As far as the Arsenal figures are concerned, I am telling you that you are seeing what they want you to see. I am not accusing them of obfuscation and agree that the figures paint a good picture. However, if you are prepared to pay for it then you can commission a report which will identify those Arsenal activities that do not appear on the latest BS & P&L and those activities undertaken under different corporate guises that fall under other accountancy rules in other contries. So please don't try and tell me that LFC are falling short of some mythical standard set by Arsenal as this is truly not the case. They are as good and as bad as each other in the presentation of financial data
So in the final analysis, we're not even being assessed for FFP by Uefa as we haven't been in the CL for two years? Is that right? Surely experts like the Guardian (and Tobes) would know that? Very confused.
http://www.itv.com/sport/football/a...rpool-to-avoid-financial-fair-play-judgement/ "Oh dear, it would appear that LFC has failed the FFP standards for the first monitoring period. As the accounts for 12/13 show a loss of £50m to add to the £40m from the previous years accounts, which is way over the 45m Euro limit set by UEFA for the first 2 year monitoring period & should therefore result in sanctions.... http://www.theguardian.com/football/...-loss-accounts All the effort for nothing then lads???" Tobes "I've got to say the level of ignorance (most wouldn't seemingly know a balance sheet from a bed spread) and their eagerness to lift the rug and brush this one away is really quite staggering even by kopite standards". This from the poster whose level of ignorance extended to not knowing the FFP rules he and CPofFuckwit were so intent on lecturing us about.
my point is not that arsenal are more honest in their reporting or anything. merely that they publish it for their fans and show the score. LFC have ayre saying"something" then people offering opiion as the report is buried some place i can't see without going and paying. I'd like LFc to stick them all on their website frankly. thats all. I acknowledge that of course arsenal play the game and no doubt try to sell/rent all that property like mad on april 30th etc.
You may or may not have seen this Some good posts on there and a good vid with John Thompson at the Echo on post 4.05 pm http://www.not606.com/showthread.php/227498-MITO-s-Block-of-Four?p=6177425#post6177425
I saw this comment "In theory all FSG have to do is write off the interest free loan and that's it. All that has happened is one part of an organisation has lent the other 40m, it's a loss to the set up either way so if they need to they will clear it from the books and hey presto! Not exactly rocket science. Man U turn a profit but have huge debts, Liverpool have very little debt but made a loss. " Would it be that easy????
Yes. 60% of our debt is to FSG and is interest-free. Our external debt to banks has just been reduced by £20m. If FFP required it FSG could just turn the internal debt to equity and 60% of our net debt magically vanishes into thin air.
Can't dish out gifts as easily Astro. The FFP was put in place just for that purpose... so that benefactors wouldn't pump in money unjustified by the investment. They state that any capital infusion has to respect fair market values. In any case, the solution here is to claim more of the debt and expenditures going towards stadium and youth projects (where FFP doesn't impinge) and have FSG loan some more interest-free money to pay off another chunk of the external debt - thus reducing the loan installment expense further.
The £35m write off for the stadium plans won't be included in the break-even calculations and that's massive. I remember thinking it was a huge amount to pay for no results and on re-reading it now, it was a Dallas based architect! Does that look a bit fishy? Do you think the 'architect' was a way of H&G paying themselves a little bonus?
Well no it wasn't little in our terms. Was the Dallas architect a front or a co. they also owned was more the point?
An interesting article laying out all the 'facts' http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/...aise-intereting-question-of-‘fairness’-of-ffp
FFP is so ludicrous it boggles my mind. A moronic waste of paper so far. A massive w**kjob conceived by a bunch of French monkeys I'm afraid. 1) Monaco (and also Liverpool by most accounts) have posted losses unacceptable by FFP. But Monaco (who's f**ked the golden ox) and us are exempt from any sanction since we are not "under review" since we weren't in Europe last season. Basically laying out an easy way to cheat the system: just stay out of Europe when you screw the pooch. (Great for us, pathetic for FFP). 2) On principle, any company should be free to dip into red as far as they like IF they see it as an honest investment for tomorrow. The shackles here by FFP are revolting and totally uncapitalistic. FSG is an honest company trying to operate within their means - if they deem their losses an acceptable means for a brighter tomorrow - so be it - it is their market-given right to do so. I'll venture even further: it is a company's market-given right to err, to blunder, and make honest business mistakes, so long as they don't go into administration. 3) If UEFA wants some kind of order and a Monaco-dwelling Russian or Arab oligarch money not spoiling the game, then they should look at Balance sheets rather than income statements. Any unjustified, gifted equity and/or priced above 'fair market' above a certain threshold amount should be a no-no. Simples.
Its a bit unethical that a Man Utd director(David Gill)is involved with Uefa's FFP investigation, I know its only the Daily Fail but they have a point and if City do read between the lines they could kick up a ****storm. Manchester wasn't the place to discuss it with the media especially at a non Utd/Uefa occasion. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...-neighbours-Manchester-City-CHARLES-SALE.html At least he never mentioned Boston based sports groups.
