Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Liverpool and Chelsea voice concerns about FFP implementation

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Liverpool and Chelsea voice concerns about FFP implementation

    Link

    Chelsea and Liverpool executives say they aren’t confident that European soccer’s governing body can administer new cost-control regulations amid lavish spending by clubs backed by wealthy owners.

    UEFA is looking at teams across Europe as part of its so-called financial fair-play rules. From next season, clubs that breach the regulations face sanctions that the Nyon, Switzerland-based body says will include fines, transfer embargoes and even suspension from the elite Champions League.
    “We have to see the application by UEFA, we have to wait and see how fair they really play it,” Liverpool Managing Director Ian Ayre said in a telephone interview. “ I have to say my level of confidence in it isn’t very high.”

    Even amid the rules aimed at taming Europe-wide soccer losses of more than $2 billion, Manchester City and Paris Saint-Germain, both owned by Gulf royalty, and Monaco, backed by a Russian billionaire, have continued to spend while losing money. Monaco signed Radamel Falcao from Atletico Madrid for a reported 60 million euros ($79 million), while PSG spent 64 million euros on Edinson Cavani, and City paid 28 million pounds ($43 million) for Stevan Jovetic.

    West London club Chelsea was one of the teams under the focus of regulators after Russian billionaire Roman Abramovich arrived in 2003. The 46-year-old has converted almost 1 billion pounds into equity in a decade that’s seen Chelsea win 11 major trophies, including three Premier League titles and the club’s first European Cup in 2012.
    Level Playing-Field

    Chelsea Chief Executive Officer Ron Gourlay said the team, which announced its first profit in the Abramovich era last year, is focused on complying with the rules even though it was “among the clubs targeted” by UEFA when the changes were announced in 2009.

    “It’s UEFA’S competition so we want to make sure that we comply,” Gourlay said in an interview. “All we’ve asked for is that UEFA police and manage the process with a clear, even playing field.”

    Gourlay said he was concerned about teams boosting their balance sheets through “arm’s length” contracts with companies connected to their owners. City, which was bought by Abu Dhabi-based Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al-Nahyan in 2008, has four sponsors related to the emirate including airline Etihad, which in 2011 agreed to pay 350 million pounds to put its name on the team’s stadium, jerseys and new training campus.

    Ticket Sales
    PSG, owned by Qatar, will get as much as 200 million euros a year from Qatar Tourism Authority through 2016, according to Le Parisien. The French champion made just 97 million euros from television rights, sponsorships and ticket sales in the 2011-12 season, according to figures published by French soccer’s licensing authority, the DNCG. The figures also showed the team earned 125.4 million euros from “other products.” Spokespeople for City and PSG didn’t respond to requests for comment.

    “If we’re going to have a fair-play system, everyone’s going to have to play fair” Ayre said, adding that failure to sanction rule-breakers “makes a mockery of the whole thing.”

    UEFA’s Club Financial Control Body, responsible for administering the rules, will “benchmark” all deals and only the fair value will be taken into account for the purpose of the break-even reporting, the soccer body said in an e-mailed statement.

    “If clubs do not abide by the rules, the CFCB will use the list of sanctions at its disposal, irrespective of which clubs are not in line with the regulations,” UEFA said.

    ‘Huge Checks’
    Liverpool, an 18-time English champion and five-time European Cup winner, has had little success in recent years. It’s not qualified for the Champions League since 2009, and won’t appear in continental competition next season after finishing seventh in the Premier League. Owned by Major League Baseball’s Boston Red Sox proprietor Fenway Sports Group, the soccer team can’t turn to wealthy backers to return to glory, making financial fair play critical to the team’s future.

    Russian magnate Dmitry Rybolovlev has been the biggest spender in anticipation of Monaco’s first season back in France’s top flight. After parting with 70 million euros for Porto duo Joao Moutinho and James Rodriguez in May, the team added Colombian striker Falcao for 60 million euros last month.

    “We can never compete with just writing huge checks for players here, there and everywhere,” Ayre said. With “the amount of time, money and effort that’s been put into this initiative, I think it would be an absolute tragedy if they don’t apply the rules strongly and firmly.”

