The press and rival fans are an absolute textbook study in confirmation bias, they believe what they need to believe in order to sustain their belief system.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules
- Thread starter ayrshire_blue
- Start date
thats not the rag way, arsenal did it in the 1920s and plenty of other clubs have done it since including city but the pl has never seen the wealth that chelski and then city brought and thats when the red tops decided it had to be stopped so the status quo could be kept. The red tops are endemic of the way this country is run , the riff raff as they believe we are can get a win every now and again just to maintain the illusion that any team can win and keep the great unwashed happy but if any team get to big for their boots or delusions of grandeur the history clubs will do everything in their power to stop it and put us back in what they see as our place, unfortunately we as city fans have never really known our place and as usual stuck two fingers square in the establishments face and said fuck you.Only cheating to their made rules. If the FFP rules did not exist it means we did it the united way and spend lots of money to assemble a good squad to go on an win leagues.
Last edited:
The line I found interesting was "he felt that it is widely considered City enhanced our revenues" – Widely considered? Why is it? Reading between the lines there i'd say that the red cartel have been in the ear of other teams telling them what they want them to believe.This is a few pages back now given that this thread marches on at a furious pace, but I saw it last night and thought it was interesting. It reflects various comments in the media, such as the recent piece by Adam Crafton in The Athletic quoting various sources from rival clubs, suggesting that City are widely seen as guilty throughout football.
However, IMO this is based on a flawed leap of logic. As the above states, the person whose view the poster is quoting believes that "it is widely considered City enhanced our revenues to comply with FFP". I don't have a problem with this opinion. Every club does so. It's precisely the type of behaviour that FFP encourages. However, I do think that the reasoning is deficient.
The assumption among our detractors seems to be that we couldn't have achieved what we've managed to achieve without breaking the rules. IMO, it's entirely feasible that we could. They imposed financial rules that they took wholesale from international finance, accounting and legal practice, so of course people can find workarounds that have been use in the real world.
I assume this is what the poster means when he states that "a sensible conversation tended to find the middle ground that probably points to City not being charged". That it's not widely understood shows how damaging the utterly hysterical media coverage of the whole affair has been.
mscenterh750
Well-Known Member
That’s what some might say.You’ll just have to roll with it…
mscenterh750
Well-Known Member
Could be a lot worse and have spent £600m in two years and still have a wank squad.Only cheating to their made rules. If the FFP rules did not exist it means we did it the united way and spend lots of money to assemble a good squad to go on an win leagues.
Prestwich_Blue
Well-Known Member
The problem is that "utterly hysterical media coverage" has become the generally accepted "truth" and very few, if any, sensible conversations seem to be taking place publicly, bar on here.This is a few pages back now given that this thread marches on at a furious pace, but I saw it last night and thought it was interesting. It reflects various comments in the media, such as the recent piece by Adam Crafton in The Athletic quoting various sources from rival clubs, suggesting that City are widely seen as guilty throughout football.
However, IMO this is based on a flawed leap of logic. As the above states, the person whose view the poster is quoting believes that "it is widely considered City enhanced our revenues to comply with FFP". I don't have a problem with this opinion. Every club does so. It's precisely the type of behaviour that FFP encourages. However, I think that there's a flawed leap of logic.
The assumption among our detractors seems to be that we couldn't have achieved what we've managed to achieve without breaking the rules. IMO, that's entirely feasible. They imposed financial rules that they took wholesale from international finance, accounting and legal practice, so of course people can find workarounds that have been use in the real world.
I assume this is what the poster means when he states that "a sensible conversation tended to find the middle ground that probably points to City not being charged". That it's not widely understood shows how damaging the utterly hysterical media coverage of the whole affair has been.
We absolutely enhanced our revenue at some point, particularly with the sale of IP back in 2012/13. That involved selling image rights to Fordham and the setting up of the two subsidiaries City Football Services and City Football Marketing, to whom we also sold IP. That was purely to try to mitigate anticipated losses to enable us to meet the Annex XI transitional arrangement and avoid sanction. UEFA closed that route by (a) excluding intra-group transfers from allowable revenue and (b) widening the 'reporting perimeter' to include companies like CFS and CFM.
Those transactions could be seen as opportunistic, maybe even a bit sharp, but there was nothing illegal and didn't actually break any rules. That's what loopholes are, after all and it's very similar to Chelsea's sale of their hotel to their holding company.
