Arsenal News
Arsenal News & Transfers
As featured on NewsNow: Arsenal newsArsenal News 24/7

Arsenal News, Only Arsenal, Blogs, Transfer News

Archives

November 2017
M T W T F S S
« Oct    
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930  

Has PSG decided to ignore FFP and bash on alone?

By Tony Attwood

Chelsea are selling David Luiz to Paris St Germain for around £50 million.

It is a deal set up to help Chelsea keep on the right side of FFP regulations, unless their manager goes on a spending spree to try to recover from this season without a trophy.

But from PSG’s point of view vis a vis FFP the deal looks like their are sticking two fingers up to FFP once and for all.

At the time that we were covering Man City’s FFP restrictions, so L’Equipe  reported that PSG were hit with the same punishment as City, in terms of fines and their Champions League squad being reduced to 21 players for next season with 8 of those in  the home grown classification.

There was also the financial incentive that €40m being returned to PSG if they comply with the measures set by the Club Financial Control Body.  Also the statement said that PSG had agreed to “significantly limit spending in the transfer market for seasons 2014-15 and 2015-16”.   UEFA added that the primary objective was to make sure that PSG become break-even compliant “in a short space of time”.

“PSG undertakes to report a maximum break-even deficit of €30m for the financial year ending in 2015 and no break-even deficit for the financial year ending in 2016 they said.   Compliance with the settlement agreement will be subject to on-going and in depth monitoring, in accordance with the applicable rules.

“In this connection, PSG also undertakes to provide the CFCB with a progress report evidencing its compliance with all relevant conditions agreed on a six monthly basis.”

PSG then said it would accept the financial sanctions imposed by Uefa although it totally disagreed with the way the matter had been resolved.  They spoke of the tremendous handicap” it would now face.  And then PSG president Nasser Al-Khelaifi gave a hint of what would come next.

“We will continue to invest in developing a highly competitive team and we will continue our investments in our stadium and training infrastructures while at the same time remaining, as we are today, debt free,”

And that seems to be what they are doing – by buying a player for £50m.

Chelsea’s FFP problem is that after the period of accounting for the FFP round just completed, Chelsea announced a loss of £49.4m in December, and so just sneaked into the £37.5m Uefa limit for the last FFP period.   They then bought Nemanja Matic, Mohamed Salah and Zouma.

So while Chelsea look to have taken FFP seriously – as we would expect since it was their owner who took the idea to Uefa in the first place, PSG are going there own way and could also buy Oscar and Eden Hazard.

So what does all this mean?   Either PSG are going on a sell-sell-sell spree, or else they are simply not going to bother to comply, and will wait to see what Uefa does next.  Then if Uefa do ban them from the Champs League in 2015/6 they might well be ready for their case in the courts.

But again, as shown on Untold before, although there might be some sort of case it has two big problems.  One is that it would take forever to go through the legal process.

The other is the EC has now formally notified Uefa that it will reject the complaint from Italian agent Daniel Striani, that FFP broke European Union competition laws.  The case has interested because Striani was represented by Jean-Louis Dupont who represented Bosman.   Striani have been sent the letter saying the Commission“ does not intend to conduct a further investigation” into his allegation.

So, all attention on PSG, for where they go, Man City might well follow along hanging to their coat tails.

The latest stories are listed on the top right of this page
.
For today’s Arsenal anniversaries just click here
.
The books

46 comments to Has PSG decided to ignore FFP and bash on alone?

  • Mandy Dodd

    Don’t think PSG give a flying fcuk about FFP, apparently they, in contrast to City were relieved at the leniency of their punishment!
    But also expect them to sell perhaps the likes of Cavani, Lavezzi, Pastore and others….perhaps even to Chelsea.
    Although after the last season, big big bucks on some of the above may be a risk

  • bjtgooner

    Is there something else going on between PSG and Chelski? Luiz is surely not worth £50m. Chelski will probably splash some cash around and PSG will probably sell. So there will be more twists and turns in this one.

    Is there a cartel type arrangement between certain clubs – in their efforts to get around FFP yet spend heavily? Maybe – or it could be as Tony has postulated – PSG don’t give a fcuk – but I would be surprised if it is that straightforward.

