The mancityfans.net football forum

Anyone seen this?

[urlnp=http://www.sportsfeatures.com/soccernews/story/46606/rummenigge-says-euro-clubs-have-cut-deal-with-uefa-on-debt-mountain]Link[/urlnp]

Rummenigge says Euro clubs have cut deal with UEFA on debt mountain

Karl-Heinz Rummenigge: leading force with Bayern and the ECA / Fotosports.com

MANCHESTER, Mar 02: Europe’s top clubs believe they have reached a compromise with European federation UEFA over the introduction of the financial fair play regulations designed to control the debt mountain.

But debt constructions such as that ‘owned’ by Manchester United, currently standing at around £716m, does not count apparently which raises an element of doubt over all these good intentions.

The complexities of the proposed regulatory system were outlined by Karl-Heinz Rummenigge, chairman of the European Club Association, after a general meeting of 93 member clubs from 53 countries during the Soccerex European Forum.

Rummenigge, chief executive of Bayern Munich, said: “We have had a very fruitful and long dicussion about the financial fair play concept presented six months by UEFA and we had full support from all the clubs for the work done by the working group.

“We have had some trouble in the economic world but we have had some economic troubles in the football industry too so this is a good moment to intervene and I’m 100pc convinced it will help.”

Rummenigge – and ECA executive board member David Gill from Manchester United – indicated confidence that the proposed threshold for club accountability could be scrapped, that the conversion of debt into equity was acceptable and that the phasing-in time schedule could be effectively extended (from 2015 to 2018).

Positive trading

Gill, meanwhile, explained that United’s debt was irrelevant as long as the club was trading positively. He refused to comment on reports of a ‘Red Knight’ group considering raising funds to try to buy out the Glazer family.

Rummenigge said that earlier in the week he and UEFA president Michel Platini had had a very positive meeting with Richard Scudamore, chief executive of the Premier League. This was significant because the debt levels of English football have been a target of concern for Platini.

Rummenigge added: “This has been a good day for European club football. Lots of money comes into European and there is no reason the clubs cannot operate properly. We could not go as we have. I have had the feeling that we in the clubs have been spending more and more money and we are always being obliged to buy players, by the press and supporters. But where is the money?”

Finally, and ironically considering its debts, Rummenigge ended with a ringing endorsement of the Premier League.

He said: “I’m one of the biggest followers of the Premier League because every Sunday I watch one or two games and I recognise that the Premier League is No1 in the world. That won’t change because they are doing a good job here in England and that is good for football because we need clubs like Manchester United, like Chelsea, like Liverpool and like the ‘new’ Manchester City.”

From my understanding of this, we can buy who we want, when we want and how we want ;-)

Ok Sheiky, you'd better order a new cheque book

Can anyone confirm we are in the clear, my mate who sent it to me is unsure and so am I?

Where's that Greek Philosopher when you need him!!!

LOL at Gill. How many £80million players does he think he has to sell each season to "trade positively"

If you're a "G-14" club or whatever it was, and you unearth the next Messi or Ronaldo(teeth), and you needed to sell, much better to sell to the likes of City or Chelsea for x million than to scum for berbatov plus 10 per cent on all green and gold scarves sold for the next five years. They need us pissing in rather than pissing out.

Beefymcfc wrote:Can anyone confirm we are in the clear, my mate who sent it to me is unsure and so am I?

Where's that Greek Philosopher when you need him!!!

The key phrase is 'conversion of debt to equity was acceptable'

This alllows the Sheikh to pump in what he wants as long as he writes it off by converting the debt to equity every trading year. Same goes for Chelsea. It was always lilkely to happen becuase there is no point in detering a wealthy individual pumping money into the game (which benefits everyone) provided he doesn't do it in a way that threatens the long term viablity of the club

AS I SAID AGES AGO THEY HAD TO DO SOMETHING ALONG THESE LINES OTHERWISE IT WOULD HAVE BEEN ABSOLUTLY REDICULOUS SEEING MAN CITY WIN THE LEAGUE YEAR IN AND YEAR OUT AND NOT BEING IN THE CHAMPIONS LEAGUE.!!!!!

IM NOT EVEN SHOCKED AT THIS DECISION.

This sounds mint.

Socs - what you reckon?

What also lends credence to this story is that both Sheikh Mansour and Abramovich converted the debt to equity only few months and at pretty much the same time which would suggest that both clubs were aware of what was coming down the road and took steps accordingly.

Thanks for confirming it. Seems that there was a lot of worry about nothing, Sheikh was all over it like a tramp on chips ;-)

Hopefully it is also an acceptance that we are now part of the top teams in Europe and we might start to get better treatment. Top 4 this season and some silverware next, please, to go with our new found status amongst the G14. Wonder who will have to drop out?

