The mancityfans.net football forum

Just a quick thing really, this isn't a thread meant to be negative or anything, I just started it because I for one am pretty confused as to how we are going to get around this and meet the necessary criteria. I am sure we will since I don't believe that our owners, Cook or Marwood etc would be unaware of it and I am sure they have plans in place to ensure that it isn't a problem, I just wondered if anyone could shed some light on it for me, because to be honest I don't see how we can do it at this point with my limited understanding.

Nobody here knows we can just guess, but it would be safe to assume that the people in chrge know what they're doing.

we'll have something crafty up our sleeves I am sure

The Sheik will order a few million of these from the online shop every now and then

http://shop.mcfc.co.uk/stores/mancity/p ... ?pid=81549

I know we have spent shit loads but now is the time to do it, its all investment in the long term. Get a winning strong squad now, then look to the youth around europe, bring them in young and get the youth team playing the same way the first 11 do, so that youth players can be brought in and fit right in immediately.

If we rebalance the squad in the next 8 months, we should be lean and mean. We could easily take 1/3 off our wage bill I reckon, by moving on the fringe Bridge / SWP type players.

Every time we've published some kind of financial report we send a team off to UEFA HQ to have a chinwag. I suppose we're saying "Look Michel old chap, we know you designed these rules with folk like us in mind. Still, this is where we are, this is what we're going to do about it, let's have a chat and if you see any problems let us know"

This fellow seems to know what he's talking about, the article's about 3 months old so has probably been posted before. If you click through some of the blogs on other clubs, well, our problems are minimal

http://swissramble.blogspot.com/2010/10/how-manchester-city-could-break-even.html

From the limited knowledge I have this is the last transfer window before these regs kick in.

1) If we are going to spend big we need to do it now (Dzeko)
2) We don't need to balance the books in this Transfer window.
3) Advantageous from our perspective to let players such as Ade, RSC, SWP, Bridge, Given etc go out on loan and sell during the summer when we will be able to record the money in the positive side of accounts.
4) If we qualify for Champs league that will have spin offs
a) All advertising revenue we currently receive will be able to be adjusted upwards in line with the Barcas, Real Madrids of this world.
b) By being in Champs League this will attract new investment.
c) We get more for being in competition.
d) Gates in CL are likely to be bigger than in EL, more pies sold etc.

5) We will no doubt start the construction work on new training facilities, and hotels, casino, Walt Disney world or whatever are superb owners are going to construct in or around ground.

6) Higher profile around world especially in the big Asian and American markets especially if in Europes elite competition, increased shirt sales.

7) May go for an even bigger Stadium with re negotiating our rent from variable amount based on crowds over 33k to flat fixed income restictions on increasing capacity removed.

AND IF IT ALL GOES TITS UP and Platini and his mob exclude us from CL in two years time and we have won Prem League title we should take them to Court and test these regs on restraint of trade and even if we lose that we should then basically say fuck it continue to invest in players win as many titles as we can and hopefully our owners will set up a far more glamourous competition in Abu Dhabi with 100m going to winners of Sheik Mansour Cup which every fucking team in the world will want to be in devaluating Chumps League because we are not the only ones who are going to fall foul of these regs.
(However if RM, Barca, AC,Inter, Rags, Scousers (If they ever qualify again) fall foul you can bet your life they will find some way of bending the rules.)

Rammyblue wrote:From the limited knowledge I have...

If that's limited then I may as well give up now!

Just face it boys, we're fucked. Back to the drawing board.

There is a thread that goes into some detail somewhere, but as Ted says no-one knows. I think the club have stated they want to work towards a sustainable model anyway, but in the short term i think it is easy for City to get around the rules. Historically it generally is for the super rich as they can set up whatever they want at whatever market value they choose, as they dont need the cash to survive.

The clubs this will hurt are more the ones that dont have euro comp income but are trying to invest to break into it.

City can set up any business sideline they want and it doesn't have to be viable. eg: A City help line only open to Rulers of countries or authorised by said Rulers. Help line rate is ridiculously expensive say 1000 quid an hour. Help line just has a tape on repeat stating: " Dont worry City will win their next game". Said Ruler has the line open 24/7.. thats a cool 100 million per year, minus very meagre operating costs.

Fair play to them i say!

I cant remember where I Read it. But I understood that as long as we could show that we have a plan that will allow us to be self sustaining within 5 years of the regulations coming into place then FIFA are happy to allow us to continue with "the project" as long as things follow the projected trajectory that we have made FIFA privy to. I seem to recall that at the same time when we had Gordon Brown and FIFA reps present at the ground while they were making the visits for the all the World Cup bids, they were also invited to a meeting where all of OUR proposals for the future were run past them and they seemed quite happy with how we were to progress.

