PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[cheekybids]

In terms of gaining a meaningful sporting advantage, I'd argue that hacking into another clubs scouting database is a much more serious offence than anything alleged in the current witch hunt against us.

Don't care if it was a rogue employee or not. He was employed by Liverpool and there's little doubt he'd have kept the acquired information to himself and it wouldn't have became common knowledge amongst the senior figures and hierarchy at the club.

They cheated, simple as.

They promoted the fuckers as well.

 

[dadnlad]

Red shirts mate, untouchable.

going over old ground
PL lets move on

 

[DJ1]

Who owns Dynasty Equity?

New York-based Dynasty Equity was co-founded by Jonathan M. Nelson and K. Don Cornwell last year and this is their first investment. David Ginsberg, who is vice-chairman of FSG, is also a senior advisor at Dynasty

....this is cosy. Assume the Premier League will be dragging all parties into a hearing to swear under oath that nothing dodgy is taking place? Probably scrutinise all their emails too?

 

[city2]

As long as sheik owns city we will always be under scrutiny but it’s the yanks who should be scrutinised

 

[Keeper!]

Funny how the Premier League haven't gone back a few years and reopened the case of the scouse twats hacking our database.

"A report published in The Times in November revealed that, in 2013, the two clubs reached a confidential settlement relating to alleged 'spying' worth £1m."

What's even more funny and plain weird is why WE allowed this to be brushed under the carpet so easily, we took a 1M payoff and more importantly or laughable, signed a non disclosure with the dippers.

I have said before but one issue I do have with our ownership is is meek minded way it's "fights" it's distractors.

 

[manimanc]

"A report published in The Times in November revealed that, in 2013, the two clubs reached a confidential settlement relating to alleged 'spying' worth £1m."

What's even more funny and plain weird is why WE allowed this to be brushed under the carpet so easily, we took a 1M payoff and more importantly or laughable, signed a non disclosure with the dippers.

I have said before but one issue I do have with our ownership is is meek minded way it's "fights" it's distractors.

I just think our owners have bigger fish to fry and stuff like this and the constant drip drip of deloony trying his best to ruffle feathers doesn't even touch the surface.

 

[Keeper!]

I just think our owners have bigger fish to fry and stuff like this and the constant drip drip of deloony trying his best to ruffle feathers doesn't even touch the surface.

Agreed but it also makes me think it's not the big deal a lot of people on here think it was.

 

[mayo31]

Agreed but it also makes me think it's not the big deal a lot of people on here think it was.

Of course it is no big deal

Only fans think it is and use stuff like this to throw insults at other fans

I don’t think the charges are as big a deal as other fans say either

I am not really arsed

I look at it this way, I go most games home and away and see some top players led by the best manager we have ever had play some of the best football ever seen in England

Nothing anyone from outside the blue family can ever say will spoil what I have witnessed and celebrated with my kids, mates and others

 

[applecentral]

I live in Minster so that's going to be noisy .... thanets a shit hole now anyway

I was born and brought up in Margate so I know Manston Airport well

 

[SomeMightSay]

"A report published in The Times in November revealed that, in 2013, the two clubs reached a confidential settlement relating to alleged 'spying' worth £1m."

What's even more funny and plain weird is why WE allowed this to be brushed under the carpet so easily, we took a 1M payoff and more importantly or laughable, signed a non disclosure with the dippers.

I have said before but one issue I do have with our ownership is is meek minded way it's "fights" it's distractors.

Huge data protection breaches from us over the password sharing, etc, obvs we’d face prosecution and fined for it so it was convenient to come to the private settlement.

 

[Metalartin]

I know Etisalat aren't the ones under investigation, but presumably their marketing department and upper management would have some sort of document trail showing what they expected to get out of a sponsorship, and reviews of quarterly sales before and after. If it was such an excellent deal there would have been correspondence from the time between Etisalat employees.

We basically relied on CAS taking him at his word, and I know he was under oath but different people might find him less credible or think Etisalat's ownership compromises his reliability.

As others pointed out earlier in the thread, Etisalat are often seen as a small unknown company in the West, that nobody has heard of, who had no place sponsoring football clubs because they couldn't possibly afford it. In other places in the world, they are a major mobile network provider though. They don't just have annual revenues in the 10s of billions, their annual profits amount to billions too. They are probably the one UAE sponsor in all of it, who could easily have afforded to meet all their obligations, without help from their owners. Etihad are the sponsor that needed more support from their owners(as many airlines do, and it would have been expected in 2003/04 when they were created) and most of that has been cleared at CAS.

