Zidane and Moomba's FFP chat.

[Magma]

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/jul/22/eu-supreme-court-rejects-ffp-challenge-uefa

i suspect ourselves and psg could put a bit more time and resources towards it than a player agent and fan groups

 

[Zidane98]

i suspect ourselves and psg could put a bit more time and resources towards it than a player agent and fan groups

I suspect the outcome will be the same. FFP are the rules, if you dont like them don't sign up for UEFA competition.

 

[moomba]

The Struani case hasn't been won or lost. It was sent back to European Court of Justice on procedural grounds back in 2015 as the Belgium Court weren't sure whether or not they had jurisdiction.

The European.Ccourt of Justice subsequently ruled that they did and the case was reheard in Belgium last month.

 

[Magma]

I suspect the outcome will be the same. FFP are the rules, if you dont like them don't sign up for UEFA competition.

it could it, it might not be. but if uefa were so confident then surely they would've smashed us back then

 

[moomba]

The “we’re not denying the content of the e-mails but so what, they were illegally acquired” defence sounds an awful lot like “the video of me murdering my wife was illegally hacked off my laptop, doesn’t matter that I’m 100% guilty, I can’t be charged”.

More like being taken to court because a newspaper wrote a story saying that you murdered your wife.

It might cause the authorities to investigate but they won't go to court without actual evidence.

My frustration with Der Spiegel articles is that they are written in a way that leads the reader to presume a rule has been broken. Without necessarily addressing the rule itself, or providing full context.

An example, one of their leaks was a contract with NAC which Der Spiegel reproduced which to me suggested we had a form of third party ownership of their players.

I wrote in this thread that I thought we could be in trouble over that.

But it turns out one of the clauses in the contract that wasn't printed (or wasn't hacked) specifically refers to compliance with UEFA rules on third party ownership. It changes the whole context of the piece that they wrote

You can even look at how many people have assumed that Mansour is topping up sponsorships based on how Der Spiegel and other media have reported things.

That's why I think we need all the facts out in the open. If that leads to punishment so be it.

And while people might be frustrated I think a lot are making the judgement that Der Spiegel have led them to mske.

 

[Zidane98]

it could it, it might not be. but if uefa were so confident then surely they would've smashed us back then

If they were aware of his highness money laundering back then between his own holding company and your sponsors I suspect the punsihment would have been much more severe. You presented books claiming commercial income that wasn't actually commercial income which is in effect fraud (if the documents that have leaked are indeed authentic).

 

[Magma]

If they were aware of his highness money laundering back then between his own holding company and your sponsors I suspect the punsihment would have been much more severe. You presented books claiming commercial income that wasn't actually commercial income which is in effect fraud (if the documents that have leaked are indeed authentic).

possibly. but i think also uefa themselves dont want to be investigated due to what might be found about them and their money.

 

[moomba]

If they were aware of his highness money laundering back then between his own holding company and your sponsors I suspect the punsihment would have been much more severe. You presented books claiming commercial income that wasn't actually commercial income which is in effect fraud (if the documents that have leaked are indeed authentic).

A few points.

First, his highness isn't necessarily Mansour. That's an assumption you've made.

Second, the money we got from Etihad, Aabar, Etisalat etc was commercial income no matter how they ultimately funded the payments.

There are contracts and those companies are obliged to make those payments. It has to be declared as income. Imagine telling HMRC that "we got the money in our account, but it was all a bit wink, wink, nudge, nudge so we didn't declare it and won't bother paying tax if that's ok.

Thirdly an owner or related party sponsoring a club is not a breach of FFP. It's a common misconception. UEFA assessed Etihad as fair market value. They said that the second tier sponsorships were ok, but we agreed not to increase them.on future returns. To UEFA, once they've agreed fair market value it simply doesn't matter where those sponsorships came from and how they were paid.

 

[WealstoneRaider]

Moomba is definitely on City’s payroll. If not, then he should be!

 

[Will.B.Worth.Da.Waite]

Don't know why you're so horrified of the all the facts coming out in a court case then.

Surely if we're cheating so much we'll be shown up in court and penalised accordingly.

You would be if this great game wasn't run by corrupt *******s

 

[moomba]

Moomba is definitely on City’s payroll. If not, then he should be!

Once again, you contribute nothing to the discussion other than making a snide dig at me.

I wonder if it's only in BF-World that saying that you hope your club gets charged, goes to court and if found guilty is punished is somehow seen as a defence of a club.

If we're in the wrong as many believe, you've got nothing to fear.

 

[moomba]

You would be if this great game wasn't run by corrupt *******s

The funny thing with people moaning about us breaking the rules, is that don't seem to know or care if we've broken an actual rule or not. They just want us punished.

If UEFA can prove we've broken a rule, then I'm all for us to be punished. Getting kicked out of the Champions League is infinitely better than all the pissing and moaning.

 

[WealstoneRaider]

Once again, you contribute nothing to the discussion other than making a snide dig at me.

I wonder if it's only in BF-World that saying that you hope your club gets charged, goes to court and if found guilty is punished is somehow seen as a defence of a club.

If we're in the wrong as many believe, you've got nothing to fear.

