Potential Transfer Ban

[Londonblue]

Apologies if this has already been covered - There's a story doing the rounds that we could suffer a transfer ban as a penalty for not abiding by FFP. Given the current crop of youngsters coming through the ranks I was thinking it could be a great chance (if we do get a ban) to get some of them up to speed in the prem and the cups...

[Goaters 103]

Oh god "smacks head in hands."

A transfer ban isnt a potential sanction, as per the FFP rules.

That Telegraph report is a work of fiction.

[Beefymcfc]

It's being talked about in the Bollox thread as that's how people are viewing it. It's quite funny though, bringing this story up now with thoughts of transfer bans or financial penalties, straight after the game with the Dippers.

I caught a little of this on TS this morning and they were talking mainly about the 350 mil Etihad deal and how it wasn't fair market value. They said we'd fail on this and put PSG in a bigger bracket but failed to mention any of the other deals that are out there. When you look at some of the deals in the Prem, with the Rags and Dippers having huge sponsorship, much greater than ours, then you'd think they'd feel the need to put it into context.

The question is, do you trust our boys when they say we'll be fine or do you trust somebody trying to sell a back page?

What would be even funnier would be when somebody asks UEFA who their head-persons son works for and why they are insistent that they've got it covered.

Or, when they ask who gave the authority for City to be sanctioned, were there any conflicts of interest with UEFA officials?

There's all sorts of shit going on and we'll soon see where the battle lines are drawn. Then, we'll see who will win the war.

[blues2win]

I saw one suggestion that MCFC had been more persuasive than PSG but who knows. I'm completely confident that our management have got this covered. If they go for us seriously UEFA know they'll find themselves in court.

[Hutch's Shoulder]

Oh god "smacks head in hands." A transfer ban isnt a potential sanction, as per the FFP rules. That Telegraph report is a work of fiction.

Yeah but remind me how long was Kompany suspended for?

[Twobob]

At most it will be a financial bung - i mean fine ...

[Lee_R]

How many clubs are being investigated, 76?.. How many clubs are in the CL?... Do me a favour! Ffs

[Beefymcfc]

I read somewhere that a club who aren't in the CL could spend as much as they want but still qualify for at least the 1st season, ie. Liverpool.

Now, if that's not barmy then what is? You try to discourage clubs from overspending but if they do you allow them into your competition?

[Wooders]

They said we'd fail on this and put PSG in a bigger bracket but failed to mention any of the other deals that are out there. When you look at some of the deals in the Prem, with the Rags and Dippers having huge sponsorship, much greater than ours, then you'd think they'd feel the need to put it into context.

Trouble is Beef is that it is not the size of the deal but the nature of it which is being looked at - they believe that Etihad/quatari sponsors have direct links with the owners of the club and they have deemed that an ffp back door

[Beefymcfc]

They said we'd fail on this and put PSG in a bigger bracket but failed to mention any of the other deals that are out there. When you look at some of the deals in the Prem, with the Rags and Dippers having huge sponsorship, much greater than ours, then you'd think they'd feel the need to put it into context.

Trouble is Beef is that it is not the size of the deal but the nature of it which is being looked at - they believe that Etihad/quatari sponsors have direct links with the owners of the club and they have deemed that an ffp back door

That's easy then mate, let them look at the Dippers sponsorship deal which has a direct relationship with their owners, or how the deal at the Swamp had implications for the person who signed it off for Chevy.

And what about Gazprom, the Russian energy giant, how do they fare in all this? Sponsoring Chelsea as well as the CL, do they investigate themselves?

It's very clear to all, it's set-up for one thing. Keep the G14 happy and don't let anybody else in or they'll take their ball home.

[john@staustell]

The problem is deeper for UEFA and that is why I dont think they'll be making any examples.

Several of the old guard are in trouble. This means they'll either have to spend gazoodles of money to get their status back, hit upon a Brendon Rogers with slightly less gazoodles, or fade forever and comply with FFP.

Take:
1) Manchester United - profits good but after interests and loan repayments only about 17M I think from looking it up a few weeks ago (may be 30-odd, sorry). So can they spend the quoted 200M - absolutely no chance and whilst wages go up if there's a prolonged absence from the CL they could easily go into death spiral
2) Arsenal - supposedly the best run but their margins are not big. Wages are high and commercial revenue is absolutely lamentable. If they drop out will Silent Stan spen millions of his own dosh? No chance. Will FFP allow him to? No. Living on the edge
3) Inter - 5th on the face of it but about 34 points behind Juve - awful. Can they spend to get back to CL? Not allowed to. Downward spiral, revenues declining without CL, team declining.
4) AC Milan - classic spenders, leaders of FFP and now an absolute basket case. Even if they do have money their beloved FFP will stop them spending. Possibility of relegation in the near future, well done Silvio for your tenure!
5) Barcelona - seem to be tottering on the edge. Like Real and United, high revenues but massive debts. Undoubtedly will get a new manager but again their margins are very tight, a real reason why they may take money for Messi.

Cant think of the rest of the G14 but I'm sure a few more are in the poo, exascerbated by FFP.

[Foreverinbluedreams]

They said we'd fail on this and put PSG in a bigger bracket but failed to mention any of the other deals that are out there. When you look at some of the deals in the Prem, with the Rags and Dippers having huge sponsorship, much greater than ours, then you'd think they'd feel the need to put it into context.

Trouble is Beef is that it is not the size of the deal but the nature of it which is being looked at - they believe that Etihad/quatari sponsors have direct links with the owners of the club and they have deemed that an ffp back door

Etihad are not a related party, we've submitted accounts with the Etihad deal included to accounting standards for the last few years and they don't deem it to be a related party transaction so UEFA can't, I'm no bean counter but I've been informed on this by someone who is.

