• 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

Manchester United, Arsenal and Chelsea are poised to receive a cut of Emirates Marketing Project’s Financial Fair Play fine after European clubs deemed the money should be split among themselves.

As revealed in Telegraph Sport in May, Uefa has drawn up plans for City’s fine of up to £50 million to be distributed to their rivals.

The European Club Association has since firmed up that proposal, revealing on Tuesday that the first tranche of that money should go to teams which qualified for the Champions League and Europa League last season.

Those clubs include United, Arsenal, Chelsea, Tottenham Hotspur, Swansea City and Wigan Athletic, all of whom stand to gain around £212,000 each from a pot of around £20 million collected from City and other sides who breached FFP.

A similar sum will be distributed to clubs who comply with the FFP rules in this season’s European competitions.

The chairman of the ECA, Karl-Heinz Rummenigge, said: “It was an agreement between Uefa and the clubs that it was money belonging to the clubs.”

Clubs will also have a chance to argue any changes to FFP rules at a meeting with Uefa on Oct 13.

Uefa president Michel Platini said in a speech to the ECA yesterday: “The framework for Financial Fair Play must be dynamic, it must evolve constantly, which is why I have convened an important round table on the subject with your representatives at Uefa headquarters on Oct 13.

“We will see whether any imperfections can be ironed out and whether there is room to further improve the system.”

www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/...arded-slice-of-Manchester-Citys-FFP-fine.html

Hah, we should be getting most of it. Without them buying their way in we'd have seen more CL participations.
 
Jordinho said:
Manchester United, Arsenal and Chelsea are poised to receive a cut of Emirates Marketing Project’s Financial Fair Play fine after European clubs deemed the money should be split among themselves.

As revealed in Telegraph Sport in May, Uefa has drawn up plans for City’s fine of up to £50 million to be distributed to their rivals.

The European Club Association has since firmed up that proposal, revealing on Tuesday that the first tranche of that money should go to teams which qualified for the Champions League and Europa League last season.

Those clubs include United, Arsenal, Chelsea, Tottenham Hotspur, Swansea City and Wigan Athletic, all of whom stand to gain around £212,000 each from a pot of around £20 million collected from City and other sides who breached FFP.

A similar sum will be distributed to clubs who comply with the FFP rules in this season’s European competitions.

The chairman of the ECA, Karl-Heinz Rummenigge, said: “It was an agreement between Uefa and the clubs that it was money belonging to the clubs.”

Clubs will also have a chance to argue any changes to FFP rules at a meeting with Uefa on Oct 13.

Uefa president Michel Platini said in a speech to the ECA yesterday: “The framework for Financial Fair Play must be dynamic, it must evolve constantly, which is why I have convened an important round table on the subject with your representatives at Uefa headquarters on Oct 13.

“We will see whether any imperfections can be ironed out and whether there is room to further improve the system.”

www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/...arded-slice-of-Manchester-Citys-FFP-fine.html

Hah, we should be getting most of it. Without them buying their way in we'd have seen more CL participations.
Click to expand...

So they're going to fine teams that fail the FFP rules and give that fine to other teams, which will then count as income to offset their overspending in FFP, oh Lord.
 
Sounds like UEFA are trying to implement a "luxury tax" system similar to that used in the NBA.

Wish they'd fine the heck out of Real Madrid so couldn't afford to keep poaching our best players!
 
SteveAWOL said:
Sounds like UEFA are trying to implement a "luxury tax" system similar to that used in the NBA.

Wish they'd fine the heck out of Real Madrid so couldn't afford to keep poaching our best players!
Click to expand...

While they turn out a profit each year that won't happen.
 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29140959

Manchester United profits plunge 84%

Manchester United has reported a sharp fall in annual profits despite record revenues for the year.

The football club said net income plunged 84% for the year to 30 June to £23.8m, from £146m a year ago.

Manchester United said its 2013 net income benefitted from a tax credit of £155.2m, which it received from "US deferred tax assets".

Had it not received that tax credit, the club would have made a loss of £8.8m in 2013.

The club said revenue increased 19% to £433.2m, compared with £363.2m a year earlier.

Manchester United said it expected revenue in 2015 to fall to between £385m and £395m suggesting its failure to qualify for the Champions League for the first time in 20 years may be to blame.

The club said underlying profits were £130.1m for the year to 30 June, compared with £108.6m a year earlier.

It said it expected annual profits would fall next year to between £90m and £95m.

The results also showed that David Moyes and his back room staff received a total of £5.2m in compensation following the former Manchester United manager's sacking in April after less than a year in the job.
'Track record'

Ed Woodward, executive vice chairman of Manchester United, said: "With Louis van Gaal at the helm as manager, and the recent signing of some of the world's leading players to further strengthen our squad, we are very excited about the future and believe it's the start of a new chapter in the club's history.

