Man City and FFP

[forestfan]

Yeah, Pep is due to stay for another two years (targets beyond CL will likely include quadruple, unbeaten season etc) but then he will more than likely be off for a new challenge (probably rebuilding Barca for the post-Messi era?) and the handover after that will be crucial.

At least there’s generally healthy competition below them in the PL if their standards slip, at least one of the next four or five will be in title contending shape. A league has really been killed off in a competitive sense when the dominant club can win it with a bad team or bad manager - e.g. Bayern this season. Everyone else might as well pack up and go home, the Bundesliga is done. Celtic have been doing similar for years in Scotland. If more leagues go that way then the ESL will be here sooner rather than later.

[hancockjr]

There's plenty on here who've said the FFP rules are the problem and City shouldn't have to worry about circumventing them. I wonder if the scales are falling from a few eyes with City winning 5 of the last 6 domestic trophies and yesterday's mis-match.

Don't confuse people disagreeing with the rules with people thinking Man City shouldn't have to abide by them.

I don't agree with the rules but whilst they are the rules they should be abided by and those who transgress should be punished.

[blahblah]

There's plenty on here who've said the FFP rules are the problem and City shouldn't have to worry about circumventing them. I wonder if the scales are falling from a few eyes with City winning 5 of the last 6 domestic trophies and yesterday's mis-match.

Don't confuse people disagreeing with the rules with people thinking Man City shouldn't have to abide by them.

I don't agree with the rules but whilst they are the rules they should be abided by and those who transgress should be punished.

I'm more on the side that they are winning too much and (arguably) taking the piss in flouting the "rules" so the other rule breakers start crying etc....

Wolves spent £110m net (apparently) this season, which looks a tad dodgy, but will they get investigated as thoroughly?

[Zimmerman]

Isn’t it something like a rolling three year thing though... so time to balance the books (and the TV money helps).

[unc.si.]

Learn the difference between revenue and profit before you make posts like that.

500m revenue resulted in a £10m profit - and I fail to believe they don't get £10+m of doping in that.

Accepted i should not have said profit but revenue, but they are still in the world's top ten for match day profit with $63m or approx £50m and their huge success has them on an upward spiral, their overall figures will only improve, its an ongoing success story.

You mean match day revenue surely, not profit.

They made £56.62m matchday revenue, not $63m or £50m as far as I can see?? where are you getting those figures from? They don't report in USD and don't disclose matchday profits. Not criticising, just wondering.

Revenues are £57m Matchday, £212m Broadcasting (of which £54m from UEFA) and the rest (£232m) from 'other commercial activities, ie sponsorship etc, which of course can be manipulated if the ultimate owners also have 'interests' in the sponsoring companies).

overall they made £105m profit before tax (and after tax - they've got about £450m of tax losses available so will be a while before HMRC sees anything from them ) before player trading activities, on which they made a £95m loss, so overall a £10m profit. Mind you about £5m of directors pay went through one of their parent companies, rather than the football club.

they don't publish a cashflow but looks like they made a cash loss for the year. Could work out how much and why if I could be bothered, which I can't They raised £58m in equity in the year though, spent £228m on payers and only received £80m cash from sales.

Profit is a bit misleading to be honest in a business like a football club, so you're right to say that Revenues are the best indicator of a football clubs financial strength (although of course if the commercial side can be inflated then that also distorts the picture.

[blahblah]

I was more on the Income Tax line and evasion arguably worse than Carr's?

I do sense that Financial Doping is pretty much "everyone is doing it, so we had to". The questions are: Who is Lance? How many are doing it so much that their inevitable destination is a World\European League?

[forestfan]

Well, the ESL must be on the table sooner rather than later, as there’s so many foregone conclusion domestic leagues now. Although research is apparently suggesting younger fans would rather watch social media superstars annihilating training ground dummy opposition than matches where the outcome is in doubt, so maybe the future is just Harlem Globetrotters football.

I’d like to see UEFA take a stand by reducing European places for leagues that are uncompetitive, to the extent that if the same team wins a league say 10 years in a row then that country gets no European places at all. It might lead to some levelling of the playing field or much needed mergers of neighbouring leagues.

[murf]

Well, the ESL must be on the table sooner rather than later, as there’s so many foregone conclusion domestic leagues now. Although research is apparently suggesting younger fans would rather watch social media superstars annihilating training ground dummy opposition than matches where the outcome is in doubt, so maybe the future is just Harlem Globetrotters football.

I’d like to see UEFA take a stand by reducing European places for leagues that are uncompetitive, to the extent that if the same team wins a league say 10 years in a row then that country gets no European places at all. It might lead to some levelling of the playing field or much needed mergers of neighbouring leagues.

The top 5 leagues in Europe were all won by the same team as last year (and the year(s) before in some cases). The kids of today are clearly idiots (and so shouldn't be allowed to vote. Ooops, wrong thread).

[Zimmerman]

Qatar looking to buy in to Leeds United?
That would shake things up... depending on how aggressive they are with their investment (if it is indeed true).

