PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Rodri’s ACL said:
Not exactly sure if this is the place to say this, but surely the rags could very easily fail PSR. They have £400m in debt payable by next year and £300m to pay on their current squad supposedly. But they’re also buying ~£200m worth of players when they can’t pay dinner ladies and are without any European football. Sounds like a recipe for disaster to me. Could be very easy to fail PSR or do a Rangers on it so.
Click to expand...

On top of all these cuts they are making to staff and the potential refinancing of debt of what they currently owe. How does this stadium get built, the £300 million of public funding they talk about doesn’t touch the sides the the £2.5 billion to get it built. How do they pay for it without more loans to cover it? It’s suspiciously got the look of a dodge on psr, they knew they weren’t getting top four when they announced the stadium build and the very real possibility they wouldn’t win the Europa league. Not a peep has been said about the stadium since.
 
Last edited:
richards30 said:
I hope so Colin but even if we have felt in maybe the image rights situation we were correct it will be a grey area and we will lose that? I just dont see full not guilty on everything mate.
Click to expand...
I agree that it's a potentially grey area, and I certainly initially thought it was one where we were vulnerable, but when I thought about it more deeply three things reassured me,

1. UEFA were aware of this well before 2018, discussed it with us and took no further action. Given the dodgy 'evidence' they did present at CAS, Fordham would have been a slam dunk for them if there was any fraudulent intent.

2. Fordham wasn't some dodgy offshore brass-plate entity that no one but those involved were aware of. It was there in plain sight, included in our Companies House information, having changed the company name from one directly referencing City and image rights. I'm sure far lesser detectives than Sherlock Holmes could've made the connection.

3. The final thing is that Fordham wasn't an attempt to hide expenses, but to increase revenue in 2012/13, when we thought we might be able to squeeze enough revenue to present a case for mitigation under the Annex XI transitional relief provisions for wages. As you mentioned above, we know UEFA then moved the goalposts slightly, meaning we couldn't take advantage of that mitigation.
 
Last edited:
richards30 said:
That we have probably been told verbally something was fine but then it wasnt? That happened when the goalposts were moved i believe when we got fined by Uefa didnt it colin? @Prestwich_Blue
Click to expand...
UEFA changed their own rules so that we couldnt possibly meet their ffp rules in such a short time frame, this is different.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
I agree that it's a potentially grey area, and I certainly initially thought it was one where we were vulnerable, but when I thought about it more deeply three things reassured me,

1. UEFA were aware of this well before 2018, discussed it with us and took no further action. Given the dodgy 'evidence' they did present at CAS, Fordham would have been a slam dunk for them if there was any fraudulent intent.

2. Fordham wasn't some dodgy offshore brass-plate entity that no one but those involved were aware of. It was there in plain sight, included in our Companies House information, having changed the company name from one directly referencing City and image rights. I'm sure far lesser detectives than Sherlock Holmes could've made the connection.

3. The final thing is that Fordham wasn't an attempt to hide expenses, but to increase revenue in 2012/13, when we thought we might be able to afford squeeze enough revenue to present a case for mitigation under the Annex XI transitional relief provisions for wages. As you mentioned above, we know UEFA then moved the goalposts slightly, meaning we couldn't take advantage of that mitigation.
Click to expand...

Thanks Colin, been a few years but i remember you doing some podcasts on the matter .
 
feedmpenzaandhewillscore said:
On top of all these cuts they are making to staff and the potential refinancing of debt of what they currently owe. How does this stadium get built, the £300 million of public funding they talk about doesn’t touch the sides the the £2.5 billion to get it built. How die they pay for it without more loans to cover it? It’s suspiciously got the look of a dodge on psr, they knew they weren’t getting top four when they announced the stadium build and the very real possibility they wouldn’t win the Europa league. Not a peep has been said about the stadium since.
Click to expand...
I've done the maths on both City and United many times, especially to try to shut up some of those morons who believe we must have cooked the books because what we have achieved isn't viable any other way, and proven it easily adds up. Maths IS one of my strong points. I've done the maths on United over the same period, circa the past 15 years and I can't make it work at all.
 
uwe rosler 28 said:
I will always stick to I don't think that people like HRH and Khaldoon would risk there reputation by fudging an extra 50 or 60m through our books from friends of theirs. Sorry the MCFC is just not worth it to them imo these people have to sign deals for trillions to keep their country going when the oil runs out. If they are found to be complicit in fraud will people want to really deal with them??
Click to expand...
Totally agree, that's always been my take on it too. Why would they want to risk everything on a project that, to them, is little more than pocket change? Why would you pay people at the top of their game if all you were going to do is fudge the figures somehow? Why would you risk the entire project, the hotel, the reputation you've built for the club and the group as a whole for again what is just small change? It doesn't make any sense, financially, morally or in any other aspect. You just wouldn't unless you were absolutely desperate and had no other option.
 
Coatigan said:
Because how can you be innocent of 115 things?

