PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

meltonblue said:
Where’s it come from that that is what Wrexham are doing? If it’s a related party transaction then it’s assessed so that that’s not allowed to happen - Reading got done for trying it for example.

It’s still not comparable to our situation though as we didn’t declare any of them as RPTs.
Click to expand...
Mate, this whole shit show is premised on the idea that everything coming out of the oil rich Middle East is related and there's a grain of truth to that, but a grain isn't enough for the Premier League to nail us, so they're screwed.
 
Luca1894 said:
We don't know, we can only infer how long it will take. If you read CAS you can see the level of detail the UEFA lawyers went down to, ie they scrutinised selected transactions over a limited time. The PL charges relate to 10 years of finanancial reporting and the investigation took 4 years to complete.

I posted this "simulated" scenario re Etisalat....

Maybe the PL witchhunt works like this, the PL lawyers scrutinise every single sponsorship financial transaction from all MCFC bank accounts (in chronological order) to drive the case.

So for example, 01/04/11 MCFC received a payment of £15M into the clubs current account. The "PL" believe this was sent by the owner of MCFC as disguised equity funding and was concealed in the annual accounts ie reported as sponsorship funds from Etisalat and therefore is a breach of PL rules. So in defence MCFC provide documentary evidence proving the sponsorship agreement between MCFC and Etisalat, call on executive officers of both parties to corroborate the agreement and provide evidence from the banks of the sender of the funds. So where does the argument go then ?, the PL lawyers have only one option ie to accuse the defence of dishonesty during the hearing. So then the PL lawyers could spend copious amounts of time discussing the integrity and honesty of the witnesses, the sponsors, accountants, auditors and the MCFC legal advisors throughout the ten year period.
Click to expand...
The only things that have ever bothered me about this charade are the PL Tribunal’s ability to make their decision based on the conveniently vague notion of ‘balance of probabilities’, the lack of a subsequent appeal, and that the public is being conditioned by the media into believing in our guilt so there will be no outcry in the event of a bullshit outcome. In terms of actual evidence, I’m expecting City to have all their ducks firmly in a row.
 
waspish said:
I believe Any sponsor under 1 million don't get looked at so we could have 50 of them and it's fine
Click to expand...
That's true, the 115 charges are bollocks, but it's generally accepted that City can use its UAE contacts pretty easily for small change sponsorship, if cash is needed in a hurry
 
The perfect fumble said:
Mate, this whole shit show is premised on the idea that everything coming out of the oil rich Middle East is related and there's a grain of truth to that, but a grain isn't enough for the Premier League to nail us, so they're screwed.
Click to expand...

No I agree with that (at least with what’s in the public domain), just saying that the Wrexham one is very different.
 
meltonblue said:
Because theirs is quite clearly an RPT as it’s the same owner of both companies. Ours aren’t, or we at least didn’t declare them to be, that’s one of the things the PL are charging us with.
Click to expand...
And that is why the PL will fail, as someone here stated in accountancy terms the Sheikh has nothing to do with our sponsors, so we've nothing to fear. But the whole PL case is premised on the belief that that's bullshit, everything of any note in the UAE has the ruling families finger prints on it.

That may or may not be true, but it will be impossible for the PL to prove, and that's why they're screwed.
 
The perfect fumble said:
And that is why the PL will fail, as someone here stated in accountancy terms the Sheikh has nothing to do with our sponsors, so we've nothing to fear. But the whole PL case is premised on the belief that that's bullshit, everything of any note in the UAE has the ruling families finger prints on it.

That may or may not be true, but it will be impossible for the PL to prove, and that's why they're screwed.
Click to expand...

Like I said, based on what’s in the public domain, I agree :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.