The general FFP thread

[Bastian]

There's numerous FFP threads concerning City, Everton, specific new rules, etc. I think a general thread on FFP would be interesting.

Lately I've been thinking about how much difference it makes selling youth products over selling bought players, i.e. we sell McTominay for 30m our spending cap under FFP is raised significantly, especially when deals are amortised. While breaking even on a bought player doesn't come close. It makes me think about the Chelsea youth operation where they don't buy them to get them into the side (bar Lampard's short first spell during a transfer embargo) but to loan them out and then sell them on (usually for quite decent money). This seems an obvious loophole, because it is not in the best interest of the game for one club to collect young players who go on 2-3-4 loan spells until they are then sold on. They could develop much further in a more stable environment and the competition would be richer for it, while a Chelsea wouldn't spend money to make money. It would make sense that a youth product sold for great profit would only count towards FFP if they had a specific number of matches played for their club.

 

[Xaviesta]

Pre FFP, Bayern Munich never won more than 3 consecutive Bundesliga titles. In the FFP era, they've won 11 in a row and only been genuinely challenged twice. If every Bundesliga club adheres to FFP, I can't see that changing.

 

[Pintu]

Pre FFP, Bayern Munich never won more than 3 consecutive Bundesliga titles. In the FFP era, they've won 11 in a row and only been genuinely challenged twice. If every Bundesliga club adheres to FFP, I can't see that changing.

FFP makes it hard for smaller clubs that need to invest big to start competing... if the leading team/teams of a league have too big advantage, FFP makes it next to impossible to breach that gap.

The EPL is better protected thanks to the TV rights giving literally everyone enough money to potentially mount a good team... But the outrageous cheating of 115 charges fc with Abu Dhabi money has made the PL less competitive.

 

[FrankFoot]

Pre FFP, Bayern Munich never won more than 3 consecutive Bundesliga titles. In the FFP era, they've won 11 in a row and only been genuinely challenged twice. If every Bundesliga club adheres to FFP, I can't see that changing.

That has little to do with FFP.

It has more to do with football going global, increasing the tv right deals for the biggest clubs, and Bayern getting huge part of that money... you can add the Bosman Law going full effect as well.

 

[Arios]

FFP makes it hard for smaller clubs that need to invest big to start competing... if the leading team/teams of a league have too big advantage, FFP makes it next to impossible to breach that gap.

The EPL is better protected thanks to the TV rights giving literally everyone enough money to potentially mount a good team... But the outrageous cheating of 115 charges fc with Abu Dhabi money has made the PL less competitive.

as if , bar Leicester, in the past 30years has been won by anyone not being Chelsea,United,Liverpool,Arsenal or City.
The fact is that Chelsea and City are relatively young since Abramovich and Althani took over not that long ago.
Else you wouldn't have Chelsea and City as powerhouses pumped by foreign investors money.
There would be only United,Liverpool and Arsenal as competitors.
So even if the smallest team of PL takes as much as Bayern,Napoli or Barcellona as winners of their league it doesn't mean much since there are teams that are 4-5-6times bigger economically speaking.
Teams that can pay many players higher wages and so on.

But the point is always that sugar daddies made today's elite clubs.
The first we can remember are Berlusconi and Moratti that changed euro/italian football with the massive money they spent in a era where prices were much more regulated and teams could decided where selling a player regardless of players wishes.

So there is no competition unless new sugar daddies decides to pump money into eu football.
The elite teams will always be the ones we knows since 10years ago or so.
Sure maybe there are good or worse football seasons leaving that elite team in or out of competition but that's it.
It's a 20 clubs circle in Europe.
Epl tv rights just brought another change where no other league can resist bar Barcellona,Real,PSG or Bayern.

And then people crying for people football!
What's the point for a fan from a smaller team to root and check games? hoping for a once/30years miracle like Leicester,Verona,Napoli or so? wow

Eu football need serious changes and FFP isn't the solution

 

[wolvored]

FFP will never work. There are too many ways around it. City as well as others have done it for years. The same as if you said all clubs could only spend x amount. The only way you could have a fair playing field is if you limited how many new players you can have per season. For example if it was 2, then every team would at least get a chance of a couple of players at their level of expenditure. The big clubs would dtill get the best players, but it would stop them hoarding players so other teams dont get them.

 

[cyberman]

Ok, can someone finally explain ffp to me. From Chelsea antics last season to what has already been explained to me, a 60m signing wouldn’t be 60 million off ffp this year but, say 12m spread over 5 years. So a 120m budget wouldn’t be slashed to 60m as the Mirror etc just reported? Isn’t that the entire point of amortisation in the ffp era?

 

[Blackwidow]

Pre FFP, Bayern Munich never won more than 3 consecutive Bundesliga titles. In the FFP era, they've won 11 in a row and only been genuinely challenged twice. If every Bundesliga club adheres to FFP, I can't see that changing.

