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

[citymike1969]

THIS JUST IN FROM RAWK

Re: Man City - Anxieta in Proelia - thoughts with them during this difficult time
« Reply #2930 on: Today at 02:52:21 PM »

Quote from: slaphead on Today at 02:36:55 PM
Heard Simon Jordan talking a lot at the weekend about the implications of all this, and he says it all about the wages for City and that will be the big thing for them now. One of the idiot journalists, may of been that dickhead Samuel, says he feels sorry for them because they will have to try to compete with us "with their hands tied behind their back". Jesus

I'd like to see a bit more comments from John Henry or our own leadership structure in support of FFP. We've been operating within the rules since it's inception. It was a major reason why they invested in the club, saving us from bankruptcy. Why there aren't more people supporting a framework that to some extent protects the league, and played a part in a club putting together perhaps the greatest ever season of football in that league is a bit strange to me? They all may well know where their bread is buttered, and I know billionaires of a feather and all that, but have some pride. If FFP gets blown out of the water it could be another dark decade or so of Chelsea and City and the like throwing it around.

===================================================================================================================================================================

...YCNMIU!!! Stadium development costs for a bogus stadium in Stanley (stockley) park...failed FFP at least once but it didn't matter because the self proclaimed 'european royalty' didn't even qualify!!!

... they want a renowned cheat who despises level playing fields to make comments!!!

ADDENDUM for any lurking bin dipping gutter rats...simon jordan is a coked up, plastic surgery addicted mess... yep, that's the fella whose words you're hanging off!

 

[domalino]

I’ll have to give it a 2nd try. I just had a go and stopped at:

“Those rules, created to reduce clubs’ indebtedness and level the playing field in an era in which teams were being infused with cash by billionaires and nation-states, require clubs to balance their spending with revenue.”

As if that’s what FFP exists for. “To level the playing field!!” I rage quitted the article.

I would suggest trying again and getting to the bit where the corruption is laid bare.

 

[blueinsa]

THIS JUST IN FROM RAWK

Re: Man City - Anxieta in Proelia - thoughts with them during this difficult time
« Reply #2930 on: Today at 02:52:21 PM »

Quote from: slaphead on Today at 02:36:55 PM
Heard Simon Jordan talking a lot at the weekend about the implications of all this, and he says it all about the wages for City and that will be the big thing for them now. One of the idiot journalists, may of been that dickhead Samuel, says he feels sorry for them because they will have to try to compete with us "with their hands tied behind their back". Jesus

I'd like to see a bit more comments from John Henry or our own leadership structure in support of FFP. We've been operating within the rules since it's inception. It was a major reason why they invested in the club, saving us from bankruptcy. Why there aren't more people supporting a framework that to some extent protects the league, and played a part in a club putting together perhaps the greatest ever season of football in that league is a bit strange to me? They all may well know where their bread is buttered, and I know billionaires of a feather and all that, but have some pride. If FFP gets blown out of the water it could be another dark decade or so of Chelsea and City and the like throwing it around.

===================================================================================================================================================================

...YCNMIU!!!

This from ****s that live in a world in which they murder 39 Italian fans and its them that are the victims in it all.

Their opinions are not worth shit!

 

[blueinsa]

I’ll have to give it a 2nd try. I just had a go and stopped at:

“Those rules, created to reduce clubs’ indebtedness and level the playing field in an era in which teams were being infused with cash by billionaires and nation-states, require clubs to balance their spending with revenue.”

As if that’s what FFP exists for. “To level the playing field!!” I rage quitted the article.

Read it all mate its worth it.

 

[KS55]

they employ evaluation companys which will give them a reasonable cost and if its not in the boundries of that then its deemed unreasonable

Unless, of course, fair value is being determined by Leterme and the club's president is the chairman of a major sponsor of UEFA.

