PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

slbsn said:
Hate to be one of those people but heard another positive soft signal (not transfer related) this morning. Seems to me that it would be incompatible with a finding of serious wrong doing at the club. I can't say anything specific but consistent with the other soft signals (being something in the background that would seem unlikely if a seriously negative outcome was coming from the case).
Click to expand...
Good to hear Stefan.

But just for the knicker-wetters (and there seems to be a few) let's reiterate:
1. The Etihad allegations were all comprehensively covered at CAS.
  • Etihad paid properly for their sponsorship.
  • No money came from ADUG.
  • Etihad paid fair value for their sponsorship.
  • Etihad got fair value for their sponsorship.
  • Etihad are not a related party (and it would make no difference if they were due to the above points).
I would be amazed if there was any issue with this group of charges. In fact they may be the subject of the rumours (but we don't know how true these are) that around 50 of the charges might have been dropped. The PL would need some pretty damning evidence that wasn't available to CAS to land these charges.

2. The Mancini allegations are a complete red-herring/crock of shit (delete as applicable). This was far more likely to be Mancini seeking a tax advantage of some sort (which isn't in itself illegal) than any attempt to disguise an expense. The numbers involved are completely insignificant given the scale of our losses at that time. Also likely to be time-barred anyway.

3. The Fordham stuff is the only one of the three substantive allegations where I initially thought that we might have been on dodgy ground. But then I thought about it and the point of these was to get revenue on the books in 2012/13, in order (as we thought back then) to meet the Annex XI transitional relief that we hoped would help us avoid punishment.

However they didn't, we negotiated a settlement, and UEFA were aware of Fordham around 2015, with the arrangement ending in 2017 or 2018. No charges were ever brought over Fordham and Der Spiegel's 'revelations' about the arrangement in 2018 were already a known quantity. Of course it's possible that the IC may take a different view but even if they do, the amounts involved are really insignificant.

Happy Chanukah to you and yours Stefan (and any other Jewish posters) and Happy Xmas to those who celebrate. There are things that worry me about City and our direction of travel, but the PL case isn't one of them.

Point of information. The related party question wasn't explicitly covered at CAS but, as I said, Etihad aren't a related party and even if they were it wouldn't make a blind bit of difference.
 
Last edited:
auction294 said:
Not wanting to hijack the thread but "over the top security policies" really? What does 'insecure methods' even mean? Wrong on so many levels.

back on topic, talk of 'charges' and 'cheating' is also wrong on many levels. Cheating is fielding 14 outfield players and 2 Goalkeepers, or bribing a match official, and as far as I can remember we haven't done either. We have supposedly not abided by 'rules' that weren't in force until we disrupted the cartel and their cosy world.

As for 'charges' other posters have eloquently written that the feasibility of a coordinated, collaboration of multiple organisations and senior individuals to conspire to commit fraud is literally laughable.

I remind myself constantly the legitimacy of the proceedings should be questioned, not City. Any organisation or individual can fall foul of laws or regulations if these are applied retrospectively with the intent to cause prejudice or damage be that reputationally or otherwise. Remembering that when the cartel dominated there was no need for the rules, not even when Jack Walker blew the rags away.

While I'm on my soapbox. Talk of Lord Pannick and his day rate has been discussed. His fee and that of the legal team should be put into perspective. Whilst the figures are eye watering no doubt, but they are not anything remarkable for him or the firms participating.

5 years ago the top fee earners at one of the firms representing City were commanding around 10k per day. I was with one of these Firms in 2019 at their Hong Kong office at the closing of a Merger to the value of 50Bn. I'm not privy to the details of both sides legal fees but assuming the legal fees, for both parties were at 2% of the Merger value combined between both representative firms then the costs whilst substantial (1Bn) the actual cost to the deal was not. My point being, Lord Pannicks day rate seems a big deal, but to him and his firm, not so much.

back to sacking our security team ..... I don't remember it being City's IT taken down for almost 1 month due to a ransomware attack. That dubious honour goes to United. Strange but true they approached me to head up their Cyber Security not long after - to be clear I said no.
Click to expand...
Who the fuck are you to come on here and spread the "Gospel of Truthfullness" ?
A wonderful post but please come back more often. ;)
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
Good to hear Stefan.

But just for the knicker-wetters (and there seems to be a few) let's reiterate:
1. The Etihad allegations were all comprehensively covered at CAS.
  • Etihad paid properly for their sponsorship.
  • No money came from ADUG.
  • Etihad paid fair value for their sponsorship.
  • Etihad got fair value for their sponsorship.
  • Etihad are not a related party (and it would make no difference if they were due to the above points).
I would be amazed if there was any issue with this group of charges. In fact they may be the subject of the rumours (but we don't know how true these are) that around 50 of the charges might have been dropped. The PL would need some pretty damning evidence that wasn't available to CAS to land these charges.

2. The Mancini allegations are a complete red-herring/crock of shit (delete as applicable). This was far more likely to be Mancini seeking a tax advantage of some sort (which isn't in itself illegal) than any attempt to disguise an expense. The numbers involved are completely insignificant given the scale of our losses at that time. Also likely to be time-barred anyway.

