority-said-ink-800m-psg-deal-483551.html

French football club Paris Saint-Germain has reportedly secured a major new deal with the Qatar Tourism Authority (QTA) worth at least €150m ($198m) over each of the next four seasons.
According to a report in Le Parisien newspaper, the agreement will be worth more than €200m in its final season in 2015/16 to the Qatar-owned club.

A massive F You to UEFA and FFP.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

SWP29 said:
That's the thing though: it won't get worse. A MASSIVE proportion of our spending went on players who weren't even bit-part. Off the top of my head, the £200m loss included players like Wayne Bridge, Roque Santa Cruz, Bellamy, Adebayor, Michael Johnson and Martin Petrov, all of whom were on disproportionately high contracts. They came when we were literally throwing money at anything which had a semi over what our club could be. We gave Gareth Barry an £80,000 contract ffs, and as much as I love Gareth Barry, he isn't worth that much. Just looking at those players mentioned above, we shed about £40m which hasn't been accounted for yet! We are taking shameful losses on these players, but are more than making up for it in the added TV revenue.

The long and short of it is this: we're respecting the FFP proposals by reeling in spending (I know, I know) while cutting costs. PSG are spending more and more and more. Only one of these teams are flouting FFP.

There will always be criticisms of how we have won the Premier League and the FA Cup, and I'll probably get dig's abuse for saying this, but: I wish that every football fan feels the way I have in the last two years about their football team at some point in the future.

And £38m for a GHod amongst men like Sergio Aguero is not taking the tinkle ;)
Click to expand...

I have nothing against old Chel$ki or City fans. It's not their decisions to have their clubs taken over.

But I do think your "pot calling the kettle black" attitude is really perplexing. You have mentioned in various posts earlier that Man Utd bought their first title in years, City is moving in the right direction and PSG are not etc.

Come on, no one can deny that money had and will always play a role in most football success stories. But City is probably the one that benefited the most. Chel$ki has secured UCL qualification when they were took over. PSG are in a similar position in their league. But where's City when they were took over by the sheikhs?

If I not mistaken you lots were not even close to a UEFA Cup place. The key members of the team that won the title were made up of big money purchases, some nice buys (Hart) and just one local boy (Richards). This doesn't compared well with the other sugar-daddy teams (may be Anzhi, I profess I don't know them very well), and not even Man Utd 92/93 team was that deprived of home grown talents. The only saving grace is that it's tougher to win the league now than in 92/93.

I recall some nice chaps at City, they are very traditional football fans and the atmosphere of going to pre-Sheikh City games were generally much better than most other grounds.

I am not saying you guys should not enjoy gatecrashing the Big 3, may be there are a lot new bandwagon fans now, but that's unaviodable. However, keeping an objective view on other club's forums would be much appreciated, at least by me.

Well, the way you are describing PSG somehow made me feel you are in fear of them or some other sponsored clubs, taking into consideration City still could not even deal with (relatively) "poor teams" like Ajax and Napoli etc.
 
Last edited:
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

So UEFA punish little Malaga. Wonder if they'll do the same to Emirates Marketing Project who lost £97m or Chelsea? Will they fudge!
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

Jurgen the German said:
So UEFA punish little Malaga. Wonder if they'll do the same to Emirates Marketing Project who lost £97m or Chelsea? Will they fudge!
Click to expand...

Malaga's sheikh owner bought them loads of expensive players, but haven't been keeping up with their increased running costs. FFP so far has been mostly about trying to get clubs to run within their means. Whether they'll do something about where those means come from is still an open question.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

Jordinho said:
Malaga's sheikh owner bought them loads of expensive players, but haven't been keeping up with their increased running costs. FFP so far has been mostly about trying to get clubs to run within their means. Whether they'll do something about where those means come from is still an open question.
Click to expand...

They've already proved they won't do anything as they let Emirates Marketing Project get away with that scandalous naming rights deal, £400m for a stadium that they don't even own!
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

Danners9 said:
I am struggling to find decent sources for this, but: http://www.arabianbusiness.com/qatar-tourism-authority-said-ink-800m-psg-deal-483551.html

French football club Paris Saint-Germain has reportedly secured a major new deal with the Qatar Tourism Authority (QTA) worth at least €150m ($198m) over each of the next four seasons.
According to a report in Le Parisien newspaper, the agreement will be worth more than €200m in its final season in 2015/16 to the Qatar-owned club.

A massive F You to UEFA and FFP.
Click to expand...

And there is nothing UEFA can and will do about it
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

I don't think the Malaga ban is the same thing as that which might be applied to City, Chelsea, PSG, etc., which haven't actually started yet (the period has started by the rules only get applied at the end.

With Malaga you have a club which has bought expensively but not paid its bills.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

japenesegardenlover said:
Think qpr will have trouble meeting it if this is anything to go by http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...rry-Redknapp-launches-attack-QPR-players.html

mental to think he is paid more then bale, what the hell were they thinking? i think they will go down and down again the is no way a club can sustain that, i hope for there sake they have clauses for relegations in the players contracts.
Click to expand...

Redknapp fined Bosingwa after the defender refused to sit on the bench for the game against Fulham last week. Redknapp said: ‘He didn’t want to be a substitute so he went home. He has been fined two weeks’ wages — £130,000. Not bad for two weeks is it? Not too bad for playing on a Saturday.’

Our top earner not getting £65,000 a week? No wonder Modric wanted to leave.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back