Football Leaks/Der Spiegel articles

[cleavers]

so why this sensationalism?

See my earlier post.

 

[cleavers]

I do that frequently. I have been bannned off red cafe more times than I have on here.

Now that really is unbelievable ;-)

 

[BlueAnorak]

Just a slight point of information. We wouldn't have passed FFP if they hadn't changed the Annex XI rules but we would, in principle, have avoided sanctions.

Thanks for that.

 

[SilverFox2]

But was he paying it? The only thing I can see relating to that is that Aabar were paying £3m a year but we needed another £12m from somewhere. So could that have come from Etisalat, the Abu Dhabi Tourist Authority and there was another Abu Dhadi sponsor whose name escapes me. If each of those put in £3m that's the extra £12m.

I agree, our owner simply found the shortfall elsewhere. Companies ebb and flow with their profitability, our owner invests in Companies that legally allow investment eg Barclays unlike uefa who illegally put up barriers to entry.

 

[Academica]

Mate it's the derby next week. Now I don't know how old you are or how long you've been following us but surely you must have realised that in the week leading up to a derby the most ridiculous stories always seem to hit the headlines. It's not happened yet but Herrera or martial will tell the world how big they are, how there is only one team in Manchester blah blah blah....
This is another non story, the press will lap it up and use it as a stick to beat us with as they can't fuckin stand us.

60 years old and been going for the last 48 years but thanks for telling me what the build up to a derby is like.

 

[Bill]

60 years old and been going for the last 48 years but thanks for telling me what the build up to a derby is like.

ha ha . brilliant post.

 

[Abattoir Blue]

The fact the Guardian reports this story but with not even a hint at any wrongdoing by us shows all you need to know.

 

[BlueAnorak]

But was he paying it? The only thing I can see relating to that is that Aabar were paying £3m a year but we needed another £12m from somewhere. So could that have come from Etisalat, the Abu Dhabi Tourist Authority and there was another couple of Abu Dhadi sponsors whose names escape me. If each of those put in £3m that's the extra £12m.

The email officially states "His Highness". I have checked up and my initial thought looks like it is correct in that "His Highness" in correspondence is the title of the Emir NOT Sheikh Mansour. He would be referred to as "H.H. Sheikh Mansour" or "His Higjness Sheikh Mansour". The article without a name is the Emir. You'd get a bollocking if you got this wrong in any correspondence.

 

[waspish]

The fact the Guardian reports this story but with not even a hint at any wrongdoing by us shows all you need to know.

It’s how the papers/media are today all they care about is clicks.

 

[Exeter Blue I am here]

Meh, I’m bored of it all already. I’m off back to look at my photo of Ruby on the Bake Off thread....