 

[Mike Cledford]

Regardless of him not referring to us as subhuman scum, the thing that boils my piss is him calling City fans out for defending the club. What does he expect when the club have maintained all along that they've done nothing wrong? Does he think City fans - or fans of any other club in this situation - are going to back an organisation as incompetent and corrupt as UEFA instead? "But City have been found guilty" they say. What, found guilty in a fucking kangaroo court by an organisation that so many of these pricks are more than happy to criticise on all manner of other matters?
Now I'm not saying the club definitely aren't guilty here. They could be bluffing I suppose, but given that they've been steadfast all along in their stance, until UEFA provides hard evidence in the form of a fucking bank statement showing beyond all doubt that it was disguised owner funding then they can get to fuck for me.

I don't think fans anywhere and at any time have bee criticised for supporting their club. There have been times when bad behaviour by some fans of Millwall etc has brought about condemnation through specific actions but this generalised abuse we get just for supporting our club in a new an unpleasant development. It is because so many hacks have forgotten they are part of a profession as their tribal comments are not professional but just echoing the chants of the dickheads on the terraces. The social media comments of many are not really whst you expect from professional presumably educated men.
United fans started the silly empty seats stuff and now its become the 'chant' of many a hack in an article even when untrue
Another thing is that the media would always close ranks around a British team against 'Johnny Foreigners'. Now they take the side of an organisation like EUFA and Munich slthough both of whom have been found to have had dishonest senior personnel because their darlings attract the big money from the East.

 

[Parisian]

I would suggest trying again and getting to the bit where the corruption is laid bare.

Read my post and compare the reported facts by several reputable newspapers (Le Monde) with the article written by the infamous panja (since when has he become the voice of truth) ? The guy is trolling your club today again:


And i had cleared the information before but Nasser Al Khelaifi didn't get elected by UEFA. He got elected by ECA (the clubs) to represent them at the UEFA committee after Arsenal guy left his spot vacant by going to Milan AC.

 

[Centurions]

Not exactly no but it is implied especially because the investigation was re-opened following the leaks.

https://apnews.com/103732d2b1ea4f7faffe3c7d169f72a9

I can see nothing that implies that there, could you quote the bit that does?

...but I think people are more or less of the same opinion here that City have been teetering on the edge of FFP for some time and may or may not have slipped up...

Which 'people' are you talking about? 11 straight years of revenue growth and 5 straight years of profit say otherwise.

I notice you skipped the above question?

 

[Lee won pen]

This is an interesting comment from the head of commercial activities of OctagonUK, one of the partner of UEFA and trusted audit firm used for fair value market assessment.

He wonders why Puma made this statement. If they weren't sure, it would have been best for them not to comment. So City must have given them solid proof of being cleared in an appeal.

This is 2014 Octagon valuation of City sponsorship :



Worth noting that the minimum value given to Etihad deal is 40 and maximum is 50. Even though it is lower than the actual deal, it is nowhere near close to the 8 M figure. This alone should tell the attacks on City aren't legit.

Isn’t the £8m figure the one that allegedly comes from Etihad direct, the rest allegedly from ADUG?

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

I've not seen it mentioned yet, so apologies if I'm repeating a conversation. But could there be a potential conflict of interest for the Abu Dhabi Executive Council?

It seems clear they were the ones who funded the majority of Etihad's sponsorship of City. As they are the owners of Etihad, there is clearly no problem there.

According to Conn's article, the US Airlines are pushing for tariffs against Etihad for over-blown state subsidies. They claim the Executive Council have being pumping money in to Etihad, which is anti-competitive. Etihad have denied it and as their accounts are private, there's no way to prove it.

It's understandable City might be reluctant to provide UEFA with the confirmation of this arrangement, because UEFA have such a terrible record or leaking to the press.

So when this goes to CAS, I assume City will want to present evidence that ADEC were the source of the finance, not ADUG. But would ADEC have a conflict of interest in that they wouldn't want this information to prejudice the case with the US airlines?

