- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: FFP - Man City and PSG Punishment
Posted on 5/6/14 at 9:01 am to StraightCashHomey21
Posted on 5/6/14 at 9:01 am to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
Um City has been doing it since 2008 and got away with it no problem except the last two years. Them and PSG had plenty of time to catch up.
I'm not worried about City or PSG, I'm worried about future competition being stifled.
quote:
We all play by the same rules.
Uh huh
quote:
They went in debt b/c of crazy spending spree
Leeds added debt to the club by financing transfer fees over multiple years and other such tactics. Man City is not doing any of that kind of stuff.
This post was edited on 5/6/14 at 9:04 am
1
Posted on 5/6/14 at 9:03 am to uway
quote:
What difference does it make? Why should busybodies get to decide the "right" way to build a club?
Because there are ways you can do it in which a club can become competitive with Manchester United and they can't have that happen any more than it already has.
Posted on 5/6/14 at 9:04 am to StraightCashHomey21
If UEFA doesn't like clubs taking huge losses, why do they impose such a steep penalty?
Posted on 5/6/14 at 9:06 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
I'm worried about future competition being stifled.
Its not, clubs rise and fall in football it happens. Dortmund for example was in financial ruin and made a comeback and didn't do it by spending and spending creating more debt.
quote:
Uh huh
Just stop even Liverpool can be brought up on FFP if they have another year of big losses.
quote:
They added debt to the club by financing transfer fees over multiple years and other such tactics. Man City is not doing any of that kind of stuff.
City is doing the same buy buy buy. We don't know what is happening behind closed doors at City. Trying to even out debt with shirt,sponsor and stadium rights tied to your owner is already a sign something is up.
If he ever gets bored with his team it will be interesting to actually see the funny accounting going on.
This post was edited on 5/6/14 at 9:12 am
Posted on 5/6/14 at 9:07 am to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
B/c how alot of these clubs tie into local european communities, which many on this board don't understand. This isn't like the american franchise model. When these teams go under of hell even get relegated it has a negative impact on the city and its economy.
Oh I see. We just need more centralized planning. That always works so well.
Posted on 5/6/14 at 9:08 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
Because there are ways you can do it in which a club can become competitive with Manchester United and they can't have that happen any more than it already has.
Whenever this happens it ends up in clubs in ruin. Leeds and Blackburn in England are perfect examples. Chelsea stopped its crazy spending once it go to where it wanted to be. While City has not.
Posted on 5/6/14 at 9:09 am to Oizers
quote:
If UEFA doesn't like clubs taking huge losses, why do they impose such a steep penalty?
This is a slap on the wrist to City
Read the comments on the Sky articles its actually pretty funny.
This post was edited on 5/6/14 at 9:10 am
Posted on 5/6/14 at 9:17 am to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
Its not, clubs rise and fall in football it happens. Dortmund for example was in financial ruin and made a comeback and didn't do it by spending and spending creating more debt.
It's not creating more debt.
If I have $1,000 and spend 100 of it on something for my house, I am not adding debt. This is Manchester City.
By contrast, if I have $50 and borrow another $50 to spend $100 on my house in the hopes that this improvement will add $200 of value (which may or may not actually happen), i am creating $50 of debt. This is Leeds United.
This really isn't that complicated and the two situations couldn't be more dissimilar.
This post was edited on 5/6/14 at 9:18 am
Posted on 5/6/14 at 9:18 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
FFP is a rich get richer scam
Not this again
. It's a bogus argument.Posted on 5/6/14 at 9:20 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
It's not creating more debt.
If I have $1,000 and spend 100 of it on something for my house, I am not adding debt. This is Manchester City.
Taking 350 millions pounds in losses in 2 years is not good any way you try to spin it. Even if you write off 60 million of it that don't go against you. You are not grasping the financial ruin this club could be in one day and the overall negative impact it could have.
Posted on 5/6/14 at 9:22 am to StraightCashHomey21
If you have 20 billion pounds then 350 million in losses is not really an issue now is it.
Posted on 5/6/14 at 9:24 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
If you have 20 billion pounds then 350 million in losses is not really an issue now is it.
Are those 20 billion on the books at City?
They are trying anyway possible to generate bogus revenue.
Posted on 5/6/14 at 9:26 am to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
Are those 20 billion on the books at City?
Why does it matter? No debt is being added to the club.
Posted on 5/6/14 at 9:29 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
Why does it matter? No debt is being added to the club.
If the club is only worth less than 500 million quid and it keeps operating at a loss. Its going to catch up.
Thats why their bogus deals FFP are not buying.
Posted on 5/6/14 at 9:32 am to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
Its going to catch up.
There are these things called transfer windows. They could offload 3 players, make 100 million on transfers and cut their wage bills drastically and they could do this all in 1 day if they wanted to.
Posted on 5/6/14 at 9:33 am to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
Its how lots of clubs are built
not major clubs (in this brief period, clubs not named Barca)
quote:
FFP forces teams to spend responsibly and build infrastructure if they want to become a mega club.
"building infrastructure" is a long-term investment that takes, literally, a decade+ to field results
how many regular starters did Man U start last year from their academy? not many. carrick mainly
de gea, evra, ferdinand, vidic, nani, valencia, rooney, kagawa, RvP, young, anderson, etc were not. i don't know if phil jones and others were from the Man U academy
Posted on 5/6/14 at 9:34 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
There are these things called transfer windows. They could offload 3 players, make 100 million on transfers and cut their wage bills drastically and they could do this all in 1 day if they wanted to.
The thing is City really doesn't do this
Posted on 5/6/14 at 9:35 am to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
B/c how alot of these clubs tie into local european communities, which many on this board don't understand. This isn't like the american franchise model.
When these teams go under of hell even get relegated it has a negative impact on the city and its economy.
City is not in danger of this, and City is not in debt. that argument doesn't fly with City
Posted on 5/6/14 at 9:36 am to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
They are trying anyway possible to generate bogus revenue.
because of FFP
Posted on 5/6/14 at 9:36 am to StraightCashHomey21
But they could if they wanted to and now UEFA is trying to force them to. I wonder what type of club will buy said players? Oh yeah, teams like ManU. Old money wins again.
This post was edited on 5/6/14 at 9:37 am
Page 2 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News