Financial Fair Play

Financial Fair Play

Author
Discussion

Gandahar

9,600 posts

128 months

Saturday 17th May 2014
quotequote all
stuartmmcfc said:
I heard that as City can afford the very best lawyers, the case ( if gone to court ) would have dragged on for years. Ultimately there was a fair chance that City would have won.
Really, so does that mean any trophies won by other clubs in Europe in the meantime would have been null and void?

stuartmmcfc

8,664 posts

192 months

Saturday 17th May 2014
quotequote all
Gandahar said:
Really, so does that mean any trophies won by over clubs in Europe in the meantime would have been null and void?
Sorry, don't understand the question?

stuartmmcfc

8,664 posts

192 months

Saturday 17th May 2014
quotequote all
Sorry, other!

stuartmmcfc

8,664 posts

192 months

Saturday 17th May 2014
quotequote all
Gandahar said:
stuartmmcfc said:
I heard that as City can afford the very best lawyers, the case ( if gone to court ) would have dragged on for years. Ultimately there was a fair chance that City would have won.
Really, so does that mean any trophies won by other clubs in Europe in the meantime would have been null and void?
Who knows, but it wouldn't have gone down well regardless of any possible outcome.

stuartmmcfc

8,664 posts

192 months

Saturday 17th May 2014
quotequote all
The problem with FFP, IMO is that, although well meaning, does go someway to maintaining the status quo and makes a "small" teams ability to challenge much, much harder.

markh1973

1,808 posts

168 months

Saturday 17th May 2014
quotequote all
Black can man said:
How have Monaco & PSG avoided any punishment ?
PSG haven't avoided punishment and Monaco haven't been in Europe so weren't assessed.

aeropilot

34,614 posts

227 months

Saturday 17th May 2014
quotequote all
My problem is with UEFA, not City, Chelsea or anything other big spending team. As far as I'm concerned, it's the owners prerogative how much they want to spend or not to spend.


UEFA should put up or shut up.


DeltonaS

3,707 posts

138 months

Sunday 18th May 2014
quotequote all
aeropilot said:
As far as I'm concerned, it's the owners prerogative how much they want to spend or not to spend.
A Chelsea fan ?

Fact is that European football (especially CL) in which 42 country's participate, has become a game in which the same small group of clubs year on year play for the win. Clubs like Chelsea, City, PSG, Monaco, etc.etc would never be where they are now if not some overseas more money, than brains type would pay the bills (and than we haven't even discussed if it even is rightfully their money that they are spending).

It kills the sport.



DeltonaS

3,707 posts

138 months

Sunday 18th May 2014
quotequote all
And as a by product:

PL wages, PL transfer fees and PL admission fees are ridiculous. The number of talents that are on Chelsea's and City's payroll is ridiculous, and gets waisted in the process.



Edited by DeltonaS on Sunday 18th May 09:56

cliffe_mafia

1,635 posts

238 months

Sunday 18th May 2014
quotequote all
The plan at City was always to spend big at the start and then be self sustaining - ironically the introduction of FFP meant that the spending had to be ramped up sooner. We're just lucky that the FFP drawbridge has hit us on the arse on the way in and not slammed shut in our faces. To compete and win and have continued success you need to spend big and you could argue that's been the case for the last 30 years.


London424

Original Poster:

12,829 posts

175 months

Sunday 18th May 2014
quotequote all
The thing is, the FFP punishments don't actually prevent a rich owner coming in and spending fortunes.

Really in the grand scheme of things they've been fined a few quid that the rich owner probably has down the back of the sofa.


aeropilot

34,614 posts

227 months

Sunday 18th May 2014
quotequote all
DeltonaS said:
aeropilot said:
As far as I'm concerned, it's the owners prerogative how much they want to spend or not to spend.
A Chelsea fan ?

Fact is that European football (especially CL) in which 42 country's participate, has become a game in which the same small group of clubs year on year play for the win. Clubs like Chelsea, City, PSG, Monaco, etc.etc would never be where they are now if not some overseas more money, than brains type would pay the bills (and than we haven't even discussed if it even is rightfully their money that they are spending).

It kills the sport.
Nope, not a Chelsea fan.

Sadly, football ceased being a sport 25-30 years ago.


And lets not forget many clubs have benefited from wealthy owners for years, even those in lower divisions, but just on a different scale. What's the difference between an owner pumping a few million into a lower league club to keep them batting above their weight, or City spending several hundreds of millions keeping them where they are....?