If the above is bullshit then I fully apologise. Wish I knew where I had read it :-\

Im guessing theres many workarounds it...Maybe a grossly inflated sponsorship deal..Indirectly involving a company that has connections with Mansour..Wink wink.

pepsi_dave wrote:I cant remember where I Read it. But I understood that as long as we could show that we have a plan that will allow us to be self sustaining within 5 years of the regulations coming into place then FIFA are happy to allow us to continue with "the project" as long as things follow the projected trajectory that we have made FIFA privy to. I seem to recall that at the same time when we had Gordon Brown and FIFA reps present at the ground while they were making the visits for the all the World Cup bids, they were also invited to a meeting where all of OUR proposals for the future were run past them and they seemed quite happy with how we were to progress.

If the above is bullshit then I fully apologise. Wish I knew where I had read it :-\

That's in the back of my head too Dave.

But sending Vicky K over to Switzerland every now and again is the way to go. Keep them in the loop and get into what they REALLY want. (Ban top clubs? Surely not)

Also 44% increase in revenue pre-success is a sign that we will be much more successful than Chelsea in the long-term-revenue stakes. Well done Cookie!!

I don't necessarily see this as a bad thing. I feel it is more about putting financial restrictions on
European Clubs who's owners take out large loans against the values of their teams. Real Madrid, Barca,
Man United, Liverpool, etc, have had their owners leverage millions of pounds without having the liability on
their own assets. We can see what kind of damage this can cause in the sale of a club like 'Pool.

Large clubs like our own with a large fan base, attendance, merchandise sales won't be effected unless
we get creative with our accounting and get put on probation. But there always seems to be at least one
PL, La Liga, or Bundesliga team that can't cover their wages and goes into administration. I read that
Mallorca had been banned from the UEFA Europa League in 2010/11 for this very reason.

It is hard for me sometimes as an American to witness this trend and understand it. All our highest pro
leagues are restricted to only the largest of cities and populations where club movement and expansion
is very rare. Their is no demotion or promotion between the pro teams since smaller 'minor clubs' enter
into agreements with the larger clubs who supply them with a never ending flow of younger, less refined
talent. American baseball was the first league start this pyramid of selective competition.

It may seem stupid to many Europeans, but the system works very well. The NHL, NFL, MLB and MLS
have all gone through periods of low attendance and financial woe, but 'salary cap' and fair draft
rules allow even the smallest markets to thrive.

Notice: I left the NBA because professional basketball is about everything but fair play and only the
largest of teams can keep or sign major talent. Fuck the NBA.

CitizenYank wrote:I don't necessarily see this as a bad thing. I feel it is more about putting financial restrictions on
European Clubs who's owners take out large loans against the values of their teams. Real Madrid, Barca,
Man United, Liverpool, etc, have had their owners leverage millions of pounds without having the liability on
their own assets. We can see what kind of damage this can cause in the sale of a club like 'Pool.

Large clubs like our own with a large fan base, attendance, merchandise sales won't be effected unless
we get creative with our accounting and get put on probation. But there always seems to be at least one
PL, La Liga, or Bundesliga team that can't cover their wages and goes into administration. I read that
Mallorca had been banned from the UEFA Europa League in 2010/11 for this very reason.

It is hard for me sometimes as an American to witness this trend and understand it. All our highest pro
leagues are restricted to only the largest of cities and populations where club movement and expansion
is very rare. Their is no demotion or promotion between the pro teams since smaller 'minor clubs' enter
into agreements with the larger clubs who supply them with a never ending flow of younger, less refined
talent. American baseball was the first league start this pyramid of selective competition.

It may seem stupid to many Europeans, but the system works very well. The NHL, NFL, MLB and MLS
have all gone through periods of low attendance and financial woe, but 'salary cap' and fair draft
rules allow even the smallest markets to thrive.

Notice: I left the NBA because professional basketball is about everything but fair play and only the
largest of teams can keep or sign major talent. Fuck the NBA.

There is a certain irony in the US system being in the country of free form capitalism. However the key point to make is that those leagues dont compete on a world stage with other countries adopting a different system.. so as you call it selective competition would soon get ditched as the US leagues failed to live up to their counterparts in other parts of the world with free open full bloodied competition and any amount of money pumped in. In my view it only works in the US because it is restricted to North America.
just sayin'

CitizenYank wrote:I don't necessarily see this as a bad thing. I feel it is more about putting financial restrictions on
European Clubs who's owners take out large loans against the values of their teams. Real Madrid, Barca,
Man United, Liverpool, etc, have had their owners leverage millions of pounds without having the liability on
their own assets. We can see what kind of damage this can cause in the sale of a club like 'Pool.

