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

[nmc]

Regarding the Der Speigel articles, which highlighted some snippets of our hacked emails. I understand our defence is that the emails were taken out of context.

What I am failing to understand, is why has Der Speigel not dug through the stolen material to add additional information that would put their original leaks into full context?

Someone has access to the full database of stolen info. Could it be that the additional information within those email threads does not incriminate us? Maybe the incriminating emails were selected deliberately to cause maximum damage to us, in the knowledge that they were not the full story.

As @tolmie's hairdoo has already indicated. The Der Spiegel article was not the work of just Pinto and the magazine - somebody else - probably tied to Bayern with a particular axe to grind is behind it - Pinto and Der Spiegel have no grounds for such venom. Just read any quotes by Hoeness or Rummenigge re City and there’s the exact same tone as the Der Spiegel article.

 

[ganganvince]

Probably the wrong thread but talk about u turns
https://www.getfootballnewsfrance.com/2020/arsene-wenger-wants-reforms-made-to-financial-fair-play/

 

[remember arthur mann]

Funny you should mention Bayern Munich and Qatar in the same sentence as one of Bayerns shirt sponsors are Qatar Airways.

Coincidence or am I just being a bit thick?

 

[BlueT]

Unless we've fucked up and are guilty the £1m settlement is the biggest fuck up the club has probably ever made.

Doesn't make any sense. Why would we accept a one million pound settlement for such a criminal act

As I say we're a soft touch

It doesn't make any sense. Why would we accept a one million pound settlement for such a blatant criminal act?

 

[Eds]

Gotta be Steve Kinsey surely ?

Steve Flimsy more like

 

[Delboy352]

surprised city haven’t employed a hacker themselves to dish dirt on tour rivals? Liverpool might be able to help us get one? ;-)

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-usa-spying-raven-specialreport-idUKKCN1PO1A6

 

[manimanc]

Thanks Columbo.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Doesn't make any sense. Why would we accept a one million pound settlement for such a criminal act?

I'm speculating very wildly here but let's suppose we confronted Liverpool with the evidence and they said "It's a fair cop but we've also got loads of emails that will show you're trying to cheat UEFA over FFP. Wanna do a deal? If so we'll pay you £1m in hush money and we agree not to do anything like this again. We both sign NDA's and nothing is ever said again. If you do, we've still got the emails." We're not really in a position to argue as we haven't actually done a settlement with UEFA at that point so accept the settlement.

Yet the emails get released a few years later anyway and all bets are off as we know where they came from, plus we've got information on other stuff.

Like I say, this is very wild speculation but it kind of makes sense in some ways.

 

[dickie davies]

I'm speculating very wildly here but let's suppose we confronted Liverpool with the evidence and they said "It's a fair cop but we've also got loads of emails that will show you're trying to cheat UEFA over FFP. Wanna do a deal? If so we'll pay you £1m in hush money and we agree not to do anything like this again. We both sign NDA's and nothing is ever said again. If you do, we've still got the emails." We're not really in a position to argue as we haven't actually done a settlement with UEFA at that point so accept the settlement.

Yet the emails get released a few years later anyway and all bets are off as we know where they came from, plus we've got information on other stuff.

Like I say, this is very wild speculation but it kind of makes sense in some ways.

 

[cheekybids]

That was the point being made.

Someone (several have actually) suggested that our auditors would be in the firing line.
My thought, which PB agreed with (if I understand right), and matches your comment, is that the auditors would look at the incoming money and sign off which sponsor it came from. Where the sponsor got the money from is out of jurisdiction, and probably interest.

So I think we all have the same opinion on that side.

You also suggested, and I'm paraphrasing here, that the auditors would sign off on what was claimed as FFP-exempt. That makes sense to me, but wasn't something I was commenting on.

Any audit has a scoping document, they may uncover things but the audits findings will be based on the “scope”.

Now talking of scoping documents has just triggered a memory, was it that UEFA didn’t provide a scope for the investigation??