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.
Prestwich_Blue said:
Gary Neville is right. FFP is entirely the wrong way to assess and monitor financial stability. When people say it wasn't designed to stop investment by owners like Sheikh Mansour, that's EXACTLY what it does and appears to be designed to do. What it should be doing is making sure investment is responsible and sustainable. Just looking at the P&L account and adding back or subtracting a few miliion here and there simply doesn't come close to achieving that.

The classic example of FFP is that you can have a club that makes a great profit, say £30m, in one year, then the owner starts to run it irresponsibly and it just breaks even the next. Finally. in the third year, it makes a £30m loss. That club would pass FFP yet just a cursory glance at the trend of the bottom line should be ringing alarm bells.
Click to expand...

Too true. You only have to look at some of the retail giants that are now struggling - analysed over the last 3/4 years would see them pass FFP but the trends over the same 3/4 years paint a worrying picture.
 
Adrian Durham (sp?) On talksport fully backing City earlier. Was good to hear. Slagging the rags and dippers off and getting to the true heart of FFP and it being about protecting the few at the expense of competition. Goughy agreeing.

Then Neville saying that?! Wow. For any of us who have been to the swamp and seen him goading us, the 4-3 game stands out for me where he was really being a dick to us...I couldn't have hated anyone more...but as a pundit I can only say he is a rare example of a great knowledge and assessment of the game and impartiality. Yes he hates us and loves the rags but he doesn't let that impact his opinion. I wouldn't be able to swallow my feelings towards the rags.

The fact Liverpool are doing well and we are the only team that could stop them, and he hates them more, probably softens his view mind.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
Gary Neville is right. FFP is entirely the wrong way to assess and monitor financial stability. When people say it wasn't designed to stop investment by owners like Sheikh Mansour, that's EXACTLY what it does and appears to be designed to do. What it should be doing is making sure investment is responsible and sustainable. Just looking at the P&L account and adding back or subtracting a few miliion here and there simply doesn't come close to achieving that.

The classic example of FFP is that you can have a club that makes a great profit, say £30m, in one year, then the owner starts to run it irresponsibly and it just breaks even the next. Finally. in the third year, it makes a £30m loss. That club would pass FFP yet just a cursory glance at the trend of the bottom line should be ringing alarm bells.
Click to expand...

The policy of FFP in itself wouldn’t stand up in any legitimate business or sector outside of football.

I think it is critical we get this case into an actual court and challenge the policy of FFP itself rather than ‘have we broke the FFP rules’ because ultimately that is what we are being charged with. We can get UEFA for diligence/policy and unfair process through CAS and likely see a reduced sentence, seeing as they don’t rule on FFP itself.

But that’s not the real fight. The real fight is as above and the part of the statement that refers to CAS as ‘the first instance’ gives me great confidence that we will do just that.

This whole mess is one last swing from a boxer who knows he is beaten.

If they win this case (UEFA), I will be genuinely done with this game. I would prefer to back in league one where non of their status quo bullshit will hurt us.

Conversley, if we have been bending rules, and I don’t mean against FFP, I mean in respect of our owners ultimately running an unprofessional model that isn’t sustainable in normal working conditions, then I’ll swallow that. We will deserve everything that comes to us.

But we all know it ain’t that and justice must surely fucking serve in this case because we deserve it.

It’s going to be a hell of a jaunt over the next year or 2 but I’m fucking certain we will win it.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
I've done 3 in the last 3 days. Bolt From The Blue is my usual home, I did Ian Cheeseman's Forever Blue on Sunday, where we mainly talked about home game issues but I did a 10-minute vlog beforehand on this, and I've just come off the Man City Show. All are always worth listening to.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that, i'll have a listen.
 
BluessinceHydeRoad said:
"...The investigation will focus on several alleged violations of FFP that were recently made public in various media outlets" (UEFA statement 7 March 2019) was all the information given about the scope of the investigation, but it does say "several" violations and it does specify that that these charges arise out of media reports, almost certainly Der Spiegel. Stefan Borson argues that UEFA cannot reopen a case where the time limit has expired and I pray that he is right. The only thing that worries me is Chumillas's email. Conn's details of Khaldoon's membership of the executive council is not a cause for concern because he is not part of the ownership structure at City? And a "US aviation industry document" is nothing like authoritative enough on its own to call into question City's or Etihad's accounts. But can the Chumillas email be used as evidence that City misled the original investigation and that the investigation can be reopened? Would this amount to City "overstating sponsorship revenue" both in our accounts and the break even information even if the information in Chumillas's email could be proven to be accurate? Would the fact that the scope document appears to have been passed on to City only after the referral decision make any difference apart from suggesting a very flawed process?
Click to expand...