One, two, ten, maybe even twenty - ok. But 115 charges, got to be guilty of something then!
Click to expand...
Because it's not 115 things, it's half a dozen duplicated over time. For example, if you get a parking ticket it's one offence, one charge. If you leave the car there and get another one the next day, it's two charges. If you continue to leave it there and continue to get tickets you end up with dozens of them, but it's the same charge repeated, not 115 different ones.

I've said from day one that the PL have nothing and that's why it's taken so long. They want city to provide the evidence for them because they haven't got any, that's why they keep saying city are "not co-operating". But you can't provide evidence of nothing if you haven't done anything wrong.

Given the time period involved, why hasn't a single shred of evidence come to light unless we haven't actually done anything wrong?
 
Coatigan said:
Because how can you be innocent of 115 things?

One, two, ten, maybe even twenty - ok. But 115 charges, got to be guilty of something then!
Click to expand...
You’re getting sucked into this 115 charges . It’s effectively 4 or 5 in total as been said on here numerous times . 100 of them could get wiped out in an instance .
Me personally thinks we’ll get charged with non cooperation and that’s it
 
TheThirdDeano said:
Just floating out the idea that the pl have lost so as a final fuck you they’ve asked us to delay announcement as long as possible in the guise of preparing for fallout but really they’re trying to disrupt one last summer as much as possible
Click to expand...
I think if the PL have lost, City will announce the fact regardless of what the PL want them to do. Why wouldn't you? We owe them nothing, certainly not the consideration of helping them save a bit of face.
 
Pezzer2 said:
You’re getting sucked into this 115 charges . It’s effectively 4 or 5 in total as been said on here numerous times . 100 of them could get wiped out in an instance .
Me personally thinks we’ll get charged with non cooperation and that’s it
Click to expand...
Agreed. WE haven't given the PL the evidence they need because there isn't any so they'll charge us with non co-operation.
 
coolcity said:
I've done the maths on both City and United many times, especially to try to shut up some of those morons who believe we must have cooked the books because what we have achieved isn't viable any other way, and proven it easily adds up. Maths IS one of my strong points. I've done the maths on United over the same period, circa the past 15 years and I can't make it work at all.
Click to expand...

It’s bonkers they looked at the business model to make it run leaner and made initial redundancies. All of a sudden they lose a final and don’t have European football another 200 plus people immediately have to go. What are they hiding?
 
coolcity said:
Because it's not 115 things, it's half a dozen duplicated over time. For example, if you get a parking ticket it's one offence, one charge. If you leave the car there and get another one the next day, it's two charges. If you continue to leave it there and continue to get tickets you end up with dozens of them, but it's the same charge repeated, not 115 different ones.

I've said from day one that the PL have nothing and that's why it's taken so long. They want city to provide the evidence for them because they haven't got any, that's why they keep saying city are "not co-operating". But you can't provide evidence of nothing if you haven't done anything wrong.

Given the time period involved, why hasn't a single shred of evidence come to light unless we haven't actually done anything wrong?
Click to expand...
I was going write something very similar.
 
feedmpenzaandhewillscore said:
It’s bonkers they looked at the business model to make it run leaner and made initial redundancies. All of a sudden they lose a final and don’t have European football another 200 plus people immediately have to go. What are they hiding?
Click to expand...
Absolutely right, the bits they're saving just doesn't make any sense. For a club with their turnover, bad times or not, it's pocket change. That said, Ratcliffe has always been a tight arse and he is notorious for doing things like this at companies he's bought out so we might be reading too much into it, but as I mentioned earlier there's something not right, the maths don't add up. You can't pay hundreds of millions in interest, keep paying crap players and managers off, win next to nothing for years yet carry on outspending everybody else no matter how you twist the figures. It makes no sense that it continues to happen and nobody's saying anything. That's why I find the 115 so galling.
 
halfcenturyup said:
This is true. He may he a great financial guy (or not) but he is no lawyer, that's for sure.

Surprised by de Marco saying the most likely outcome is some charges sticking and some not. Unless he is only talking about non-cooperation, what on earth can he be basing that on?
Click to expand...

Nothing surprising here, it's almost a banker. The only way he will be wrong is if either side gets a 100% victory, which is unlikely, given that most people think we will be found against with the non-cooperation charges.
 
coolcity said:
Absolutely right, the bits they're saving just doesn't make any sense. For a club with their turnover, bad times or not, it's pocket change. That said, Ratcliffe has always been a tight arse and he is notorious for doing things like this at companies he's bought out so we might be reading too much into it, but as I mentioned earlier there's something not right, the maths don't add up. You can't pay hundreds of millions in interest, keep paying crap players and managers off, win next to nothing for years yet carry on outspending everybody else no matter how you twist the figures. It makes no sense that it continues to happen and nobody's saying anything. That's why I find the 115 so galling.
Click to expand...

The PLs primary stake holders in setting it up were United, Liverpool, Everton, Arsenal and Spurs. Is it pure coincidence that one of the clubs that benefited the most in their growth from the PLs creation is now a billion in debt and getting their buddies at the Premier League to point the finger a City to call us cheats?
 
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