Man City Charges

[The Rising Sun]

Yeah and then we posted a 128m profit the year after. We are able to generate a lot of revenue if necessary. Something Bournemouth cant do.

Either way, the point of my post wasn't the exact figures, I was giving a rough guide to the problem with wanting Bournemouth to be allowed to spend beyond their means to "compete" with the big clubs.

WE have a mountain of debt .
Despite FFP

 

[The Rising Sun]

Yeah and then we posted a 128m profit the year after. We are able to generate a lot of revenue if necessary. Something Bournemouth cant do.

Either way, the point of my post wasn't the exact figures, I was giving a rough guide to the problem with wanting Bournemouth to be allowed to spend beyond their means to "compete" with the big clubs.

We posted a profit because we sold the women's team to ourselves . That added about £200milion to our income. And I think it was maybe the season before the record losses.
We would have even more losses in the last few years if it wasn't for the sale of assets (hotels) to ourselves.
AND it hasn't done us a bit of good football wise..
You use the club with by far the smallest stadium in PL as an example, ignoring the likes of Villa, Newcastle etc etc

 

[The Rising Sun]

Yeah and then we posted a 128m profit the year after. We are able to generate a lot of revenue if necessary. Something Bournemouth cant do.

Either way, the point of my post wasn't the exact figures, I was giving a rough guide to the problem with wanting Bournemouth to be allowed to spend beyond their means to "compete" with the big clubs.

July 2026 ....

At the operating club level, the balance sheet inverts. Chelsea Football Club Limited reported a net liability position of £1.38 billion, a deterioration from the £1.12 billion deficit in 2024. On a book-value basis, the club is technically insolvent. Its status as a going concern depends entirely on a £2.02 billion interest-free, on-demand loan owed to intermediate holding company BlueCo 22 Limited, which increased by £382.2 million over the period. The directors’ going-concern assessment is based on the assumption that BlueCo 22 will not call in the debt within the next 12 months

 

[The Rising Sun]

Yeah and then we posted a 128m profit the year after. We are able to generate a lot of revenue if necessary. Something Bournemouth cant do.

Either way, the point of my post wasn't the exact figures, I was giving a rough guide to the problem with wanting Bournemouth to be allowed to spend beyond their means to "compete" with the big clubs.

Affirmed
“The Company is reliant on its intermediate parent undertaking, Blueco 22 Limited, for its continued financial support. The Company has received confirmation that sufficient funds will be provided to finance the business for the foreseeable future and at least 12 months from the date of signing of these financial statements. The directors have therefore adopted the going concern basis in preparing these financial statements. Blueco has indicated its intention to continue to make available such funds as are needed by the company, and that it does not intend to seek repayment of the amounts currently due to other group companies, which at 30 June 2025 amounted to £2.024bn, during the going concern assessment period

 

[bisright1]

I don't know why you've taken the view that people on here have a thing about Bournemouth??

Some people have brought it up, its not my fault you havent read it.

WE have a mountain of debt .
Despite FFP

I dont think we are a well run club.
I think we would have a lot more debt if PSR didnt exist.
I think with this ownership, we could be at risk of genuinely being run into the ground, PSR provides a gate.

We posted a profit because we sold the women's team to ourselves . That added about £200milion to our income. And I think it was maybe the season before the record losses.
We would have even more losses in the last few years if it wasn't for the sale of assets (hotels) to ourselves.
AND it hasn't done us a bit of good football wise..
You use the club with by far the smallest stadium in PL as an example, ignoring the likes of Villa, Newcastle etc etc

Again, I dont think we are a well run club.

I think Villa and Newcastle have the opportunity to overtake us in the future. However both of those clubs have a history of being relegated to the championship, the former in particular because PSR did not exist. Because they were so badly run into the ground as they exceeded their revenue chasing - and failing to achieve - champions league places.

July 2026 ....

