HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Soccer (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=166)
-   -   Financial Fair Play: first casualties (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1258167)

tobo 09-11-2012 08:06 AM

Financial Fair Play: first casualties
 
The Financial Fair Play commission of the UEFA has revoked last years prize money of 23 teams. Those clubs now have the time until the 30 september to get their finances in order. On that day, there will be a second evaluation.

TEAMS
FK Borac Banja Luka, FK Sarajevo, FK Zeljeznicar (Bosnia)
CSKA Sofia (Bulgaria)
Hajduk Split, NK Osjiek (Croatia)
Atletico Madrid, Malaga (Spain)
Maccabi Netanya (Israël)
Shkendija 79 (Macedonia)
Floriano (Malta)
Buducnost Podgorica, Rudar Pjevija (Montenegro)
Ruch Chorzow (Poland)
Sporting Lissabon (Portugal)
Dinamo Boekarest, Rapid Boekarest, Vaslui (Romania)
Rubin Kazan (Russia)
Partizan Belgrado, Vojvodina (Serbia)
Eskisehirspor, Fenerbahçe (Turkey)

Chimaera 09-11-2012 08:32 AM

what a crock.

So FFP is cracking down on the minnows instead of the big fish it seems.

Only Atletico is of much note, and no one will shed a tear.

ProPAIN 09-11-2012 08:50 AM

UEFA: "You're not making enough money? Ok, we'll cut off one of your major income then!"

Genius!

One day, someone is going to have to tell me how FFP works. If clubs in debt aren't allowed to participate, aren't all major clubs in the same boat? Or did I not understand that correctly? Is it even if they are in debt, they can justify that they still have enough cash flow coming in to compete (ticket sales, merchandise, sponsorships, etc.)?

HajdukSplit 09-11-2012 09:09 AM

no surprise with Hajduk Split, they are in very deep financial crap but the HNS (Croatian FA) lets them get away with it. The club should have been suspended months ago but the HNS just ignored it and continues to let them play.

vsk92 09-11-2012 09:10 AM

And if small team can't spend some to try and get into the CL to receive the 10 million+ guaranteed to cover the spending then there won't be any small budget team's in Europe from now on

Kimi 09-11-2012 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vsk92 (Post 54239745)
And if small team can't spend some to try and get into the CL to receive the 10 million+ guaranteed to cover the spending then there won't be any small budget team's in Europe from now on

Except you can do that under these rules. The books are looked at over a number of years, so you can dip under even to push for Europe. Once you're there you can go stabilise again, but if you can't you get hit by penalties in a few years once it's evident you can't aford it.

The concept of 'we must spend more money then we really have so we can be get "glory" ' is the one they want rid of. It's unhealthy for clubs to keep on doing that.

Evilo 09-11-2012 09:57 AM

I can't believe people are whining about that.
UEFA is trying to crack down on teams which are not paying their players.

Seems awfully logical to me that a firm can't compete with other firms if they can't pay their employees.

It has nothing to do with the future FFP, it's just the first warning towards teams that are not doing what they should do as first priority : pay the salaries.

To see people whine here is amazing.:shakehead

EDIT : I'll add that under the current system, Atletico, Sporting Lisbon, Fenebahce and co are allowed to play in domestic and european competitions, winning their league some UEFA coefficient points and yet they are not capable of paying the players' salaries.
They should be banned from both domestic and european competitions and their UEFA points thrown away to teach their respective league to pull their heads out of their *****. In France, you're stripped of your professionnal status if you can't pay the salaries : you go back to low amateur levels and obviously, you can' tplay in Europe. Why should the above teams be any different?
Again, I can't believe people are whining about this, when it's all common sense and should have happenned 25 years ago.

Kimi 09-11-2012 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ProPAIN (Post 54239409)
UEFA: "You're not making enough money? Ok, we'll cut off one of your major income then!"

Genius!

