PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[BringBackSwales]

VOOMER.

(It was an example)

An example of an irrelevance?

 

[JewelZee]

Is that a fact though?

Yes...

 

[Metalartin]

So some are getting themselves into a frenzied panic based on if, buts and maybes, while doubting the club's statement on the evidence they have? For wishy washy "They would say that though, wouldn't they" reasons(sounds familiar).

"Naah, you're alright", not joining you on that ride just yet. We could do with some disclaimers on some these opinions though, for the lurkers not to get carried away.

 

[BringBackSwales]

Was just watching one of the documentaries on 93:20, the guy who is a really good commentator (whose name I have forgotten cos I am an FOC) who says shortly after Sergio’s goal “where does football go from here”? Who’d have thought the answer would be driven by corrupt agenda driven uefa, premier league and media cunts

 

[Bluearmy]

this was already proved in CAS not to be an attempt to disguise payments so why is it being brought back up?

All they have?

 

[wolviedinho]

Uh... Jonathan Rowland and Fordham weren't brought up at CAS at all.

That diagram and explanation doesn’t look great tbh but no matter how it looks as long as city can prove nothing illegal(owner funding)has taken place then it don’t really matter.

You can see why questions can be asked but we don’t have city’s full response on paper. Bend but not break is a fine line.

 

[balotellishaircut]

Was just watching one of the documentaries on 93:20, the guy who is a really good commentator (whose name I have forgotten cos I am an FOC) who says shortly after Sergio’s goal “where does football go from here”? Who’d have thought the answer would be driven by corrupt agenda driven uefa, premier league and media cunts

I think it was Peter Drury, I’m not certain though.

 

[Dribble]

This article was helpful for me. Not confirming its veracity, but seems to provide some useful info regarding image rights. This can be found in the Project Longbow section.

Top soccer club made creative plays to meet sport’s financial rules

Manchester City, owned by a Gulf sheikh, implemented “Project Longbow” to boost income and cut costs as it struggled to meet watchdog’s financial rules.

www.reuters.com

I found this paragraph very interesting...

"Luca Enriques, Professor of Corporate Law at the University of Oxford, said that while a football club might be bound by UEFA’s rules, the club’s sponsors or business partners would not have any legal obligation to follow the governing body’s rules. “I don’t see how you can put third parties under the domain of football rules,” he said."

 

[toffee balls]

Pep is privy to information that not one person on this forum has had the benefit of. He has had reassurances from his closest friends that we are fine and dandy, which is good enough for me.

If we spend the next months and years trying to second guess our BoD, this place will be a madhouse within weeks.

Best to let it play out and enjoy life's rich tapestry.

Well said - I will try.

 

[Goatmeal]

What we know is that City's internal documents involve putting 4 random companies between ADUG and Fordham, 4 companies who do nothing, have no business plan, and involve routing things through the BVI.

That may sound a bit dodgy but is there a rule saying you can’t do that? Is it illegal?
Company I worked for did something similar and were used to protect assets in case the parent company fell into difficulties.
For example, one of them owned the building and rented it back to parent company.