Blue Since 76 wrote:Hopefully it is also an acceptance that we are now part of the top teams in Europe and we might start to get better treatment. Top 4 this season and some silverware next, please, to go with our new found status amongst the G14. Wonder who will have to drop out?

I think it may necome the new G15, or Giss for short ;-)

Never in doubt really - the clubs have called Twatini´s bluff and he´s been forced into the biggest climbdown since Tensing and Hillary descended Everest!

Beefymcfc wrote:

Blue Since 76 wrote:Hopefully it is also an acceptance that we are now part of the top teams in Europe and we might start to get better treatment. Top 4 this season and some silverware next, please, to go with our new found status amongst the G14. Wonder who will have to drop out?

I think it may necome the new G15, or Giss for short ;-)

No, it has to stay as 14, otherwise the dream of a European League wouldn't work. I think the one with the biggest debt should be kicked out

carl_feedthegoat wrote:AS I SAID AGES AGO THEY HAD TO DO SOMETHING ALONG THESE LINES OTHERWISE IT WOULD HAVE BEEN ABSOLUTLY REDICULOUS SEEING MAN CITY WIN THE LEAGUE YEAR IN AND YEAR OUT AND NOT BEING IN THE CHAMPIONS LEAGUE.!!!!!

IM NOT EVEN SHOCKED AT THIS DECISION.

Nor me. Scudamore said ages ago it was completely unworkable in the format Platini was bullshitting about & Khaldoon muttered something similar when interviewed earlier in the season.

Very interesting stuff. The debt into equity might not mean what we would like it to mean though, it may mean that it is acceptable to eliminate debt interest from the equation by capitalising accumulated debt but NOT that you can spend more than you actually earn going forwards. Would allow any club to spend up to their turnover rather than up to their turnover less debt interest repayment by eliminating that debt interest element. Still does not mean you can use equity to spend more than you earn.

whatever they finally decide, this bit sounds promising - the phasing-in time schedule could be effectively extended (from 2015 to 2018).

That buys us more than enough time to be very confident that we can raise our turnover to a competitive level in time so very hopeful.

Socrates wrote:Very interesting stuff. The debt into equity might not mean what we would like it to mean though, it may mean that it is acceptable to eliminate debt interest from the equation by capitalising accumulated debt but NOT that you can spend more than you actually earn going forwards. Would allow any club to spend up to their turnover rather than up to their turnover less debt interest repayment by eliminating that debt interest element. Still does not mean you can use equity to spend more than you earn.

whatever they finally decide, this bit sounds promising - the phasing-in time schedule could be effectively extended (from 2015 to 2018).

That buys us more than enough time to be very confident that we can raise our turnover to a competitive level in time so very hopeful.

How would they stop us from having an enormous loan paid back at a ridiculously low rate?

Quality stuff, very happy with that read.

Ted Hughes wrote:

Socrates wrote:Very interesting stuff. The debt into equity might not mean what we would like it to mean though, it may mean that it is acceptable to eliminate debt interest from the equation by capitalising accumulated debt but NOT that you can spend more than you actually earn going forwards. Would allow any club to spend up to their turnover rather than up to their turnover less debt interest repayment by eliminating that debt interest element. Still does not mean you can use equity to spend more than you earn.

whatever they finally decide, this bit sounds promising - the phasing-in time schedule could be effectively extended (from 2015 to 2018).

That buys us more than enough time to be very confident that we can raise our turnover to a competitive level in time so very hopeful.

How would they stop us from having an enormous loan paid back at a ridiculously low rate?

Nothing, but if we use it to spend more than we have EARNED then we won't meet the UEFA criteria so there would be no point doing it!

Socrates wrote:

Ted Hughes wrote:

Socrates wrote:Very interesting stuff. The debt into equity might not mean what we would like it to mean though, it may mean that it is acceptable to eliminate debt interest from the equation by capitalising accumulated debt but NOT that you can spend more than you actually earn going forwards. Would allow any club to spend up to their turnover rather than up to their turnover less debt interest repayment by eliminating that debt interest element. Still does not mean you can use equity to spend more than you earn.

whatever they finally decide, this bit sounds promising - the phasing-in time schedule could be effectively extended (from 2015 to 2018).

That buys us more than enough time to be very confident that we can raise our turnover to a competitive level in time so very hopeful.

How would they stop us from having an enormous loan paid back at a ridiculously low rate?

Nothing, but if we use it to spend more than we have EARNED then we won't meet the UEFA criteria so there would be no point doing it!

Is that not in effect what the Glazers are doing but they're choosing to spend the money on buying themselves the club & giving themselves pocket money rather than spending it on on players?