3. The Fordham stuff is the only one of the three substantive allegations where I initially thought that we might have been on dodgy ground. But then I thought about it and the point of these was to get revenge on the books in 2012/13, in order (as we thought back then) to meet the Annex XI transitional relief that we hoped would help us avoid punishment.

However they didn't, we negotiated a settlement, and UEFA were aware of Fordham around 2015, with the arrangement ending in 2017 or 2018. No charges were ever brought over Fordham and Der Spiegel's 'revelations' about the arrangement in 2018 were already a known quantity. Of course it's possible that the IC may take a different view but even if they do, the amounts involved are really significant.

Happy Chanukah to you and yours Stefan (and any other Jewish posters) and Happy Xmas to those who celebrate. There are things that worry me about City and our direction of travel, but the PL case isn't one of them.
Click to expand...
I'm worrying about where the next win is coming from.
 
Essex blue said:
Had a conversation tonight with a fan from another club whose speaks regularly with his chairman. He thinks City will be punished but not with all the charges but still enough to be relegated to the championship! I carnt name the chairman or the club!
Click to expand...
Solid post mate. Sounds like youve been in a convo with a chain of know nowts. Hope you had a good night.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
Good to hear Stefan.

But just for the knicker-wetters (and there seems to be a few) let's reiterate:
1. The Etihad allegations were all comprehensively covered at CAS.
  • Etihad paid properly for their sponsorship.
  • No money came from ADUG.
  • Etihad paid fair value for their sponsorship.
  • Etihad got fair value for their sponsorship.
  • Etihad are not a related party (and it would make no difference if they were due to the above points).
I would be amazed if there was any issue with this group of charges. In fact they may be the subject of the rumours (but we don't know how true these are) that around 50 of the charges might have been dropped. The PL would need some pretty damning evidence that wasn't available to CAS to land these charges.

2. The Mancini allegations are a complete red-herring/crock of shit (delete as applicable). This was far more likely to be Mancini seeking a tax advantage of some sort (which isn't in itself illegal) than any attempt to disguise an expense. The numbers involved are completely insignificant given the scale of our losses at that time. Also likely to be time-barred anyway.

3. The Fordham stuff is the only one of the three substantive allegations where I initially thought that we might have been on dodgy ground. But then I thought about it and the point of these was to get revenue on the books in 2012/13, in order (as we thought back then) to meet the Annex XI transitional relief that we hoped would help us avoid punishment.

However they didn't, we negotiated a settlement, and UEFA were aware of Fordham around 2015, with the arrangement ending in 2017 or 2018. No charges were ever brought over Fordham and Der Spiegel's 'revelations' about the arrangement in 2018 were already a known quantity. Of course it's possible that the IC may take a different view but even if they do, the amounts involved are really significant.

Happy Chanukah to you and yours Stefan (and any other Jewish posters) and Happy Xmas to those who celebrate. There are things that worry me about City and our direction of travel, but the PL case isn't one of them.
Click to expand...
Thank you and Merry Christmas!
 
jrb said:
Honestly Stefan, don’t worry about it. We’re all ears. :-)

Got to be honest, I’m so looking forward to the Talkshite show with Jim Shite, and the dodgy mobile phone seller, made good, when the 115 verdict comes out.

PS. I’m sure Jim and Simon are very nice people in person.
Click to expand...
You started off ever so well JRB and the spoilt it with this load of bollocks. ;)
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
In many ways this thread is the best on the board, but should be visited episodically imo.

It’s great to leave for a bit, then reimmerse. Have enjoyed being back on here these last few days.

Anyway, for any of you sad cunts on this thread (like me) on Christmas Eve, Merry Christmas.

Let’s hope (as I think most of us expect) that this soap opera turns out positively for the club in 2025. And that the club capitalises on that purposefully.
Click to expand...
Fuck off and get pissed in your native Black Country pissy arse.
How are you mate and do you still frequent some of those wonderful small breweries around the Wolves and Brum area ?
 
york away to this! said:
One of my lads "knows" a gal and her brother heard from someone he once met in piccadilly gardens that all season card holders are being gifted £115,000 for Christmas.
The sheikh feels it would be a fitting, yet humorous, thanks for our continued support.
You heard it here first. Don't forget to leave your chimney open tonight for special deliveries...
Click to expand...
Fuck off withe your nonsense. We all know that Piccadilly Gardens are in London. You know fuck all. ;)
 
Essex blue said:
Had a conversation tonight with a fan from another club whose speaks regularly with his chairman. He thinks City will be punished but not with all the charges but still enough to be relegated to the championship! I carnt name the chairman or the club!
Click to expand...
But we instantly know he’s talking bullshit because The Premier League cannot decide where in the pyramid we would be placed. The EFL would have that headache. It really is fucking tidal wave of fucking nonsense.
 
Essex blue said:
Had a conversation tonight with a fan from another club whose speaks regularly with his chairman. He thinks City will be punished but not with all the charges but still enough to be relegated to the championship! I carnt name the chairman or the club!
Click to expand...
yawn.gif
 
Essex blue said:
Had a conversation tonight with a fan from another club whose speaks regularly with his chairman. He thinks City will be punished but not with all the charges but still enough to be relegated to the championship! I carnt name the chairman or the club!
Click to expand...
Can you say what town the club comes from, without naming the club? Can you say what league the club plays in?
 
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