The trick is to not let the money run out, as in Blackburn Rovers case.



epom

11,529 posts

161 months

Thursday 22nd May 2014
quotequote all
All the noise made about ffp, and thats all it has turned out to be really. Fining Man Ciy ?? seriously ? Joke.

BlackLabel

13,251 posts

123 months

Monday 31st July 2017
quotequote all
Does this Financial Fair Play thing still exist? It's working phenomenally well isn't it!

Old Man Fred

821 posts

89 months

Monday 31st July 2017
quotequote all
BlackLabel said:
Does this Financial Fair Play thing still exist? It's working phenomenally well isn't it!
If neymar goes to PSG for £200 million this will be the basis of Barca's complaint apparently.

They were explaining it on the radio earlier this afternoon with man city as an example. I can't remember the exactly figures but with the £100 million from the premier league, a few million from player sales and the 'allowed' spend (around £50 million i think) and with some creative accounting (they are moving their accounting year forward a month), they can spend £300 million this year!!

stuartmmcfc

8,664 posts

192 months

Monday 31st July 2017
quotequote all
Brilliant smile

TEKNOPUG

18,960 posts

205 months

Tuesday 1st August 2017
quotequote all
Old Man Fred said:
BlackLabel said:
Does this Financial Fair Play thing still exist? It's working phenomenally well isn't it!
If neymar goes to PSG for £200 million this will be the basis of Barca's complaint apparently.

They were explaining it on the radio earlier this afternoon with man city as an example. I can't remember the exactly figures but with the £100 million from the premier league, a few million from player sales and the 'allowed' spend (around £50 million i think) and with some creative accounting (they are moving their accounting year forward a month), they can spend £300 million this year!!
The Qatar Investment group are going to pay him € 300 MM “for being the face” of the world cup 2022 and Qatari Airlines, so he can pay Barca €222MM to buy himself out of his contract and move to PSG which they handily own and that way avoid any of this financial fairplay nonsense …Brilliant !

mandos_01

632 posts

101 months

Tuesday 1st August 2017
quotequote all
FFP was a waste of time as soon as Etihad Airways, Etihad Fuel, Etihad Lingerie and Etihad Dog food all decided they had a longstanding desire to be commercial partners at Man City for hundreds of millions of £

That they're all owned by the same family as Man City is obviously coincidental

Hackney

6,843 posts

208 months

Tuesday 1st August 2017
quotequote all
It's a terrific rule that - as with all the best financial rules - allows those with the most money to circumvent / bend / ignore the rules that other teams have to play by.

Interestingly Manchester City have everything sponsored by Etihad. Everything.
Last season Nottingham Forest were investigated to make sure their shirt deal (the owner's company) wasn't paid for over the odds.

This season 3 teams in the Championship have a minimum of £85m by virtue of their failure in the premier league.
Other teams relegated last summer have slightly less as they're in year two of the three year jackpot

I can't find the quote but IIRC Newcastle United spending last summer was more than one / some Championship clubs have spent in their entire history.

FFP while valid in principle is creating tiers within tiers
Top 8 Prem
Everyone Else
Relegated teams in Championship
Stalwart Chamionship
Promoted from Lg1

Incredibly difficult to move upwards through those groups compared to yo-yoing or staying put.



TEKNOPUG

18,960 posts

205 months

Tuesday 1st August 2017
quotequote all
Hackney said:
It's a terrific rule that - as with all the best financial rules - allows those with the most money to circumvent / bend / ignore the rules that other teams have to play by.

Interestingly Manchester City have everything sponsored by Etihad. Everything.
Last season Nottingham Forest were investigated to make sure their shirt deal (the owner's company) wasn't paid for over the odds.

This season 3 teams in the Championship have a minimum of £85m by virtue of their failure in the premier league.
Other teams relegated last summer have slightly less as they're in year two of the three year jackpot

I can't find the quote but IIRC Newcastle United spending last summer was more than one / some Championship clubs have spent in their entire history.

FFP while valid in principle is creating tiers within tiers
Top 8 Prem
Everyone Else
Relegated teams in Championship
Stalwart Chamionship
Promoted from Lg1

Incredibly difficult to move upwards through those groups compared to yo-yoing or staying put.
The problem being though that if you didn't have parachute payments, newly promoted teams to the Prem wouldn't spend any money on players. It's not the transfer fees, it's the wage commitments. You'd have a situation whereby the 3 promoted teams wouldn't almost be guranteed to be relegated every season. Which is why relegated teams have to get promoted again the 1st season, otherwise there is a fire sale in season 2 when the payments reduce. Whilst that means that it's very difficult to get promoted, at least you have a fighting chance of staying up if you are guaranteed £250m over the ext 3 seasons.