I still don't get where they feel they have a case to be outraged. The rules were never supposed to stop fair investment for a club in a position to do so(they lied to the football world about that). One season in to when FFP really came into effect, City had already won their first PL title, were in a fairly modern stadium able to sell naming rights, were planning to build a state of the art training complex with naming rights available. Are they seriously arguing City weren't in the summer of 2012, in a brilliant position to attract sponsors and well worth their current deal?
They keep going on about the performance of Etihad Airways and the other Abu Dhabi companies, is why the sponsorship is fake and wrong too. The fact that Sheikh Mansour with his club as champions, with so much going for it, instead of attracting a new sponsor, wanted to leverage City's position to help Etihad Airways. It's not that hard to grasp is it? That's the reason companies bother to sponsor at all to begin with, it's advertising and brand recognition and so on.
I'm trying to get my head around the whole Etihad thing, starting since we were taken over in 2008, so correct me if I'm wrong anyone:
Etihad became our shirt Sponsor in May 2009 at a value of £20m per season to begin with. That was more than we worth worth at the time but £20m a year isn't ludicrous, especially for a club that needed investment.
In July 2011, The City of Manchester Stadium was set to become The Etihad Stadium. City announced a new deal with Etihad Airways for a new sponsorship deal worth £400m over 10 years. It extended the Shirt Sponsorship, added Stadium naming rights and included the eventual Etihad Campus naming rights. To justify the extra £20m a season maybe it was £15m a season for the Stadium Naming and £5m for the Etihad Campus naming. Or maybe the shirt sponsorship was increased to £30m a season and the extra £10 came from stadium and campus naming.
In 2015 two things happened which could have justified an improved deal the £265m deal with Chinese investors who bought shares in the club in Dec and the stadium expansion. There were reports of an increased deal that year, The Mirror were reporting £80m a season which is not likely and they aren't a reliable source to begin with:
From Forbes in 2016(note it's in dollars not pounds):