Post #1
Thursday August 7, 2014 1:29pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 1,467
Ok, so I've seen a few posts here on YA about Man City being able to circumvent the FFP rules with their affiliation with NYCFC, and I'm wanting to know more. I'm certain that such a thing could be done, but does anyone have any specifics about how they're actually doing it or are we just speculating that they're doing so?

Post #2
Thursday August 7, 2014 3:24pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 3,723
Im just speculating. But with loadn deals you can hide and play around with money very easily. For instance, lets say they wanted Lampard for 6 million Euros. That would have added 6 mil to their bottom line. Now instead they can have NYCFC (still them but a different corporate IP) buy him for that amount and loan him for say 1 million and they just saved themselves money towards FPP. Also Benfica has a smiilar agreement with Orlando and just announced two U20 players will be coming to Orlando for this year and next. Benfica or Man City can loan them to the MLS (gets around lots/all of the MLS allocation processes) for an over market price. They only have to pay the salary to prevent MLS team from going over the salary cap (which they'd be paying anyways) but can show an extra 2,3,4 milion revenue for the loan agreement.

Again I'm not claiming his is exactly how its being done but I believe this is the concern coming from other european teams

Post #3
Thursday August 7, 2014 5:05pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 1,467
From what I read on the Benfica deal, the two players signed multi-year deals with OCSC and it's not a loan...but I didn't delve into it too deep so I could be mistaken.

What you've laid out is how I imagined the thing going though, wages are a lot higher on NYC's books than on City's post-loan. I.E. Frank signed on 90k/wk to NYCFC but City is only covering a fraction of that while he's on loan.

Is this really an issue for us though? I mean, FFP doesn't apply to us since we've got the cap structure (which I guess is its own kind of FFP), and will encourage the huge foreign clubs to invest in American clubs/teams. Sounds like a win/win unless you're a ManU fan.

Post #4
Thursday August 7, 2014 7:10pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 3,723
Right. I dont think there's anything MLS can do to stop this, nor should they. Whatever gets talent to MLS works for me. I'd imagine the other EPL/UCL teams wont be happy, or will try to emulate it.

Post #5
Thursday August 7, 2014 10:42pm

Joined Oct 2012
Total Posts: 278
The problem that could arise, and just my opinion, is MCFC gets around FFP rules however, they can call a player back when needed so NYCF could be a revolving door of players going back and forth. Just when supports start backing players they can be replaced with different ones. So supporter end up supporting the club name not club and players.

Post #6
Friday August 8, 2014 2:25am

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 3,723
Original post from joey11

The problem that could arise, and just my opinion, is MCFC gets around FFP rules however, they can call a player back when needed so NYCF could be a revolving door of players going back and forth. Just when supports start backing players they can be replaced with different ones. So supporter end up supporting the club name not club and players.

The only thing that should in theory prevent this from happening is that there's a limit to the amount of players that a team can register for European competition. They could bring them in for epl games but I doubt that has much of a chance of happening.

Post #7
Friday August 8, 2014 5:51am

Joined Apr 2014
Total Posts: 9
FFP doesn't affect any club outside of UEFA. Regarding how MCFC could circumvent FFP rules, they could potentially loan a player from NYCFC to avoid paying a transfer fee, or permanently transfer player from NYCFC for a fee less than the player's true value. If a loan is made for a player, either MCFC or NYCFC could pay the player's wages (or the wages could be split between the two clubs) depending on what the loan contract dictates. Considering the current salary cap of the MLS, MCFC would likely pay the player's wages in full, as NYCFC wouldn't want to pay for a player that isn't contributing. Regarding Lampard in particular, MCFC has taken his full wage burden until January 2015. It seems unlikely that MCFC will loan many players from NYCFC, as the only players that would interest them would most likely be DPs for NYCFC, and NYCFC wouldn't be likely to sign a DP only to loan him to MCFC. Because of EPL squad rules, MCFC could not loan a player from NYCFC and have him be eligible to play unless; the player was under 21, MCFC have an open non-homegrown player slot (which they currently do not), and/or the loan occurred during a transfer window (as this is the only time MCFC can alter their squad list). Obviously, the player would then be subject to FA requirements. Depending on the player, the time of year, any FFP sanctions, and MCFC's squad list, one or more of the above requirements would affect any prospective loan.

