PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[LongsightM13]

I keep on hearing that we pay Haaland £835k a week more than double what anyone else was prepared to pay, do people seriously believe this?

I know he is a top class player but really.

Lets assume that Madrid offered him £400k a week, he is a known City fan who had the chance to play for us, not only that but also to play under Pep and with a genuine chance of clearing up a serious amount of silverware over the next 5 years. With this in mind do people really think that we topped it up by another £435k on top just to make sure we got him.

And that's before we talk about the supposed £50 million signing on fee split between him and Alfie.

The same people then claim he will walk away from this to go and play for Madrid in a couple of years, almost like they can't decide which bullshit to believe.

The only ‘source’ for that bullshit was Mike Keegan, acting as a stenographer for someone at liverpool or united who was bitter about Erling choosing City and getting off to a flying start

 

[Nicholas van Whatsisface]

You're right - the standard of reporting is abysmal. Right the way through from web articles written by kids (or so it seems) to so-called quality broad sheets. The quality of writing is superior in the latter but the content is normally biased and uninformative. It all adds up to provide fodder for belligerent key warriors to do their stuff on social media and turn the whole football community against us. Why haven't any of these analysed the charges like our legal and financial colleagues on here - pointing out that there are really 4/5 charges and not 115. That would be good analytical writing making a contribution to what is a complex subject. But of course they would prefer to trumpet the 115 charges so that social media dimwits can peddle the line of how can you not be guilty - some of these charges must be true. I get the fact that football is tribal and do not expect or want support from our red friends - but it is not unreasonable to expect the media to be informative and objective. I can honestly say I have only garnered information and perspectives from this thread - particularly those who have a legal and financial background and I am extremely grateful for all their efforts.

The problem is - and this is largely true whichever the outlet - you’ve got a bunch of journalists who are experienced in writing about Sport attempting to grapple with complex financial, legal and geopolitical concepts and arguments - issues about which they are clearly hopelessly out of their depth firstly in understanding and secondly in accurately representing in their articles.

You layer onto that a bad faith approach in most cases based on basic football tribalism (although in some I suspect there’s a lot more to it than that), in which there’s simply no incentive or appetite to even try and understand the complex convergence of arguments and factors at play which underpin this story - as it’s easier and generates more clicks to follow an ‘assumption of guilt’ narrative - and you’ve got the current woefully inadequate, staggeringly simplistic coverage of what should be an interesting story.

Why anyone would expect a bunch of sports reporters to be remotely capable of writing about geopolitics, governance and finance is way beyond me.

Just as I’d have no interest in reading the FT’s Chief Economics Commentator writing about the rough and tumble of a relegation six pointer, I have no interest in hearing Miguel Delaney desperately groping about trying to explain the complex political and social history of the Middle East, or the legal arguments for and against in the CAS case against City - particularly when he very clearly hasn’t even bothered to read any of the relevant documents relating to the case.

I mean - most of these fucking idiots can’t even seem to grasp the fact that Abu Dhabi isn’t a state, when they’re busy calling us ‘state owned’!

Why would I trust their understanding of way more complex issues when they get the most elementary, entry level concepts completely wrong!

 

[SilverFox2]

He looked like someone with a dose of the shits that was stuck out on the pitch when he could feel the next bout coming on.

I would like to think that is because he heard some 'hard truths' - I tend to think that it was more him thinking about how to best serve his real employers

I seem to recall our battle with UEFA where the then top man there was supposed to be sympathetic to our cause.
Like him Mr
Masters will just carry on regardless, maybe thinking that his current redshirt wearing members may abandon the scapegoat PL if things go pear shape.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

I keep on hearing that we pay Haaland £835k a week more than double what anyone else was prepared to pay, do people seriously believe this?

I know he is a top class player but really.

Lets assume that Madrid offered him £400k a week, he is a known City fan who had the chance to play for us, not only that but also to play under Pep and with a genuine chance of clearing up a serious amount of silverware over the next 5 years. With this in mind do people really think that we topped it up by another £435k on top just to make sure we got him.

And that's before we talk about the supposed £50 million signing on fee split between him and Alfie.

The same people then claim he will walk away from this to go and play for Madrid in a couple of years, almost like they can't decide which bullshit to believe.

They must have some really sharp brains at UEFA/PL as even MI5 or MI6 would have struggled to make the connection between us and Fordham.

 

[domalino]

@Prestwich_Blue if this case goes past the summer will we get another 5 charges added for non-cooperation for that season?

 

[halfcenturyup]

View attachment 80540

We really tried hard to cover our tracks.

Can you help me out with this again, PB. Is this the situation?

City managed image rights for some players. So they made money from the players' image, then paid some of that to the players. The easiest way to account for that is as some image rights income and some image rights expenses. But City needed some more income to meet FFP, so the club came up with the idea of selling some or all of those rights to a third party, in return for a one-off payment. Meaning we got money up front from the third party to help our FFP, then the third party commercialised the rights, earning money and paying the players a share of it.