"Louis' footballing philosophy fits very well with Manchester United and he has an impressive track record of success throughout his career, winning league titles with every club he has managed."
Click to expand...

Full details are here:
http://ir.manutd.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=133303&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1965576&highlight=


It's going to be interesting to see how they meet the Premier League's rules with regard to wages in the year to 30 June 2015. Last year their wage bill increased by £34m to £215m. Under PL rules, their wages are only allowed to increase, compared to 2012/13, by the increase in "Club Own Revenue" (which excludes PL TV money) plus £4m per annum. They are anticipating a £40m+ fall in revenue in 2015 which should only leave room for a very modest increase in wages - which seems at odds with their summer signings.
 
Same old ManU, always buying silverware...

Would be ironic if the FFP rules are enforced against them, considering those rules were drawn up to ensure that clubs like ManU and Real Madrid could continue to financially dominate their domestic leagues as they have over the decades in which they have repeatedly set transfer records and paid the highest wages...

@sportingintel: Recommended @DTGuardian column on #mufc spending not being new & any lament for a home-grown utopia is misplaced http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/sep/13/manchester-united-not-sold-soul-bought-big …
[tweet]510911533057343489[/tweet]
 
he's right, people will start calling pot & and kettle but these rules didn't exist when he first joined Chelsea
 
Liverpool are 'very relaxed' amid suggestions they may have almost £7million of Champions League prize money withheld due to breaches of UEFA Financial Fair Play regulations.

Liverpool are due to receive the money next month, after qualifying for the first time in five years - but in order to meet Financial Fair Play regulations clubs must not lose more than £35.4m over a period of two seasons.

Emirates Marketing Project and Paris St Germain both exceeded that figure and suffered significant penalties.

Liverpool's losses for the 2012-13 financial year were £49.8m, plus £41m losses for the 10-month period through to May 2012.

However, clubs can use investment in youth development and club infrastructure to offset those figures and Liverpool believe they would have a strong case to present to UEFA should they be investigated.

Clubs can also use projected revenues when arguing their case and Liverpool figures for the current year are expected to be very healthy.

www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/...ims-lose-7m-Champions-League-prize-money.html
 
Liverpool will be named as one of several clubs under investigation by Uefa for possible financial fair play (FFP) breaches this week.

It is understood that an announcement by the European governing body is expected to be made as early as Thursday.

Liverpool, Monaco, Inter Milan and Roma - who were all absent from European competition last season and have recently submitted their accounts to Uefa - are due to be asked to provide further information on their finances to the Club Financial Control Body (CFCB).

No financial sanctions will be imposed at this stage however - though a provisional sanction to withhold Champions League money is possible as a next step in the process and the CFCB will hold talks and ask for more information from all the clubs involved before making any such decision.

Liverpool made a loss of £49.8 million for the 2012-13 season, and £40.5m for the 10-month period before that.

The Merseyside club will hope to avoid any sanctions by writing off a big chunk of losses as allowable stadium expenditure - the 2011-12 accounts reported that £49.6m was associated with Liverpool's stadium costs, £35m coming from former co-owner Tom Hick's aborted plan to build a new stadium on Stanley Park which new owners Fenway Sports Group had to scrap.

Uefa's FFP rules say losses must be no more than £35.4m over the 2011-12 and 2012-13 seasons, but allow expenses such as on youth development and stadium costs to be written off.

Emirates Marketing Project and Paris Saint-Germain were the clubs hit hardest by Uefa last season for breaching FFP rules - they were each fined £49m and handed restrictions on transfer spending and a reduction in Champions League squad size.

Uefa remain confident that legal action against its FFP rules will be defeated and that a crucial European Commission decision in its favour will be made in the next fortnight.

Emirates Marketing Project's independent supporters' club has joined the legal action being taken by Belgian agent Daniel Striani, which was lodged with the European Commission and the Belgian courts in May 2013.

A statement from MCFC Supporters Club, which has almost 15,000 active members and 168 branches worldwide, said: "Far from implementing a true 'financial fair play', this rule is in fact a prohibition to invest that prevents ambitious owners to develop their clubs, that therefore shields the established European elite from being challenged (this elite being unsurprisingly the main sponsors of the Uefa rule) and that, consequently, puts additional financial pressure on supporters (higher prices and lower quality).

