The reason uefa like the 3 year periods and applying “rule” or “annex” changes that are then applied retrospectively over the entire period is that if 2 of the accounts sets filed under uefa current guidelines judgements at the time as required by law in most European countries, is that by looking at the files accounts which obviously can’t be changed/ refinanced they can match they own agenda to determine their own desired outcome with very little probability of the club needing ffp protection to change anything within that period. This strategy took city from that broader line monitoring bollocks to outright fail and took PSG from pass (ish) to oh fuck we need to flog our bench.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
UEFA FFP investigation - CAS decision to be announced Monday, 13th July 9.30am BST
- Thread starter razman
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
MeatHunterrr
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 24 Apr 2014
- Messages
- 11,440
Says the manager of a club that just spent 200 million last summer.It is no surprise the klopp mentioned competition wirh Citys finances yesterday and it came out in the NYT coutesy of the Fenway Sports group. Its an old school smear campaign aided by the bbc. It still goes back to 2014 and the year of slippery G.
80s Shorts
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 13 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 12,616
Does anyone know if it will be raining at Wembley on Saturday? I don’t know whether or not to take a coat.
10% chance of precipitation and around 17c. Checked it earlier.
Paulpowersleftfoot
Well-Known Member
That’s all well & good but what do you think about NYT being dipper shareholders?Pretty sure the Mail overtook them a few years ago. So that's not a great call.
Metalartin
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 12,442
I'm not really sure if they all came from the same place but millions of documents were stolen including most of the top clubs sensitive data. We were told as City fans to wait and see what comes out about other clubs like United... glad we didn't fall for that keep quiet bluff.Please can someone clarify who’s server was hacked? Was in on the City Group network hence just our emails or was it some central server with many clubs emails? If the latter, is it just Der Spiegel that has trawled through all the content and decided who to pursue? Are they sat on other sensitive emails from other entities and decided to ignore them? Or is everyone else squeaky clean?
Honestly, as far as I can see, the sulking that these journos are starting to do only tells me City fans are doing the right thing by questioning as much as they can.
"...:( these City fans are rats, they wont let me spread propaganda in peace".
....I'm keeping a lid on what I feel about this currently as it may turn out to be much ado about nothing. However, if we do end up with a CL ban I really hope the club come out swinging and go for every organisation and as many individuals as possible.
Targets include:
UEFA
BBC
TalkSport
Most print titles
Roan the Rat
Every sports journo more or less other than Samuel
G14
Gill
Loads more but I've not enough time to list them.
Joffrey
Cersei
Ilyn Payne
The Hound
....
WestGorton
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 13,090
Agreed. That scouse twat Ayre was bleating years ago and he was their Chairman if I recall. Klopp is German...Der Spiegel.....Bayern.....etc I want to Schalke and smelt their pain. I went to Lyon and smelt friendship.Says the manager of a club that just spent 200 million last summer.
80s Shorts
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 13 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 12,616
This is a very significant occurrence in the whole matter.
The NYT are standing by their journalist and the claim that he has a source close to the investigation. There has been no denial from UEFA that information may have been leaked. The cornerstone of any disciplinary investigation is the absolute mutually-held promise of confidentiality between parties. What has happened, and what City have seized upon with noticeable emphasis, is that there has been a breakdown in trust over UEFA's complete inability to maintain their promise of non-disclosure during investigative proceedings. I believe that the NYT is telling the truth. I believe that someone from within the CFCB IC has leaked information to the press. The reasons for this are unknown but given the timing, I think we all have our suspicions. By failing to uphold the ethical tenet of confidentiality, the whole UEFA investigation has been prejudiced. The likelihood is that any subsequent action would be successfully challenged in court, because UEFA cannot demonstrate that they have been able to satisfy the fundamental premise of impartiality. Make no mistake, City's statement was very carefully worded and allows the club to steal the initiative. Instead of questions being asked about us, the club can rightfully be asking very pointed questions of UEFA and the legitimacy of the CFCB IC.
Maybe that's what we wanted to happen and made sure it did. All a bit GOTs but not beyond the realms of possibilities.
Fame Monster
Well-Known Member
Because the problem of UEFA with PSG is the value of their related party sponsorships. PSG didn't try and fool UEFA (what City is accused of) about those deals and their value.
UEFA in concertation with PSG deemed that 200 M QTA deal was worth 100 M. So, PSG operated with that 100 M value in mind.
However, when PSG did Neymar/Mbappé, Real Madrid, Barcelone and Tebas went mad and cried calling foul. Then UEFA launched an immediate investigation and decided to devaluate retroactively those deals.
Again, it is not PSG that had unilaterally decided it was worth 100 M. It was UEFA that agreed it was the fair value.
So they went on and decided QTA is worth around 50 M and they devaluate the other contracts by a minor margin. Instead of showing benefices during 2015/2016/2017 years, PSG is now in big deficit due to the retroactive effect.
