PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[domalino]

I'm begging to wish I'd paid attention at school.

Simplified version :

Normal way of doing things.

1) Club negotiates buying image rights with player when they join.
2) Club pays player for using image over the season.

City's Fordham way.

1) Club negotiates buying image rights with player when they join.
2) Create new company called MCFC Image rights ltd.
3) Club sells shares in MCFC Image rights Ltd to a third company called Fordham for £25m.
3) Fordham pays players and City for image rights over the season.


It was actually a little bit more complicated in reality and involved David and Jonathan Rowland (Conservative donors and friends of Abu Dhabi) and a series of shell companies to disguise it all.

 

[i kne albert davy]

OK so normal way of doing things.

1) Club negotiates buying image rights with player when they join.
2) Club pays player for using image over the season.

City's Fordham way.

1) Club negotiates buying image rights with player when they join.
2) Create new company called MCFC Image rights ltd.
3) Club sells shares in MCFC Image rights Ltd to a third company called Fordham for £25m.
3) Fordham pays players and City for image rights over the season.

Is that good or bad for us though.

 

[domalino]

Is that good or bad for us though.

If the Premier League investigators convince the independent panel that it happened, it's very bad.

 

[i kne albert davy]

If the Premier League investigators satisfy the independent panel that it happened, it's very bad.

Oh dear.

 

[Dribble]

But as I understand it we actually RECEIVED money from the image rights company who then went on to pay it out ( double whammy).

My understanding is we sold the image rights to this company & paid them for the rights to use the images.

The issue seems to be that the company (albeit separate to City) was owned by a City related company. To be honest, I've seen no reports that money was paid to this company by City.

Again, I don't know how this company was funded, eg: Purely by image rights revenue, or was it owner funded too, which is perfectly legal, but could be perceived as City paying itself for image rights, hence keeping roughly £20m per season off our books.

Perhaps @Prestwich_Blue could elaborate, clarify & correct where necessary...

 

[domalino]

Oh dear.

Yes, I think if it were proven to be the case, it would satisfy the really high bar for proving dishonest behaviour that @projectriver talks about.

It suggests the club packaged up a loss making part of the company, sold it to another ADUG controlled group for £25m and then went to great lengths to disguise it though a shell company in the British Virgin Islands.

 

[HelloCity]

It was actually a little bit more complicated in reality and involved David and Jonathan Rowland (Conservative donors and friends of Abu Dhabi) and a series of shell companies to disguise it all.

Is this fact?

 

[bluemonkey71]

If the Premier League investigators convince the independent panel that it happened, it's very bad.

How do they need convincing if they have the same info as above? Is this your understanding of the flow of money or it’s fact pulled out of the hacked mails?

 

[domalino]

My understanding is we sold the image rights to this company & paid them for the rights to use the images.

The issue seems to be that the company (albeit separate to City) was owned by a City related company. To be honest, I've seen no reports that money was paid to this company by City.

Again, I don't know how this company was funded, eg: Purely by image rights revenue, or was it owner funded too, which is perfectly legal, but could be perceived as City paying itself for image rights, hence keeping roughly £20m per season off our books.

Perhaps @Prestwich_Blue could elaborate, clarify & correct where necessary...

In one of the emails, Simon Pearce writes to Jonathan Rowland promising that ADUG will fund Fordham with £11m per year.

 

[Gaylord du Bois]

OK so normal way of doing things.

1) Club negotiates buying image rights with player when they join.
2) Club pays player for using image over the season.

Fordham way
1) Club negotiates buying image rights with player when they join.
2) Create new company called MCFC Image rights ltd.
3) Club sells shares in MCFC Image rights Ltd to a third company called Fordham for £30m.
3) Fordham pays players and City for image rights over the season.

Thanks for that. It looks like this is the one, which could be exploited to give us a kick in the swingers, then.