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

[Bald fraud]

Operation mudslinging is still well and truly still an ongoing enterprise then I see. If we've fought off UEFA then surely we can do the same to the Premier League if they try one on. This is just another attempt to sully our name in the media to tarnish fans views. Most importantly though and the only thing I'm mildly upset about is that it's also saying to any other potential sponsors/investors "Look, do you really want all this shit thrown at you should you partner up with City?" It may put a few off.

And that’s all they are trying to do. Blacken our name so badly that no business would want to have their name associated with us. Leaving is to rely on “related party” sponsorships and for us to be told what is fair value and they can keep us in check telling us what we can spend wankers

 

[salfordbluetrue]

I believe that this is indeed part of a campaign waged by the American owned clubs to ensure that the only finance coming into the game comes through those streams which favour them so that a hefty proportion of that finance doesn't actually stay in the game for very long. This approach is typical of corporate America where legislation appear to be a weapon to make competition difficult rather that promote prosperity and consumer satisfaction through competition. But the "sneaky six" or whatever we want to call them seem to be driven to ever more desperate lengths to force English football down a road which is quite clearly contrary to tradition and law. FFP limited owner investment despite the clear statement in both UK and EU law that any attempt to do so is prohibited and any sanctions imposed to enforce such a step are null and void. The courts have shown on several occasions that the football authorities must obey the law of the land not the wishes of those running the game. Steps to impose "fair market value" and ideas on "associated party deals" are no more than mumbo jumbo to disguise the fact that the revenues of clubs owned by non-Americans will be controlled and their decisions made for them by their "competitors". Not only does this appear aimed at ruining clubs owned by those from a specific area but it seems to be the work of a cartel. Even worse it sends out the message to the British government that it may encourage and welcome investment from the UAE and Saudi Arabia in every sector of the UK economy apart from football, where there investment must be subject to approval by an American cartel. The courts will not be interested in the rules of the game but they will be very interested in upholding the law of the land.

They may also be more interested in the finances of some of the cartel than in those of Manchester City which have been subjected to hostile forensic examination on more than one occasion. Why are the accounts of a club not far from here filed in a tax haven? Why do they pay so little in tax? I'm sure that some big city law firms can find many more questions that a certain club might not want asking, before other clubs are asked about sponsorship deals. The cartel may find that not only do they lose but they also get a very bloody nose.

A good post i am hoping the Tax man wins, after all City put money into Britain where the Cartel all take it out. come on Britain think of you pensioners :)

 

[Marklr]

The old City are state owned "argument" for me again:

https://www.quora.com/profile/Dom-Moore-2
"Dom Moore

· 32m ago

No matter how many times you copy and paste that response on the many posts ousting City, it doesn't make it true.
City are majority owned by Sheikh Mansour, an active member of the Abu Dhabi Royal family and Deputy Prime Minister of UAE. This is worldwide common knowledge.
According to accounts submitted by City, he has invest almost TWO BILLION DOLLARS into the club. This is recorded on accounting balance sheets. This is a fact.
Your other income has come from inflated sponsorship fees from organisations also owned by the UAE/Abu Dhabi state (Etihad) for which you have been reprimanded for. A disgusting and unsporting practice.
There is no debate to be had here. No one compus mentis opposes this.
You can have your trophies, but you get the bittersweet shame with it.

Upvote

Reply"


This is from Quora which is a question and answer site. Many googled questions get answered on here.
Does anybody fancy writing a reply to the bit about being state owned?
Not the last bit...that's easy for me.

 

[manimanc]

The old City are state owned "argument" for me again:

https://www.quora.com/profile/Dom-Moore-2
"Dom Moore

· 32m ago

No matter how many times you copy and paste that response on the many posts ousting City, it doesn't make it true.
City are majority owned by Sheikh Mansour, an active member of the Abu Dhabi Royal family and Deputy Prime Minister of UAE. This is worldwide common knowledge.
According to accounts submitted by City, he has invest almost TWO BILLION DOLLARS into the club. This is recorded on accounting balance sheets. This is a fact.
Your other income has come from inflated sponsorship fees from organisations also owned by the UAE/Abu Dhabi state (Etihad) for which you have been reprimanded for. A disgusting and unsporting practice.
There is no debate to be had here. No one compus mentis opposes this.
You can have your trophies, but you get the bittersweet shame with it.

Upvote

Reply"


This is from Quora which is a question and answer site. Many googled questions get answered on here.
Does anybody fancy writing a reply to the bit about being state owned?
Not the last bit...that's easy for me.

