PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

KS55 said:
Yes, I can’t remember where I picked that up from but I would not quote it if it had not seemed kosher at the time. Hope I haven’t misled everybody!
Click to expand...
But will it matter the people who hire top KC do so on the basis of cases won not one verdict on a panel plus there is the tax rank principle
 
Moggzy said:
From what I have heard, you’re dealing with an entirely different situation here.

If the IP find city guilty, by default, they’re also finding a number of international companies guilty also. That guilt will be based on the fraudulent production of published and audited inland revenue accounts.

That judgment will have to be on a rock solid legal footing because it will be challenged by those caught in association of the verdict.

The connotations are wide ranging and could run for years.
Click to expand...
The CAS judgment had to be rock solid surely ? Plus don’t both for and against do a summing up explainer like you get at US Supreme Court
 
eastmanc said:
The UEFA judge was always going to find against City just like the City Judge was always going to find for City.
Click to expand...

That’s the point… won’t three PL appointed judges vote with the PL just as the UEFA judge did regardless of the facts. Hardly instils confidence in the legal profession the way the UEFA judge behaved.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
It was probably me but I'd ignored the Etihad/Etisalat sponsorships because there not a hope in hell of those being found in breach of the PL rules in my opinion. CAS made sure of that and the PL would have to have solid evidence that a load of people lied at CAS to overturn that.

Fordham was probably in the region of £12/13m a year for three years (2013/14 to 2015/16) and Mancini's contract was for £1.75m a year for the years 2009/10 to 2012/13.

So never more than £13m in any one year.
Click to expand...
Over three years a total of >£40M
The PL gave the rags the same for Covid losses plus £35 more in relation to the sale of 27% of £1B of rags debt to Scruffy Jim
 
eastmanc said:
The UEFA judge was always going to find against City just like the City Judge was always going to find for City.
Click to expand...
But this post and the one above it from @halfcenturyup - only add to the concern of some posters - and perhaps we are right not to take at face value this line that KCs will not be swayed in anyway etc.

If this is the true explanation then some of the more faint-hearted of us have some justification for our concerns
 
Last edited:
KS55 said:
The German judge was simply following CAS practice of not voting against his nominator. Mad, but that seems to be the case. Later events, in which a junior in his practice issued a paper ‘proving’ City’s guilt, suggest he actually thought City had broken the rules. But just hang on to “There is no evidence that…etc”, eleven times.
Click to expand...
But.............

And I will draw a line under this concern after this post....

Again can posters not see how this just adds to the concern.

Eleven times the CAS panel stated that there was no evidence - yet one of it's members voted against CITY purely because it was the tradition to vote in line with their sponsor
 
Oldham Exile said:
But this post and the one above it from @halfcenturyup - only add to the concern of some posters - and perhaps we are right not to take at face value this line that KCs will not be swayed in anyway etc.

If this is the true explanation then some of more faint-hearted have some justification for our concerns
Click to expand...

This worries me the UEFA judge voted in favour of his employer regardless of the facts. What's to say the 3 KC won't do the same ?
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
We just don't know what this cash injection is for. Could be anything; the stadium in New York, our stadium expansion, another acquisition or something else.

The thing that bothers me is that, whereas City generate huge cash flows, the rest of CFG gobbles up cash overall, with no end in sight. Of course the Sheikh can afford it and may even consider it a price worth paying to support some wider objective but it's a shit business proposition in my view.
Click to expand...
Obviously we are the jewel in the crown and NYC may well be worth the huge investment in a new stadium eventually but the rest of CFG is hardly worth bothering with. I don't get the implied 5.5 billion valuation the new share issue shows. I also don't understand how the multi club model benefits Manchester City as I couldn't give a rats arse about any of the other clubs.
 
Oldham Exile said:
But.............

And I will draw a line under this concern after this post....

Again can posters not see how this just adds to the concern.

Eleven times the CAS panel stated that there was no evidence - yet one of it's members voted against CITY purely because it was the tradition to vote in line with their sponsor
Click to expand...
Lord Pannick will somehow raise and challenge this protocol as being 'outwith the spirit of the panel' who are there only to rule on the facts of the case, not to follow historical voting precedent.
 
Invisible Man's Bandage said:
Obviously we are the jewel in the crown and NYC may well be worth the huge investment in a new stadium eventually but the rest of CFG is hardly worth bothering with. I don't get the implied 5.5 billion valuation the new share issue shows. I also don't understand how the multi club model benefits Manchester City as I couldn't give a rats arse about any of the other clubs.
Click to expand...
Good night & leave the blinkers by the bed !!
 
Invisible Man's Bandage said:
Obviously we are the jewel in the crown and NYC may well be worth the huge investment in a new stadium eventually but the rest of CFG is hardly worth bothering with. I don't get the implied 5.5 billion valuation the new share issue shows. I also don't understand how the multi club model benefits Manchester City as I couldn't give a rats arse about any of the other clubs.
Click to expand...
I don't want to go off-track, but I would think that there are going to be significant benefits for CITY from the multi-club strategy. Long-term, it must be greatly contributing to our global brand and more practically, the route though which Savinho was brought to the club seems to have been supported by our model.
 
Oldham Exile said:
I don't want to go off-track, but I would think that there are going to be significant benefits for CITY from the multi-club strategy. Long-term, it must be greatly contributing to our global brand and more practically, the route though which Savinho was brought to the club seems to have been supported by our model.
Click to expand...
off topic but it took years for academy to bear fruit and make millions i guess finding talent is goal
 
nmc said:
That’s the point… won’t three PL appointed judges vote with the PL just as the UEFA judge did regardless of the facts. Hardly instils confidence in the legal profession the way the UEFA judge behaved.
Click to expand...
I get your point. I think @projectriver answered it a few times though.

I think the fact that CAS found us innocent of the main charges might make it more difficult for the PL or put another way the PL panel will at least be aware of the CAS ruling and may need “new” rock solid evidence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top