We've also leveraged the owner's position in the ruling family to bring on sponsorships from Abu Dhabi-based companies, or those that have business relationships there. My understanding of the Hays sponsorship was that it was effectively a quid-pro-quo for them getting the exclusive contract to manage recruitment at the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company. I think there's a relationship or joint-venture with Nexen Tyre. Nothing wrong with these, assuming they're done at fair market value.
The allegations, as we've talked about on here ad nauseam, appear to involve:
(a) claiming revenue that's deemed to be equity investment,
(b) not declaring expenses (namely player & manager remuneration) that we should have, namely some players' image rights and Mancini's contract with Al Jazira.
But no one in the media appears to be linking (a) to the CAS case or has questioned why the PL has brought these charges in light of the pretty comprehensive and detailed evidence presented to support the outcome at CAS. And it's clear that even in the worst case outcome in (b) that the impact on meeting FFP/PSR will almost certainly not make a difference to us passing FFP and certainly not to us passing PSR.
These are the elements for what I'd describe as a 'sensible conversation'.
I think that most clubs have been run like sweetshops historically and when our execs came along with good business experience and changed the game, other clubs just could not believe it. The fact is City were run really poorly previously and the contrast is mind blowing. Look at the rags, the so called biggest club in England and: they are in debt up to their eyeballs, their stadium is falling apart, their player recruitment has been abominable for a decade and more nonsense besides. Scruffy Jim, well versed in big business, turns up and is asked what he is going to change at the old toilet. “Everything” he answered. And how? Recruit a CEO from City for a start. QED.I can understand fans with no idea of how business works not believing that we could ever have done it fairly. However you would think anyone with a modicum of business expertise would know that many established and hugely successful businesses have lost market leadership through being bloated with success and complacent or not taking the threat posed by a new competitor seriously and not reacting to improve themselves.
City under the Sheikh should be a textbook case study in business/marketing/leadership.
Bodicoteblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 23 Apr 2012
- Messages
- 6,052
It makes me worry about the strain that is going to be put on an already struggling mental health service when we are cleared.The press and rival fans are an absolute textbook study in confirmation bias, they believe what they need to believe in order to sustain their belief system.
Some people seem to have invested so much emotion and faith in a guilty verdict that some kind of breakdown may occur in those who are already deep down enough to be violent towards us.
It has taken on a cult-like momentum, and I think there may be serious mental problems for some.
Manchester_lalala
Well-Known Member
Shows you easily it is to manipulate the emails which were leaked. Without the accounts of Etihad and City, the emails are worthless.That wasn't specifically set out in black and white iirc but even if not, it's a pretty safe assumption. In their submission to CAS, City talked about the 'accruals basis' of accounting, which is separate to the cash payments. That means if Etihad contract to pay us £60m a year over 10 years, we'll record £60m a year in the accounts, regardless of whether the cashflow is £60m a year or not.
If Etihad paid us £200m in year one, we'd still show that as £60m revenue in the P&L account, with £140m as deferred revenue in the balance sheet. If they paid us nothing the following year, we'd again show £60m revenue, but with deferred revenue of £80m.
So when Harris was going on about us under-stating the Etihad revenue, when he added up three years cash receipts and divided by three, he clearly had no idea about accruals accounting. The timing of the cashflow is irrelevant.
The City are guilty cult. Massive (!) Membership in clubs’ boardrooms, on the terraces, in the media, on the PL board, in UEFA. Hon President: Senor Teabag.It makes me worry about the strain that is going to be put on an already struggling mental health service when we are cleared.
Some people seem to have invested so much emotion and faith in a guilty verdict that some kind of breakdown may occur in those who are already deep down enough to be violent towards us.
It has taken on a cult-like momentum, and I think there may be serious mental problems for some.
Main activities: Hating Muslims, especially Arabs, lying.
Future Prospects: Mega Breakdown.
I borrow from Criminal law. Even if the emails are evidence of Mens Rea, where’s the Actus Reus?Shows you easily it is to manipulate the emails which were leaked. Without the accounts of Etihad and City, the emails are worthless.
So many in the media don’t seem to understand this and think the emails are evidence of wrong doing. Actually, I don’t think they are decent evidence of intent but you can give the haters this as a sop, and then ask them where is the evidence of actual wrong doing? Is it in our accounts? Have you read them?
Er,,,,no.
Has any journo ever asked rival execs who castigate us these questions?
No? So down the conspiracy hole you go.
