FFP Again

[Dameerto]

Interesting to note that they had been warned about their finances first, though.

[Piccsnumberoneblue]

I was thinking about this earlier. let's take Aston Villa, a club that we know will be hamstrung by FFP for any future glory. Randy Lerner knows that he can't afford to compete with the top clubs, and therefore is not going to see Villa win the League or even qualify for the Champions' League. He can now achieve mid table obscurity at a lower price. He wasn't gonna win it anyway, now failure will be cheaper for him. . . . . And he can blame 'the rules'.
Would Randy Lerner vote for FFP? Possibly.

[ronk]

The Turkish club situation is different. They've failed to pay wages and instalments of transfer fees.

From a UEFA POV this is the 2nd worst thing a club can do (after match fixing).

There's no risk of that problem with us, so drastic steps like that won't easily happen.

[john68]

My apologies Paddy Blue...I was aware that UeFA had banned clubs previously and maybe it was remiss of me not to make it plain that I was posting specifically about the FFPR that are now being introduced.

Mancio,
This is not the 1st time you have suggested that the FFPR will not happen. You seem to be convinced that this all scaremongering. What leads you to this conclusion?

[Rag_hater]

The Turkish club situation is different. They've failed to pay wages and instalments of transfer fees.

From a UEFA POV this is the 2nd worst thing a club can do (after match fixing).

There's no risk of that problem with us, so drastic steps like that won't easily happen.

Think this is the main point.

[Slim]

I was thinking about this earlier. let's take Aston Villa, a club that we know will be hamstrung by FFP for any future glory. Randy Lerner knows that he can't afford to compete with the top clubs, and therefore is not going to see Villa win the League or even qualify for the Champions' League. He can now achieve mid table obscurity at a lower price. He wasn't gonna win it anyway, now failure will be cheaper for him. . . . . And he can blame 'the rules'.
Would Randy Lerner vote for FFP? Possibly.

Let's say you are a billionairre looking to emulate Manchester City, PSG, Chelsea, etc. And you think, I'll buy a club for an inflated price(as they all do), and spend lavish amounts of cash getting them to a point where they can compete in Europe. UEFA might have their regulations but until this club gets to that point, FFP can go do one.

Now he has a choice, he can buy a club in Spain(no domestic FFP), Italy(no domestic FFP) or England(domestic FFP). Now which do you think he is going to purchase?

On the flipside, Randy Lerner with his Aston Villa will never compete and the only chance he has to make a significant profit and get out of the club is to sell to a rich billionairre who wants to spend this money, do you think he is going to willingly hurt the resale value and attractiveness of his club in order for Manchester fucking United to maintain their monopoly across the board?

Where...exactly where is the upside for him in voting for it? Because it will screw City and Chelsea? Because he gets a fall guy for his clubs inability to compete? Give me a fucking break, if it doesn't have a $$$$ sign attached to it, he wouldn't give a flying fuck about voting for it.

[Beefymcfc]

FFP - like going to the bar and asking for Stella only to be given a pint of Fosters. I'm going to look at the pint, look at the barmaid, turn-about in disgust and walk out the door.

[Piccsnumberoneblue]

I was thinking about this earlier. let's take Aston Villa, a club that we know will be hamstrung by FFP for any future glory. Randy Lerner knows that he can't afford to compete with the top clubs, and therefore is not going to see Villa win the League or even qualify for the Champions' League. He can now achieve mid table obscurity at a lower price. He wasn't gonna win it anyway, now failure will be cheaper for him. . . . . And he can blame 'the rules'.
Would Randy Lerner vote for FFP? Possibly.

Let's say you are a billionairre looking to emulate Manchester City, PSG, Chelsea, etc. And you think, I'll buy a club for an inflated price(as they all do), and spend lavish amounts of cash getting them to a point where they can compete in Europe. UEFA might have their regulations but until this club gets to that point, FFP can go do one.

Now he has a choice, he can buy a club in Spain(no domestic FFP), Italy(no domestic FFP) or England(domestic FFP). Now which do you think he is going to purchase?

On the flipside, Randy Lerner with his Aston Villa will never compete and the only chance he has to make a significant profit and get out of the club is to sell to a rich billionairre who wants to spend this money, do you think he is going to willingly hurt the resale value and attractiveness of his club in order for Manchester fucking United to maintain their monopoly across the board?

Where...exactly where is the upside for him in voting for it? Because it will screw City and Chelsea? Because he gets a fall guy for his clubs inability to compete? Give me a fucking break, if it doesn't have a $$$$ sign attached to it, he wouldn't give a flying fuck about voting for it.

