I imagine PSG, Monaco, City dont want to play in europe. You are French Shwan, whats the deal with Monaco. Do you think they will have any games to play next season. What are the french clubs doing about their ability to pay no tax and therefore offer huge wages above all french clubs.
Chelsea are the countries biggest earners from last season so should be ok to spend reasonably this summer. they will make a loss though, how much though I dont have a clue. City shouldn't be spending anything, time is running out for them to comply. Any other club I would prefer to beat them on the pitch but I cant say I wont laugh at City when it all ****s up. They deserve it. Hope the French clubs are destroyed ( PSG and Monaco ).
What are your views Drogs? Think you wont be affected? What about the likes of Monaco and PSG, whts your views on those two clubs? I'd b worried personally if I was a chelsea fan, not because my clubs spending like madmen but because the clubs who are clearly taking the piss are only going to rile UEFA up and make other clubs who have made attempts to comply get punished as well when UEFA decide to show their strength.
I reckon City and Chelsea will dodge it through the proviso about no wages included before 2010 and the 'improving trend' bit. City will point to losses of £200m in 2011, £100m last year and probably £50m this year, with some knocked off for old wages, say they're improving. UEFA will probably give them a slap on the wrist and withhold some prize money and say they're only punished if losses rise again in future. Ditto Chelsea, even without the CL winners money this year. Then PSG and Monaco will work their books to show a similar improving trend and use the same excuse. I think clubs have also been helped, ironically enough, by the commercial power of the big clubs. Everyone thought City's £35-40m a year deal for shirt sponsorship, ground naming and training ground was massively inflated, but now Utd are getting around £70m a year for shirt and training ground alone, with a hypothetical OT naming being worth at least £10m so we're double City's deal. So there's no chance of UEFA saying that deal isn't valid, and when you add the TV money increase in then City and Chelsea can both afford a bit more spending and can claim some more 'sponsorship' deals from affiliated companies. Ultimately FFP does seem to be doing what it was supposed to do - controlling the rate of spending without completely restricting it, and forcing clubs to think about balancing their books whereas in previous seasons Chelsea and City would probably have already gone nuts at this stage of the window.
indeed seem they don't want it true is unfair .. but what can we do? imagine a rival club having this advantage here in UK, any other club fan will be fuming
indeed , chelsea are living by the edge and acting responsibly , look to now, to buy new players they are planning to sell Luiz i think chelsea cab have 10-20m cushion to operate in negative balance as they will not be counted in FFP.. so even if they publish any loss about minus 20m, they should be still ok .. that is sure not the case of City & PSG and now Monaco
well problem with that is that UEFA want clubs to break even from now on, to keep losing will not be acceptable, agree, I think given how City had reduced their losses, they may get slap on the wrist and withhold some prize money, only problem with that, is without the CL prize money, City are doomed, they will never manage to break even or even get close, (ex: they made a loss of -50m this season, if next Season UEFA withhold the 30m of CL, even if keep the expenditure at the same level, their final loss the following season will be -80m without the CL money) .. sooner or later they will be banned either way
I think they have a slight concern but not a big one.. bcz i think chelsea will marginally meet FFP but i think they do hate it more than they are worried about it .. bcz without it , they could had dominated the league or at least had more trophies in their cabinet.. is not nice for them to see themselves forced to sell their big assets (such as Luiz) to fund future transfers .. so sure they hate FFP
Not necessarily. A £50m loss will be mostly cancelled out by the new £40m+ TV revenue, and City will be able to discount a lot of their wage bill for players they signed before 2010. The most likely outcome for City is that for the next few years they will limit their spending to a net of around £40-50 million a year, keeping their amortisation flat and meaning they make very few losses at all. I doubt UEFA will withhold all prize money - more likely they will warn them and threaten to withhold the money unless they improve in the future. Which the new TV deal will ensure. That's a good thing imo - I don't want City to disappear down a black hole of never ending punishments. As long as they aren't taking the piss any more, buying up any half decent player from any club they can find like they were doing in 2009 and Chelsea were doing a few years back, then it'll be good to still have them as competitors. Might help some of their fans get over their massive inferiority complex too
the only thing missing in your equation is that the more TV money = signings fees & wages will rock high is simple demand and offer equation .. that is how market work UEFA already submitted an offical warning to City some months ago .. they will now to pass to step 2, withholding CL money or any other financial punishsmet sure are 50-50 chance with the chance of them been banned.. but warning alone? i highly doubt it .. remember UEFA banned earlier other clubs over breeching other FFP issues, they didn't even gone to the warning or the financial punishment just straight to the banning
Not really. City already pay the highest wages by quite some way. All that will happen with the new TV deals is that Utd and Arsenal will be able to match their wage offers and Liverpool, Spurs etc will be closer. It'll take away City and Chelsea's financial advantage, but their players won't be able to demand more money from City as there won't be competition for their squad players. After all, it's not like anyone will be queuing up to offer Tevez over £200k a week to play for another club
So City have paid 30million for a 28 year old who has played most of his professional football in the Ukrainian league and it's considered one of the signings of the summer. Last summer United paid 24million for a 29 year old who had played most of his professional football in England and it was considered an expensive gamble. That's why we're Champions.
But of course. It's a clear statement of intent. Not a massive act of desperation at all. Oh no. And don't forget that Atlético Paranaense have a record of producing highly rated players who adapt well to the PL. Like Kleberson.
So all the screaming about dodgy deals, not everyone, just man u supporters, was wrong, or as the truth would have it, you have gotten even dodgier deals in fact Short short memories indeed and I have not seen this board infested with City fans crying their eyes out over this as you lot were when City got theirs. Just a single example of how you lot like to twist things
Oh Jesus he's serious . You really should ask your carer to buy you a big dollop of self awarenes for your birthday.
