Kevin Carr's Gloves 3285 Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 Uefa have told the above they are not falling for these huge sponsorship deals from their owners other business arms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj 17 Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 You got a link so I can read the full piece? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Carr's Gloves 3285 Posted February 5, 2013 Author Share Posted February 5, 2013 http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/news/champions-league-paper-round-uefa-threaten-city-chelsea-084722834.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mustyelbow 0 Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 what will it mean if they dont act under the financial fair play regs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Carr's Gloves 3285 Posted February 5, 2013 Author Share Posted February 5, 2013 what will it mean if they dont act under the financial fair play regs? They won't qualify for any UEFA competitions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26960 Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 They won't qualify for any UEFA competitions. Well that's the ultimate sanction, there are various less severe punishments. It'll be interesting to see if they ever go for that option. And what's the problem with Chelsea's sponsorship arrangements? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 Posted The Swiss Ramble's thoughts on here before, but just to repeat the conclusion of an in depth look at who in the Premier League could be worst hit... The only club that looks vulnerable is Manchester City, whose loss for FFP is still a frightening £142 million. Indeed, the club’s sporting director Brian Marwood admitted, “We’ve got a huge amount of work ahead of us to make sure we are sustainable.” They will benefit from rapid revenue growth, both in terms of distributions from the Champions League and (especially) new commercial deals, but the chances are that their losses will still be well beyond UEFA’s limits in the short-term. However, a safety net might be provided by yet another exemption in the FFP rules, whereby UEFA will not apply sanctions, if: (a) the club is reporting a positive trend in the annual break-even results; ( the aggregate break-even deficit is only due to the annual 2011/12 break-even deficit, which is in itself due to player contracts signed before 1 June 2010 (thus excluding wages for the likes of Carlos Tevez, Gareth Barry, Vincent Kompany, Joleon Lescott and Kolo Toure). Even that might not be enough, though UEFA will surely take note of City’s £100 million investment in their academy, plus their relative restraint in the transfer market this summer. The vast majority of clubs should be just fine with FFP, particularly those in England. http://swissramble.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/uefas-ffp-regulations-play-to-win.html?utm_source=BP_recent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now