[jimtolmie_tache]

I'm so cynical about UEFA, I could expect anything of them, and their thought processes.

Remember that David Gill is prominent in all this as well.

It may well be that the ultimate sanctions are not used, and we escape with a small fine or whatever. But it's the uncertainty that's bein sewn ahead of the summer. Apparently, the final sanction may not be decided until just before the season starts. So if you are Aguero, for example, what are you meant to think? You may be spending the next season in a side that is totally uncompetitive in the Champions League, because of proposed wage limit sanctions. So just in case, it's a fair bet that Sergio will be onto his agent to see if there's any chance of getting to a club with a better chance of getting to the later stages... a Real Madrid, say, or a Bayern.

It also works for any players we might be interested in during the summer. Would Suarez even look twice at City if there's even a hint of this in the pipeline?

It could be a cunning UEFA ploy to get players to leave the clubs they don't like, and join the ones they approve of - MUFC, LFC, Arsenal etc. And they don't even need to apply any sanctions, just get the press to bandy around what could happen, and leave the final judgement to the very last minute before the season starts.

UEFA won't be happy till they have a hermetically sealed Super League of teams playing in red (and Real Madrid at a push), endlessly fulfilling the same fixtures for PPV TV in front of vetted audiences of 'consumers', waving pre-sanctioned banners displaying the faces of the players who best promote the brand.

[Original Dub]

I'm so cynical about UEFA, I could expect anything of them, and their thought processes.

Remember that David Gill is prominent in all this as well.

It may well be that the ultimate sanctions are not used, and we escape with a small fine or whatever. But it's the uncertainty that's bein sewn ahead of the summer. Apparently, the final sanction may not be decided until just before the season starts. So if you are Aguero, for example, what are you meant to think? You may be spending the next season in a side that is totally uncompetitive in the Champions League, because of proposed wage limit sanctions. So just in case, it's a fair bet that Sergio will be onto his agent to see if there's any chance of getting to a club with a better chance of getting to the later stages... a Real Madrid, say, or a Bayern.

It also works for any players we might be interested in during the summer. Would Suarez even look twice at City if there's even a hint of this in the pipeline?

It could be a cunning UEFA ploy to get players to leave the clubs they don't like, and join the ones they approve of - MUFC, LFC, Arsenal etc. And they don't even need to apply any sanctions, just get the press to bandy around what could happen, and leave the final judgement to the very last minute before the season starts.

UEFA won't be happy till they have a hermetically sealed Super League of teams playing in red (and Real Madrid at a push), endlessly fulfilling the same fixtures for PPV TV in front of vetted audiences of 'consumers', waving pre-sanctioned banners displaying the faces of the players who best promote the brand.

Chill the bones mate!

[jimtolmie_tache]

Chill the bones mate!

Serious point. It seems that, by appealing, Arsenal and others can string out this process till August if they want to, so it's not going to be a great selling point for potential targets.

"And you'll be playing in the Champions League. Probably.... alongside World Cup winner SERGIO AGUERO! Maybe. "

[Original Dub]

Chill the bones mate!

Serious point. It seems that, by appealing, Arsenal and others can string out this process till August if they want to, so it's not going to be a great selling point for potential targets.

"And you'll be playing in the Champions League. Probably.... alongside World Cup winner SERGIO AGUERO! Maybe. "

This is going to be shown for the complete farce it is.

[blues2win]

Exactly. I'm constantly amazed at the number of fans worried about this. Soriano and co are not complete idiots. They have things in hand. Chill. If UEFA really went for us we'd retaliate by challenging the whole nonsense for the blatantly illegal restraint of trade it is.

[Hutch's Shoulder]

My bet is we get a fine, pay it and everything carries on as normal.

[Wooders]

My bet is we get a fine, pay it and everything carries on as normal.

Transfers will be under the spotlight - even just a fine will have a serious impact on us

[Socrates]

The problem is deeper for UEFA and that is why I dont think they'll be making any examples.

Several of the old guard are in trouble. This means they'll either have to spend gazoodles of money to get their status back, hit upon a Brendon Rogers with slightly less gazoodles, or fade forever and comply with FFP.

Take:
1) Manchester United - profits good but after interests and loan repayments only about 17M I think from looking it up a few weeks ago (may be 30-odd, sorry). So can they spend the quoted 200M - absolutely no chance and whilst wages go up if there's a prolonged absence from the CL they could easily go into death spiral
2) Arsenal - supposedly the best run but their margins are not big. Wages are high and commercial revenue is absolutely lamentable. If they drop out will Silent Stan spen millions of his own dosh? No chance. Will FFP allow him to? No. Living on the edge
3) Inter - 5th on the face of it but about 34 points behind Juve - awful. Can they spend to get back to CL? Not allowed to. Downward spiral, revenues declining without CL, team declining.
4) AC Milan - classic spenders, leaders of FFP and now an absolute basket case. Even if they do have money their beloved FFP will stop them spending. Possibility of relegation in the near future, well done Silvio for your tenure!
5) Barcelona - seem to be tottering on the edge. Like Real and United, high revenues but massive debts. Undoubtedly will get a new manager but again their margins are very tight, a real reason why they may take money for Messi.

Cant think of the rest of the G14 but I'm sure a few more are in the poo, exascerbated by FFP.

United may well be able to spend a big sum as the spending would be amortised over the length of the contracts. Some players may be coming to the end of amortisation periods or be leaving or even having the amortisation re-spread by signing new contracts, this would free up significant blocks of profit and avoid the ffp trap. The fact they could do this by running up more and more debt while siphoning more and more money out of the game shows how disgracefully tilted the whole ffp structure is in the favour of the old guard...