Cheers for that Slim. I'm trying to work out if there is a reason for the likes of Villa, Everton, Newcastle etc to vote it in. It had crossed my mind that the chance to sell it on is diminished, except if it is a profitable business as it stands, which supposedly FFP will encourage. I wonder how supporters will react at these clubs if the final hope is crushed. There has been a drift away gradually by supporters of this type of club, would it become a stampede?

[patrickblue]

My apologies Paddy Blue...I was aware that UeFA had banned clubs previously and maybe it was remiss of me not to make it plain that I was posting specifically about the FFPR that are now being introduced.

Mancio,
This is not the 1st time you have suggested that the FFPR will not happen. You seem to be convinced that this all scaremongering. What leads you to this conclusion?

TBH I wasn't sure if it was done under FFPR, it was the fact that it specifically stated in the article that it was that prompted me to post.

[Dameerto]

I was thinking about this earlier. let's take Aston Villa, a club that we know will be hamstrung by FFP for any future glory. Randy Lerner knows that he can't afford to compete with the top clubs, and therefore is not going to see Villa win the League or even qualify for the Champions' League. He can now achieve mid table obscurity at a lower price. He wasn't gonna win it anyway, now failure will be cheaper for him. . . . . And he can blame 'the rules'.
Would Randy Lerner vote for FFP? Possibly.

Let's say you are a billionairre looking to emulate Manchester City, PSG, Chelsea, etc. And you think, I'll buy a club for an inflated price(as they all do), and spend lavish amounts of cash getting them to a point where they can compete in Europe. UEFA might have their regulations but until this club gets to that point, FFP can go do one.

Now he has a choice, he can buy a club in Spain(no domestic FFP), Italy(no domestic FFP) or England(domestic FFP). Now which do you think he is going to purchase?

On the flipside, Randy Lerner with his Aston Villa will never compete and the only chance he has to make a significant profit and get out of the club is to sell to a rich billionairre who wants to spend this money, do you think he is going to willingly hurt the resale value and attractiveness of his club in order for Manchester fucking United to maintain their monopoly across the board?

Where...exactly where is the upside for him in voting for it? Because it will screw City and Chelsea? Because he gets a fall guy for his clubs inability to compete? Give me a fucking break, if it doesn't have a $$$$ sign attached to it, he wouldn't give a flying fuck about voting for it.

Cheers for that Slim. I'm trying to work out if there is a reason for the likes of Villa, Everton, Newcastle etc to vote it in. It had crossed my mind that the chance to sell it on is diminished, except if it is a profitable business as it stands, which supposedly FFP will encourage. I wonder how supporters will react at these clubs if the final hope is crushed. There has been a drift away gradually by supporters of this type of club, would it become a stampede?

The reason they could vote it in, is if they think it will lead to a position where they are making handsome profits from their midtable obscurity season after season. IF it looks likely that they can, the Prem becomes a multimillionaire's playground rather than a billionaire's, and the net result would be more businessmen owning clubs and less football enthusiasts.

[john68]

Slim,
An interesting scenario and a point well made Mate but I think it is only one scenario of a number.
Premier league clubs are global brands and irrespective of the profit that the actual club makes, they can also be used as a vehicle to raise the global profile of the owners other interests.

The ADUG group made it quite clear at the time of their take over that they wanted to use the CITY brand to attach other businesses to. Consider the profile of a Premier League club, shown globally on TV once possibly twice a week, plus all the additional programmes, radio coverage, on-line and newspaper coverage. It makes owning a Premier League club almost cheap, as long as the profile is handled right.

I have no knowledge of Lerner's situation but with the new TV deal, there is plenty of scope for profit at Villa.

[DoomMerchant]

City, no matter how much we spend or what we decide, will never be banned from anything for FFP. Why we are playing a cat and mouse game about it i'm interested in, but....

it's a fucking joke, and will never work.

end of story.

cheers

[john68]

City, no matter how much we spend or what we decide, will never be banned from anything for FFP. Why we are playing a cat and mouse game about it i'm interested in, but....

it's a fucking joke, and will never work.

end of story.

cheers

I don't understand why or how you have come to the conclusion that FFPR will be a nonsense Mate. I'm not suggesting you are wrong but most high level and considered opinion seems to disagree with you. UeFA want it,the Clubs themselves want it, the European Commission support it.
It is not necessarily banning clubs Mate, but there are a whole range of listed and announced sanctions that UeFa have that could damage us.
Personally, I think with the efforts and progress we have made, we should escape being banned but I do see a distinct danger of other sanctions possibly being imposed.