7 in to 4 doesn’t go... time for us to start drawing on the human rights angle to get rid of these oil bullies

[forestfan]

Qatar looking to buy in to Leeds United?
That would shake things up... depending on how aggressive they are with their investment (if it is indeed true).

7 in to 4 doesn’t go... time for us to start drawing on the human rights angle to get rid of these oil bullies

20 oil zillionaires would make for a great Premier League

[blahblah]

Qatar looking to buy in to Leeds United?
That would shake things up... depending on how aggressive they are with their investment (if it is indeed true).

7 in to 4 doesn’t go... time for us to start drawing on the human rights angle to get rid of these oil bullies

No one likes Qatar either

[Bob Newhart]

Qatar looking to buy in to Leeds United?
That would shake things up... depending on how aggressive they are with their investment (if it is indeed true).

7 in to 4 doesn’t go... time for us to start drawing on the human rights angle to get rid of these oil bullies

No one likes Qatar either

[blahblah]

[Zimmerman]

Since 08/09:

City £1076m
United £605m
Chelsea £412m
Arsenal £311m
Everton £259m
Liverpool £221m
Spurs £96m

[murf]

Since 08/09:

City £1076m
United £605m
Chelsea £412m
Arsenal £311m
Everton £259m
Liverpool £221m
Spurs £96m

Nett I assume

[Zimmerman]

Yep

and the last 4 seasons;

City 462
Utd 333
Ars 235
Eve 222
Bri 191
WHU 128
Che 123
Lei 107
Bou 94
Tot 74
Liv 64

[murf]

You can see why United are so far behind.....

[forestfan]

And why City don’t have serviceable cover at CB

[Zimmerman]

Aside from the £137m spent on the three centre backs still on their books?

[blahblah]

Is that as much as MU?

[Zimmerman]

£158 for their 4

[murf]

£158 for their 4

No, that is what they are worth. I believe they paid about £158m

[thebillfella]

To give a bit of balance / context to this hijacked thread , here are the pre Suarez and Coutinho sell on fees amounts, which clearly skew all figures before as individually these fees dwarf the total gross spends on all players for most teams in most seasons (nice and convenient for our resident scouse fans, but still doesn't explain why Liverhampton has never won the premier league or only won 1 trophy in 11 seasons )

1992-1998 net spend
Newcastle: £40,570,000
Arsenal: £31,070,000
Liverpool: £29,625,000
Chelsea: £27,705,000
Spurs: £18,630,000
City: £12,070,000
United: -£40,000

1999-2003 net spend
United: £90,050,000
Liverpool: £60,110,000
Newcastle: £56,950,000
City: £54,662,000
Spurs: £46,552,500
Chelsea: £40,760,000
Arsenal: £17,916,000

1992-2003 net spend
Newcastle: £97,520,000
United: £90,010,000
Liverpool: £89,735,000
Chelsea: £68,465,000
City: £66,732,000
Spurs: £65,182,500
Arsenal: £48,986,000

2004-2013 net spend
Chelsea: £524,500,000
City: £434,820,000
Liverpool: £168,800,000
United: £123,400,000
Spurs: £100,850,000
Newcastle: £1,900,000
Arsenal: -£23,570,000

2008-2013 net spend
City: £407,150,000
Chelsea: £229,200,000
Liverpool: £60,100,000
United: £57,050,000
Spurs: £6,150,000
Arsenal: -£31,600,000
Newcastle: -£38,300,000

Getting back on subject of City though, the figures above leading up to City's first Prem trophy show City spending over 600% more than their nearest rival to land the Prem. By contrast, United spent £19,285,000 (gross) in total on players before securing their first title. In the same period, Liverpool spent £23,965,000 and Spurs spent £19,260,000 - a fairly level playing field rather than blowing away the opposition with somebody else's money in comparison.

Anyone that tries to claim that claim that City and before them Chelsea have just mirrored what United did in the past in terms of outspending their rival (and that whilst the source of the money is different, Chelsea and City have just replicated the model for success created by United) can see from the figures above that this quite simply isn’t true.

[forestfan]

Aside from the £137m spent on the three centre backs still on their books?

Well yeah, it’s a lot, but they wouldn’t get their money back on the two uninjured ones now, and not replacing Kompany was asking for trouble. Could make the title race a bit more interesting, though (or even make it a Liverpool procession).

[Judio]

Saracens get 35 points and a 5 million fine

Would that ever happen to a Football club

We all know the answer

[Zimmerman]

Net spend of all clubs to have featured in the Prem ie 1992 to date;

Top 10 still includes Stoke and Sunderland (not Spurs)

[blahblah]

Nor Leicester

[thebillfella]

Bare in mind the vast majority of City's spend comes from 2007 onwards as well

[Darbyand]

Bare in mind the vast majority of City's spend comes from 2007 onwards as well

Abu Dhabi arrived late August 2008. They tried to sign Berb but got Robinho only that window. So most of it has been from 2009.

[thebillfella]

Thinking about the other dodgy money launderer Sinawatra before them as well