The 14 Most-Pinnable

Sport - Telegraph Online, Daily Telegraph, Sunday Telegraph

Дата публикации: 2017-09-14 07:24

The Bundesliga publishes an excellent English language annual review on the financial position and it makes interesting reading. Unfortunately, the Premier League does not produce a comparable report. Glenn Moore also recently wrote an interesting piece on German football.

NCAA Ballpark Experience Rankings 2014 - Stadium Journey

Manchester City appear to have been briefing journalists that they are on track to pass the FFP test. Assuming that is correct (and they are unlikely to be mistaken), by my calculations they need to find around £ to nominally pass the test. Last year the accounts included a figure of £ which City received from the club owners in return for some 'Intellectual Property and Know How'. It is possible that they trimmed their expenses more than I predict - however I think it is more likely that we can expect some similar, rather baffling, one-off item in their accounts.

At the other end of the payment table, other than Aston Villa, all clubs below 8 th receive less under the Italian Model. Villa would gain as they would score highly in the Supporter index are from a large city, and score well in post-war results. The big losers would be Swansea – they would be nearly £77m worse off and end up being the poorest rewarded team, despite their good league position last season.

Have Manchester United found the answer to their biggest

It therefore seems likely that the Qatar Tourist Authority would be classed as being Related to QSI. Under the rules, all Related Party Transactions have to be reviewed by the UEFA Financial Control Body (EFCB). This body is required to review all Related Party Transactions and identify a ‘fair value’ for the transaction – where this differs to the amount paid, the transaction will be adjusted for the purposes of the FFP test. So, assuming the rules are applied strictly as per the UEFA FFP rulebook, we would expect the deal to be adjusted downwards. [Note: the EFCB will also be responsible for reviewing Man City's £ 'Intellectual Rights' Related Party payment revealed in my 66 Dec article.]

The annual Deloitte's Rich List reveals some interesting information about Man City's income - figures that have not yet been published owing to delays publishing the club accounts.

All is not well with Turkish football and last week the Istanbul Stock Exchange regulators warned the ‘big 9’ (Galatasaray, Besiktas, Fenerbahce and Trabzonspor) that they must take immediate action to improve their finances.

The other key figure to note is the ‘Profit from player trading’ figure. I have assumed that Manchester United don’t make a profit from player trading in the coming summer (they have a number of players that they would probably prefer to lose who may have to be sold at a loss). Whereas a loss on player trading doesn’t impact the ability to increase wages, the rules allow a club to increase their wages if they can make a profit. This might have a direct bearing on players such as Rooney, who are on a low book-value in the club accounts and who could be sold for a significant paper profit.

Assuming the size of the TV revenue pot is not changed, the Italian model makes the Premier League TV distribution look like this:

STCC rules is concerned with ensuring that clubs don’t blow their bumper TV deal on wages (therefore ensuring club aren't vulnerable if the next TV deal is reduced, or if the club gets relegated).

The biggest discrepancy relates to the item shows above as ‘sale of rights to owner’. This item is particularly interesting and has not been fully explained by the club. On page 669 of the report, the club advise: