City & FFP | 2020/21 Accounts released | Revenues of £569.8m, £2.4m profit (p 2395)

[aguero93:20]

@from a rag,

Stopped reading there.

 

[FanchesterCity]

The problems with these errors are two fold:

1) They are mistakes, and that lends itself to the inevitable question - what other 'mistakes' are there?
2) When the same typographical / clerical mistake happens in two distinct set of accounts, it starts to look like both set of accountants are created in tandem... i.e. not an honest 'as is' representation, but as part of a wider accounting strategy.

They may well be entirely innocent mistakes, but they simply add fuel to the fire, and it also begs the question that if we do make these sort of mistakes, how well founded is our belief that we're in the clear with FFP?

 

[lancs blue]

Garcia is just a typo in set of accounts

On the face of it yes - but the problem is that with the club's accounts being the subject of such intense scrutiny they really need to avoid this sort of basic error - especially a footballing one! The accounts document must surely have gone through a pre-publication review process and not to pick it up gives out an impression of sloppiness that the club could do without. The vultures are out there and they'll pounce on things like this to suggest that if City can't get these basics right then how accurate are the rest of the accounts.

 

[KenTheLandlord]

@from a rag,
Re Lampard. I know you are saying that there is nothing to see here and I would agree with you in normal circumstances but this is yet another in a long line of "iffy" situations involving City over the past few seasons . Start with this issue , why did City not clarify this situation earlier ? why let it get to this ? Also it nearly looks like Lampard himself didn't know who he had signed for . Then there is the latest issue over the hiding of losses in "subsidiary" companies.Transfering of over half the staff to another company within the group of companies , no wider public announcement it just happened and it looks like they were hoping no one would notice and it happened with 2 subsidiaries not just 1 . There's the Garcia issue citing the wrong club & country that he's gone to this is either completely amature or someone was in a hurry to provide figures to someone for a "specific" reason plus it shows a lack of respect to the player Then there was the "Intellectual Property Rights" debacle in 2013 figures where a figure of 22.7m was charged to a sister company within the group this figure was completely made up. Now you can defend your club as most would tend to do but when people are reading 5&6 significant stories about the clubs finances , how they sign players and their basic communication skills you gotta start thinking that City are not being 100% honest . Rules are for all not just some

If that rag **** wants to talk iffy, there are still 99 questions sat the desk unanswered.
Needs to get his own crooks sorted out.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

@from a rag,
Re Lampard. I know you are saying that there is nothing to see here and I would agree with you in normal circumstances but this is yet another in a long line of "iffy" situations involving City over the past few seasons . Start with this issue , why did City not clarify this situation earlier ? why let it get to this ? Also it nearly looks like Lampard himself didn't know who he had signed for . Then there is the latest issue over the hiding of losses in "subsidiary" companies.Transfering of over half the staff to another company within the group of companies , no wider public announcement it just happened and it looks like they were hoping no one would notice and it happened with 2 subsidiaries not just 1 . There's the Garcia issue citing the wrong club & country that he's gone to this is either completely amature or someone was in a hurry to provide figures to someone for a "specific" reason plus it shows a lack of respect to the player Then there was the "Intellectual Property Rights" debacle in 2013 figures where a figure of 22.7m was charged to a sister company within the group this figure was completely made up. Now you can defend your club as most would tend to do but when people are reading 5&6 significant stories about the clubs finances , how they sign players and their basic communication skills you gotta start thinking that City are not being 100% honest . Rules are for all not just some

If that rag **** wants to talk iffy, there are still 99 questions sat the desk unanswered.
Needs to get his own crooks sorted out.

I think the questions have been answered, mate. Just not publicly. Taggart was certainly unusually obedient towards the Glazers, given all the circumstances.

 

[moomba]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

2) When the same typographical / clerical mistake happens in two distinct set of accounts, it starts to look like both set of accountants are created in tandem... i.e. not an honest 'as is' representation, but as part of a wider accounting strategy.

More likely to be a mistake in the source document.

 

[TrueBlue1705]

One thing at City needs sorting out for sure ...... people doing the finances are making us look like tw*ts with schoolboy errors .... Given they will be getting paid a fortune they either need to get their sh*t together or City bosses need to boot them...

 

[portisheadblue]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Question for the rag please;

Who paid off the Glazer's PIK debt of about $400 million just before you were re registered in Cayman Islands ????

And the answer is ........

 

[BluessinceHydeRoad]

@from a rag,
Re Lampard. I know you are saying that there is nothing to see here and I would agree with you in normal circumstances but this is yet another in a long line of "iffy" situations involving City over the past few seasons . Start with this issue , why did City not clarify this situation earlier ? why let it get to this ? Also it nearly looks like Lampard himself didn't know who he had signed for . Then there is the latest issue over the hiding of losses in "subsidiary" companies.Transfering of over half the staff to another company within the group of companies , no wider public announcement it just happened and it looks like they were hoping no one would notice and it happened with 2 subsidiaries not just 1 . There's the Garcia issue citing the wrong club & country that he's gone to this is either completely amature or someone was in a hurry to provide figures to someone for a "specific" reason plus it shows a lack of respect to the player Then there was the "Intellectual Property Rights" debacle in 2013 figures where a figure of 22.7m was charged to a sister company within the group this figure was completely made up. Now you can defend your club as most would tend to do but when people are reading 5&6 significant stories about the clubs finances , how they sign players and their basic communication skills you gotta start thinking that City are not being 100% honest . Rules are for all not just some

I think the simple thing to do would be to register in the Cayman isles.

 

[FanchesterCity]

2) When the same typographical / clerical mistake happens in two distinct set of accounts, it starts to look like both set of accountants are created in tandem... i.e. not an honest 'as is' representation, but as part of a wider accounting strategy.

More likely to be a mistake in the source document.

Of course, it's a mistake. Any court in the land can see it's a mistake and Garcia's transfer is well publicised. The point is, if they are using the same source document, why? One set of company accounts should not be related to another set of accounts, otherwise they look like they are inextricably linked and not operating independently.

The devil is in the detail, and whilst one mistake does not make the entire accounts incorrect, it just opens up a door for more suspicion and scrutiny.

We're clearly not trying to con anybody that Garcia went to a different club! it just looks bad, and can only erode confidence rather than instil it.