At the operating club level, the balance sheet inverts. Chelsea Football Club Limited reported a net liability position of £1.38 billion, a deterioration from the £1.12 billion deficit in 2024. On a book-value basis, the club is technically insolvent. Its status as a going concern depends entirely on a £2.02 billion interest-free, on-demand loan owed to intermediate holding company BlueCo 22 Limited, which increased by £382.2 million over the period. The directors’ going-concern assessment is based on the assumption that BlueCo 22 will not call in the debt within the next 12 months

Affirmed
“The Company is reliant on its intermediate parent undertaking, Blueco 22 Limited, for its continued financial support. The Company has received confirmation that sufficient funds will be provided to finance the business for the foreseeable future and at least 12 months from the date of signing of these financial statements. The directors have therefore adopted the going concern basis in preparing these financial statements. Blueco has indicated its intention to continue to make available such funds as are needed by the company, and that it does not intend to seek repayment of the amounts currently due to other group companies, which at 30 June 2025 amounted to £2.024bn, during the going concern assessment period

I do not think we are a well run club.

 

[dkw]

Some people have brought it up, its not my fault you havent read it.

That some people being you, no one even mentioned them unti you came up with this nonsense:-

[td]

I don't know why so many people are determined for a club like Bournemouth to be on a level playing field with Man United. They are a small club with no fans. They have no right to win things.

[/td]​

 

[bisright1]

That some people being you, no one even mentioned them unti you came up with this nonsense:-

[td]
​

I don't know why so many people are determined for a club like Bournemouth to be on a level playing field with Man United. They are a small club with no fans. They have no right to win things.

[/td]​

People were making the argument that we should enable all clubs to have a level playing field. Does that not include Bournemouth?

You were saying it is unfair that bigger clubs have more money to spend on players.

So I called out Bournemouth as an example, you want them to have more money? or the big clubs to spend less? If you don't like Bournemouth as an example, what level of club is allowed to be considered?

 

[WhiteWall]

People were making the argument that we should enable all clubs to have a level playing field. Does that not include Bournemouth?

You were saying it is unfair that bigger clubs have more money to spend on players.

So I called out Bournemouth as an example, you want them to have more money? or the big clubs to spend less? If you don't like Bournemouth as an example, what level of club is allowed to be considered?

Personally i think that the rules as they are currently constructed cause more issues than they possible solve, but profligate unsustainable spending is, and always has been a concern, with a number fo high profile collapses along with a vast number of clubs reinventing themselves over time.

I don't think that in a free, open market, we should be preventing clubs from spending the funds that they have available to them and conducted an annual club solvency test with the owners having to stand up a bond covering any financial deficit would strengthen the financial security of clubs.

Of course a complete review and restructuring of the transfer markets and the salary spend at a player level would help, but the problem that we have is that the larger clubs from European leagues would then be circling if they are not bound by the same system. Unfortunately both Uefa and FIFA are too corrupts to devise a an environment that supports all clubs, players and the paying public at the same time. This will always continue until it all goes pop at some point.

 

[Sconnie Blue]

Ownership removed, relegation, and a massive points deduction the year they re-enter the Premier League. Unknown if the points deduction will be spread over years.

That's the suggested punishment doing the rounds.

 

[dermott]

Ownership removed, relegation, and a massive points deduction the year they re-enter the Premier League. Unknown if the points deduction will be spread over years.

That's the suggested punishment doing the rounds.

The PL and EFL can now cooperate over points deductions. As they did with Leicester.

 

[bisright1]

Personally i think that the rules as they are currently constructed cause more issues than they possible solve, but profligate unsustainable spending is, and always has been a concern, with a number fo high profile collapses along with a vast number of clubs reinventing themselves over time.

I don't think that in a free, open market, we should be preventing clubs from spending the funds that they have available to them and conducted an annual club solvency test with the owners having to stand up a bond covering any financial deficit would strengthen the financial security of clubs.

Of course a complete review and restructuring of the transfer markets and the salary spend at a player level would help, but the problem that we have is that the larger clubs from European leagues would then be circling if they are not bound by the same system. Unfortunately both Uefa and FIFA are too corrupts to devise a an environment that supports all clubs, players and the paying public at the same time. This will always continue until it all goes pop at some point.