Couple of things. I don't believe CAS will be interested in the accounting side of things. All they'll be looking at is whether UEFA correctly followed its own procedures, whether we had a fair crack of the whip and, they did, whether our punishment was reasonable.

Second, I'd imagine City wouldn't bring that up as it was a leaked document, so they could hardly complain about hacked and leaked documents being used to prosecute them but use one in their defence. Its not their document to use anyway.

 

[Parisian]

Unless, of course, fair value is being determined by Leterme and the club's president is the chairman of a major sponsor of UEFA.

Yeah. He decided to lower by 37% the contracts which has forced his team to sell all his bench and buy finished players on free (Alves, Buffon).

Wonder if UEFA had forced City to devaluate the contracts by 37% and sell some bench players, you would feel like Sheik Mansour is ruling the game.

 

[Rammy Blue]

Get an injunction in which court?

Kangaroo?

 

[Parisian]

Isn’t the £8m figure the one that allegedly comes from Etihad direct, the rest allegedly from ADUG?

Yeah (ADUG or your UAE EC). But your accounts were validated with those values in 2014 and you were fine. So, if they consider you have breached the break even rule, they must have further devalued your contract and used those numbers in the email.

 

[Shaelumstash]

Couple of things. I don't believe CAS will be interested in the accounting side of things. All they'll be looking at is whether UEFA correctly followed its own procedures, whether we had a fair crack of the whip and, they did, whether our punishment was reasonable.

Second, I'd imagine City wouldn't bring that up as it was a leaked document, so they could hardly complain about hacked and leaked documents being used to prosecute them but use one in their defence. Its not their document to use anyway.

Sorry, I wasn't suggesting City used a leaked document. Rather, if they provided documented proof that ADEC funded the Etihad sponsorship, would that prejudice ADEC's case with the US airlines?

If the case is going to be solely about process, do you think UEFA leaking to the press is enough of an abuse of process in itself for us to win the case?

 

[Nicholas van Whatsisface]

Have a read of this regarding Yves Leterme and the PSG case back in 2019

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/24/sports/psg-uefa-ffp.html

Seems Yves Leterme had the interests of Qatar at heart allowing PSG to get off the hook. Interesting that Bein Sports had at the time secured a multi-million dollar deal to become a UEFA partner

I think that this along with other information could effectively show UEFA for what they are if we decide to go after them

Thanks for posting mate - makes for a very interesting read!

Considering that article, and the picture it paints of Leterme, alongside the clear conflict of interest that exists in the central roles played by very recent CEOs of two of our direct competitors, firstly in Rick Parry sitting on the investigatory panel which reviewed our case and recommended the current sanctions, and secondly in David Gill - also former vice-chairman of the G14 before it was 'officially disbanded', lest we forget - sitting on the executive committee at UEFA who ratified these sanctions - it's baffling people like Liew and Conn seem so outraged that we are now biting back at UEFA through this process.

This was an act of aggression by people with self-evidently vested interests in disabling our capacity to compete, and ensuring the top table remains closed to competition - twisting the purpose of FFP from one of limiting owners loading debt onto their clubs (as it was originally intended) to in the end acting solely to limit any owner from investing their own money risk free to grow their business - as is common practice in any industry across the world.

Why should we be respectful of these people, whose clear objective is to protect the interests of the stakeholders they support (be they direct competitors like United, Liverpool and the G14 cartel in the case of Gill and Parry, or geopolitical competitors like Qatar in the case of Leterme).

They're standing up for their interests - and we're now standing up for ours. Because if we don't - there isn't a hope in hell of expecting any of that miserable bunch to take our perspective into account before passing judgement!

Their dealings with us throughout the FFP process have been duplicitous and disrespectful - is it any wonder we have started to reciprocate in kind? Who can blame us?

Again - a bit of balance in viewing our dealings with UEFA in any context more complex than the reductive, simplistic 'City are refusing to respect the upstanding governing body of their sport' line trotted out by Liew, Conn and their ilk would be an interesting piece for a proper journalist to explore in more detail.

