Platini: No Ban For Failing FFP This Time Around

[Blue Since 76]

I didnt say every season, but only a fool would say we dont need to spend when chelsea, liverpool and the rags will be.
Its not our fault decent players are usually 20-30 million though - shaw, who is still really only a prospect, is being banded about at 30 mill
A decent centreback will cost the same.. We also need to address getting some backup fir silva..

Zabaleta was £6m. So was Kompany and Clichy was similar. There's no need to always spend £20m plus on a player.

As for a Silva back up, how about Nasri or Jovetic. Or push Yaya to where he's effective. Or give Lopes some games. Or do we buy Fabregas as well to sit on the bench just in case?

[Nigels Tackle]

I didnt say every season, but only a fool would say we dont need to spend when chelsea, liverpool and the rags will be.
Its not our fault decent players are usually 20-30 million though - shaw, who is still really only a prospect, is being banded about at 30 mill
A decent centreback will cost the same.. We also need to address getting some backup fir silva..

Zabaleta was £6m. So was Kompany and Clichy was similar. There's no need to always spend £20m plus on a player.

As for a Silva back up, how about Nasri or Jovetic. Or push Yaya to where he's effective. Or give Lopes some games. Or do we buy Fabregas as well to sit on the bench just in case?

haven't we already 'signed' bruno zuculini for a measly £1.5m?

[Ted Hughes]

I didnt say every season, but only a fool would say we dont need to spend when chelsea, liverpool and the rags will be.
Its not our fault decent players are usually 20-30 million though - shaw, who is still really only a prospect, is being banded about at 30 mill
A decent centreback will cost the same.. We also need to address getting some backup fir silva..

Zabaleta was £6m. So was Kompany and Clichy was similar. There's no need to always spend £20m plus on a player.

As for a Silva back up, how about Nasri or Jovetic. Or push Yaya to where he's effective. Or give Lopes some games. Or do we buy Fabregas as well to sit on the bench just in case?

haven't we already 'signed' bruno zuculini for a measly £1.5m?

He is more backup or competition for Fernandinho or Milner/Nasri I would say from the bits I've seen.

[Nigels Tackle]

I didnt say every season, but only a fool would say we dont need to spend when chelsea, liverpool and the rags will be.
Its not our fault decent players are usually 20-30 million though - shaw, who is still really only a prospect, is being banded about at 30 mill
A decent centreback will cost the same.. We also need to address getting some backup fir silva..

Zabaleta was £6m. So was Kompany and Clichy was similar. There's no need to always spend £20m plus on a player.

As for a Silva back up, how about Nasri or Jovetic. Or push Yaya to where he's effective. Or give Lopes some games. Or do we buy Fabregas as well to sit on the bench just in case?

haven't we already 'signed' bruno zuculini for a measly £1.5m?

He is more backup or competition for Fernandinho or Milner/Nasri I would say from the bits I've seen.

point was fee related not who is being brought in as cover for / to replace

[Ted Hughes]

I didnt say every season, but only a fool would say we dont need to spend when chelsea, liverpool and the rags will be.
Its not our fault decent players are usually 20-30 million though - shaw, who is still really only a prospect, is being banded about at 30 mill
A decent centreback will cost the same.. We also need to address getting some backup fir silva..

Zabaleta was £6m. So was Kompany and Clichy was similar. There's no need to always spend £20m plus on a player.

As for a Silva back up, how about Nasri or Jovetic. Or push Yaya to where he's effective. Or give Lopes some games. Or do we buy Fabregas as well to sit on the bench just in case?

haven't we already 'signed' bruno zuculini for a measly £1.5m?

He is more backup or competition for Fernandinho or Milner/Nasri I would say from the bits I've seen.

point was fee related not who is being brought in as cover for / to replace

Yeah, but another creator like Silva will cost big money. Not many 21 year olds with that kind of pedigree & we saw the auction for Hazard last year.

[Wooders]

Zabaleta was £6m. So was Kompany and Clichy was similar. There's no need to always spend £20m plus on a player. As for a Silva back up, how about Nasri or Jovetic. Or push Yaya to where he's effective. Or give Lopes some games. Or do we buy Fabregas as well to sit on the bench just in case?

Right ok - we 'll win the league without spending just like we have this season
Or we'll pickup a world class cb for 6 million
Ok.

[Socrates]

Zabaleta was £6m. So was Kompany and Clichy was similar. There's no need to always spend £20m plus on a player. As for a Silva back up, how about Nasri or Jovetic. Or push Yaya to where he's effective. Or give Lopes some games. Or do we buy Fabregas as well to sit on the bench just in case?

Right ok - we 'll win the league without spending just like we have this season
Or we'll pickup a world class cb for 6 million
Ok.

We're just going to have to learn to be a bit patient and continue to be as creative as possible with such things as our approach to long contracts for key players so that annual amortisation is decreased while trying to spend much very wisely with the money we have. I expect our punishment to be a fine and a reduction in champions league squad places so additional players may not be able to play in all competitions anyway. We are going to be within a few points of champions this year and we will just have to hope we can push on with not so much in the way of additions. Our expectations do need to be a little lower though. We are certainly good enough to attain the five trophies in five years before the project enters the next phase and should be content with that.

[john@staustell]

This is gonna fuck us right up the arse - we NEED to spend this summer - between 50-100 million I reckon to address the deficiencies in our squad - ffp will kaybosh that, get used .to being second or even third best for a while

I dont agree. This current season is when all our extra income comes into line - the extra TV money, extra CL money, loads of extra commercial money. Dont forget we are already 6th in the Deloitte revenue league even last season, before our bigger money. Wages are falling from last summer with Tevez etc out the door. The ground expansion is happening.