Large clubs like our own with a large fan base, attendance, merchandise sales won't be effected unless
we get creative with our accounting and get put on probation. But there always seems to be at least one
PL, La Liga, or Bundesliga team that can't cover their wages and goes into administration. I read that
Mallorca had been banned from the UEFA Europa League in 2010/11 for this very reason.

It is hard for me sometimes as an American to witness this trend and understand it. All our highest pro
leagues are restricted to only the largest of cities and populations where club movement and expansion
is very rare. Their is no demotion or promotion between the pro teams since smaller 'minor clubs' enter
into agreements with the larger clubs who supply them with a never ending flow of younger, less refined
talent. American baseball was the first league start this pyramid of selective competition.

It may seem stupid to many Europeans, but the system works very well. The NHL, NFL, MLB and MLS
have all gone through periods of low attendance and financial woe, but 'salary cap' and fair draft
rules allow even the smallest markets to thrive.

Notice: I left the NBA because professional basketball is about everything but fair play and only the
largest of teams can keep or sign major talent. Fuck the NBA.

Problem is that, IMHO, all these "financial fair play" rules do is protect the clubs you mentioned above. Because apparently it is okay to have shitloads of debts from loans as long as your turnover is high enough to service it.

brite blu sky wrote:

CitizenYank wrote:I don't necessarily see this as a bad thing. I feel it is more about putting financial restrictions on
European Clubs who's owners take out large loans against the values of their teams. Real Madrid, Barca,
Man United, Liverpool, etc, have had their owners leverage millions of pounds without having the liability on
their own assets. We can see what kind of damage this can cause in the sale of a club like 'Pool.

Large clubs like our own with a large fan base, attendance, merchandise sales won't be effected unless
we get creative with our accounting and get put on probation. But there always seems to be at least one
PL, La Liga, or Bundesliga team that can't cover their wages and goes into administration. I read that
Mallorca had been banned from the UEFA Europa League in 2010/11 for this very reason.

It is hard for me sometimes as an American to witness this trend and understand it. All our highest pro
leagues are restricted to only the largest of cities and populations where club movement and expansion
is very rare. Their is no demotion or promotion between the pro teams since smaller 'minor clubs' enter
into agreements with the larger clubs who supply them with a never ending flow of younger, less refined
talent. American baseball was the first league start this pyramid of selective competition.

It may seem stupid to many Europeans, but the system works very well. The NHL, NFL, MLB and MLS
have all gone through periods of low attendance and financial woe, but 'salary cap' and fair draft
rules allow even the smallest markets to thrive.

Notice: I left the NBA because professional basketball is about everything but fair play and only the
largest of teams can keep or sign major talent. Fuck the NBA.

There is a certain irony in the US system being in the country of free form capitalism. However the key point to make is that those leagues dont compete on a world stage with other countries adopting a different system.. so as you call it selective competition would soon get ditched as the US leagues failed to live up to their counterparts in other parts of the world with free open full bloodied competition and any amount of money pumped in. In my view it only works in the US because it is restricted to North America.
just sayin'

Very true sad to say. The United States is a very closed off place when it comes to international competition. And I believe our homegrown games, baseball (not rounders), American football and even (ugh) professional basketball suffer from this. I have a lot
of pride in our countries pastimes (esp baseball) and would like to see a more internationally balanced level of play.

The World Baseball Classic was started in 2006 to try and rectify this situation and other countries have dominated the competition. The United States has yet to win one!!

And while the MLS has the Lamar Hunt cup (our version of the FA Cup) and plays in friendly competition with South American clubs, we continue to very poorly.

Wooders wrote:we'll have something crafty up our sleeves I am sure

I think this might be possible. There's something interesting going on with the individual companies within the Manchester City group, first signs of which were in the group 2010 figures released a few months back. Until the individual company accounts are filed with Companies House, I can't tell. Should be within the next couple of months though - I will post back when they come through.

I might be barking up completely the wrong tree, but the Fair Play rules seem to refer to the football club which is a separate company to the Manchester City Ltd group holding company that the Swiss Ramble blogpost has analysed.

El_Quince wrote:

Wooders wrote:we'll have something crafty up our sleeves I am sure

I think this might be possible. There's something interesting going on with the individual companies within the Manchester City group, first signs of which were in the group 2010 figures released a few months back. Until the individual company accounts are filed with Companies House, I can't tell. Should be within the next couple of months though - I will post back when they come through.

I might be barking up completely the wrong tree, but the Fair Play rules seem to refer to the football club which is a separate company to the Manchester City Ltd group holding company that the Swiss Ramble blogpost has analysed.

I think Cooky's little hint about the stadium naming rights may turn out to be an earth-shaker!

so whats this about us buying a stake in 2 Portuguese clubs in order to help meet FFP, and of course develop a scouting system in Portugal?

Firstly have we actually bought a stake in two Portuguese clubs? If we answer that we can start making assumptions about why.