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

[Sleeping_Easy]

Anyone who thinks because this is an in house interview that it will be ignored are wrong. This is the biggest news story in the sports world right now and one of the biggest in general. They'll all report it.

 

[bluwes]

I think it's more a concession that Etihad is state subsidised, which the powers at the club might not want to confirm.

Neither would Etihad because One of the US airlines, think it might be Delta are suing them over state subsidies

 

[Plays By Sense Of Smell]

"They relied more on out of context stolen emails than all the other evidence that we provided about what actually happened".
​

I think that really is the smoking gun.

We already know at least 1 of the emails has discrepancies to what actually happened. People discussing something happening isnt proof of something actually having happened.

Bingo

 

[OB1]

What I cannot get my head around is this concept of related parties, or not related parties, and how it applies to our sponsorship revenue.

When formulating the FFP rules and the calculation of the break-even requirement, UEFA decided not to use some arbitrary method of determining this, but instead to use rules and principles as defined in International Accounting Standards. The very same principles auditors use when determining whether income should be declared as being from related parties or not.

This was in theory a wise and sensible move. Not only are the rules well known and understood by all the audit firms, they contain rules and guidelines which apply objective, not subjective tests. For the very reason that we do not want to have a situation where companies accounts are open to interpretation, with one firm saying one thing and another firm concluding something different. If a party is deemed not to be related, then all of the income from that organisation is by its very definition "fair market value" since it was fairly obtained from the market! Of course the opposite is true: If revenue is coming from a related party, then there is a question about the basis upon which that revenue was secured and therefore a question about what the fair value would have been had it been obtained on the open market.

As I understand it, Etihad Aviation Group is owned by the Abu Dhabi government, not by ADUG and neither by any other organisation over which Sheikh Mansour has control. In any event the question as to whether Etihad is related or not, will have been the subject of our annual audit of our accounts. And our independent accountants have repeatedly signed off our accounts on the basis that Etihad is NOT a related party. To do so, knowing or suspecting this to be untrue, would be a criminal offence and surely something that any reputable accounting firm would never contemplate.

So how on earth is it that UEFA can unilaterally decide that Etihad *is* related? Sure it may smack of being a bit of a fiddle - since we can all imagine there may be possible influences which could be brought to bear amongst the upper eschelons of the Abu Dhabi powers that be. But that is really not the point, and is - from UEFA's perspective "tough shit". IAS24 - the standard which deals with related parties - has very specific objective tests, which we have passed. It is not within UEFA's remit to decide upon a different set of criteria. Their own rules say they will apply IAS24 standards, and those standards define Etihad as not being related.

And if Etihad is not related, then there can be no question of us having artificially inflated our revenues (from Etihad). They are what they are, as stated in our audited accounts.

What am I missing here? Apart from UEFA being a bunch of crooks who will make up the rules as they go along and as it suits them, of course.

Etihad is not a related party.

 

[mancity1]

My biggest hope is that City fucking destroy UEFA in the court's, they're as bad as FIFA, rotten to the core.
Great interview by Ferran, thanks to him I feel much better now.

if not nimrod both will self implode , the landscape of how football is administered and organised to handle the next twenty years is changing rapidly.

I wonder if FIFA and UEFA ARE Co2 net zero emission (LOL).

 

[oakiecokie]

Shouldn’t be allowed anywhere near the ground, snivelling twat!

Oh he should as I feel a new episode of the Nottingham train would be welcome.

 

[Mikeegrini]

I don’t think CAS’s decision will be conclusive.

They will almost certainly find that UEFA didn’t follow the correct process..they’ve already hinted at that.

But with such a complicated situation I think they will bounce it back to UEFA and say start it again and this time do it fairly.

UEFA will then offer City a way out. City might well reject it and we are back to CAS.

That’s my guess.

Thing is though, after the ruling from the recent ECJ case of Ali Riza and the Turkish FA. UEFA would have to either change the process so that they aren't judge, jury and executioner. Or risk a fresh appeal on process, should City lose the rerun.

 

[blueinsa]

Not talking about the subject matter, but the fact that since he arrived he has had little or no contact with the fans.

He is a well spoken dude and is clearly passionate about the club, it would be better if he had more contact with the supporters in the past.

Its a fair criticism and one i completely agree with.

 

[bewildered]

I think it's more a concession that Etihad is state subsidised, which the powers at the club might not want to confirm.

Of course Etihad is state subsidised, as are many big companies. Its irrelevent, the question is... is City sponsorship by Etihad fair value? Clearly Yes, and did the funds come from Etihad (directly or indirectly - doesn't matter) or ADUG? Clearly Etihad (as the Open Fair Skies document confirms).