We definitely see a lot less issues with clubs going into administration since PSR /financial regulations than before it.

Since 2014 only 5 clubs have enterered administration in England (in the top 4 leagues)

In the 12 years before, I counted 36.

So whilst I think there's always ways to improve it, I am definitely happier with a world in which we aren't seeing clubs go into administration, meaning unpaid bills to those working in and around football, means uncertainty for fans, etc.

 

[Clearlake Cartel]

Ownership removed, relegation, and a massive points deduction the year they re-enter the Premier League. Unknown if the points deduction will be spread over years.

That's the suggested punishment doing the rounds.

So another US Finance Conglomerate can sweep in and tilt the scales in their favour for all PL voting.

Welcome to ‘International Series’ PL fixtures moving forward.

Got to be very very careful with how harsh the punishment is as it could be to the detriment of the league in the long run.

Just look at how Scottish clubs handled Rangers, they killed their own league by baying for blood and and that’s BARELY close to recovered over a decade later.

Not saying the PL is a 2 team league like that but going too hard on City will only strengthen the likes of La Liga, Serie A and an ever improving Ligue 1.

 

[Zeta]

Scotland has a 2 team league though. England has far more competition. If you really want to send a message, they need to go down to the conference. Champiosnhip will be pointless, they'll be back in a year with record points and back to normal.

 

[WhiteWall]

Scotland has a 2 team league though. England has far more competition. If you really want to send a message, they need to go down to the conference. Champiosnhip will be pointless, they'll be back in a year with record points and back to normal.

If Arsenal, Liverpool, Man Utd, Man City, maybe Spurs (cos of stadium size) and us bail into a Superleague funded by Saudi and the Emirates, then it could easily end up a 2 team league. LIV SuperLeague 2.0.

 

[Clearlake Cartel]

Scotland has a 2 team league though. England has far more competition. If you really want to send a message, they need to go down to the conference. Champiosnhip will be pointless, they'll be back in a year with record points and back to normal.

The thing is Juventus got relegated to Serie B and a 9 point deduction for their part in the Calciopoli scandal. That was genuine bribery and match fixing corruption.

City’s punishment can’t exceed that as it’s not as serious.

Asterisk their titles and have their fine be the equivalent of their winnings in that time period redistributed to the clubs affected alongside a sufficient transfer ban.

We can all move on with our lives and go back to moaning about VAR.

 

[Zeta]

A fine does nothing.

 

[WhiteWall]

The thing is Juventus got relegated to Serie B and a 9 point deduction for their part in the Calciopoli scandal. That was genuine bribery and match fixing corruption.

City’s punishment can’t exceed that as it’s not as serious.

Asterisk their titles and have their fine be the equivalent of their winnings in that time period redistributed to the clubs affected alongside a sufficient transfer ban.

We can all move on with our lives and go back to moaning about VAR.

I wouldn't be so sure if tax is involved.

You can commit murder in this country and the average time in custody is about 16 years. Steal taxes from the government and these fckers will throw away the key.

 

[Sconnie Blue]

City’s punishment can’t exceed that as it’s not as serious.

Is it?

You’re talking about 33 matches influenced by officiating bribery versus nine years of artificially inflated revenue that let City spend close to £1 billion they shouldn’t have had access to.

Both cases created collateral damage and long‑term ripple effects throughout their respective leagues, and across Europe, distorting competition far beyond the immediate seasons involved. Can easily make the case that City's is more serious, as it spanned a decade.

 

[bisright1]

The thing is Juventus got relegated to Serie B and a 9 point deduction for their part in the Calciopoli scandal. That was genuine bribery and match fixing corruption.

City’s punishment can’t exceed that as it’s not as serious.

Asterisk their titles and have their fine be the equivalent of their winnings in that time period redistributed to the clubs affected alongside a sufficient transfer ban.

We can all move on with our lives and go back to moaning about VAR.

Its irrelevant what the Italian league does.

 

[Scott]

A fine does nothing.

Which is why it will happen.