Search results

These numbers are not correct. The SCR wage number is not going to be that high. Even if total is £500m, the SCR part is going to be £375m at worst. And average trading profit is higher than £15m too.

I don't come on here to discuss things generally but I have mentioned our wage bill many times on social media. It is too high for what is on the pitch. But no I don't think 115 has played a material part - who knows maybe in one or two isolated cases but I doubt it.

Net spend is not a particularly good metric as it depends a) what you went into the period with b) the quality of sellable young players. Net spend doesn't deal with the wage run rate. Bouaddi is 99% certain to sign even if Rodri stays (unlikely). And they are planning for more big signings...

Everyone finds a way as we can see. Arsenal are doing well financially, Spurs have underspent and how Chelsea hit their settlement agreement with UEFA nobody knows. I still think Chelsea hope to sell a big player to us before the close of the window.

We've upped a number of players wages, Anderson is on very big money, we only had 6 months of Guehi (discounted fee balanced by wages) and Semenyo in 25/26, Grealish is currently back being paid by City etc etc. All adds up. The new regs are easy to comply with

City have a top team but they are as human as the next team and there is huge change this season. We all know how such change has impacted other clubs. If you don't want to see my view or anyone elses and you want to assume the team have everything completely under control always, that is great...

I am not really talking about current season SCR and UEFA tests. I'm talking more generally and about prudence and sustainability.

Again, I'll answer questions how I want. Even in the best case (sale of Savinho (will be replaced), sale of Reijnders (may not), sale of Rodri (surely replaced), sale of Rico (good profit but relatively lower wages and no amortisation charge) purchase of Bouaddi (£25m pa min in wages and...

Too biased, not biased enough... so fucking boring. The spending is clearly a very big issue and there are many clubs over the years where red flags should have been raised earlier. City's wage bill per the UEFA full measure in 24/25 with no bonuses was £468m. Even after the free transfers...

It is ridiculous but nothing is going on of the type of thing you are inferring. You can still find occasional very long waits - stumbled on this one yesterday - it happens. It shouldn't but it does...

They agreed a sanction agreement with the PL so answers it re PL, agreed a settlement with UEFA so answers it re UEFA, agreed a settlement with HMRC so answers it re HMRC and the FA case was specifically agent and third party interest related, so answers it re that. Auditors clearly mislead and...

The circle on Chelsea (and Everton for that matter) can be and was far smaller than City. We don't know if the City case could be kept secret because it hasn't been tested. But for those that still believe its been out for months, you must also believe City lost in some way and either they are...

All these cases that you and the MHs and his cronies mention are not like City. City is like a company AFTER a SFO investigation has been launched. Everybody goes into a new mode at that point. Everything is considered in the light of the allegations made. So I don't really agree there are the...

I agree - nothing is irrefutable. It is just a PR line. But there is a big difference between the audit of a company with no allegations of fraud and the audit of a company with a detailed list of alleged wholesale fraud in a highly public situation. The idea that BDO still take no special...

One other thing I'd say - litigation is not about finding one email or one extract and arguing its a smoking gun. It is quite attritional and a battle at every step of the way and ultimately about a body of evidence one way or the other - I have been trying to explain this for years including in...

There is no real way to block fully and you can't stop people talking about you even if you do.

It is another example of how individual, out of context statements won’t make a case - again as I have repeatedly explained to him. Likewise, just because he’s concluded Pearce lied under oath is not the point - his view is irrelevant. I have repeatedly explained publicly that tribunals are slow...

No. It all post dates the hearing so it has no evidence on any of it to consider

Later

Interesting if I do say so myself