Last edited:
Course he/she doesnt, hes found an audience and the endorphins that attention brings are flowing and he/she will say anything to keep getting that hit, its like giving a lab rat treats till it explodes and in essence thats mostly what social media is a bunch of attention junkies pressing the button over and over hoping for a treatI can’t decide if old Magic hat is more or less obsessed about City (& Stefan) than Nick Harris…
Honestly must not have anything else to do with his time.
Its actually both saddening and hilarious how many journos and rival fans are supposed experts in financial law but genuinely havent the first clue on what it entails and why wording and context are so important.I borrow from Criminal law. Even if the emails are evidence of Mens Rea, where’s the Actus Reus?
So many in the media don’t seem to understand this and think the emails are evidence of wrong doing. Actually, I don’t think they are decent evidence of intent but you can give the haters this as a sop, and then ask them where is the evidence of actual wrong doing? Is it in our accounts? Have you read them?
Er,,,,no.
Has any journo ever asked rival execs who castigate us these questions?
No? So down the conspiracy hole you go.
StillBluessinceHydeRoad
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 14 Aug 2020
- Messages
- 2,453
- Team supported
- City
I have to say that the contributions on here over the last few hours have brought to the debate a degree of knowledge, reflection and consideration of context which is entirely absent from discussion of the matter elsewhere. Bluemoon is considering the evidence available to all but those on the inside of the matter: therest (especially the media) are prey to hysteria. An example is Bajkowski's latest offering in the MEN. He claims to be sharing with us the "prediction" made by prof Rob Wilson, " a football finance expert", on the outcome of the IC's proceedings. And City are in for "a significant sanction in terms of a financial penalty, a fairly big apology from City for not disclosing information when they should have done." This will be "a bit of an egg on the face from their perspective" but he " can't imagine how they would be relegated out of the division." All this is because City have "probably sailed very, very close to the wind."
The difficulty is that Wilson appears to have no evidence at all for what he says and he doesn't appeat to think he needs any! This is not a rational view based on dispassionate consideration but "a gut feeling". City have denied all the charges, denied any wrong doing and actually say they have irrefutable evidence to support these claims, but the well educated gut of the professor knows better. Can Lord Pannick possibly triumph over a professorial gut?!
The forces lined up against us are the most formidable since a domestic pet predicted German victory at the world cup of 2006.
The difficulty is that Wilson appears to have no evidence at all for what he says and he doesn't appeat to think he needs any! This is not a rational view based on dispassionate consideration but "a gut feeling". City have denied all the charges, denied any wrong doing and actually say they have irrefutable evidence to support these claims, but the well educated gut of the professor knows better. Can Lord Pannick possibly triumph over a professorial gut?!
The forces lined up against us are the most formidable since a domestic pet predicted German victory at the world cup of 2006.
Course he/she doesnt, hes found an audience and the endorphins that attention brings are flowing and he/she will say anything to keep getting that hit, its like giving a lab rat treats till it explodes and in essence thats mostly what social media is a bunch of attention junkies pressing the button over and over hoping for a treat
Sounds like he’s one of those political types ala panja ala Harris that has a problem with ‘human rights’ ‘use’ et al
Colin Bells Boots
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 19,216
- Team supported
- Manchester City
Sounds like he’s one of those political types ala panja ala Harris that has a problem with ‘human rights’ ‘use’ et al
No doubt, but moreso when it suits their argument and target of their criticism.
No1 was Colin bell
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 24 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 623
Brilliant post mate.I have said this all along, the ongoing narrative since the sheikh took over has been three things, the first one was the sheikh will get bored and go away and when that didnt happen it was the narrative that they only win because they spend loads of money and then when they spent loads of money and we carried on winning then it went to it must be that they have cheated.
They cant wrap their heads round the idea that any club with better ideas, more qualified people and more vision can come along and not only emulate what they have done but surpass it so we must be cheating, for them we have to be cheating because if we have done what we have done without cheating it blows the idea that they are special out of the water, it shows that their legacy and their history means exactly nothing, it proves that ANY club can do what they have done with the right people and to their fans and their whole belief system that would be devastating because they really do believe that they are special and for CITY and specifically LICKLE CITY as they have always mocked us with to show that they aint special and that they are just another washed up company trading on when they used to be good is too much for their feeble minds to take so we had to be cheating right?
Wrong and the quicker they get used to the idea that the red tops aint special the less painful this will be for them but you know what i dont want them to get used to the idea i want them to cling that belief till we destroy every last bit of it.
Protein Junkie
Well-Known Member
If they are they must have Mark Thatcher at the helm.Is it wishful thinking on my part that I hope the premier league are trying to look for a way out of this
One for the FOCs