UEFA Financial Fair Play Regulations

...... or is that the legal term for 'fiddling the books'??

On another point, Barcelona and Real Madrid are insolvent. They rely on the goodwill of the banks in Spain to provide funds and overdrafts. They can not survive on the income they generate. Do you think UEFA will simply not allow them into European Competitions from 2013 onwards?? They would be akin to turkeys voting for Christmas.

Sponsorship would come under the related parties regulations. City's current sponsors are owned by a relative of the City board, and as such would be open to scrutiny, and probably taken out of the equation. Any sponsorship deal will have to show complete impartiality. Ignore City for now, they're going mad and I can't see what they will do. I assume they have some sort of plan. Barca and RM - I sincerely hope UEFA are as harsh on them as they will obviously be on English Clubs. Otherwise the whole game goes to the dogs.

The rules were requested, designed and voted in by football clubs. Think about it. Who ultimately benefits from them? The Clubs with large incomes. It stops anyone else joining the Club - it stops the next Man City.

I initially thought that the Hotels and theme parks would also be included, until I saw this

Relevant income is decreased if the elements a) to h) in paragraph 2 include any items below (detailed in part B):

k) Income from non-football operations not related to the club

fifthcollumnblue you always say not to believe any media talk about city as they always tell lies and they all hate city. Yet you still post links from pepers etc, what makes them true? but when they say yaya toure is on 200k a week is not? ps: i dont have a clue what all the nonsense talk is about above, just saw the link to the daily mail so i though id make the point, but correct me if im wrong in my mesaage/

With the ammount of crap that has been printed about my club (not including your good self) this summer I'm most certainly ready to be defensive. We will be fine, it is not like Sheikh Mansour is going to wake up one day and scream OMG! We've spent too much and now we can't play in Europoe, DOH!. I think the real issue here is why Uefa have implemented these rules in the first place, as it would seem to me that they are designed soleley to reinforce the status quo of the biggest clubs with the largest revenue streams from ticket sales, TV rights and Champion's league success staying exactly where they are - at the top. There is already a glass ceiling on other clubs breaking the Top 4 cartel, I'm sure the villans must have noticed this having been there or thereabouts numerous times but always falling at the last hurdle because you don't have the £40-odd million per season that the sky 4 recieve from the CL. The likes of Tottenham and Everton have been one-offs. These laws entrench the monopoly and will be far worse for football than some "little upstart club" like City attempting to do 10 years worth of spending in 2 years and thus upsetting the cosy little applecart.

fifthcolumnblue - you can defend all you like, but there is no denying that you are now officially the most hated club in the land. You bristled at the use of the word 'soulless', but there isn't a more apt word to describe Man City at the moment.

All that will happen is the Billionaire sheikhs will provide money for the club in other ways ie big sponsorship deals, paying a fortune as the shirt sponsor etc. Hope I'm wrong but they'll get round it

so it isnt just me suck of seeing no loyalty from players. lets face it we are in BIG TROUBLE this season, i fear a close relegation battle on the cards. The FA is like the rst they protect the big boys, cos they make em the most money simple, THATS WHY U NEVER GET A PEN AT OLD TRAFFORD STAMFORD BRIDGE, etc. it SADDENS me clubs like us ie Everton, Spurs will never probably win the leahe again. our history was great the futur is not i hope im VERY wrong but im disiluusined with football nowadays

I agree that it is teams like City that have caused UEFA to take a hard stance. But City will be in trouble even if they stop spending on transfers, simply because they're committed themselves to paying massive wages (beyond their turnover, never mind profit) for 4 or 5 years which takes them well past the start date of the rules. Buying players outright now with a view to making lots of profit on them in the future is only a genius masterstroke as suggested by Martin Samuel, firstly if City are to become a selling club, and secondly if anyone wants to buy their players and pay the grossly inflated wages. Virtually all clubs will decline especially seeing as they don’t really have a glut of talent that bigger clubs would be interested in, and this will drive the value of their players down. The development at Eastlands is also a good story told by hopeful City fans, but largely irrelevant even if they are allowed to include the income. The area is a total cesspit and it simply won't attract people when the centre of Manchester is a mile away. Trust me, the Beckham’s and Brad Pitt won't be staying there when they're in town, just maybe Liam Gallagher as a show of loyalty. So any extra income will be limited to turnover from the local Neanderthals in the leisure complex. City also have to pay all gate receipts above 30,000 to Manchester City Council, and the council have and will continue to reject any attempts to buy the ground which is a useful income for them, and so increasing the ground capacity isn’t a viable option. The council will also refuse planning permission for the building of another stadium in close proximity to Eastlands should City decide they want to use the land they own to build a new stadium. Ultimately City got to turn a £100 million company making a £93 million loss, into at least a £400 million company with massive profits within the space of 2 years, and as Abramovich has proven (in his 7th year without profit), throwing a billion pounds at something doesn't make is a successful and profitable business. Section 2J above is included to stop teams being paid £300 million for a pre-season friendly or annually for a bogus sponsorship deal to allow the owner to inject money. Only values deemed to be at a fair market rate will be allowed on the books, meaning City won't be able to claim for a sponsorship deal that earns them more than the big teams in the league.