“Only in the BF world”? Come on literally everyone is of the opinion City are fixers, proving it conclusively is the problem though. If OJ Simpson can get away with murder...

Anyway, take my comment as a compliment as it was intended. You are pretty savvy on your legal knowledge. Certainly to someone like me who’s a bit of a novice.

 

[moomba]

“Only in the BF world”? Come on literally everyone is of the opinion City are fixers, proving it conclusively is the problem though. If OJ Simpson can get away with murder...

Read again. Only in the BF world would.me wanting us charged, tried and.if.guilty be punished be seen as some form of.defence. or something only a paid employee of the club would say.

I'm well aware many think we are.guilty of offences, although I suspect very few know what actual offence they think we're guilty of.

 

[ADL9798]

uefa are scared of ffp being pulled apart in the courts. hence why the punishment we got was settled, and why ffp has since loosened. uefa still have to answer to eu laws.

I think most football fans, managers, owners, etc would rather FFP rules were debated in court through an open and transparent process than some clubs deciding they don’t like the rules, then surreptitiously and systematically breaking them to gain advantage. Perhaps I’m cynical, but I think there’s a reason why PSG/City didn’t go down the former route despite all the blustering.

EU law applies in some respects but on a fundamental level the key issue here is how UEFA and the FA administer their own competitions. Tighten FFP, loosen FFP, it doesn’t matter. As long as it’s tightened or loosened for everyone.

 

[moomba]

I think most football fans, managers, owners, etc would rather FFP rules were debated in court through an open and transparent process than some clubs deciding they don’t like the rules, then surreptitiously and systematically breaking them to gain advantage. Perhaps I’m cynical, but I think there’s a reason why PSG/City didn’t go down the former route despite all the blustering.

I think it was just a pragmatic decision. We got a settlement we were happy with so didn't take that last resort of court action.

I wanted us to fight it at the time but that was more an emotional choice. TBH I still wish we did.

EU law applies in some respects but on a fundamental level the key issue here is how UEFA and the FA administer their own competitions. Tighten FFP, loosen FFP, it doesn’t matter. As long as it’s tightened or loosened for everyone.

You can administer your own competition but you still have to comply with the laws of the land. For example if UEFA wanted to make the champions League for white players only they wouldn't be allowed to. Their competition, same rules for all teams but illegal.

 

[Zidane98]

I think it was just a pragmatic decision. We got a settlement we were happy with so didn't take that last resort of court action.

I wanted us to fight it at the time but that was more an emotional choice. TBH I still wish we did.



You can administer your own competition but you still have to comply with the laws of the land. For example if UEFA wanted to make the champions League for white players only they wouldn't be allowed to. Their competition, same rules for all teams but illegal.

PSG / City are also bound by EU laws and I suspect the reason either club doesn't complain too much about EU market rules is because of this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_aid_(European_Union)

Both PSG and City receive significant income from state based entities. I doubt that either club has applied to have that aid approved by the EU (happy to be corrected on this if it isn't the case) in the marketplace. I believe Tebas was prepared to take a case to the EU about this very thing.

 

[moomba]

PSG / City are also bound by EU laws and I suspect the reason either club doesn't complain too much about EU market rules is because of this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_aid_(European_Union)

Both PSG and City receive significant income from state based entities. I doubt that either club has applied to have that aid approved by the EU (happy to be corrected on this if it isn't the case) in the marketplace. I believe Tebas was prepared to take a case to the EU about this very thing.

Yeah, Tebas has been threatening to take us to court for a good few years now although I think instead of suing us he'd have to sue UEFA for not enforcing whatever law he thinks we've broken.

FWIW, FFP has a limit of 30% of income coming from state owned entities. We're currently around 13% but that will drop with the Puma deal.

No idea where the 30% comes from but it is in the FFP toolkit.

 

[Zidane98]

Yeah, Tebas has been threatening to take us to court for a good few years now.

FWIW, FFP has a limit of 30% of income coming from state owned entities. We're currently around 13% but that will drop with the Puma deal.

No idea where the 30% comes from but it is in the FFP toolkit.

I dont care what FFP says. EU marketplace rules dont allow it at all unless approved.

 

[Magma]

zizou going one on one with ffp

 

[moomba]

I dont care what FFP says. EU marketplace rules dont allow it at all unless approved.

So you need to get EU approval for every deal you do with a state owned entity.

That doesn't sound realistic tbh.

 

[Zidane98]

So you need to get EU approval for every deal you do with a state owned entity.

That doesn't sound realistic tbh.

It's EU law.

 

[moomba]

It's EU law.

Which law?

And where do you find details on which transactions with state owned entities have been approved.

I'm keen to see if we applied and we're rejected or just didn't apply.

Also keen to see if other football clubs have bothered to seek approval for their contracts with state owned entities.

 

[WealstoneRaider]

 

[Will.B.Worth.Da.Waite]

The funny thing with people moaning about us breaking the rules, is that don't seem to know or care if we've broken an actual rule or not. They just want us punished.

If UEFA can prove we've broken a rule, then I'm all for us to be punished. Getting kicked out of the Champions League is infinitely better than all the pissing and moaning.

Sepp, is that you?