Now, FFP didn't like that for two reasons: first it generated income that helped us meet FFP (we thought) and secondly because it confuses the position on amounts paid in total to players which, it seems, is important to them for some reason.

UEFA raised this with the club but didn't pursue it in their charge sheet. Why? No idea. Maybe because it was a perfectly valid business transaction, accounted for properly, and supported by legal and fiscal opinions, who knows? In any case, the activity was brought in-house again in 2018, probably as a result of negotiations with UEFA?

Is that it, more or less?

 

[horlock_was_super]

The Martin Samuel article is 'out there.'
How can one person be so against the tide?
If he has got insider information then once again the club have got it right in personnel recruitment.
Having this true sports journalist seemingly in our corner is on a par with Pep as manager and KdB in the first team.
I don't believe he would risk his reputation and standing within the game if he wasn't across the whole thing comprehensively.
I don't think his integrity would allow him to be a paid shrill or the like and he's playing the long game safe in the knowledge that he will always be the go to guy on matters City related going forward once this shit is done and dusted.
The fact that he's referenced other clubs who have been hoodwinked through FFP in this latest article will begin the ringing of many alarm bells among supporters of other clubs I am sure.
Top six (sadly we're a part of it like it or not). Everyone else - Want success? From now on accept your place, take your turn at being this seasons yo-yo club, parachute payments will see you right and when we decide to change the rules to suit ourselves again you'll be the last to know!

 

[Come-on-City]

Can you help me out with this again, PB. Is this the situation?

City managed image rights for some players. So they made money from the players' image, then paid some of that to the players. The easiest way to account for that is as some image rights income and some image rights expenses. But City needed some more income to meet FFP, so the club came up with the idea of selling some or all of those rights to a third party, in return for a one-off payment. Meaning we got money up front from the third party to help our FFP, then the third party commercialised the rights, earning money and paying the players a share of it.

Now, FFP didn't like that for two reasons: first it generated income that helped us meet FFP (we thought) and secondly because it confuses the position on amounts paid in total to players which, it seems, is important to them for some reason.

UEFA raised this with the club but didn't pursue it in their charge sheet. Why? No idea. Maybe because it was a perfectly valid business transaction, accounted for properly, and supported by legal and fiscal opinions, who knows? In any case, the activity was brought in-house again in 2018, probably as a result of negotiations with UEFA?

Is that it, more or less?

Yes, from what I have read that would be my summary.

All perfectly legal and a way to accelerate the receipt of income from sponsorships from a 5 year period into one accounting period - could be argued that the income should have been deferred (spread-out over the term of the agreement), but this would depend on the legals which we obviously do not have access too (and I doubt De Spiegel or Prem / UEFA would have done either).

As long as the accounting decision was sound and able to be argued then nothing to see here.

 

[Dinas]

I keep on hearing that we pay Haaland £835k a week more than double what anyone else was prepared to pay, do people seriously believe this?

I know he is a top class player but really.

Lets assume that Madrid offered him £400k a week, he is a known City fan who had the chance to play for us, not only that but also to play under Pep and with a genuine chance of clearing up a serious amount of silverware over the next 5 years. With this in mind do people really think that we topped it up by another £435k on top just to make sure we got him.

And that's before we talk about the supposed £50 million signing on fee split between him and Alfie.

The same people then claim he will walk away from this to go and play for Madrid in a couple of years, almost like they can't decide which bullshit to believe.

I keep getting this from the social media 'intelligentia'. I've commented to some that the figure is very interesting and that I would be grateful if they would pass on the source of said information. Comments range from 'well everyone knows it's true' to the Daily Mail or Sky Sports. It seems we are the only ones who are sceptical and cynical of the media have any credibility or authority. This is how the myths are peddled and I'm at a loss to see what we can do it about it except as fans to take them on at every opportunity and to keep on winning and showing what a remarkable organisation we are.

 

[citizen_maine]

The Martin Samuel article is 'out there.'
How can one person be so against the tide?
If he has got insider information then once again the club have got it right in personnel recruitment.
Having this true sports journalist seemingly in our corner is on a par with Pep as manager and KdB in the first team.
I don't believe he would risk his reputation and standing within the game if he wasn't across the whole thing comprehensively.
I don't think his integrity would allow him to be a paid shrill or the like and he's playing the long game safe in the knowledge that he will always be the go to guy on matters City related going forward once this shit is done and dusted.
The fact that he's referenced other clubs who have been hoodwinked through FFP in this latest article will begin the ringing of many alarm bells among supporters of other clubs I am sure.
Top six (sadly we're a part of it like it or not). Everyone else - Want success? From now on accept your place, take your turn at being this seasons yo-yo club, parachute payments will see you right and when we decide to change the rules to suit ourselves again you'll be the last to know!

I could be wrong, but i think it's purely coincidence that his stance on FFP is consistent with our (fans) stance on it. He has been consistently and vehemently anti-FFP since way before it was implemented and indeed before our takeover