UEFA FFP investigation - CAS decision to be announced Monday, 13th July 9.30am BST

What do you think will be the outcome of the CAS hearing?

  • Two-year ban upheld

    Votes: 197 13.1%

  • Ban reduced to one year

    Votes: 422 28.2%

  • Ban overturned and City exonerated

    Votes: 815 54.4%

  • Other

    Votes: 65 4.3%
  • Total voters
    1,499
Status
Not open for further replies.
Neville Kneville said:
We'll have to use the satellite lazer cannon for that, as it's too close for the nukes.

Or Godzilla.
Click to expand...
You think Godzilla would go near this?
GfotqFq.jpg
 
OntarioBlue said:
Not any more. The Rags deal with Chevrolet is rumoured to be worth over £50m a year and they have a separate training kit with Aon rumoured to be worth £15m a season. I would I thought given where City are now in the world rankings, a ground naming and kit deal would comfortable be worth £60 to £70m a year.
Click to expand...
That's the point many are missing, the argument that we aren't fair value, for what we get from Etihad, died ages ago.

Also, the only time fair value is needed, is when the source of revenue is a related party(they would have to own part of ADUG/City Group). If I remember right UEFA already ruled that Etihad weren't, since Sheikh Mansour doesn't own or control any of Etihad Airways' business.

So not only is Etihad Airways not a related party, thus exempt from the "fair market value" criteria, even if they were one, what we get is not over market value anyway.... so that would be a shit "cheat" wouldn't it?
 
Last edited:
I completely understand people’s concerns, frustration and anger over this situation but surely the simple truth is if we have broken the rules we deserve to be punished. If we haven’t, and I am sure we have a team of accountants and lawyers that is a match for anyone’s, we will be exonerated.

The important thing right now is that we can’t allow this to affect the players. We have a lot of big games ahead. We are in great positions in the remaining three competitions.

Imagine winning a double, treble or even a quadruple and then being exonerated. That would be the biggest “fuck you” of all time.
 
F
Metalartin said:
That's the point many are missing, the argument that we aren't fair value for what we get from Etihad died ages ago. The only time fair value is needed, is when the source of revenue is a related party(they would have to own part of ADUG/City Group). If I remember right UEFA already ruled that Etihad weren't, since Sheikh Mansour doesn't own or control any of Etihad Airways' business.

So not only is Etihad Airways not a related party thus exempt from the "fair market value" criteria, even if they were one, what we get is not over market value anyway.... so that would be a shit "cheat" wouldn't it?
Click to expand...
UEFA accepted the Etihad deal as FMV so irrelevant if related party or not.
For my money this is just UEFA sabre rattling to appease the baying hordes. They have just as much to lose by reopening this particular can of worms.
10 years in a legal battle with someone with infinitely deeper pockets won't end well.
 
cibaman said:
I think with Pep it would depend on whether he was satisfied that the club had been open with him about what happened.
Click to expand...
Yes. If they have been straight, he will stay but if they tried to pull the wool, he would be mightily pissed off. They would deserve to lose him. I expect they have told him the truth.
 
jimbo101 said:
F

UEFA accepted the Etihad deal as FMV so irrelevant if related party or not.
For my money this is just UEFA sabre rattling to appease the baying hordes. They have just as much to lose by reopening this particular can of worms.
10 years in a legal battle with someone with infinitely deeper pockets won't end well.
Click to expand...
Ah, so they calculated whether it was FMV first, rather than whether it was a related party and left it there? Well we were good on both counts from what I gather.
 
Metalartin said:
That's the point many are missing, the argument that we aren't fair value for what we get from Etihad died ages ago. The only time fair value is needed, is when the source of revenue is a related party(they would have to own part of ADUG/City Group). If I remember right UEFA already ruled that Etihad weren't, since Sheikh Mansour doesn't own or control any of Etihad Airways' business.

So not only is Etihad Airways not a related party thus exempt from the "fair market value" criteria, even if they were one, what we get is not over market value anyway.... so that would be a shit "cheat" wouldn't it?
Click to expand...

I wouldn’t mind but the very first season of the Etihad deal saw us win the PL with virtually the last kick of the campaign which had neutrals the world over drooling, and instantly raised the global profile of the club.