One day, someone is going to have to tell me how FFP works. If clubs in debt aren't allowed to participate, aren't all major clubs in the same boat? Or did I not understand that correctly? Is it even if they are in debt, they can justify that they still have enough cash flow coming in to compete (ticket sales, merchandise, sponsorships, etc.)?

It's not debt that's important, but income and expenses. You have to make enough money from the footballing operations to cover the normal expenses of the club. If you can cover all your loan payments, then having the mountain of debt isn't an issue. The books are looked at over a number of years too, so you can take a bad hit and still even out over the next few.

There's also some exceptions to the rules. Big one-off costs are ignored if they'll be helpful in the long term, such as a new stadium or training facilities. Take Arsenal, they've just build an expensive new stadium but it's not counted against them as they'll make money from it over the coming decades.

The Swiss Rambler has a post going over it that's a good read.

villevalo 09-11-2012 10:09 AM

Its like most economic policies, it affect the little guys far more then the big guys.

FFP is a nice, well intention idea, but I just don't think its going to work, and its shown by its first moves, its began by tackling smaller clubs rather than the big ones.

Evilo 09-11-2012 10:13 AM

It has already started to work when you see big teams slowing down BIG time on the transfer market the last year or so, and cutting down on the ridiculous salaries. It obviously hasn't worked yet on Chelsea, City, PSG, etc... but it's a good step in the right direction.
Personally, any attempt to limit the craziness of football money is fine by me.

ProPAIN 09-11-2012 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evilo (Post 54241055)
It has already started to work when you see big teams slowing down BIG time on the transfer market the last year or so, and cutting down on the ridiculous salaries. It obviously hasn't worked yet on Chelsea, City, PSG, etc... but it's a good step in the right direction.
Personally, any attempt to limit the craziness of football money is fine by me.

There definitely was a dip in spending on Chelsea's behalf the last few years (relatively speaking). The only reason they spent so much was 1. They won the CL and 2. They needed to reload on their squad. Half the money on transfers this year came from the CL winnings alone, so it wasn't too bad. Good investments so far too (Hazard, Oscar and co. will sell a **** ton of shirts) so good I think these kind of teams will manage to match FFP rules.

Edonator 09-11-2012 11:16 AM

I remember hearing stories about Zeljeznicar tapping players up and having them pay the club to tryout, and then once making the team, they'd inform them that they might, or might not be paid. They'd get a car and/or an apartment, but wages would come and go.

Shrimper 09-11-2012 11:16 AM

I always thought FFP was about staying within your means of revenue?

tobo 09-11-2012 11:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by great_one98 (Post 54242351)
I remember hearing stories about Zeljeznicar tapping players up and having them pay the club to tryout, and then once making the team, they'd inform them that they might, or might not be paid. They'd get a car and/or an apartment, but wages would come and go.

Asking players to pay for a tryout?
How sick is that??? :shakehead

HajdukSplit 09-11-2012 12:07 PM

not that uncommon in the region....although he panned out, Nikica Jelavic probably got games for Hajduk because of his mafioso uncle and there was apparently some shady business with his transfer to Zulte-Waregem

Live in the Now 09-11-2012 12:36 PM

If anything, I think this shows that the regulations are going to have some teeth over time. Most clubs are completely in favor of it, there are only a few outliers. And any fan of a club not compliant should be bothered.

Cin 09-11-2012 02:18 PM

Can somebody link me to a place that explains what FFP actually is? I've been watching and I'm super confused.

ProPAIN 09-11-2012 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cin (Post 54246877)
Can somebody link me to a place that explains what FFP actually is? I've been watching and I'm super confused.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=financial+fair+play+uefa :sarcasm:

Sorry, but honestly though, Google is a beautiful thing. From Page 1 alone.

http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/f...-explained.php

http://www.uefa.com/uefa/footballfir...lay/index.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UEFA_Fi...ay_Regulations

ck26 09-11-2012 03:05 PM

The FFP "rules" have so many loopholes, I fear the only teams that will get caught up by it are those who don't have world-class accountants to manage them. This first list of teams does not inspire confidence that FFP will do what the average fan wants it to do ...

gary69 09-11-2012 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ck26 (Post 54248263)
The FFP "rules" have so many loopholes, I fear the only teams that will get caught up by it are those who don't have world-class accountants to manage them. This first list of teams does not inspire confidence that FFP will do what the average fan wants it to do ...