PSG has now one window (15 days) to find the difference to comply with the authorized deficit in FFP break even rule. PSG, then, proceeds to sell for the correct amount missing.
So what happens ? UEFA then launches another investigation over their own 1 year investigation, saying they should investigate more and deeper and devaluate more : simply, they want to make us being caught by FFP despite the fact we did exactly what they asked us to do.
So PSG goes to CAS and we win on a technicality, not even for their obvious moving goalposts strategy.
City is accused of having lied about the way (and who is behind) the money is coming from some sponsorships. A similar situation would have been if Football Leaks had shown QTA is receiving direct money from the Emir of Qatar to finance PSG. But well, it is sure that QTA deal was a way to circumvent the FFP in the first place anyway.
And the latest news about QTA (named Qatar National Tourism Coucil recently) is that UEFA expressely asked for the termination of the contract !
I didn't even know UEFA could tell you to terminate a contract. I mean, they can put the "fair value", all right. But who are they to tell you to terminate a contract.
However, recently, Nasser said that the contract could still be going on but under another form. He said that since there are advertisement about Qatar (Visit Qatar) around the stadium and we make the Winter Qatar Tour promotion, it should not be for free.
I know but my point is that both PSG and City were accused of lying about an aspect of FFP. PSG were accused of lying about the value of their sponsorship, and City are accused of lying/not disclosing that Etihad may be a related party. In PSG's case, they devalued their QA sponsorship. In City's case, if Etihad are deemed to be a related party, surely the sanction City should face (on the basis of the PSG precedent) is no more than retroactive devaluation if the sponsorship is deemed to be above fair market value?
Manchester_lalala
Well-Known Member
I'm keeping a lid on what I feel about this currently as it may turn out to be much ado about nothing. However, if we do end up with a CL ban I really hope the club come out swinging and go for every organisation and as many individuals as possible.
Targets include:
UEFA
BBC
TalkSport
Most print titles
Roan the Rat
Every sports journo more or less other than Samuel
G14
Gill
Loads more but I've not enough time to list them.
Samuel has the same understanding as us about FFP. He’s been calling UEFA and the cartel out since most City fans knew what UEFA and their cronies were up to.
Certainly wasn’t a dig at you! My own posts often have typos/ autocorrect gone crazy etc, I put that down to fat fingers/alcohol& old age, however like you Iam a fan on a football forum not a journalist from an alleged top 10 in the world paper. IMHO the later shouldn’t leave his posts open to translation or interpretation. Therefore I summarise he’s a twat that’s stealing a living in a profession that should be one of integrity and privilege for the deserving minority selected to inform the masses.Well it normally takes me a few edits to get what I want to say across properly, so I'm probably not one with room to talk but as you say he's a journalist at apparently "the biggest news publication in the world" according to twitter.
roypaulknewmyfather
Well-Known Member
For once, I'm hoping the BBC and other media are doing us a favour by publishing the thoughts/wishes of some UEFA members. As has been quoted many times on this thread, we entered into discussions and negotiations with CFCB on agreed terms that no one was to say anything until the discussions were over. If by blabbing these gobshites have broken the terms then its time to unscrew arseholes and nail them to the wall. Bring it on!
Prophet of Doom
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2007
- Messages
- 1,925
Wouldn't know but the hacker has form for extortion.
He is being extradited back to Portugal on the basis he initially tried to extort money from Doyen Sports on return of stolen files.
His legal team have come up with the genius idea that his demands for money was just to see how much they were worth !!
Good luck with that on in court !
Magicpole
Well-Known Member
That’s just wrong! I know for a fact that there was some lisispool fans on that boat and they were attacked by Chelsea fans with an iceberg.
And they had a bear with them. I saw the footage.
@matt5cott for anyone on twitter who wants to send the talksport ‘expert’ a polite response
@liamdfisher is the talksport boss
Why? What did Matt Scott do?
dark 'n stormy
Well-Known Member
Think they are sat on thousands. Not sure where they came from, but not just our club.
I'm not really sure if they all came from the same place but millions of documents were stolen including most of the top clubs sensitive data. We were told as City fans to wait and see what comes out about other clubs like United... glad we didn't fall for that keep quiet bluff.
Honestly, as far as I can see, the sulking that these journos are starting to do only tells me City fans are doing the right thing by questioning as much as they can.
"...:( these City fans are rats, they wont let me spread propaganda in peace".
Thanks, so as Der Spiegel is the only organisation that has the data, they get to choose who to pursue and who to ignore. Seems fair!
The Colonel
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 10 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 2,266
Any links between the Liverpool owners and the NYT?
Matt Scott appears to have released accounts via his twitter feed.
From 5 years ago.
cleavers
Moderator
Nobody knows.Any links between the Liverpool owners and the NYT?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.