Also dont forget there is no need to City to make a profit - unlike Arsenal and Scum (and probably Liverpool). Once break-even point is reached (currently) any extra growth is ours, rather than some greedy American owner.

I suspect they give us a ticking off for being late, but they'll realise now the stable door was well shut when we got inside.

Also - with the money we are now earning, a £50M player is, say £10M a year with amortisation. It's actually just pissing in the wind, bugger all.

[Rag_hater]

The money we have means that the people who think we are fucked are going to be disappointed.UEFA have said those people expecting blood & thunder are in cuckoo land.

[Ted Hughes]

If they don't stop the PSG sponsorship deal, Sheikh Mansour can invest as much money as he wants. It seems to me that the genuine plan for City has always been to break even eventually anyway though.

If we desperately need money to come in, short term, I have no worries that money will come in. If Messi becomes available for instance, we will try to sign him imo.

[Rag_hater]

I don't think you should change a winning team,maybe give it a bit of fine tuning,but the team is fine as it is.

[Socrates]

If they don't stop the PSG sponsorship deal, Sheikh Mansour can invest as much money as he wants. It seems to me that the genuine plan for City has always been to break even eventually anyway though.

If we desperately need money to come in, short term, I have no worries that money will come in. If Messi becomes available for instance, we will try to sign him imo.

They don't have the power to stop a sponsorship deal, what they can do is revalue it for ffp purposes and adjust PSG's loss upwards thereby increasing the work they have to do to break even and also increasing the penalty they will receive.

[Rag_hater]

[youtube]ETxmCCsMoD0[/youtube]

[Rag_hater]

[youtube]ETxmCCsMoD0[/youtube]

[BlueinBosnia]

We're just going to have to learn to be a bit patient and continue to be as creative as possible with such things as our approach to long contracts for key players so that annual amortisation is decreased while trying to spend much very wisely with the money we have.

Am I right with my understanding of this:

i) If we buy an old player with one year left on their current contract with another club for, say, 4 million, and give them a 2-year contract for 100K a week, for FFP purposes, their cost will be 7 million per year, or thereabouts? (50 x 100K + 0.5 x 4M)

ii) 'Amortisation value' only counts for the initial contract offered, and cannot be extended over contract extensions?

If so, isn't signing players like Demi financially far less astute in comparison to, say, a 19 year old on a 6 year contract for 30M on slightly lower wages?

[Blue Since 76]

Right ok - we 'll win the league without spending just like we have this season
Or we'll pickup a world class cb for 6 million
Ok.

Well that's how much Kompany was. And Vidic was similar a couple of years earlier. There will have been an increase on fees in that time, but £40m for Mangala? Really?

How much has Liverpool spent to go from 7th to, at worst, 3rd and probably 1st? How many of their first team would get in ahead of ours - Suarez alongside Aguero, Sturridge as back up and...?

Arsenal may have blown a fortune on Ozil, but everyone laughs at them for not spending, yet we're only 7 points better off, if we win our game in hand.

So either we're not getting anything like value for money or we're not getting the best out of what we've got. I'd suggest the latter and if we can't afford to do the former anymore, that's going to become a big problem as we're going to have to turn kids or £10-£15m players into league winners.

[RodneyRodney]

For me, the most worrying thing is that they are being so vague with what the potential punishments are. If they have a defined set of infringements, surely they should have a corresponding punishment for each infringement?

It increasingly appears UEFA are going to define the punishment once they have concluded their 'investigations' and settled on which clubs are deemed to be in trouble.

You are quite right(at least I hope you are).
I'm no lawyer , but I cannot comprehend how anything Twatini is "threatening" can possibly stand up in court.

If there is no specific sanction specified for violation of a constraint, prior to a violation of said constraint, then I cannot see how any court of law can enforce that sanction.
How the fuck can you charge me 200 quid for parking in the wrong spot , if you do not state clearly that the penalty for parking in the wrong spot is 200 quid ? You can't just make up the penalty according to your own particularly whims , and what direction the wind's blowing in that particular day.

As I said Michel , your FFP law is a bucket of crap and you know it. Now do the planet a favour and drown yourself in boiling vomit.
Live.
On TV.
At half time in the ECL final.

[RodneyRodney]

I think we should spend without any inhibition , as we see fit , in the coming window(s), and invite Plonkinis cavalry onto the guns of the Sheikhs' lawyers . It would be a turkey shoot.

How I just WISH Schumacher had taken out the right Frenchman back in '82 . . . with an elbow to the windpipe.

[DoomMerchant]

They don't have the power to stop a sponsorship deal, what they can do is revalue it for ffp purposes and adjust PSG's loss upwards thereby increasing the work they have to do to break even and also increasing the penalty they will receive.

Can you go crawl back under your rock again please?

You are absofuckinglutely annoying.

I think you have the FFP acumen and insight of a half-drunk snail.

Cheers

[BlueinBosnia]

They don't have the power to stop a sponsorship deal, what they can do is revalue it for ffp purposes and adjust PSG's loss upwards thereby increasing the work they have to do to break even and also increasing the penalty they will receive.

Can you go crawl back under your rock again please?

You are absofuckinglutely annoying.

I think you have the FFP acumen and insight of a half-drunk snail.

Cheers

I think he's right on this, from my understanding: If there's a 500m sponsorship that looks a bit fishy, then UEFA could say "Hang on a sec! You can only count 300m of that as fair market value." The remaining 200m can only be spent on things for which the club doesn't have to adhere to FFP, or spent within things UEFA count within FFP on, but at the risk of punishment, as it will count as 'loss'. For leagues without their own FFP rules in addition to UEFA's, the additional 200m can be spent on non-UEFA-competition registered squad players' wages, and so on. For the PL, I'm not sure - I assume infrastructure, and other expenditures which fall outside PL FFP jurisdiction.