[carl_feedthegoat]

City, no matter how much we spend or what we decide, will never be banned from anything for FFP. Why we are playing a cat and mouse game about it i'm interested in, but....

it's a fucking joke, and will never work.

end of story.

cheers

I don't understand why or how you have come to the conclusion that FFPR will be a nonsense Mate. I'm not suggesting you are wrong but most high level and considered opinion seems to disagree with you. UeFA want it,the Clubs themselves want it, the European Commission support it.
It is not necessarily banning clubs Mate, but there are a whole range of listed and announced sanctions that UeFa have that could damage us.
Personally, I think with the efforts and progress we have made, we should escape being banned but I do see a distinct danger of other sanctions possibly being imposed.

What I dont understand is that there will be financial penalties ontop of other penalties for clubs who dont comply...seems contridictory to what they are trying to do.

[Dameerto]

IF there's a situation where a club is penalised for effectively spending too much money on transfers, the most obvious punishment for a first offender would be a transfer embago.

[Swales4ever]

Mancio,
This is not the 1st time you have suggested that the FFPR will not happen. You seem to be convinced that this all scaremongering. What leads you to this conclusion?

Sir John,
everytime a tosser from the Establiment try and strive an additional tributary (now it seems to be the EPL FFP) of the main FFP stream of bollox, this debate starts back to square one: honestly but humbly, it's sickening... ;)
what leads? roughly cuz I still have to sort out the baggage to come at Yours...

1st and most important: IT GOES AGAINST THE FOUNDATION ITSELF OF THE EU (designed, with all the complications and byzantines typical of our European prides for local diversities, to be the same open area as the USA are): IT FACTUALLY DENIES ALL THE PILLARS OF FREE TRADE (absence of "trade-distorting", Free access to markets, Inability of firms to distort markets through government-imposed monopoly or oligopoly power, basically). I don't give a flying shit on whether few obscure officials of UE and UEFA met behind the scenes and agrred a private interpretation which would deem the FFP set of rules as accorded to the European Community treaties, law and regulation on anty-monopoly and free trade. It's not an estoppel. It will never prevent a Club like City to suit those desperate bunch of Debt Holders and their appointed sniper (UEFA President) before all the viable instances of the European Justice. THEY ARE FULLY AWARE OF THIS AND WILL NEVER RISK TO MAKE IMPLODE THE GOLDEN GOOSE, just to protect Gill and Co.: THE ARE JUST PREDENDING! Throughout the full set of judicial instances, They should face a Legion of Top Lawyers who just need to find a Court in the will of sifting NOT ONLY the formal compliance of FFPR with the FREE TRADE & ANTI-MONOPOLY principles, but also THE PRACTICAL EFFECTS of them towards INVESTORS IN THE WILL TO TRADE ON THE OPEN MARKET and TO INJECT WEALTH INTO THE FOOTBALL SYSTEM. there is no jurist in the whole world that can say for granted that FFP will be upheld.
The case is even more ludicrous when considered domestically: we are talking of a Fair, Globally recognised INVESTOR who have poured in excess of half a billion pounds of equity (at very least) into the ENGLISH ECONOMY, also redeveloping, multiplying the estate values and creating thousands jobs in one of the most degraded areas of the Country. Just to remember the present incumbent at Downing Str. is a Tory and what is the sole CREED of the Tories (as well as American Republicans)? CUT TAXES AND BUROCRACY IN ORDER TO EASY THE FREEDOM OF INVESTMENTS, right?

2nd: FFP is sold as a regulation to enforce smoothing of costs: hence it provides for a gradation of sanctions aimed at forcing the path to compliance and cost savings. the last MCFC financial statement can be fairly considered the peak of reported losses, while the forthcoming will report a sensible decrease of the loss ratio and the subsequent one 2012/13 will almost get close to break even.
NOW, taking into account that 2010/11 scrutiny has already granted the licence and MCFC admitted to CL draw, how the hell the next FS giving proof of a SERIOUS PATH TOWARDS COMPLIANCE might be deemed to withdraw the licence? Can City get a lower fine for non compliance in the first season of the FFP's application? It might even happen, but it wont stop our path towards compliance (next season = 1 maximum purchase, reduction of payroll and huge increase of revenues).
Still I'd struggle to find out how it might apply to city and not to Chealsea probably, and surely to PSG, Zenith and Anzhi

I have plenty of respect for Your passionate research of datas, figures and independant legal advices, but trust me when I say that IT IS THAT SIMPLE, while on the other hand, this tempative, MEDIATIC only witch hunt to the MAIN CHALLENGER, involves too many factors (political, economical and legal) in the equation to be controlled and forced to the way G14 would love.