  • Pete

    We don’t really know how FFP will be perceived after this year, but if most clubs decide it is for real we could see the bottom drop out of the transfer market. We all know that the market has been sustained at it’s current rarefied level by Man C, PSG and Chelsea. Real Mad, Barca and Liverpool are on their uppers financially – which leaves Man U, Bayern and… us as the last of the (relatively) big spenders.

    If PSG are hoping to be able to realise what they paid for players they discard they could be in for a real shock. Chelsea have been smart in offloading Mata and Luiz for big money before the bottom falls out of the market.

    This time next year, on current trends, I think PSG and ManC could be staying at home on European nights.

    Much as I rate Sagna, I am scratching my head at their contract offer to Sagna – right back is not a position in which they are weak!

  • oldgroover

    I wouldn’t hold my breath on this one, especially as Platini’s son Laurent is employed as a lawyer by PSG owners Qatar Sports Investments. He’s not actually involved very much (if at all) with PSG, but there has to at least be a little conflict of interests here.

  • Kenneth Widmerpool

    off topic, but have you all seen the animated chart showing twitter mentions during the Cup Final?- very interesting to see areas of the fan base…
    COYG! A+A!

  • AL

    Dock them points, that’ll stop the willy nilly flouting of rules.

  • Vintage Gooner

    Have PSG found another loophole? Clearly the ‘arms distance’ requirement on sponsorship could equally be needed on transfers. Otherwise Quatari Colts (a team I just invented)could be spending untold sums on purchasing surplus players from PSG and lo and behold the books all balance.

    However the extent to which people will have to go to get round FFP would justify it’s introduction particularly if future potential loopholes are properly closed.

  • WalterBroeckx

    I wonder if behind the scenes there has been talks between the big spenders Chelsea – MC – PSG – Monaco to set up a transfer league on their own.
    You sell to us, we sell to you, you sells to them and them sell to whoever needs the money to come in line with the FFP rules.
    So we might see a kind of money carousel between those teams where they sell players for ridiculous amounts of money to each other. It keeps the ‘normal’ teams out of the competition for those players and it will allow them to balance the books to whom will benefit from it.

  • oldgroover

    Walter
    That could be what could happen. Have you seen this excellent Flemish Arsenal blog?http://www.flemishgooners.be/

  • jambug

    I said it yesterday £50 Million for Luiz?

    Absolute joke and bodes very badly for the kind of transfer window we are in for.

    I tend to go along with the ‘Cartel’ line of thinking.

    Depressing.

  • bjtgooner

    The other aspect of any cartel or similar arrangement is an agreement to not sell to certain clubs.

    I have no evidence for this, just an impression that someone behind the scenes last summer was making it difficult or impossible for Arsenal to finalize certain targets. I don’t mean the antics of the cheeky Chickens or the lying Divers – where the motive was fairly obvious – but other targets that we seemed close to suddenly became unavailable.

  • Kelser

    I definitely think that there’s something fishy about that transfer but maybe I’m missing a point. How would this benefit PSG?

  • Sammy The Snake

    Cartel of rich football clubs… I think you have a good line of thinking here.

    Qatar buys from Chelsea, a Russian company owned by Abromovich sponsors Monaco, Monaco buy a player from City, and Sheikhs of Abu Dhabi (xxx bank) sign a sponsorship with PSG. All happy…

    You should come to Middle East and see the ridiculous sponsorships going around. Banks and tel operators are offering needless football promotions. A bank is heavily advertising ManU credit cards while they are languishing in 7th place…

  • Mike T

    Quite an amusing article .

    I will agree that David Luiz going for £50 million is a very good deal for Chelsea. No perhaps I should say a very very good deal. No perhaps a better description is incredible.

    As I have said previously I personally think FFP is so flawed as to be un workable and whilst I know some are celebrating UEFAs recent rulings I for one believe that all that we will see now is clubs stretching matters and I wonder if this deal is the first steps of one such side step.

    This transfer is due to go through on 10 June 2014. In both clubs 2013/14 accounting period.

    If my back of a fag packet calculations are right and assuming wages at Chelsea haven’t risen and amortised transfer costs rise (£15 million) there would be a need to bring in about £65 million to break even.