Germany and the Bundesliga have their own spending rules that prohibit teams from going into debt too much else they do not license for the league. That and the 50+ rule are much more important for German football than the FFP. I do not even think that the 50+ rule is diametral to that as the fans in Germany are (in difference to e.g. a lot of the English fans) are against outside investors.

About that Bayern streak - it just is not all about the money. Yes, probably always the favourites to win - but that it happens so often in a row is not just a money story as the situation before 2012 was not really different. Maybe you can compare that with PSG who have an even bigger distance to the next teams but did not always win.

One of the biggest problems of the Bundesliga are the TV contracts of the EPL where now even some middle class teams without international participation can raid Bundesliga clubs and the top clubs "steal" from Bayern's competitors...

 

[bringbackbebe]

Ok, can someone finally explain ffp to me. From Chelsea antics last season to what has already been explained to me, a 60m signing wouldn’t be 60 million off ffp this year but, say 12m spread over 5 years. So a 120m budget wouldn’t be slashed to 60m as the Mirror etc just reported? Isn’t that the entire point of amortisation in the ffp era?

All this is great in the short term but will start pinching you in 2-3 years if results don't come and when you have to keep selling home grown talent to be compliant. Chelsea are near there already. City have doped for years before enforcement became strict, so have got away with it.

 

[TheMagicFoolBus]

Ok, can someone finally explain ffp to me. From Chelsea antics last season to what has already been explained to me, a 60m signing wouldn’t be 60 million off ffp this year but, say 12m spread over 5 years. So a 120m budget wouldn’t be slashed to 60m as the Mirror etc just reported? Isn’t that the entire point of amortisation in the ffp era?

Sure!

FFP has to do with accounting losses relative to revenue. The way that accounting on transfers works is that transfer fees are amortised over the length of the contract the player signs. This is the loophole that Chelsea were exploiting in signing players to long-term deals - so Enzo Fernandez's transfer fee gets spread over 9.5 years instead of the more typical 5 and thus represents a lower annual cost. UEFA has now closed this loophole so that transfer fees only get distributed over the first 5 years of a contract - longer contracts are still allowed, but you can't spread the transfer fee out beyond 5 years.

It's important to note that the way transfer fees count for from an accounting perspective is different from what actually gets exchanged between clubs in terms of actual payment. There are also tax implications that can come into play, especially with respect to buyout clauses. For instance, the way a buyout clause technically works is that the player has to buy himself out of the remainder of his contract via a payment to his current club - the purchasing club then reimburses the player. This is how Neymar was transferred - and because that payment goes to a player, it is taxed at a much higher rate and ultimately costs the purchasing club more. This is why, for instance, Chelsea just paid 37m to Villareal for Nicolas Jackson instead of the 35 million release clause because Villareal accepted payments over the next two years instead of having it all upfront.

What adds an extra layer of uncertainty for United at this point is the potential lack of cash flow. Regarding the report in the Mirror, it's unclear whether they are referring to what United can fit in under FFP or to what your current owners are willing to fund prior to the sale. Essentially right now you have a Glazer parasite problem and not an FFP problem - but much of this summer has been miscast as the latter.

 

[Zebs]

Manchester United FC (ENG), Konyaspor (TUR) and APOEL FC (CYP) reported minor break-even deficits. These clubs were fined respectively with €300,000, €100,000 and €100,000.

https://www.uefa.com/insideuefa/med...6-1000--cfcb-concludes-break-even-assessment/

 

[SaboTaj]

https://www.uefa.com/insideuefa/med...6-1000--cfcb-concludes-break-even-assessment/

What happened? Are we in the mud now?

 

[Revan]

FFP is stupid to be fair. Started as a way of protecting clubs from going bankrupt, but in reality it was a way of keeping the status quo and protecting the big clubs from getting challenged.

At this stage, I do not even know what it is. Something to limit the spending power of clubs so the money stay with the owners, I guess.

I guess at some stage some clubs will go to a legal war with UEFA/country FA and the entire FFP will be dead.

 

[Nonameisknown]

Really? Getting fined before that other crooked club?

 

[awop]

About time UEFA stepped in to punish those cheaters from Manchester ! Wait...

 

[Andycoleno9]

We got punished before City. Now i have seen it all. Bloody hell.

 

[RedRocket9908]

Its ridiculous how a lot of the City fans on Twitter are reposting comments about our fine and using it to call us cheats when we were only found guilty on a technicality and their own club had to pay a UEFA fine of €10m plus are facing 115 charges from the Premier League.

The difference between the fanbases on this is that Man Utd fans will happilly accept that their club were in breach of the rules and were deservedly fined while City fans refuse to accept their club has done anything wrong and make ridiculous claims about everyone being out to get them.

 

[Gandalf]

We got punished before City. Now i have seen it all. Bloody hell.

Liam Broady is piling on about this on twitter. City fans loving it.