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

[gordondaviesmoustache]

To be fair I think they both did

What’s fair got to do with it? Have you seen how useless that fucking ambulance chaser from Walsall is?

 

[Dirty Harry]

To be fair I think they both did

Arsene Wenger enjoyed watching it apparently .

 

[BringBackSwales]

What’s fair got to do with it? Have you seen how useless that fucking ambulance chaser from Walsall is?

He has a way with goats though. Not unlike you and Jefferson

 

[BluessinceHydeRoad]

I’m with you that it’s a source of reassurance that Khaldoon is as adamant that we have done nothing wrong as he is, but I’m not with you on the last couple of sentences. I actually don’t think UEFA has anything other than those emails in its armoury, but those emails are pretty unequivocal in their content (several different ones all on the same theme - namely you pay a fraction of the sponsorship, Sheikh Mansour will make up the rest) and they have been accepted as being of real evidential weight by one set of judges already.
Whilst a set of fully audited accounts would be helpful, if I were a CAS judge (and before anyone starts, I have no legal training whatsoever) I would want more than that. I would want a full and credible explanation for the content of those emails. Hopefully we’ve got one

City should have a set of accounts and the documents required to verify them which have satisfied the audit Uefa demanded in 2014 and our own auditors in every year that these are an accurate record of the club's affairs. The club has pointed this out on several occasions and the auditors have confirmed their view that the accounts are full and accurate. Etihad have confirmed that they have fulfilled all their contractual obligations. If this is the case it seems that two conclusions follow : that the emails may be embarrassing but they are not in any way evidence of any falsification of the accounts and secondly that UEFA cannot have any other reliable evidence of a falsification of the accounts because none can exist. I speculate that this is the position outlined by Khaldoon and Sorriano and one put forward by our counsel. I don't know which expert witnesses we might have called but Pearce would not be one if we were bent on showing that the emails bore no connection to what actually happened, which is the situation revealed by the accounts and allied documents.

That's my view, belief and speculation but City would never ask me to speak on their behalf in a twelvemonth of Sundays. Nevertheless I can't see how UEFA can show our accounts to be falsified if what the club has told us is true. As I've said many times, I trust and believe the club.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

He has a way with goats though. A bit like you and Jefferson

I’ve tried with Jefferson, but he’s having none of it. He says they look at him funny. Say it puts him off his stroke, which is fair enough.

So just me and the chair, then.

 

[bluemanchester]

The following is directly copied from the Mediapart article linked earlier. We don't get to see the actual "we can do what we want" email just the bolded bit below:

Simon Pearce, a non-executive director at Manchester City, allegedly had another idea: “We could do a backdated contract for the next two years,” worth £5m a year, which “could be paid immediately”. Essentially modifying contracts.

How would the sponsors react to this? Pearce was apparently not worried: “the ones that I have real control over are Abu Dhabi Tourism Authority (ADTA) and Aabar… We can do what we want.”

Shortly thereafter, ADTA’s sponsorship fee goes up by £5.5m, Ethiad’s fee by £1.5m and Aabar’s by £500k. Chumillas writes: “We have decided with Simon Pearce to modify the terms of certain sponsorship contracts with AD (Abu Dhabi).”

An audit that was undertaken at the demand of UEFA in 2014 concluded that the value of the contracts with Manchester City’s four Abu Dhabi sponsors, which made them €140m a year, were worth half according to market value. The sponsors don’t care, according to Mediapart, as it is Sheikh Mansour who is secretly funding them. Already in 2010, Pearce had planned for a £15m contribution from Aabar, before reassuring the firm: “We have discussed it, the yearly contribution of Aabar will be £3m. The £12m remaining will come from another source procured by His Highness.”

Well we will know soon enough. It has been an interesting wait.

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

Just on a point of order but the G14 only existed between 2000 and 2002. In 2002 they admitted 4 more teams, thus effectively becoming the G18. They disbanded in 2008, before setting up the European Club Association. There were 16 founder members of that group with Utd and Chelsea being the English reps. There are 109 ‘ordinary member clubs’ of which 6 are from England made up of the 5 usual suspects plus City.
I know I’m not really adding to the debate but it’s accurate to call them the cartel and it’s inaccurate to call them the G14. Judgements could get overturned on such matters....

 

[remember arthur mann]

Well we will know soon enough. It has been an interesting wait.

 

[The Future’s Blue!]

‘I will not accept for this club to be used as a diversionary tactic on poor investment decisions from other clubs’.

Therein Is the understanding of why we are now in this situation.

 

[M18CTID]

The following is directly copied from the Mediapart article linked earlier. We don't get to see the actual "we can do what we want" email just the bolded bit below:

Simon Pearce, a non-executive director at Manchester City, allegedly had another idea: “We could do a backdated contract for the next two years,” worth £5m a year, which “could be paid immediately”. Essentially modifying contracts.

How would the sponsors react to this? Pearce was apparently not worried: “the ones that I have real control over are Abu Dhabi Tourism Authority (ADTA) and Aabar… We can do what we want.”

Shortly thereafter, ADTA’s sponsorship fee goes up by £5.5m, Ethiad’s fee by £1.5m and Aabar’s by £500k. Chumillas writes: “We have decided with Simon Pearce to modify the terms of certain sponsorship contracts with AD (Abu Dhabi).”

An audit that was undertaken at the demand of UEFA in 2014 concluded that the value of the contracts with Manchester City’s four Abu Dhabi sponsors, which made them €140m a year, were worth half according to market value. The sponsors don’t care, according to Mediapart, as it is Sheikh Mansour who is secretly funding them. Already in 2010, Pearce had planned for a £15m contribution from Aabar, before reassuring the firm: “We have discussed it, the yearly contribution of Aabar will be £3m. The £12m remaining will come from another source procured by His Highness.”

Re the bolded bit at the end. Not wanting to get into all this business again of who His Highness is referring to, but even assuming it’s our owner it doesn’t say he’ll be funding the difference. It just says he’ll be procuring it from another source. That source could easily be ADEC and not ADUG, and let’s face it - he’d be the most obvious person within the club to arrange it with ADEC.