And there's also always a chance down the years that one club (not playing in UEFA competitions at that time) with a rich owner decides to make a huge splash trying to buy the domestic title and disregard the FFP rules in their attempt.

Offering huge transfer fees for clubs (maybe meeting release clauses) and offering contracts which multiply players' previous salaries. They wouldn't care whether they were allowed to play in Europe the next season. They'd just want to win the domestic title first, and then deal with whatever follows in future years.

Let's say a traditional big club hasn't made it to any UEFA competition for 5 or 6 years and hasn't won the domestic league title for a decade or two either. And then they go for the above described route. What are the other (top) clubs bound by FFP rules going to do in that league? Just watch idly by, helpless to compete financially with the new biggest spenders?

If the FFP rules as they currently stand (e.g. UEFA not being able to impose even Europe-wide legally binding transfer bans, let alone global transfer bans) were still the same at that time, then there's little chance of preventing some club going on a huge spending spree. Of course the domestic leagues could come up with similar FFP rules of their own, but it remains to be seen if all the leagues in Europe are willing too do just that.

Cin 09-11-2012 07:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ProPAIN (Post 54248009)

Haha I feel you on googling it, I just figured maybe one of you guys would have a really good article you may have read. Thanks though!

Chimaera 09-11-2012 08:51 PM

The investment it would take to take a club to the top of any of the top four leagues is so prohibitive and dicey in possible result where unless someone just doesn't care about lighting 300+ million on fire, that it's a remote possibility. Also at this stage winning the CL is the premier event that the egomaniac owners with that type of cash would want. The only real option they have is to dummy corp and sponsor it out of the losses.

They also could invest in anything they want, turn a profit and help balance the books. They can buy supermarkets and then turn revenue over from what it seems

ck26 09-12-2012 03:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chimaera (Post 54256145)
The investment it would take to take a club to the top of any of the top four leagues is so prohibitive and dicey in possible result where unless someone just doesn't care about lighting 300+ million on fire, that it's a remote possibility.

Any of the top four, yes, but the champions of Estonia and Bosnia and Montenegro have a path to Europe too. The acceptable losses + underwrite-able losses mean that if a benefactor cuts the club a check for 20-30m Euros a year, he can do pretty much whatever he wants at that price. It wouldn't take many years of that to completely swallow up every league except the Prem, Bundesliga, La Liga and Serie A. If willing to throw away 20m a couple years (smartly), CSKA Sofia or a Lokomotiv Plovdiv could dominate the Bulgarian League at will, and the increased UEFA revenue alone will make up the difference.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Chimaera (Post 54256145)
Also at this stage winning the CL is the premier event that the egomaniac owners with that type of cash would want.

Yes and no. Silvio Berlusconi wants to win the Champions League as a means to an end to political office in Italy; he has used AC Milan as a tool for popular support. Certain clubs and countries (Barcelona in Spain, Hajduk Split in Croatia) have a political / demographic factor that makes them attractive for other reasons than simple revenue and trophies.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Chimaera (Post 54256145)
They also could invest in anything they want, turn a profit and help balance the books. They can buy supermarkets and then turn revenue over from what it seems

On some level this is true, but the details of what does and doesn't count as "club revenue" can be dicey, and a number of expenses fall under the umbrella of "community and infrastructure development" and can be ignored ... hence, the accountant thing.

gary69 11-09-2012 02:36 PM

Chelsea seem alright regarding FFP, finally showing profit for the past financial year:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/20270934

The increased turnover puts them in the fifth place in the world behind Real Madrid, Barcelona, Manchester United and Bayern Munich.

VEGASKING 11-09-2012 03:20 PM

Only because of the CL win. They'll have to do that every year just to basically break even.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:58 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.