Little danger of seeing that any time soon given the scruples of our press!

 

[mrbelfry]

UEFA's statement refers to us as overstating sponsorship revenue is it possible we are getting our knickers in a twist with ADEC, ADUG, Etihad, related parties etc? That statement doesn't imply objections to how the money was sourced but rather how much there actually was.

Could it be as simple as UEFA reading the Etihad pay £8m email and nothing the discrepancy between that and what appears in our accounts/ffp statement? I can't remember where I read that we had some contracts not signed when we showed them the investigators - could it be an Etihad contract? Combine the £8m email with an unsigned contract but then an item on the calcs showing £60m from Etihad (or whatever the figure is) can you get to an accusation of "overstating sponsorship revenue"?

OR can it refer to the "we can do what we want" email chain that referenced claiming sponsorship money for beating Wigan in the FA Cup?

 

[City Raider]

My take is that UEFA haven't really wanted to pursue this which is why they hoped we would take the small 'pinch'.
When we didn't, the 'elite' G14 continued to apply pressure for UEFA to act. UEFA have announced the unprecedented 2 year ban in the hope we accept a compromise of a 1 year ban. Under these circumstances I think it is quite possible that UEFA will not have followed procedures because they didn't expect (or want) to be in this position.

If we don't concede (and I don't think we will) and if we win the appeal then this will severely damage UEFA's integrity (funny I know) and their finances. At this point the G14 will wrestle power away from a weak UEFA and we will be in a completely different war.

Whatever way I look at it, the G14 cannot lose.

Tend to agree. Whatever way I look at it, ends with UEFA in a vulnerable position. We’ve shown our intent and regardless of CAS outcome we’ll go after FFP. Just can’t see that standing up to any objective scrutiny.

So what comes next? These clubs obviously don’t want us at the table. There has to be some diplomacy as well as legal action.

 

[razman]

Ahh well, what else is left to investigate

 

[blueinsa]

Thanks for posting mate - makes for a very interesting read!

Considering that article, and the picture it paints of Leterme, alongside the clear conflict of interest that exists in the central roles played by very recent CEOs of two of our direct competitors, firstly in Rick Parry sitting on the investigatory panel which reviewed our case and recommended the current sanctions, and secondly in David Gill - also former vice-chairman of the G14 before it was 'officially disbanded', lest we forget - sitting on the executive committee at UEFA who ratified these sanctions - it's baffling people like Liew and Conn seem so outraged that we are now biting back at UEFA through this process.

This was an act of aggression by people with self-evidently vested interests in disabling our capacity to compete, and ensuring the top table remains closed to competition - twisting the purpose of FFP from one of limiting owners loading debt onto their clubs (as it was originally intended) to in the end acting solely to limit any owner from investing their own money risk free to grow their business - as is common practice in any industry across the world.

Why should we be respectful of these people, whose clear objective is to protect the interests of the stakeholders they support (be they direct competitors like United, Liverpool and the G14 cartel in the case of Gill and Parry, or geopolitical competitors like Qatar in the case of Leterme).

They're standing up for their interests - and we're now standing up for ours. Because if we don't - there isn't a hope in hell of expecting any of that miserable bunch to take our perspective into account before passing judgement!

Their dealings with us throughout the FFP process have been duplicitous and disrespectful - is it any wonder we have started to reciprocate in kind? Who can blame us?

Again - a bit of balance in viewing our dealings with UEFA in any context more complex than the reductive, simplistic 'City are refusing to respect the upstanding governing body of their sport' line trotted out by Liew, Conn and their ilk would be an interesting piece for a proper journalist to explore in more detail.

Little danger of seeing that any time soon given the scruples of our press!

Another excellent post from you on this subject.

 

[Zin 'messiah' Zimmer]

Ahh well, what else is left to investigate

This has already been adjudicated on, can’t be subject to further sanctions if they’ve signed off on them!