Not only that, the new TV deal was announced that summer which was a huge increase on the previous one and I recall the Premier League even saying that us winning the league in such dramatic fashion contributed to them securing such a good deal, so in a way we actually made more money for ALL Premier League clubs from thereon in.
 
Metalartin said:
Ah, so they calculated whether it was FMV first, rather than whether it was a related party and left it there?
Click to expand...
Exactly.
Whilst they suspected it may be a related party (which it isn’t) it was assessed as FMV so they didn’t press the matter.
They weren’t happy with 2 of our 2nd tier sponsors, but the sanction included them, insisting that the money from them didn’t increase over the next 2 years, so that’s that avenue closed as well.
Can’t really see anything even remotely resembling a smoking gun in any of the DS leaks.
 
Chippy_boy said:
Nope, I just think when someone says it looks like we've cheated, they have a point. The general attitude on here seems to be (a) that if you even dare suggest such a thing you're some kind of closet rag or at the least an "inferior blue", and (b) that it's impossible that our great club could have stooped to such things and that the evil UEFA in cahoots with god knows who, has made it all up. I think that's bollocks. Yes the rules are unfair, and yes the bastards are out to get us and yes we probably broke the rules to get around them. IMO.
Click to expand...
Ok, recent example. Bayern statement: paying 60m for Mahrez is another example of City causing transfer inflation, they have been doing this all the time (I paraphrase cos cant be arsed to find it).
Is that statement true? Look up top transfer fees and, before Mahrez we only had one in the top 15 . We still only have 2 or 3 in the top 20 . Compare to Liverpool or the rags or PSG or the spanish.
It is part of a campaign. Saying does not make it so. Dont fall for it.
 
Shaelumstash said:
I didn’t call you bonkers, mate. I said if you don’t think the Daily Mail had an influence on Brexit then you were bonkers.

But you seem to accept they probably did.

I had a quick read of your Civitas article. It’s a right wing Quango so I’m not sure how impartial they are to the subject.

I was going to dig out an article that suggests the BBC have given too much air time to Nick Griffin, Tommy Robinson, Nigel Ferage etc and have been seen by some to be irresponsible in helping to normalise extreme right-wing views in the drive to provide “fair and balanced air time” to all political pursuations.

But I didn’t need to.

Your own article by Civitas suggests the BBC’s EU coverage has been “presented through the prism of party politics, particularly those of the Conservative party.”

It goes on to say “Left-wing advocates of leaving the EU have been given even less air-time”.

And this is the article you choose to back up your point that the BBC is “extreme left-wing”? Come on, mate.
Click to expand...

Civitas is a think tank not a quango. It's not impartial it represents a particular viewpoint. It differs from the BBC in that it doesn't pretend to be impartial.

Giving air time to extreme right wing lunatics like Tommy Robinson isn't an attempt at balance, it's an attempt to smear centre right opinions by association, rather like remainers branding all leavers as thick old uneducated racists.

The BBC doesn't discriminate between left wing and right wing views where Brexit is concerned. Only remain views are heard.

The BBC is the Guardian on TV and doesn't represent my opinions. If the BBC was the Telegraph on TV and did represent my opinions I would at least have enough integrity and self awareness to recognize the truth of the situation and call it out for the disgrace that it is.

Not the place for this discussion (obviously) let's agree to differ and get back to worrying about FFP.
 
mac said:
So Uefa have trawelled through our accounts year on year why didn’t we just put them in the caymans. What will the outcome be as I need to sort my Chelsea tattoo out very soon.
Click to expand...
I've been kindly alerted to the fact that they have a transfer ban. Time to start digging for your old Blackburn kit.
 
Pingu the Penguin said:
I suspect all of this will have galvanise the resolve of the players, manager, staff, and club in the weeks ahead.
Click to expand...
"Breaking; WWF open investigation into Manchester City after media reports of talking penguin being kept in the Etihad Stadium without a zoo licence"
 
The_Caddy said:
This is the huge problem especially with the PL now involved. If we are penalised & the likes of Utd, Arsenal, Liverpool, Real, Barca & Bayern don't deem it sufficient what happens then? Utd & Liverpool could threaten to pull out of the PL. The big European teams could threaten to pull out of the CL. If these teams aren't competing then the money that the PL & UEFA make would be drastically reduced. I don't see either body willing to take that kind of hit.
Click to expand...
And the sheik's alternative comp wins!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top