PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[eastmanc]

Mancini and Fordham will be time barred.

Wasn't this proven at CAS not to have been a problem?

 

[halfcenturyup]

Wasn't this proven at CAS not to have been a problem?

Iirc (not at my computer yet) Mancini was time barred at CAS and Fordham wasn't even mentioned by UEFA in 2019 presumably because it was part of the 2014 settlement, which rather blows the knowing concealment argument out of the water.

 

[eastmanc]

Iirc (not at my computer yet) Mancini was time barred at CAS and Fordham wasn't even mentioned by UEFA in 2019 presumably because it was part of the 2014 settlement, which rather blows the knowing concealment argument out of the water.

I thought that CAS said it was alright to have a different company deal with things like image rights

 

[silva_is_gold]

Another great post from Super City From Maine Road. Text copied from Facebook.

NEWS:

Etihad Airways are preparing a stock market IPO (initial public offering) following a profitable performance in 2023.
This process would allow full disclosure of all financial accounts and transactions to potential investors.
This is very bad news for the Premier League, who have the Etihad sponsorship deal at City under scrutiny as part of their 115 charges.

If it came to light that Etihad executives were involved in manipulating the sponsorship deal with City, it could cause serious damage to the company’s reputation in the eyes of potential investors, if there are any skeletons in the closet, presenting the company accounts for IPO will uncover them.
Which begs the question… Why would Etihad Airways consider a move like this knowing it will have a negative impact on both Manchester City and themselves?
The answer is; they wouldn’t. Because they’ve done nothing wrong.
Etihad wouldn’t be willing to grant unfettered access into their financial affairs and corporate practices if it would uncover a smoking gun to prove fraud had been committed.

The Premier Leagues accusation is that City executives have colluded with officials from Etihad and have lied not only to the club’s independent auditors, but also to UEFA and The Premier League. By extension, that also calls into question what information was disclosed by City’s owners to Silverlake before the American private equity firm bought a significant stake in the club in 2019. That’s why the Premier League’s allegations go way beyond accusing City of failing to meet Profit and Sustainability Rules.
Throw in the mix the stake purchased by a Chinese consortium and that makes five separate entities that City would have had to bare face lie to the entire time… How likely you think it is that our world class investment magnates would go to such deceptive lengths is entirely up to you.
I know where my money would be, and it wouldn’t be backing them to be frauds.

CAS have already ruled that any suggestion of a conspiracy involving executives of both City and Etihad, as well as high-ranking Abu Dhabi officials and even members of the country’s Royal Family was beyond the realms of possibility.
This is really really not going well for the Premier League, and all the millions of rival fans who are not privy to this information (by choice) are going to be a sight to see. Stock up on popcorn blues, it’s going to be BIBLICAL.

Another great post from Super City From Maine Road. Text copied from Facebook.

NEWS:

Etihad Airways are preparing a stock market IPO (initial public offering) following a profitable performance in 2023.
This process would allow full disclosure of all financial accounts and transactions to potential investors.
This is very bad news for the Premier League, who have the Etihad sponsorship deal at City under scrutiny as part of their 115 charges.

If it came to light that Etihad executives were involved in manipulating the sponsorship deal with City, it could cause serious damage to the company’s reputation in the eyes of potential investors, if there are any skeletons in the closet, presenting the company accounts for IPO will uncover them.
Which begs the question… Why would Etihad Airways consider a move like this knowing it will have a negative impact on both Manchester City and themselves?
The answer is; they wouldn’t. Because they’ve done nothing wrong.
Etihad wouldn’t be willing to grant unfettered access into their financial affairs and corporate practices if it would uncover a smoking gun to prove fraud had been committed.

The Premier Leagues accusation is that City executives have colluded with officials from Etihad and have lied not only to the club’s independent auditors, but also to UEFA and The Premier League. By extension, that also calls into question what information was disclosed by City’s owners to Silverlake before the American private equity firm bought a significant stake in the club in 2019. That’s why the Premier League’s allegations go way beyond accusing City of failing to meet Profit and Sustainability Rules.
Throw in the mix the stake purchased by a Chinese consortium and that makes five separate entities that City would have had to bare face lie to the entire time… How likely you think it is that our world class investment magnates would go to such deceptive lengths is entirely up to you.
I know where my money would be, and it wouldn’t be backing them to be frauds.

CAS have already ruled that any suggestion of a conspiracy involving executives of both City and Etihad, as well as high-ranking Abu Dhabi officials and even members of the country’s Royal Family was beyond the realms of possibility.
This is really really not going well for the Premier League, and all the millions of rival fans who are not privy to this information (by choice) are going to be a sight to see. Stock up on popcorn blues, it’s going to be BIBLICAL.