    Under UEFA’s breakeven rule, clubs with a loss of more than 5 million euros last season or this campaign risk exclusion from the Champions League and Europa League, the continent’s top club competitions. Clubs can have a loss of up to 45 million euros a season if shareholders cover it. The UEFA sanctions don’t apply to domestic championships.

    To contact the reporter on this story: Tariq Panja in Rio de Janeiro at [email protected]
    To contact the editor responsible for this story: Christopher Elser at [email protected]
    Last edited by Fredo; 22-07-13, 07:28 PM.
    Are we winning?

    #2
    Why do Americans refer to sports teams in the singular, and the British refer to them in the plural?
    Oh I don't know.

    Comment


      #3
      I prefer the plural. But maybe that is because I am more familiar with it.
      Oh I don't know.

      Comment


        #4
        Chelsea have some front

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by dom9 View Post
          Why do Americans refer to sports teams in the singular, and the British refer to them in the plural?
          Trey Nyoni: countdown to stardom- 2 years 1year 0.5 years

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by dom9 View Post
            I prefer the plural. But maybe that is because I am more familiar with it.
            The plural always seems more inclusive to me. The clubs are seen as a community rather than an organisation.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by Hollowman View Post
              The plural always seems more inclusive to me. The clubs are seen as a community rather than an organisation.
              I think you're right. We refer to companies in the singular, don't we? Actually now, thinking about it, I'm not so sure.
              Oh I don't know.

              Comment


                #8
                The last paragraph is wrong. Clubs are allowed a €45m loss over 3 seasons not each season.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by G View Post
                  The last paragraph is wrong. Clubs are allowed a €45m loss over 3 seasons not each season.
                  Well that's Chavski & Man City out of the CL then...
                  Thanks for the memories Rafa - YNWA!

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by G View Post
                    The last paragraph is wrong. Clubs are allowed a €45m loss over 3 seasons not each season.
                    Are you sure about that?
                    Hello mert.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by Nick77 View Post
                      Well that's Chavski & Man City out of the CL then...
                      Not if they are seen to be improving their debts. So basically once they make a smaller loss each year the are fine.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by G View Post
                        The last paragraph is wrong. Clubs are allowed a €45m loss over 3 seasons not each season.
                        Like blood on iron

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by Fivex View Post
                          Are you sure about that?
                          Yep

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by G View Post
                            Something on there that I think few people are taking account of when they discuss this:


                            3. Transfer Fees
                            An important part of the rules relates to the way that player transfers have to be accounted for. Although a club will often pay a transfer fee to another club immediately, from a Break Even perspective the financial cost of acquiring a player has to be written-off over the duration of the contract. We need an example: let's assume Torres was signed for £50m on a 5 year contract and that Chelsea paid Liverpool £50m via an immediate bank transfer. As far as the Profit & Loss section of accounts is concerned (and the Break Even test), Torres' purchase price would be depreciated (or amortised) evenly over the 5 years of the contract. So, during the first 12 months, only £10m would be incurred as a cost in the accounts and Torres would end the year with a 'book value' of £40m. After 5 years, Torres' contract would have ended and he would be free to leave the club (he would also have a book value of zero). If the club sells Torres part way-through the contract, the club the difference between the amount they receive for the player and the book value at the date of the sale is accounted for immediately in the accounts (and the Break Even test) as a 'loss/profit on player trading'. This is important as it explains how a club can sell a player for below the original purchase price and still record a profit in the accounts during the year of sale. If Liverpool sell Andy Carroll for anything above £18m in the summer, they will record the difference as a profit on player sales during 2013/14. If we assume that Falcao comes to Chelsea for £50m on a 5 year deal in the summer, the club's P&L account for the year will only include £10m as an expense (under the heading 'amortisation'). The club will also, of course, have to include the player wages as an expense in the Profit & Loss account. If you want to know more about 'amortisation', see the video at the foot of this page.
                            "The man who never alters his opinion is like standing water, and breeds reptiles of the mind."
                            -- William Blake

                            Comment


                              #15
                              I've not read all that, very busy today but I presume it's talking about fees spread over a contract term, so 55m for suarez over 6 years is really only 9.1 a season and that's the loss that has to be covered by club revenue or club owner.

                              I agree, nobody discusses it that way.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X