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

[Gordyola]

I've found a document that confirms the Etihad sponsorship was covered by the Executive Council, not ADUG. It was part of the Open Skies case brought by the US airlines against the Gulf ones (Etihad, Qatar & Emirates) and claimed that they were in receipt of huge government subsidies. As part of their defence Etihad had a presentation done for the Crown Prince, MBZ, by consultants Booz Allen.
Link here: http://www.openandfairskies.com/press-releases/newly-unearthed-etihad-documents/

Go to the link saying "major legal submission" and it'll open a PDF. On page 14 it says:

So there you have it. The Etihad sponsorship money, at least that money that wasn't paid from their own funds, came from the Executive Council, not ADUG.

Great work Colin this may well have been part of City's 200pg ignore by UEFA investigator Leterme

 

[Dubai Blue]

I shall ask him what he means by “football clubs should be run by football men”?

By that logic, he presumably believes football journalism should be written by "football men".

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Get your facts straight. Also, FFP is one of the things we're in no danger of breaking. We're constantly controlled and checked upon by every financial regulatory body in Italy.

And there has never been any corruption issues with financial bodies in Italy have there?? Lol

 

[OB1]

From Der-Spiegel leaked email analysis
"As we discussed, the annual direct obligation for Aabar is GBP 3 million," Pearce wrote. "The remaining 12 million GBP requirement will come from alternative sources provided by His Highness."

With just a single sentence, Pearce confirmed the accusations that his club had repeatedly, indignantly rejected: Namely, that His Highness, Sheikh Mansour, paid a portion of the sponsoring money himself!

Der-Spiegel have clearly assumed that His Highness is Sheikh Mansour

Pearce, highly experienced Abu Dhabi protocol, won's have made a simple mistake as BlueAnorak said above doing so leads to being bollocked

We have to hope he didn't make a mistake because City are currently getting bollocked...

 

[Fordyboy46]

Hey, even if this comes crashing in all around us we still have a team to support ( Bury fans haven't), still in a cup final, still potentially several more big games to play this season. Plenty of positives in all this mayhem, keep the faith.

 

[KS55]

Say we win this what happens to the premiership case against us is that one over to?

The prem case rests on the UEFA verdict and would fall if we were cleared by CAS. The prem could quite legitimately bring its own case but they would have to start ab initio and produce evidence. If CAS had declared the email as not cogent, the prem would probably just let it go.
When this is over, we can legitimately ask why the prem, knowing that one of their members was under attack, decided to attack as well. The answer, of course, would be Livar-rags.

 

[Scottish Cityzen]

The emails state 'HH' = High Highness = Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan, the ruler of Abu Dhabi .

Sheikh Mansour and all the other male members of the royal family are 'HE' = His Excellency.

On that point alone there is no validity whatsoever in claims by UEFA or the hostile media that Sheikh Mansour (or ADUG) paid Etihad's sponsorship money.

I hope the above is correct but there is an earlier post on here referencing Sheikh Mansour’s twitter which the username appears to be “HHMansoor” - that account has 1.3 million followers, is that his genuine account and if so it casts confusion on this area of who HH is being referred to?

When I did a quick search there were several titter accounts in his name.

 

[Bluewonder]

Genuine question:
Is the accusation (rightly or wrongly), and the reason for the ban and fine, simply that Sheik Mansour paid into the club via Etihad?
Cheers in advance for any replies

 

[laserblue]

I shall ask him what he means by “football clubs should be run by football men”?

Ask him if he has any thoughts about Sheffield United being Saudi owned, Chelsea and Bournemouth owned by Russian oligarchs, Stoke owned by a family that runs a betting organisation, Brighton owned by a professional gambler, West Ham owned by people who made their money from porn mags and dildos, United owned by a bunch of cowboys with previous experience only in American football and shopping malls, Liverpool run by a shady American with a baseball background whose baseball and football clubs have both been called out for cheating, etc., etc.

 

[Rolee]

Genuine question:
Is the accusation (rightly or wrongly), and the reason for the ban and fine, simply that Sheik Mansour paid into the club via Etihad?
Cheers in advance for any replies

The statement from UEFA doesn't specifically refer to any particular sponsorship but yes the accusation is that declared income from sponsors was overstated.

We're going to have to wait until appeal is over to get the specifics.