The US Aviation report was claiming Etihad was receiving subsidies. Etihad claimed it was a loan.
Could go someway to why the club are claiming out of context emails. If Etihad had to borrow the money then the Executive Council paid the borrowed money directly to the club rather than channel it through Etihad first.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
I've done 3 in the last 3 days. Bolt From The Blue is my usual home, I did Ian Cheeseman's Forever Blue on Sunday, where we mainly talked about home game issues but I did a 10-minute vlog beforehand on this, and I've just come off the Man City Show. All are always worth listening to.
Click to expand...


How confident are you PB? The more I read, the more I think our appeal will fail or only result in a reduction in penalty rather than being thrown out
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
Jordan has been making one defamatory comment after another for months. I don't understand why we have not taken action against him. His comments have been broadcast and repeated online. It would be easy to stop him not least because it prejudices our chance of a fair hearing. He has told lie after lie. He can't prove any of it so would lose against any action we take.
Click to expand...

Are these figures correct ?
"City earned more than £80m ($104m/€96m) when they reached the quarter-finals last season while Liverpool made £110m ($143m/€132m) for winning the Champions League."
 
CC1 said:
How confident are you PB? The more I read, the more I think our appeal will fail or only result in a reduction in penalty rather than being thrown out
Click to expand...

It likely won’t be thrown out at CAS.

The fight will be after it when we go into an actual court.

CAS is just the first step because that is the process after a sporting judgment.

I expect the club don’t believe they will see this thrown out at CAS
 
supercity88 said:
Adrian Durham (sp?) On talksport fully backing City earlier. Was good to hear. Slagging the rags and dippers off and getting to the true heart of FFP and it being about protecting the few at the expense of competition. Goughy agreeing.

Then Neville saying that?! Wow. For any of us who have been to the swamp and seen him goading us, the 4-3 game stands out for me where he was really being a dick to us...I couldn't have hated anyone more...but as a pundit I can only say he is a rare example of a great knowledge and assessment of the game and impartiality. Yes he hates us and loves the rags but he doesn't let that impact his opinion. I wouldn't be able to swallow my feelings towards the rags.

The fact Liverpool are doing well and we are the only team that could stop them, and he hates them more, probably softens his view mind.
Click to expand...

Neville said as a co-owner of Salford City FC they'd still be non league if they hadn't been able to invest significantly to move the club forward. Therefore how could he possibly defend FFP when it stops City's ( or any other) owners from investing to get to the top table.
 
chedinho said:
Arsenal have the greatest history of any team in the world.
Historically they have had influence over the fa for more than a century and at one time were the fa.
Punishing clubs who won or threatened to win trophies
Historically the biggest cheating bastards in world football.
Click to expand...
Tell us more.
 
I see that prick David Conn is back on the shit stirring shift at The Gonadian, the idea he was a City fan doesn’t wash with me, he apparently follows FC United who are a low rent Man Utd tribute act, the punters will be all be dyed in the wool reds, so City will be Citeh, the berties, bitters etc their hero’s will be Choccy McClair, Wyan Wilson and co. Does he really expect us to believe he was once a blue. About as blue as that shithouse Jamie Red Issue Jackson.
 
Blue Hefner said:
A quick Google search shows UEFA revenue for was over 2 billion euros. They’ve got a few bob

“UEFA (Union of European Football Associations) total revenue 2004-2018. This statistic shows the total revenue of the UEFAfrom the 2004/05 season to the 2017/18 season. The season runs from July 1 to June 30 of the following year. The revenue of the 2017/18 season was 2.79 billion euros.”

City will not want this in the courts for 10 years for a variety of reasons. Not least as it will effect any potential negotiations of new sponsorship deals. Uncertainty is not a good thing
Click to expand...
Their revenue is that, their cash reserves aren’t though. 90% of their revenue goes out to clubs for CL payments.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
No but it shows up FFP for the nonsense it is.
Click to expand...

We can all agree on that, but I think all the focus on challenging ffp is unhelpful here.
We’re not challenging the rules we are clearing our name.
Whatever we think of ffp we have to abide by it and we do.
I’d be surprised if there is any appetite within the club to take on UEFA again by attacking the regulations.
Let’s just get this ban overturned and let someone else deal with ffp.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top