    However I expect, with the increased transfer profit(+£50 million), TV money (+ £40 million), commercial money (+£20 million) CL revenue(+ £10 million) I would expect Chelsea to show a profit this year of around about £40 – £60 million.

    So probably no FFP issues for Chelsea.

    I know you lot love a conspiracy so how about this.

    Luizs value following his 3 and a bit years at Chelsea is in the region of £ 11 million. If the fee is say £45 million there will be a profit of £34 million in respect of this one sale alone.

    Say Chelsea agree then to buy Cavani and or others for £75 million and say these players combined values is now £40 million. In their accounts PSG likewise will show a profit of £35 million.

    Chelsea will get the two players they want for Luiz plus £30 million, which seems about right in the current market.

    Ok I accept there will be implications in terms of Chelsea increasing the sums that will appear in their accounts by way of increased amortisation but as I point out earlier I really don’t think that for 2013/14 et seq Chelsea have any real FFP issues whereas we all know that PSG do.

    If its not something along the lines I detail above then quite simply Chelsea have done remarkably well.

  • Mandy Dodd

    Would not be at all surprised by what you suggest Mike T!

  • Mandy Dodd

    Sagna to City is a strange one I agree Pete. Having said that, they regularly rotate their left backs….and Sagna can play in more than one position as well. Shame he is going to City it seems, but still cannot but help wish him well, just not when competing against us. Glad to see him get every penny he will earn up there but let’s stop him winning a trophy or two!

  • Vale

    The FFP is a joke IMO. Tis simple, if a club fails to meet the set rules, that club should be banned. If UEFA took such a strong stance then everyone will take the fair play rules serious. Instead they let em off with silly fines and player caps. What’s 60m euros to a club willing to pay 50m for a player who is not worth half that price? Malaga struggled to pay players’ wages and were banned for the Europa League. I think Platini just huffed and puffed. The time has come to show his hand and he froze. The deal stinks of something fishy. In fact, all em big money transfers stink. Reminds me of Carroll for 35m, a one season wonder, when the same Liverpool bought Suarez for less than 25m. Neymar’s transfer has shed more light on the deals that happen underneath during these transfers – a player unproven in Europe for 57m? Haaaa…Luiz to PSG just falls in the same category – cartel transfers.

  • Vale

    Good insight Mike T. I guess UEFA have got its work cut out for it. These clubs only recently rose to stardom by spending big, and can only sustain that rise doing just that. Not until, they breed some youth. I laugh at that thought too. Can anyone count the number of youth players that have made it to Chelsea’s first 11 since 2005? With that kind of money, they will always find loopholes and exploit these. UEFA just look like a loud mouth to me. Lost confidence in em since the rulings.

  • Valentin

    Rumours in France is that PSG has already a deal to sign Eden Hazard. One of stipulation of the FFP punishment is that they cannot spend more than 60 millions on a single player. As Hazard is valued at 80 millions, one way to bypass that restriction would be to undervalue him by 20 millions and overvalue another player from the same club by 20 millions. Alex is rumoured to be that player.
    Luiz valued at 30 millions makes more sense, even if I still think that it’s way too much.
    As they cannot increase their wage bill, it is clear that Alex, Jeremy Menez will be let go. Pastore, Lucas Mouras, Cavani could all be sold to financially compensate the player movement expenditure.
    If that is the case, I wonder how UEFA would respond to that blatant disregard for their rules.
    Because if they don’t, we may end up with the same accounting shenanigans that Italian football were specialist in the 80’s and 90’s. Beating new records in term of players’ price on a regular basis, just to hide losses. The main difference is that this time, the owner have pockets so deep they are unlikely to go bust. At least not in Parma and Parmalat way.

  • jambug

    Valentin

    Makes me fucking sick.

  • jambug

    I never thought for 1 second FFP would work.

    I now know for certain it wont.

    The first transfer of the window and it’s complete and utter impotence is exposed in it’s full glory.

    What an absolute joke.

