PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[mancity2012_eamo]

What did we ever do to deserve all this shit that's been thrown at us the last few years?

Get successful.

 

[BringBackSwales]

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

That’s him mate

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

What do you want?

If you want to inhabit a world where only things that have been explicitly stated by the club in a public statement are "factual statements" then you should probably just leave this thread and come back in 18 months when there's a verdict, because the only factual statement so far is the PL and City statements from last monday. The other 14,450 posts in this comment are opinion and discourse.

In the meantime, the rest of us are probably going to keep discussing the possibilities using what we have in the public domain and trying to figure out what the club is fighting.

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.

Feel free to offer another theory why the corporate structure was like that if you don't think that's someone disguising it. Or don't, because it won't be a fact.

Fordham wasn't very well disguised. It was originally Manchester City Football Club (Image Rights) Limited and was set up on May 2012. It was shown as a subsidiary company of MCFC & John Macbeath and Simon Cliff were two of the original directors.

A year later, MCFC (IR) Ltd changed its name to Fordham Sports Image Rights Limited and Macbeath & Cliff resigned as directors. But Fordham was still listed under Manchester City Football Club on the Companies House website. You'd hardly need to be Sherlock Holmes to work out there was a connection. Even Eamonn Holmes could have done that.

So they paid for the IP of the image rights and presumably paid them. They only filed abbreviated accounts, just a balance sheet without a P&L account so you can't see what revenue they received, if any. The allegation is that ADUG covered their outgoings via equity investment.

But, as I said, Fordham was there in plain sight, connected to City.

 

[toutmaster]

When is all this shit going to be on panorama bet they are foaming at the mouth

 

[The Stockport Iniesta]

Fordham wasn't very well disguised. It was originally Manchester City Football Club (Image Rights) Limited and was set up on May 2012. It was shown as a subsidiary company of MCFC & John Macbeath and Simon Cliff were two of the original directors.

A year later, MCFC (IR) Ltd changed its name to Fordham Sports Image Rights Limited and Macbeath & Cliff resigned as directors. But Fordham was still listed under Manchester City Football Club on the Companies House website. You'd hardly need to be Sherlock Holmes to work out there was a connection. Even Eamonn Holmes could have done that.

So they paid for the IP of the image rights and presumably paid them. They only filed abbreviated accounts, just a balance sheet without a P&L account so you can't see what revenue they received, if any. The allegation is that ADUG covered their outgoings via equity investment.

But, as I said, Fordham was there in plain sight, connected to City.

If there was anything untoward why didn't uefa go after it Colin?

 

[Cobwebcat]

It’s possible that City kept papers back as they didn’t want our rivals to see our strategy rather than anything illegal. City didn’t disclose all the documents to UEFA and then gave them all to CAS. If I remember correctly CAS fined City because they thought, had the papers been disclosed earlier, it may not have reached CAS in the first place.

Seems like we’ve done the same again. Why hand over documents to your rivals when you have done nothing wrong. Wait for the independent panel and then produce them.

I even think I heard Pep say “wait, we have a lot more documents” When it comes to it out comes the “irrefutable evidence”

We are all speculating but we do have a past example of City’s strategy. It’s reasonable to think we just follow the winning formula of last time.

Thats my theory. It’s not clever or based on law, but it is what happened last time. In my job, if I don’t understand something complicated (all the time) I look for a previous example and try to copy it!

My money is on us.

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

You do know that once a hacker a past your security, they can get pretty much anywhere on your network if you have the time & skills right?

Pretty certain it was our email server which got hacked, so Pinto would’ve had access to ALL of the clubs emails

I find that all the more remarkable, that out of the millions of emails there are only an isolated handful taken out of context and at times spliced together, that are supposedly the smoking gun.
I do find that mind boggling, that this is the basis of a case against City.

It doesn’t surprise me, but it always seemed like clutching at straws to me.

Having said that I do think we’ve already lost and the objective of our detractors has been achieved.

There is no proof of innocence. It’s immaterial. I’m growing to hate this game the more I learn about it.

The only victory that would change this for me is for us to get a counter message out there to fans of the rest of the league that a cartel is running this show and the rest of the league are just complicit puppets.

I don’t see that happening though.

 

[aguero93:20]

It wasn't an individual email account that was hacked, it was the whole server meaning Pinto had access to EVERYTHING contained on the server.

I'm comforted by the idea that this would mean he had to watch all Kolarov's harlem shake videos.

 

[domalino]

Fordham wasn't very well disguised. It was originally Manchester City Football Club (Image Rights) Limited and was set up on May 2012. It was shown as a subsidiary company of MCFC & John Macbeath and Simon Cliff were two of the original directors.

A year later, MCFC (IR) Ltd changed its name to Fordham Sports Image Rights Limited and Macbeath & Cliff resigned as directors. But Fordham was still listed under Manchester City Football Club on the Companies House website. You'd hardly need to be Sherlock Holmes to work out there was a connection. Even Eamonn Holmes could have done that.

So they paid for the IP of the image rights and presumably paid them. They only filed abbreviated accounts, just a balance sheet without a P&L account so you can't see what revenue they received, if any. The allegation is that ADUG covered their outgoings via equity investment.

But, as I said, Fordham was there in plain sight, connected to City.

Come on now, I never said Fordham’s existence was disguised, the allegation is that the money came from ADUG via the Rowlands 4 companies and it’s that which seem to be getting disguised.

I’m interested in hearing your reasoning for such an obscure corporate structure appearing in a City documents if not to disguise where the money was ultimately coming from?

 

[aguero93:20]

Eric Morecambe would say otherwise.

No he wouldn't, he's dead.