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

[Man_City_Loyal]

Not seen this info in this tweet

“3 weeks ago, @mancity made 100+ page submission. In their referral CFCB say more qs need to be asked of City but, since submission, none put to club. It's 5 years exactly since 1st FFP ruling. CFCB regs say no prosecutions more than 5 years after event.”



@tolmie's hairdoo

So is that good news for us with the lack of questions asked or?

 

[Nascent Blues]

No mate I’m saying he supports Newport, and erm, Leeds.

I apologise for trying to infuse a little levity into the mix.

 

[Indaparkside]

So is that good news for us with the lack of questions asked or?

They’d find some loophole or make one up

 

[Tricky_Trev]

This may be a whoosh moment for me however i'll treat your Question as genuine (for now)

You have to go back to the very beginning and look at the very instigation of FFP
City did indeed sign up to abide by the rules put in place and set about putting in place various schemes to increase incomings and reduce outgoings (all of which are within the rules) we even employed the same people Uefa employed to draw up those rules to find ways around them. Essentially we believed those rules were put in place to stop us investing in our own business at a time when we were committed to do so to within the 10 year business plan that had been drawn up where escalated investment was critical to making that plan a success.
At the end of the 1st accountability period 2013 - 14 we had indeed spent a lot of money in fees and wages for players. Based on the rules that were in place we were able to discount a substantial amount of the excess monies as pre arranged wage commitments before FFP was thought of. We were however still struggling to meet the 3 year loss amount for the period that was allowed 34 Million. So we submitted our accounts as verified by our accountants and City do this publicly - not in the Cayman Islands where nobody gets to see it. We felt we had nothing to hide. However no sooner than the audited accounts were submitted Uefa changed the rules to ensure we couldn't claim the pre 2010 wages. It meant we would fail the test by a lot rather than by a little. We were clearly mislead and City were angry that their good faith had been abused.
The failure ensured Uefa carried out an investigation of our accounts and disagreements regarding sponsorship amounts and as to what is and isn't allowed. Suffice it to say agreements were reached on all those sponsorships and schemes whereby some were allowed to stand as they were whilst City agreed to curtail others and not continue with other schemes. NONE of the sponsorships was deemed to be overvalued but we agreed to be punished for failing the overall break even requirement. Such agreements are part of the process of FFP and are in fact integral to its operation. We suffered a huge fine, a restriction on squad size for the CL and agreement to abide by the break even amounts going forward under close scrutiny by Uefa.
We stuck to the rules, increased our sponsorships across the board (middle Eastern sponsorship now roughly accounts up to only 20% of our income only). We currently sit 5th in DeLoittes money list and expect to exceed income of £600 Million turnover this reporting year with no debt ensuring we have no fear of breaching the break even amount and will make a healthy profit (without our owner putting a penny in) for the last 3 years. This amounts to the completion of the first 10 year phase of City business plan and its utter success (despite the initial couple of years requiring the expenditure)
Last year following a hacker stealing lots of private information from servers all over the world (mainly Portugal) trying to blackmail banks without success certain emails were ahem given to a German newspaper (der Spiegel) who act as a whistleblower for alleged corrupt practices particularly within football.
They produced a series of articles quoting elements of emails they allege showed that Citys owner had in fact paid monies to some of Citys sponsors to pay the sponsorship fees. I should point out this doesn't artificially inflate these sponsorships as they are currently at values commensurate with our position in football and it was agreed by Uefa at the time we were investigated. What is surprising and what most journalists and twitter gobshites don't understand is that this process (if proven and City say it isn't) is not either illegal or against FFP rules. I accept it wouldn't be in the spirit of the Regulations but that is another argument. Most would argue that depriving an owner of investing money in his own business is not in the spirit of competition law in Europe as well.
So now Uefa have again investigated City on the back of those alleged emails and despite agreeing to keep stum and carry out a thorough process have done neither. They or as the press like to say "sources close to the investigation" have obviously blabbed to the press regarding findings and punishments to be administered before due process has been completed. So City declared guilty before the case is heard then!
So City have been referred to the Uefa FFP Adjunctory Chamber of the process for consideration of sentence and today we also find out that this investigation has been rushed is indeed incomplete because the matter had to be concluded within a 5 year period of the initial findings, ending today as they are FFP rules for the limitation of alleged offences.
It is still unclear what they are actually charging City with breaching but City have issued some extremely strong legal statements indicating we have given irrefutable evidence to the investigation that proves we are innocent of the charges of financial irregularity. Also indicated as any innocent party should faced with a guilty verdict that they will appeal any findings to an appropriate judicial review, likely in this case to be the Court for Arbitration in Sport (CAS)
That covers 5 years of bullshit and farce and there are other trivialities like members of both investigatory boards having "conflicts of interest" i.e Rick Parry ex of Liverpool Board being on the AC board deciding any punishment.

