Re: "City face Euro Expulsion"
Ding.
FFP regulations are perfectly clear and have been through the review stage where everybody had their chance to challenge them.
There is on potential challenge to be made; that £20m of income from related parties is above fair value. We could lose a couple of million off of our total.
That's it.
Despite what David Conn completely incorrect writes, and it angers me that an ex-lawyer can be so wrong on such an important detail because he wants it to be correct, the Etihad deal cannot be challenged as a related party transaction as none of the definitions for what related parties mean in the UEFA document fit the relationship between City and Etihad.
Prestwich_Blue said:The rags PR machine is getting a bit desperate. Anything to take the pressure off wee Davey.
Ding.
FFP regulations are perfectly clear and have been through the review stage where everybody had their chance to challenge them.
There is on potential challenge to be made; that £20m of income from related parties is above fair value. We could lose a couple of million off of our total.
That's it.
Despite what David Conn completely incorrect writes, and it angers me that an ex-lawyer can be so wrong on such an important detail because he wants it to be correct, the Etihad deal cannot be challenged as a related party transaction as none of the definitions for what related parties mean in the UEFA document fit the relationship between City and Etihad.