  • Mike T

    @Vale
    To bring in a young player and develop them to the first team isn’t a something that will take 5 ,6 or even 7 years its a 10-15 year project.
    Its not just about identifying say 10 year old its first about putting a structure in place that will find that 10 year. Its about building an academy with the correct infrastructure and above all finding the right staff to manage the whole project.
    The first batch of players that came through our, Chelsea’s RA funded academy, failed to meet the standard. The whole project was re vamped following the sacking of Arneson and only now are their signs that the new approach working. Indeed , at Cardiff, our last game of the season, 3 of our academy players were on the pitch.
    Look out next season for a few more to be there or there about and in particular look for name like Baker, Ake, Saville, Christenson & Bamford

  • jambug

    Mike T

    But until that time arrives your Club are perfectly happy to circumnavigate the FFP rules by making dodgy deals with your fellow oilers.

    I’m so glad you, City, and the like have made it such a fairer, level playing field.

  • Mike T

    @Jambug

    You really do miss the whole point. A deal isn’t dodgy if it doesn’t break the rules.

    The more you legislate the more you tie your self in knots.

    As for a level playing field when was there ever such a thing? As for crying its unfair that you will get you no where.

  • bjtgooner

    @Mike T

    “Dodgy” usually implies evasive or shifty or underhand. I would consider an “underhand” deal one that has been initiated to circumvent a rule which a transgressor finds inconvenient; and usually where the transgressor does not wish to be caught in breach.

    So, if the situation outlined by Valetin is indeed factual, then Chelski would be complicit in a deceptive transaction – and jambug’s comment about a “dodgy” transaction is quite fair.

  • bjtgooner

    Apologies – Valentin not Valetin.

  • Mike T

    bjt

    Using your definition the signing of Fabregas was dodgy. It was not it was more about using the rules to your advantage.

    Or what about a club that re arranges its tax liabilities to take advantage of reducing Corporation Tax rates. Not dodgy just good business.

    The irony is I only floated a maybe not a known is happening.

  • bjtgooner

    @Mike T

    We were not in discussion about Fabregas, we were discussing your wrong dismissal of jambug’s term “dodgy” as applied to Chelski as described above.

  • Mike T

    Its all about opinion and I am right and my wife agrees!

    Irrespective I agree £45 million or whatever the figure is does make even my eye brows rise!

  • Ray from Norfolk, Virginia

    I thought that deals with UEFA are about total annual transfer budget.
    So, you can buy 2 players at 60+50 mil and sell 4 or 5 at about 20 mil each.
    Your net transfer budget is then about 10 mil and is thus deemed acceptable.

    I expect the big spenders to do their business early, and people like AW late.
    The big fees league of oilers / oligarchs is now in peacock plumage overdrive.
    Clubs holding on to valuable players with big $ expectations will sell late.
    Knowing transfer dynamics is not common, and ITK reputations are usually BS.

  • Mandy Dodd

    Bad day for the spuds, they lost Van Gaal, now Ancelotti. Looks like the chap from Soton.

  • menace

    Chelsea’s was not just a trophy-less season. It was a season of failure.

  • bjtgooner

    @Mike T

    It is not about opinion.

    It is about: – “A deal isn’t dodgy if it doesn’t break the rules.”

    Clearly a deal can be “dodgy” if it is underhand and circumvents the rules – where the transgressor seeks out loopholes or ambiguity to further his cause.

    But if you and your good wife wish to believe differently – fine – stick to your dodgy beliefs! 🙂

  • Valentin

    @Mike T, the only structure Chelsea put in place with regards to Youth system is a complete new scouting department and extra funding. Nearly all those marvellous brilliant Youth Chelsea players have been bought, expensively I may add. Mostly by breaking the rules such as circumventing the interdiction of transfer (international for UEFA, national for the FA) for U16 by giving non-existent job to parent within the FA authorised distance.
    BTW, dodgy does not necessarily means illegal. The same way a deal can be immoral but still legal.
    Looking at your position, If you were one of those celebrities caught very publicly in tax avoidance scheme, you would the one who refuse to acknowledge that the scheme was “dodgy” and immoral.

  • Shard

    I had the same thought about there being some sort of agreement between Chelsea and PSG to help each other, but in that case I would have expected Chelsea to buy some players from PSG. Not the other way round. Perhaps that will happen later.

