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

[aguero93:20]

Noticed on twitter that musclepharm have signed a sponsorship deal with CFG... In case you wonder what kind of proteinbars you ought to buy

Sorry bud, I'm an animal man, unless they start sponsoring the rags.

 

[mac]

Cayman Islands you say ?

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/football-corruption-case-brit-accused-5799720

Let's just say that City had their accounts in the Cayman Islands and were totally legit. You could bet your house on that article saying at the bottom Man City use the islands for their accounts etc. Just to associate the corruption with us.

 

[inbetween]

Let's just say that City had their accounts in the Cayman Islands and were totally legit. You could bet your house on that article saying at the bottom Man City use the islands for their accounts etc. Just to associate the corruption with us.

As do United, Manchester United Plc was incorporated in the Cayman Islands.

 

[I'm no cynic but...]

As do United, Manchester United Plc was incorporated in the Cayman Islands.

QUIET. You'll give the game away!!!

 

[mac]

As do United, Manchester United Plc was incorporated in the Cayman Islands.

I know but they haven't been quoted. It's just that if there is any way to discredit us the rag media will put it in.

 

[BlueAnorak]

Etihad Response to US Airlines complaint that Etihad violates the US Open Skies charter:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/06/01/airlines-competition-etihad-idUKL1N0YN1WT20150601?rpc=401

The key point for City is that Etihad DENY state funding being given to Etihad to sponsor City

Etihad Airways rejects subsidy claims, attacks U.S. airline 'oligopoly'
(Adds detail on Manchester City football club sponsorship)

By Jeffrey Dastin

(Reuters) - Etihad Airways on Monday issued it strongest response yet to claims that it received market-distorting subsidies, saying it is required to repay loans and that its U.S. competitors have a "condescending" view of non-U.S. law.
The comments by the Abu Dhabi-based carrier mark its latest move to deter the Obama administration from revisiting aviation agreements with the United Arab Emirates and Qatar. U.S. airlines say more than $40 billion in subsidies from the countries have allowed Etihad, Emirates airline and Qatar Airways to begin driving down prices and push competitors out of certain markets, contrary to "Open Skies" agreements negotiated by the United States.
In a 60-page submission to the U.S. government Sunday made publicly available Monday, Etihad said U.S. Open Skies policy did not prohibit airlines from receiving shareholders loans. Etihad's sole shareholder, the government of Abu Dhabi, gave it $5.2 billion with "the express requirement that such loans be repaid by Etihad."
No international trade rules or precedent by the United States exists for addressing airline subsidy claims, complicating the U.S. government review of the matter.
Etihad said Open Skies policy does not define subsidy, but its main concern is to stop subsidies from lowering airfare artificially.
Citing a study it commissioned, Etihad said its published fares from April 2013 to March 2015 fell "generally" within the range of the fares of its opponents: namely, Delta Air Lines Inc , United Continental Holdings Inc and American Airlines Group Inc.
Other complaints by these airlines "take a very condescending view of non-U.S. law," Etihad added.
The U.S. airlines say Etihad has received a $501 million benefit because the UAE does not tax travelers connecting through its airports. Etihad said the rule applies to all carriers.
Etihad also said it funded its sponsorship of the Manchester City football club from its own liquidity, countering claims that Abu Dhabi covered the reportedly $640 million deal.
It summed the allegations as "little more than a regulatory attempt to further cement [U.S. airlines'] oligopoly."
Jill Zuckman, spokeswoman for the U.S airline-union Partnership for Open & Fair Skies, said in a statement, "Government to government consultations are entirely appropriate given that Etihad has taken billions of dollars in subsidies." (Reporting by Jeffrey Dastin in Los Angeles; Editing by Bernard Orr)

 

[stony]

Etihad Response to US Airlines complaint that Etihad violates the US Open Skies charter:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/06/01/airlines-competition-etihad-idUKL1N0YN1WT20150601?rpc=401

The key point for City is that Etihad DENY state funding being given to Etihad to sponsor City

For a country built on capitalism they sure don't like competition. The American airlines did their best to scupper Concorde at the time.

 

[SilverFox2]

I'm sure it happens in many other sectors but perhaps the Airlines dispute is just an extension of the Boeing / Airbus dispute who have been accusing each other in similar fashion for many years usually about state aid subsidising deals etc..
Inevitable I suppose that City are mentioned but it just shows how big a Club we have become in USA.

I note that the response accuses the US Airlines of 'Oligopoly', very similar to our view that the G14 control(led) UEFA decisions to exert a 'barrier to entry' form of Cartel in football.

 

[Aytoun]

Gill will have been told exactly what to do by the glassmen. This FIFA business is going to be incandescent in America & will be no good for their business, even though everyone knows he has nothing at all to do with the rags.

 

[gazzaa2]

We could be saved again if Gill takes up the FIFA job now.