IT WON'T NEVER happen, and when the 2012/13 Financial Statements will be released in a little more than an year time, You will finally waive all the worries and start enjoying the ride: I can think of very few, if any, who deserve it most.
when I'll have the pleasure to be admitted to Your gracious presence, my Lord, I'll try to be more exhaustive and technical, if You'd want.

[john68]

City, no matter how much we spend or what we decide, will never be banned from anything for FFP. Why we are playing a cat and mouse game about it i'm interested in, but....

it's a fucking joke, and will never work.

end of story.

cheers

I don't understand why or how you have come to the conclusion that FFPR will be a nonsense Mate. I'm not suggesting you are wrong but most high level and considered opinion seems to disagree with you. UeFA want it,the Clubs themselves want it, the European Commission support it.
It is not necessarily banning clubs Mate, but there are a whole range of listed and announced sanctions that UeFa have that could damage us.
Personally, I think with the efforts and progress we have made, we should escape being banned but I do see a distinct danger of other sanctions possibly being imposed.

What I dont understand is that there will be financial penalties ontop of other penalties for clubs who dont comply...seems contridictory to what they are trying to do.

The only thing that any of us know Mate, is what the list of sanctions is. Not even the clubs themselves know how harshly or leniently they may be applied. Unless UeFA make some statement we will only know that when UeFA start to apply sanctions.

[john68]

Mancio,
With respect.
1...The FFPR is NOT as some seem to think, something that may or not be introduced in the near future. IT IS HERE NOW. It actually exists as we speak. We are currently in the initial part of the compliance period. Denying it WON'T happen is nonsense mate...It IS HAPPENING. Consider the fact that clubs like City have actually changed their whole investment strategy. They would only have done so with the best of advice and yet none of that advice available seems to have found any grounds to legally challenge it. I am certain had that been the case, City would have ignored compliance and the investment strategy remained unchanged.

2..."I don't give a flying shit on whether few obscure officials of UE and UEFA met behind the scenes and agrred a private interpretation which would deem the FFP set of rules as accorded to the European Community treaties, law and regulation on anty-monopoly and free trade." The European are NOT a bunch of obscure officials. The EC is the driving force behind almost all EU policy and EU law. Probably the most powerful body within the EU. It has already stated its full support.

3...The FFPR does not regulate how clubs spend their money. It merely states that clubs that don't meet the stated criteria MAY be subject to sanction and/or MAY not be granted a UeFA licence. The FFPR has the full support of the ECA. Do you really think that UeFA drew up these regulations without doing their legal homework and without ensuring their legal and political arses were well and truly covered?

4... "...just to protect Gill and Co..."Your interesting use of language that is NOT true but used to attempt to diminish why the FFPR have been introduced. Gill is merely a negotiator for one part of the drivers behind these regulations. The FFPR are being introduced to defend the multi billion Euro markets and incomes of multi global companies.

5...The Tory creed also serves to defend those who are its friends...but that is totally irrelevant. The Government have played no part in any of this, Tory or Labour.

6...This is the 1st season of compliance, so your whole point about last season's balance sheet is irrelevant. It is useful only as a reference to our starting point. As the question of any FFPR sanctions being applied does not start for another couple of seasons. Your statement about a licence being granted to us despite our financial showing is irrelevant.

7...UeFA don't REMOVE licenses already granted. The licence is granted or not each season. In a couple of seasons clubs have to comply to certain laid down criteria for this to happen or to limit sanctions.
8...Hiding behind Chelsea, PSG et al is another nonsense. Each club will be treated on its merits individually. If those other clubs fail that is their business. "My mate murdered his sister, so it is ok for me to murder mine" is not a defence Mate.

Finally, I have already stated that with the improvements to city's balance sheet, plus investment in the Academy and other measures City have taken to attempt to become compliant, I don't think City will be refused a licence but may be subject to some other sanction.

[Socrates]

UEFA wise FFP is just an extension and strengthening of the same rules that are being used against Turkish clubs and would have been used against Rangers if that club hadn't folded altogether. UEFA's right to grant licenses to compete is indisputable. As long as it is administered fairly from club to club there is little that can be done but to comply with it.

[Beefymcfc]

UEFA wise FFP is just an extension and strengthening of the same rules that are being used against Turkish clubs and would have been used against Rangers if that club hadn't folded altogether. UEFA's right to grant licenses to compete is indisputable. As long as it is administered fairly from club to club there is little that can be done but to comply with it.

Which we will, of course. The fair bit is a different matter.