"With this Uefa rule, it is now almost impossible for any ambitious investor to take over a 'sleeping giant' and to turn them into the next Emirates Marketing Project or Paris St Germain."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/liverpool/11119531/Liverpool-to-face-Uefa-financial-fair-play-investigation.html
 
The Merseyside club will hope to avoid any sanctions by writing off a big chunk of losses as allowable stadium expenditure - the 2011-12 accounts reported that £49.6m was associated with Liverpool's stadium costs, £35m coming from former co-owner Tom Hick's aborted plan to build a new stadium on Stanley Park which new owners Fenway Sports Group had to scrap.
Click to expand...

That's not quite right from 'The Telegraph' - the £49.6m cancelled stadium costs were in the 2010-11 accounts which is the year before the first year taken into consideration under FFP. If Liverpool had been in European competition last season they would have been subject to the FFP tests in relation to 2011-12 and 2012-13, which I believe they would have failed. However, they will now be able to include in the assessment the 2013-14 accounts, which are expected to be significantly better, and they'll probably escape any punishment.
 
galeforce said:
he's right, people will start calling pot & and kettle but these rules didn't exist when he first joined Chelsea
Click to expand...

He's a bloody hy-po-crite, that's what he is. Probably just his usual media games, but the fact remains there's a big chance Chelski FC wouldn't have excisted today if it wasn't for Abromawich's oil money. They certainly wouldn't have won as many (if any) trophies without the Russian and his wealth.

Yes these rules weren't in place back then, but Chelski are as bad as anyone when it comes to financial doping and buying success. In my eyes, they're the worst.


Edit: Why is the word h y p o c r i t e replaced with hypocrite??
 
No doubt UEFA will ensure that any new rules avoid penalising their beloved Real Madrid for being almost £500 million in debt though...

Manchester United could face Uefa Financial Fair Play sanction for £350m debt - Telegraph
Manchester United could become the next target of Uefa’s Financial Fair Play regulations after the governing body confirmed it would consider making debt reduction part of any change to the rules.

United have sailed through Uefa’s existing FFP tests, which focus exclusively on preventing clubs recording annual losses. But European football’s governing body has arranged a meeting on Monday to discuss potential tweaks to the regulations, amid criticisms it punishes over-investment but not the accumulation of debt.

United are £350 million in debt, having been saddled with a £790 million burden by the Glazers when they took over the club in 2005.

Gianni Infantino, Uefa’s general secretary, said: “We’re now focused on losses and to repay the debt is part of the loss that the club can make at the end of the season. But, certainly, the question of debt is something that can be put on the table.”
Click to expand...
 
The court case that might see FFP scrapped starts today in Brussels.


Financial Fair Play under threat: Brussels court case could potentially lead to rules being scrapped

Emirates Marketing Project’s hopes that Financial Fair Play (FFP) might be ruled illegal rest on a potentially hugely significant court case which opens in Brussels on Thursday.

The challenge to Uefa’s regime – which City fell foul of last year – has been brought by football agent Daniel Striani, and supporters of both City and Paris Saint-Germain, and will be heard over the next two days at the Court of First Instance in the Belgian capital.

Striani and the fans are being represented by Jean-Louis Dupont, one of the lawyers who secured the landmark Bosman ruling 20 years ago, with Dupont preparing to argue that FFP infringes competition law and should therefore be declared illegal.

European football’s governing body, Uefa – which will have its own legal representation in court – insists it has support for FFP from the European Commission, which in October decided not to investigate Striani’s case further. Legal opinion suggests that it may be more than a year before the case is resolved.

The case of Karen Murphy, the Portsmouth landlady who took on the Premier League, underlines how drawn out decisions can be. Ms Murphy went to court to fight for her right to use satellite decoders to show live football intended for transmission abroad.

The legal argument in the Striani case is that the break-even requirement of FFP is in breach of article 101.2 of the EU Treaty. This article prohibits cartels and other agreements that could disrupt free competition and, therefore, have an impact on consumer protection.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...ly-lead-to-rules-being-scrapped-10070581.html
 
at its base, FPP protects the people who have already done financial doping.

It may be a long drawn out case, but likely to see FPP thrown out once serious scrutiny happens.
 
If it gets a final decision, I find it hard to believe that FFP wouldn't be declared illegal because of competition law.

However, I wouldn't be surprised if they reach a settlement involving the clubs, UEFA and the European Commission. Perhaps something introducing an altered FFP more slowly so that City and PSG find themselves on the inside. Then they can back it the cause of fairness, just as Chelsea support FFP now.
 
Sports have all kinds of rules, it's not a normal business. Limited spending could be one.

The competition comparison to normal business would be two different sports trying to draw customers.
 
Raziel said:
at its base, FPP protects the people who have already done financial doping.

It may be a long drawn out case, but likely to see FPP thrown out once serious scrutiny happens.
Click to expand...

Whist the challenge has substance, I doubt that it will be successful
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back