Ave itttttt haha

 

[halfcenturyup]

I thought that CAS said it was alright to have a different company deal with things like image rights

I don't remember it even being discussed tbh, but you may be right. I will check later.

 

[tregyblue61]

Wasn't this proven at CAS not to have been a problem?

If I remember correctly, CAS said even if wasn't time-barred, it would have been cleared by them. It wouldn't have been an issue.

 

[SilverFox2]

Well united’s plainly have as they’ve had a change in their ownership model and there’s definitely been an attempt at a detente by Ratcliffe.

They may (individually or collectively) have concerns about meeting P&S and want tbe system completely overhauled and see our charges as a hinderance to that. They may have come to the realisation that the fishing expedition is going to bear no fruit. They may be of the view that the charges have reached the limit of their effectiveness.

Could be loads of possible reasons. Things change, priorities can change all the time. It’s just a fact of life.

Most modern sectors of business embrace change rather than resist it.

A 5 year projected business plan should meet every 3 or 4 months or so to check what changes need to be made to compete.
This gradual change means that after 5 years the original business plan is usually totally different than it's original plan version to achieve its objectives.

I firmly believe that this capability has made City so resistent to the intentially destructive FFP changes by UEFA and PL made.

Other teams have not changed so they have not progressed and are currently being found out by a multitude of changes they had not envisioned, United included.

 

[Len Rum]

Mancini and Fordham will be time barred.

Not sure mate.
Isn't it six years from when the allegations became known about ( as opposed to when the allegations occurred) ?

 

[halfcenturyup]

Not sure mate.
Isn't it six years from when the allegations became known about ( as opposed to when the allegations occurred) ?

Only if they were knowingly concealed, I think.

UEFA knew about Fordham in 2014. It was part of the settlement. And it was in the audited accounts. It wasn't exactly hidden.

Mancini time limitation may start in 2018 if the panel thinks it was deliberately concealed but it's peanuts. Certainly not enough to affect the true and fair view given by the accounts. And FFP didn't exist at the time. And it's a valid contract for Mancini with a third party. If Guardiola worked as England manager in the international breaks, for example, would you expect the money paid to him by England to be in City's books as a cost?

 

[JewelZee]

I should be worried RE our 115 case if the UEFA appointed person was the equivelant of a KC yet still was partisan in his verdict.
Would the PL appointed panelists really risk their careers to find us guilty if our evidence was clearly contrary to that verdict,?

I wish I knew the answer to that question. One would think not, but who knows? How old are these gents? Is there an amount sufficient enough to send someone off into the sunset?
The most interesting point I've seen to date is the possibility that Etihad Airways is going to go public via an IPO on the NYSE. This would mean that Etihad would have to obtain SEC approval through a vigorous and transparent vetting process. Were they to gain such approval how could an independent panel of 3 judges appointed by the PL find them to be involved in what amounts to large scale fraud? That would be ridiculous. Also, my understanding is Etisalat is already 40% publicly owned and is, therefore, already subject to reporting and review by the appropriate regulatory bodies. Are they duping everyone as well?
Also, are Silver Lake in on a massive fraud or victims of SM's deceitfulness? As if an equity firm the size of Silver Lake would be so easily taken in by a fraud of such magnitude when making the decision to invest heavily into CFG.
And while we're at it, it takes some balls to straight up accuse a member of the UAE Royal Family of being an absolute cheat and a fraudster. It's one thing to make sure people are following the rules, but it's another to bring forth this type of charge.
115 charges my ass!! What an obvious agenda driven shitshow this all really is.
And all these ridiculous twats coming onto social media with their mini documentaries thinking they can spell out exactly what it is City have done. Yeh, sure, we're to believe SM, Kaldoon, Soriano, the lot of them are the biggest idiots in the world using major sponsorship contracts to inflate their revenue. And they're doing it with major sponsors from the UAE to boot. Can a plot be more obvious?
The whole thing is a joke. Either you can ascertain that deals were made at substantially above market value or you can't. And in failing that, which is a given, you then need to prove the sponsors in question did not make the payments to City but rather SM himself did. Even if that were the case it would be impossible to prove without testimony supported by documentation from someone within these companies entrusted with this level of financial activity.
I would bet my last dollar if anyone is kicking the can down the road right now it's the Prem. They are certain that their case is a loser and are buying time to figure out a way to get out of this while saving face and meanwhile they're getting the side benefit of City's name being dragged through the mud.
This is only going to end one way and that's with City being exonerated, simple as...