In the reverse scenario, NYCFC can loan a maximum 4 players from MCFC. The players available for NYCFC to loan will be the U-18, U-23 (MCFC EDS), or players not named to MCFC's EPL and/or UEFA squad lists. Using MCFC's 2013-2014 squad lists as an example, NYCFC could have loaned players like Tosin Adarabioyo (U-18), Marcos Lopes (EDS), Gareth Barry, and John Guidetti. Keep in mind the MCFC player has to agree to the move to NYCFC, and isn't contractually obligated to do so. A situation could arise where NYCFC would be able to exploit MLS' salary cap by loaning players from MCFC and only pay a very small fraction of the player's wages. Chivas USA has the same opportunity, but it isn't discussed as Chivas GDL aren't based in Europe, or have resources comparable to that of MCFC. Considering MCFC cannot increase their wage budget this season compared to last season (per FFP sanctions), they wouldn't be too enthused to offload a player but continue to pay his wages. That being said, any wage savings MCFC gets by loaning players to NYCFC could be stated as "revenue." However, considering the MLS average salary of ~$142,000, MCFC would only receive 338,000 pounds in "revenue" (assuming they loaned the max 4 players to NYCFC at the league average salary), which is a negligible amount in terms of FFP.

Lastly, a player that transfers from NYCFC to MCFC, or vice versa, could potentially be moved at a "discount." For example, let's say a future DeAndre Yedlin for NYCFC is valued at $10 million, yet is sold to MCFC for $7.5 million. MCFC could potentially subvert FFP by buying NYCFC players on the cheap, and use their savings towards meeting FFP requirements or other transfer(s).

Under the current MLS structure, the MCFC-NYCFC partnership could easily prove more advantageous for NYCFC than for MCFC. However, because the MLS technically owns all teams, it has the authority to reject any potential transfer between the two clubs, and it remains to be seen if they would allow NYCFC to loan a player from MCFC without paying his wages. As it stands, the only clear advantage(s) from the partnership is NYCFC's bankroll, and MCFC's ability to use Lampard towards their "homegrown" quota for EPL/UCL. I use "advantage" lightly here, as any NYC team would have a fat wallet, and Lampard was released by Chelsea, meaning MCFC could have acquired him outright without a transfer fee, and is not getting any assistance in paying his wages from NYCFC.

Post #8
Friday August 8, 2014 1:33pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 1,467
I can't see MLS thinking that this is a bad thing, if it does indeed inspire other big teams to buy into the development of soccer in this country. They've got the cash to splash and see that we're producing quality players much more regularly than ever before, and will probably continue to do so for the foreseeable what's not to like?

Know Nothing
Post #9
Friday August 8, 2014 3:31pm

Joined Jan 2013
Total Posts: 1,575
I think the Lampard situation is a unique one since NYCFC will not start playing until next season. I don't think MCFC wanted to sign Lampard, but given the restrictions they are under from their FFP penalty, they need English players. My prediction is that Lampard will only play CL and cup games while he is at MCFC.

Where the relationship will bear fruit will be MCFC loaning younger players or players coming back from a long injury layoff to NYCFC to gain experience and/or match fitness.

Most big clubs have arrangements with other teams in Europe for this purpose, and to make it easier for the player to qualify for a work permit.

Post #10
Friday August 8, 2014 9:56pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 3,723
Sunderland is the latest European team to partner with mls. They are joining up with DC united to "expand each other's brand names". Seems like all the mls teams are trying to partner up. It'll be interesting to see if more follow this model.

Post #11
Tuesday June 16, 2015 5:08pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 3,723
Man City is "loaning" 18 year old Spanish future star Left back. I just think there's too much fishy with these kinds of moves and wish MLS didn't allow it.

Post #12
Tuesday June 16, 2015 5:14pm

Joined Oct 2013
Total Posts: 3,023
Meh. As long as NYCFC as the equivalent of the Durham Bulls I wouldn't worry too much about it.

Keep up with the latest moves by Americans around the world during the January transfer window.
Yanks Face Relegation in England
Tale of Two Young Yanks in Europe
Wagner Nears Premier League Goal
YA lineup prediction vs. T&T

Chile, United States, World Cup, Thailand