These two graphs from statista are in AED but it still amounts to billions when converted to GBP. They show the profit and revenue streams of Etisalat and although neither of them start in 2012, they do both show massive growth specifically in the 2010s, over a number of years:

Revenue streams starting from 2014 to 2022:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1113821/etisalat-revenue/

Net profit starting in 2015 to 2022:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1114239/etisalat-uae-net-profit/

Brand value would be another arguing point, I imagine. There is data that shows growth on that too.

Etisalat brand value starting in 2015 to 2023:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1129926/etisalat-brand-value/

Leading telecommunications brands in the Middle East in 2023, by brand value:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/971969/middle-east-leading-telecom-brands-by-value/
Currently, they hold a fairly close second place position to Saudi Telecom, who sponsored United for many years.

Edit: Slightly off topic but I've seen some data on Etihad too, which shows there was significant growth in revenue and profits from 2011 to 2015. It was 2016, where they then started taking losses(Pep era, where the performance and brand value of City skyrocketed):
https://www.statista.com/statistics/529980/etihad-airways-revenue/

Etihad Airways key business trends(Revenues & Profit etc) 2011-2021

 

[Centurions]

Of course it is no big deal

Only fans think it is and use stuff like this to throw insults at other fans

I don’t think the charges are as big a deal as other fans say either

I am not really arsed

I look at it this way, I go most games home and away and see some top players led by the best manager we have ever had play some of the best football ever seen in England

Nothing anyone from outside the blue family can ever say will spoil what I have witnessed and celebrated with my kids, mates and others

Correct if this is regarding the ex-employees accessing our scouting database, it was done and dusted years ago and presumably the relevant authorities were informed including the PL and everyone moved on.

I find it rather pathetic and small minded that people on here keep bringing it up although I do have a lot of doubts about some of the repeat offenders.

 

[Invisible Man's Bandage]

In terms of gaining a meaningful sporting advantage, I'd argue that hacking into another clubs scouting database is a much more serious offence than anything alleged in the current witch hunt against us.

Don't care if it was a rogue employee or not. He was employed by Liverpool and there's little doubt he'd have kept the acquired information to himself and it wouldn't have became common knowledge amongst the senior figures and hierarchy at the club.

They cheated, simple as.

Once again this is unbelievable negligence by the club after having such lax IT 'security' that a nobody like Pinto could steal our entire unencrypted email database and sell it for criminal gain all because some idiotic employee clicked on a link.

I retired from the German company I worked for just before Christmas and on my final day my entire server access was cut around lunchtime so I couldn't see my mails, the CRM with information on every customer in Europe or anything company related. The level of complacency and incompetence within the club is shocking and I would have expected sackings at executive level..

The charges and the Liverpool 'hacking' are for the most part self-inflicted.

 

[ayrshire_blue]

Once again this is unbelievable negligence by the club after having such lax IT 'security' that a nobody like Pinto could steal our entire unencrypted email database and sell it for criminal gain all because some idiotic employee clicked on a link.

I retired from the German company I worked for just before Christmas and on my final day my entire server access was cut around lunchtime so I couldn't see my mails, the CRM with information on every customer in Europe or anything company related. The level of complacency and incompetence within the club is shocking and I would have expected sackings at executive level..

The charges and the Liverpool 'hacking' are for the most part self-inflicted.

Self inflicted it may be, and our own negligence for sure - but still cheating on their behalf whichever way it's dressed up. If we had an access password to all of our accounts as "password123" it's basic stupidity but still another club's employee has no right or reason to be gaining access. What they've done with the information gained will never be known, but I don't for a minute accept they'll have sat on it hush hush.

 

[Invisible Man's Bandage]

Self inflicted it may be, and our own negligence for sure - but still cheating on their behalf whichever way it's dressed up. If we had an access password to all of our accounts as "password123" it's basic stupidity but still another club's employee has no right or reason to be gaining access. What they've done with the information gained will never be known, but I don't for a minute accept they'll have sat on it hush hush.

Of course it's cheating but hey, the world can be a mean place.

I don't have the option of finding out products sold and prices at every customer in Europe at my old company so I couldn't sell this information to a competitor to fund my retirement even if I wanted to. The bastards cut my server access :)

 

[LongsightM13]

"A report published in The Times in November revealed that, in 2013, the two clubs reached a confidential settlement relating to alleged 'spying' worth £1m."