 

[Ban-jani]

Proving the whole system is corrupt, is ran in favour and by the “elite clubs” and nailing UEFA in the courts to the point of destruction, will be greater and more satisfying than any title win.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

The legal time limit in the Uk for libel is that you have to start action (even preliminary letters) within 12 months of first publication of the article (online or in print). So we are out of time with Der Spiegel. I don't know the rules in foreign courts though. CFG has been damaged everywhere. Could we sue them in the USA for example? However there would be nothing to stop us suing any UK broadcaster or publisher which has repeated any false allegations within a 12 month period of any CAS ruling. That would include organisations like the Daily Mail, Indpendendent website, Talksport, the BBC, and all the tabloids. All these groups have published or broadcast false stories about City's finances multiple times in recent months. In any civil action they would have to prove that what they had published was true (an impossiblity). They would also struggle with mitigation because to argue the "fair comment" defence you have to prove you published "in good faith" and so many articles have been totally biased and one-sided with not even a single balancing comment from City's side of the story.
David Conn for example is wide open for an action that could finish his career. The Guardian has probably been one of the worst culprits.

If anything Conn, or anyone else wrote, was actionable, it would have been taken down by now.

 

[toffee balls]

Rob Harris , maybe can't understand properly - when he says Ferran can't talk a lot about it. Much needed from club

Why do i need to read that.
If i was interested in what he has to say , I would go look for myself.

 

[oakiecokie]

Apparently he has tweeted over 640,000 times during his Twitter tenure.

This would suggest..

A) A loner
B) Needs for recognition
C) Has no partner or sex life
D) Lives on his own
E) Narcissistic
F) Has no life
G) Needy
H) All of the above

Have to disagree on C Tolm.I bet his fucking hand has a great sex life.

 

[Marvin]

Some people in the media clearly have a vendetta against Manchester City.

I thought it was all predictable stuff but done well.

The one thing I liked was the issue of timing. I thought it would be in City's interest to slow this down to ensure that we are in next season's competition, but an early verdict is another statement of confidence. Of course you could again say that this is just talk and easy to say.

 

[purplenose]

Think we’ve got them.

The laughing in the office from the Rags and Scousers has died a death today over the lunch time reading of this.

That must be greatly satisfying. Even more so when the penny drops that their cartel might just be on the verge of being outed and dismantled.

 

[oakiecokie]

We can feel the fans are behind us,dead right

He obviously "signs in" on this Forum. ;)

 

[mindmyp's_n_q's]

The bank would judge your ability to pay - not the car dealer.

And would the bank judge it as dodgy if I had a guarantor that was offering to cover the full amount in lieu of owning more of the car than me?

My boss (the owner) has just invested £100k of his own funds into our business for expansion as the business couldn't afford to do it at this time. The investment will for itself in 18 months.

What's the difference in etihads owners investing money with a view that in the long term it may also pay for itself?

 

[eyalluvitt]

It’s like Sainsbury’s Bringing in a rule that if your rich and successful & earn over 150 grand a year If your dad was a painter earning 18K and your grandad drove a bus for 12k you can only spend 50 pounds a week with us. Utterly ridiculous and we should go for the jugular.

 

[BlueMoonz1977]

He Couldn't have made it clearer that there are two factions within UEFA and the whole business is political. This has been blindingly obvious for months if not years. I wonder how this will be reported in the mainstream media in the UK. Are they going to call Soriano a liar? It was a great statement. Didn't give our hand away legally but dropped a couple of hand grenades. It does seem clear that UEFA have just ignored our defence. FFS is it really true that UEFA have built their whole case on a few stolen emails (out of context) in a German magazine that has subsequently been shamed (in a different case) for literally making up stories? And those emails were hacked by a man who is in jail and faces trial on 90 charges of hacking, extortion and fraud. Is that all they have got?

This is where it could get very interesting. He has stated not all of UEFA is the same, but that this decision is political - I have read that as in UEFA are a split entity but that certain factions within UEFA that are not cosher exert influence and judgements

 

[glyncity]

Can anyone explain to me , why it's got this far based on these hacked Der Speigel e mails (if that is in fact UEFA,s main body of evidence) , when Etihad would surely have audited records , for legal and tax purposes , showing all their outgoings for sporting or promotional uses , which either tally with the information in the Der Speigel articles or they dont..
If Sheik Mansour did in fact top up Etihads sponsorship deal , why would he or anyone feel the need to e mail the fact round the club/organisation , surely any communication would have been between the boards of Etihad airways and ADUG and be kept "on a need to know basis" , and maybe I'm being naive but no one at club level would need to know surely..
Also as far as I'm aware Etihad could be owned by the Sheik and the funding for the deal could have been 100% from him and as long as it was deemed market value , no rules would have been broken , (eg: Leicester owner owns King Power, Peter Coates owns Stoke and Bet365 , Mike Ashley , Newcastle , Sports Direct , Red Bull and many others) so why would Sheik Mansour go to great lengths to hide something he could quite legally do openly ?..doesn't make sense
As I am no expert in law or accountancy and admit there may be some glaringly obvious faults in my thinking , but however , surely a simple solution would be a letter from the people at Etihad showing verified accounts from the years in question, which would put this matter to bed one way or the other quite quickly ....