You can find all the Der Spiegel reports on line and reading through this thread in its entirety will greatly inform you of the intricacies of the whole sham that is FFP if you care to look. I for one am now reasonably well versed in the actions of Uefa in response to these investigations and their documented process. Most of the things about FFP that will surprise anybody are what is allowed as opposed to what isn't.

@DAV771 This is your homework for today.

 

[Fred_Quimby]

The club statement makes it clear that City intend this matter to be resolved by "an independent judicial body" and the assumption, held almost universally, is that this is CAS. I cannot agree. The only cases CAS has dealt with concerning FFP were those of PSG, in which they overturned the verdict because CFCB had not followed its correct procedure, and AC Milan, where exclusion from European competition was not deemed a suitable punishment. City's difference with UEFA seems far wider. There is certainly fury at UEFA's failure to follow correct procedure, hence its reference to the leaks and its naming of Yves Leterme. But our complaint is not simply about "due process" but apparently concerns the entire competence of UEFA to deal with such matters. City have no intention of pleading fair cop gov but let us off because.... (as Milan and PSG appear to have done). City are going to argue that the whole matter of leaving this to UEFA is unacceptable. It appears we are not necessarily accused of breaching FFP rules but of "financial irregularities. This phraseology may be important because if it involves the integrity of City's accounts it may well bring into question certain very big players indeed as well and the commercial courts will be very interested to know UEFA's qualifications for pronouncing on such questions. CAS may deal with the question of the "hostile process" involved but a chamber which "ignores a body of irrefutable evidence provided by Manchester City FC to the chamber" on a matter of major financial/commercial interest? One of the issues certainly appears to be emerging as the right of UEFA to poke it nose into such matters at all - not just because it makes such a mess of it. And we are only the smallest of steps to the whole question of whether UEFA has any right to limit investment in any form by a club owner in his club. I think the endgame is coming and City seem ominously confident

It looks like City are saying that UEFA are not competent to look at the evidence. So, if this is not going to CAS, which you are saying, where will it end up. There has to be some kind of ‘court’ that will look at all the evidence and rule on it. But who will it be? ECJ?

 

[Parisian]

It's important to recognise that an owner putting money into a football club is not against the rules. People use the term financial doping and think that it is dodgy (some people in football have been quite disingenuous convincing people of that) but it's not necessarily so.

So yes, we have grown at a huge rate, and yes our owner has invested in the club but it's not necessarily against any rules.

Personally I think many people in football don't like the way we have grown, and think it's bad for football. I think they'll do what they can to stop it. We saw that early in the piece when UEFA changed their own guidelines on FFP after we had released our financial statements and it was too late for us to do anything about meeting the new guidelines.

There's also some whose motives aren't so fair. The G14 clubs see us as a threat and have tried everything they could to nullify that threat including developing and adapting FFP rules to suit their purposes.

Finally, we have been fairly clear that we haven't broken the rules. So unless/until that's proven otherwise I don't think your second to last paragraph applies.

I welcome the referral today, and I'll welcome a ban when it comes. Because until we take this to court we'll continually be subject to innuendo, and mistruths. Let's face it though, even if we do go to court and win it probably won't count for much in the court of public opinion.

I think people forget and (don't mind) how their club have become prominent in their time. Arsenal was known as the money club, Blackburn had their period thanks to the money, Inter Milan was the biggest spender during a decade, most of Milan AC success is due to Berlusconi "financial doping" and now he has stopped they are shit, Barcelona before their incredible generation with Iniesta, Messi, Busquets, Xavi earlier was always a money club and have returned to their way despite trying to make people think they always were a la Masia club, Real Madrid with Galacticos eras, etc.

So, it is funny when they try to explain you City and PSG is what is bad for football whereas football has always been a succession of financially doped clubs fighting and overtaking each other.

 

[Tevez32mcfc]

Been too busy to check but is there a media shitstorm brewing about Sheffield united

Rumour going around that Sheffield United, Aston Villa and Derby (possibly Derby but might be wrong) will all fail FFP like Birmingham did, but they are delaying providing the EFL with accounts until the end of the season. Not sure how it would work if one got promoted seems as Birmingham were deducted points.

 

[davek1808]

Anyone got any idea of the time scale of this because you do know that we're going to known as Manchester City (who have a champions league ban hanging over them) whether we win the fa Cup or are linked with a player.

 

[Machiavelli]

I apologise for trying to infuse a little levity into the mix.

I think you’ve just clarkied yourself ;)
I don’t for one minute believe he’s a Newport or Leeds fan. Newport is wall to wall rag/scouse, maybe he “follows” Newport this season as they’ve been on the TV and have made the playoff final.

 

[Machiavelli]

Rumour going around that Sheffield United, Aston Villa and Derby (possibly Derby but might be wrong) will all fail FFP like Birmingham did, but they are delaying providing the EFL with accounts until the end of the season. Not sure how it would work if one got promoted seems as Birmingham were deducted points.

“Rumour”??? You’ll have to do better than that, where are these rumours from?