What's even more funny and plain weird is why WE allowed this to be brushed under the carpet so easily, we took a 1M payoff and more importantly or laughable, signed a non disclosure with the dippers.

I have said before but one issue I do have with our ownership is is meek minded way it's "fights" it's distractors.

I’ve been though this before
The Liverpool employee(s) undoubtedly committed criminal offences under both the previous, pre GDPR data protection act and also the computer misuse act, and would/should have faced prosecution. The latter legislation includes prison sentences as a potential penalty
However, both the cult (if there was evidence they knew about it) and City were also potentially liable for civil penalties under the old DPA and fines of up to £500k had it been reported to the ICO. The scousers for unlawful access to personal data and City for failing in their legal duty to keep personal data secure from unauthorised access.
So it probably suited both parties to keep it quiet

 

[Metalartin]

I didn't ever look at the hacking scandal as a massive criminal offence. For City's part, they settled it out of court and moved on and I see the arguments why that was for the best. I thought the point was that someone proved the act itself, which came under Liverpool's responsibility, did in fact break some of the PL's own rules. Wasn't there also a belief from Spurs, that some of their former employees(who went to Liverpool) did the same thing, or was that twitter rumours? No investigation, no punishment, very little media interest.

I really do have my doubts it would have been treated the same in the media or the common PL fan's eyes, had that been City. They'd have formed a rabble and went full faux outrage, until the PL had to show they were doing something. The same rules for everyone argument would be used: "The rules are the rules and Liverpool agreed to follow them like anyone else la. So they should be punished."

It is off topic though and it's not going to change anything to keep going back to it. Leave that to the Liverpool thread IMO.

 

[LeonardoDaVnci]

Maybe the PL witchhunt works like this, the PL lawyers use every single financial transaction from all MCFC bank accounts (in chronological order) to drive the case.
So for a made up example, lets pretend on 01/04/11 MCFC received a payment of £15M into the clubs current account. The "PL" believe this was sent by the owner of MCFC as disguised equity funding and was concealed in the annual accounts ie reported as sponsorship funds from Etisalat and therefore is a breach of PL rules. So in defence MCFC provide documentary evidence proving the sponsorship agreement between MCFC and Etisalat, call on executive officers of both parties to corroborate the agreement and provide evidence from the banks of the sender of the funds. So where does the argument go then ?, the PL lawyers have only one option ie to accuse the defence of dishonesty during the hearing. So then they can spend copious amounts of time discussing the integrity and honesty of the witnesses, the sponsors, accountants, auditors AND AND the MCFC legal advisors throughout the ten year period, who all must have been implicit.
That's just one transaction in one FY year, that could take weeks to hear out.

I'm sure there will be hundreds of transactions that could be scrutinised in this way. That's why this will go on for years to come, I'm assuming legal hourly rates are approx £500 an hour. The total legal costs to all involved will be tens of millions and no one ever questions it...

 

[cheekybids]

Once again this is unbelievable negligence by the club after having such lax IT 'security' that a nobody like Pinto could steal our entire unencrypted email database and sell it for criminal gain all because some idiotic employee clicked on a link.

I retired from the German company I worked for just before Christmas and on my final day my entire server access was cut around lunchtime so I couldn't see my mails, the CRM with information on every customer in Europe or anything company related. The level of complacency and incompetence within the club is shocking and I would have expected sackings at executive level..

The charges and the Liverpool 'hacking' are for the most part self-inflicted.

I disagree with the scouting hack, you can’t 100% prevent corporate espionage & I’m not buying we didn’t take it further through fear. I’ve just agreed a financial settlement where they have admitted no liability but like the Scouse cunts they wouldn’t have paid a penny if they felt they’d have won. Why did I settle for less than I should have, well that’s what happens at conciliation, you agree to a win win as there is never 100% certainty in the result.

 

[Invisible Man's Bandage]

I disagree with the scouting hack, you can’t 100% prevent corporate espionage & I’m not buying we didn’t take it further through fear. I’ve just agreed a financial settlement where they have admitted no liability but like the Scouse cunts they wouldn’t have paid a penny if they felt they’d have won. Why did I settle for less than I should have, well that’s what happens at conciliation, you agree to a win win as there is never 100% certainty in the result.

Have you quoted the wrong message there as those points relate to another post?