    Whether by design or not, perhaps this will distort this year’s market too. Luiz is worth what Mesut Ozil was worth last season. Will this lead to other clubs adjusting their demands accordingly? If nothing else, it might lead to delays in conducting business for normal clubs. WHich suits the oilers. (Although sometimes you think they just rely on other teams to do all the legwork and simply come in at the last minute)

    On the face of it, buying David Luiz for that much, when for example, Vermaelen might be available for less than half that, makes no sense whatsoever. Which is why people are looking for ulterior motives… Or should I say something dodgy in the deal 🙂

  • jambug

    Apart from it being ‘dodgy’ 🙂 my real problem was how it would distort/inflate the transfer market even more.

    On reflection though, if it really is a case of the ‘over valuation’ of one player (Luiz) whilst, and at the same time, under valuing another (Hazard) the Net affect on market inflation may not happen.

    For me that was the biggest problem because it could of seriously affected our ventures in the transfer market.

    As for ‘dodgy’ deals, for pities sake the ‘oilers’ entire modus operandi is a dodgy deal.

    As despicable as they are I’m resigned to the fact they’re going to keep doing anything and everything they can that will enable them to keep buying trophies for as long as they can get away with it, and going by the last 2 years efforts at buying trophies they are going to have to re double there efforts with regards to there ‘dodgy’ dealings and perhaps the ‘dodgy’ Luiz/Hazard deal is the first indication of that.

  • Mike T

    I thinks its best to draw a line under what we think dodgy means as I said I find the sum that is stated as being the transfer fee incredible and if that’s what some call dodgy then so be it.
    The market reacts to all sorts of different things and the major one is what money does a club have.
    I read yesterday that Ed Woodward at Man Utd has gone on record and said that they have already made numerous approaches to clubs but because the selling club knows Man Utds position prices being quoted seem to be loaded by about £10 million.
    Another major factor this year is the World Cup and a couple of good saves or a couple of good games can see a players value soar.
    This is a transfer window during which clubs will probably try and get their business done very quickly

  • Valentin

    @Mike T,
    Manchester United are not in the Champion’s league, they are desperate for a raft of new players and they have money. Of course people will try to take advantage of that. The same reasons PSG, Manchester City have had to pay over inflated prices. Chelsea went through the same pain as the prices they paid for Drogba, Essien, Obi Mikel can testify.
    Arsenal faces the same problem, in that clubs know that Arsenal has money. Some even try to generate an auction by advertising Arsenal’s real or pretend interest in their player.
    Football business is business and business can be brutal, devious and dodgy.
    Buying a players based on how well a player does in a nation tournament is quite often a recipe for disaster. Arshavin at Euro 2008, Poborski at 1996, Suker at 1998, Cannavaro 2006 were all transfers that ended in tears. Different environments, motivations means that extraordinary performances are rarely repeated at club level. Clubs should have already decided who they are after, rather letting themselves being swayed by a couple of extra games.
    With the number of scouts making a living all year long watching games, every decent managers should already be aware of all the players at the World Cup. Journalist and ITK twitters may be influenced by a good performance at the World Cup, professionals should not.

  • Will Rickson

    Poor article poor comments same old Arsenal fans

  • Will Rickson

    Chelsea made like 2 million profit recently have good revenue will sell other players do not need to buy much and as you say support FFP So all we have so far is a club over paying for a player from another club not enough to make the type of suggestions you lot are doing. And i sense you want to also talk about City when this is specifically about PSG and Chelsea and furthermore linking City and PSG is just laughable City made great effort to meet FFP despite hating it and being screwed by the powers that be PSG did no such thing

  • oldgroover

    This thread’s done for Will. Leave it!

  • Will Rickson

    Oldgrover I can say what I want in this thread If you have nothing positive or informative to say do not say it What is it that I have said that you object to

  • oldgroover

    I don’t object to anything, of course you can say what you want, and continue to do so if you think it’s of any interest. I was just trying to save you the trouble of posting on a dead thread, people have moved on.

  • Will Rickson

    Ok Was not aware that was the case. Anyway do you accept that this whole site is Anti City and in fact of very poor standard perhaps the reason I find it interesting if a little infuriating

  • oldgroover

    Will
    It’s definitely anti oilers money and unfortunately by default anti City as it’s been pointed out on here that the City fans are a decent lot who actually do mostly come from Manchester. Looks like the thread might become “live” again now.