Looks Like PSG might get done for FFP

[Mr Popodopolous]

https://www.ft.com/content/004c9d5e-3cdc-11e8-b7e0-52972418fec4

Of course, this is subject to whether UEFA are brave enough to enforce their own rules on a 'name'- a regular CL club, with plenty of expensive and notable players, as opposed to UEFA Cup contenders in Turkey, Russia etc.

If it's just a major fine they get, they may as well do nothing, but only a CL ban would send out a message.

[Roger Red Hat]

11 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

https://www.ft.com/content/004c9d5e-3cdc-11e8-b7e0-52972418fec4

Of course, this is subject to whether UEFA are brave enough to enforce their own rules on a 'name'- a regular CL club, with plenty of expensive and notable players, as opposed to UEFA Cup contenders in Turkey, Russia etc.

If it's just a major fine they get, they may as well do nothing, but only a CL ban would send out a message.

Subscription needed.

[marcofisher]

If they can buy a player for circa £200mill and loan another player with an obligation to buy for over £100mill when the loan deal expires and still not get done by FFP, it may as well be sacked off.  

[Mr Popodopolous]

8 minutes ago, Roger Red Hat said:

Subscription needed.

Managed to read it earlier...let's see.

Well I was able to read it, but not copy and paste it (but I'm not a subscriber).

Long story short, they may well be guilty of overstating their sponsorship value. If indeed, according to UEFA's commercial benchmarking they are guilty then it's likely they will fail FFP.

In layman's terms which I'm sure many already know, if PSG (or anyone had a sponsorship of £50m in a year, but UEFA's fair value for a top club was the average (say £30m per year), then £20m of that would be discounted in their revenue. In particular, if it is from third party related companies.