Here's a reply.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

The old City are state owned "argument" for me again:

https://www.quora.com/profile/Dom-Moore-2
"Dom Moore

· 32m ago

No matter how many times you copy and paste that response on the many posts ousting City, it doesn't make it true.
City are majority owned by Sheikh Mansour, an active member of the Abu Dhabi Royal family and Deputy Prime Minister of UAE. This is worldwide common knowledge.
According to accounts submitted by City, he has invest almost TWO BILLION DOLLARS into the club. This is recorded on accounting balance sheets. This is a fact.
Your other income has come from inflated sponsorship fees from organisations also owned by the UAE/Abu Dhabi state (Etihad) for which you have been reprimanded for. A disgusting and unsporting practice.
There is no debate to be had here. No one compus mentis opposes this.
You can have your trophies, but you get the bittersweet shame with it.

Upvote

Reply"


This is from Quora which is a question and answer site. Many googled questions get answered on here.
Does anybody fancy writing a reply to the bit about being state owned?
Not the last bit...that's easy for me.

The Queen owns racehorses. Are they state-owned? Prince Charles set up Duchy Originals (which eh subsequently sold). Was that state-owned? The answer is, of course, no.

That's complete nonsense about Etihad & other inflated sponsorships. Even UEFA accepted that Etihad was fair value and we certainly weren't sanctioned or reprimanded. The only issue was the second-tier sponsorships (Aabar & Etisalat I think) where we voluntarily agreed to keep them at their current levels.

Has Sheikh Mansour put in nearly $2bn? Yes he has but some of that was the actual purchase price and at least $400m was for infrastructure (CFA & SS3). And so what? An owner has invested in a run-down company, made it successful and profitable, and increased the value of his investment by at least a factor of 2.

 

[domalino]

The Queen owns racehorses. Are they state-owned? Prince Charles set up Duchy Originals (which eh subsequently sold). Was that state-owned? The answer is, of course, no.

That's complete nonsense about Etihad & other inflated sponsorships. Even UEFA accepted that Etihad was fair value and we certainly weren't sanctioned or reprimanded. The only issue was the second-tier sponsorships (Aabar & Etisalat I think) where we voluntarily agreed to keep them at their current levels.

Has Sheikh Mansour put in nearly $2bn? Yes he has but some of that was the actual purchase price and at least $400m was for infrastructure (CFA & SS3). And so what? An owner has invested in a run-down company, made it successful and profitable, and increased the value of his investment by at least a factor of 2.

If you’re going to defend the club and it’s ownership, don’t waste everyone’s time with a completely dishonest comparison of a constitutional monarchy and an absolute monarchy. Stick to the stuff that’s not going to crumble under the tiniest amount of scrutiny.

 

[KS55]

If you’re going to defend the club and it’s ownership, don’t waste everyone’s time with a completely dishonest comparison of a constitutional monarchy and an absolute monarchy. Stick to the stuff that’s not going to crumble under the tiniest amount of scrutiny.

A huge non sequitur if ever I saw one.

 

[Jesus H Gabz]

If you’re going to defend the club and it’s ownership, don’t waste everyone’s time with a completely dishonest comparison of a constitutional monarchy and an absolute monarchy. Stick to the stuff that’s not going to crumble under the tiniest amount of scrutiny.

I’d love a seat on your pedestal, bet it’s reet comfy! some of your posts are insightful, intelligent & offer plenty to a debate, but a lot of em are you just being a wiener & generally trying to take some kind of higher ground, honestly just chill out a bit & stop taking life so serious

 

[Gorton_Tubster]

state owned or not. It all ends when Pep leaves, allk the hatred and bitterness all stops. Whether we're state owned or not matters not a bit, its used to beat you guys over the head until you come crying onto the forums.

THE best answer is "so fkin what, we're winning and you're crying" That is THE only thing that they will listen to. I dont answer ANY questions about City anymore from rival fans, I just tell them they're jealous - Which is the actual truth!

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

state owned or not. It all ends when Pep leaves, allk the hatred and bitterness all stops. Whether we're state owned or not matters not a bit, its used to beat you guys over the head until you come crying onto the forums.

THE best answer is "so fkin what, we're winning and you're crying" That is THE only thing that they will listen to. I dont answer ANY questions about City anymore from rival fans, I just tell them they're jealous - Which is the actual truth!

Not sure you're first paragraph is correct, as I think it will depend upon whether the level of success changes with a new manager in place.

The yank owned clubs will still be forcing the narrative imo because their slice of the pie is affected by our success.