Nah, FFP is fatally flawed. Though its spirit is justified. Like the EU or UN or ...Formula One. Or technology-blind refereeing. It needs to be revised completely. It is because of the damn thing itself that PSG and City inject themselves further with "revenue" and "equity"! So that the bottom line doesn't show massive losses. Pathetic.
I'm getting fed up arguing with you but you truly don't understand why the regulations were drawn up as they were.
You said yourselves it is flawed. Don't have to argue for argument's sake. Do you think that it does justice to free market principles to tell a company "Don't spend further!" "Don't incur a loss!"? A non-bankrupt company should calibrate their risk-taking any way it pleases. It's their right to do so.
think your a marked man seriously though, not sure if it is the rules that is flawed or the punishment handed out for breaking the rules. guess we may see soon enough, not expecting much though.
It's not a free market, it never was and it never will be. That's the essential point that you are missing. Ask yourself why these regulations are being introduced. If they have any value at all it is to stop unfettered free market capitalism fro ruining European football as a truly competitive activity! Capitalism has no inherent rights - only those ALLOWED them by society.
Didn't mean to make a political statement, so you're reading too much between the lines there. Whether liberal or conservative, we respect a company's right to take risks with their own money. We don't go telling our grocer "stop buying so much dog food as it's not getting sold and is putting you in the red and that is unacceptable for me that you should be losing 40k this year".
It might come as a shock to you Livtor mate but Fenway are only custodians of Liverpool FC, FSG are for now but the fans are forever. PS, some of us arent Conservative or Liberal, we're Labour.
Is tobes whining again.... lfc are just bigger, better and much more popular than your lot so keep on a whining... for the record i don't give a bollocks about ffp as its patently a waste of time as a system as we will all see with city and psg.
I'm aware of all that PMK. What irks me is that most people are quick to ask for punishment of the culprits through the wrong trial. And this FFP as drawn is a joke of a trial. A dangerous French trial. I would actually love for a rival club to spend themselves unfettered into administration. Let them do it. Why not? The only thing we need to monitor is that there is no fishy underwriting by a parent billionaire club.
Unlike some of you I'm not a financial whizkid, but JH is correct to call into question how we've been pulled over FFP for the season they took control and after the financial mess of H&G yet City and Chelsea have wangled the system and are in the clear. As well as learning about Football FSG should use their financial nous to follow suit in skullduggery.
Lol, so FSG's accounts were actually writing off cash that the previous yanks had slid out the back door and yet they never chose to mention that fact?... As for your last paragraph if you'd have actually read my post then you'd have seen I said that you were off the radar this summer ffs
Football clubs are social institutions and not just normal businesses. If the current custodian puts the club at risk by accruing unsustainable debt, then he risks destroying that social institution - see Portsmouth and Leeds for further details It's therefore the duty of the games governing body to legislate against spending that isn't capable of being self sustained by the club independent of the current custodian. The initial FFP rules are flawed and capable of being twisted, but it's a start and one that's long overdue
In-bold: loophole city. Plus, wrong starting point. It is a matter between the club owners, its board and supporters to decide how risks are taken. It shouldn't be up to UEFA and FFP. The only thing these external bodies need to monitor is that the books are genuine and there is no underwriting, bankrolling, gifts & goodwill made by the parent billionaire company or its vehicles.
That's just sheer hypocracy. There is absolutely no difference a club spending itself into administration and a billionaire doing the same until he/she is bankrupt. Both are wrong. Both are a fraud on the fans that support that club and both should be regulated. Now the set of regulations that UEFA have imposed are their first stab at a process in which the complexity of financial arrangements is notorious.
Surprisingly building something doesn't just cost bricks and mortar. The reason it was included in the accounts was, it costs money to get developments through planning. Go and have a look at buying a piece of land to build a house, a plot with approved planning will cost far more than one without (even more so if your looking at large scale commercial developments). That work, and more importantly an approved scheme is a asset to the company ie. if they do go ahead that money does not need to be spent on that part and are no risks that it may be declined. Our current owners have decided not to go with the scheme, therefore it holds no value anymore and so should not be valued as an asset on our books.
The mechanisms to control spending should be internal i.e. in the hands of that club's owners, board and supporters. With FA chiming in some respects where the league is concerned. They should not be in the hands of some French Big Brother.
I'm fully aware that planning applications etc incur cost, but you didn't buy the land and a spade never broke the ground, so for £35m to be assigned to that project is a flagrant pisstake as there's no way on Gods green Earth that £35m was spent getting that project to that stage, it's a laughable assertion
