PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[feedmpenzaandhewillscore]

Surely he'd be the first person they'd want to speak to.

Whatever the reasons behind the Mancini contract (or contracts), I can't see how it can be any more than a slap on the wrist at worst. Any **** wanting points deductions/trophies stripping/relegation if they find against us on that particular one is a desperate **** who deserves to shit hedgehogs for the rest of their days.

It’s very odd isn’t it? Mancini left the club under a cloud and this could have been his opportunity to give his former employers a big fuck you. It’s very strange that with all of the so called industrial attempts to cook the books over numerous years there hasn’t been a single whistle blower come into the public eye.

 

[pauls]

Great post. There's Etisalat as well, but CAS dealt with that even though it was time-barred. And even UEFA were ok with that once Etisalat had reimbursed ADUG. So as you say, there's absolutely no mileage there.

Is this possibly where they can get us,?UEFA where OK with it but did we not tell the Premier League, from the uneducated it does look like us paying our own sponsorship which the dodgy Piers Morgan montage threw up.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Is this possibly where they can get us,?UEFA where OK with it but did we not tell the Premier League, from the uneducated it does look like us paying our own sponsorship which the dodgy Piers Morgan montage threw up.

We didn't have to tell the PL anything, other than submit our audited accounts, which CAS said were correct and the sponsorship was properly funded and fair value.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Is this possibly where they can get us,?UEFA where OK with it but did we not tell the Premier League, from the uneducated it does look like us paying our own sponsorship which the dodgy Piers Morgan montage threw up.

I think you misunderstand what happened. It was all set out in the CAS award: the club signed a sponsorship at fair value with Etisalat, services were provided in full but for a two year period payments from Etisalat were held up by finalisation of a new contract. During that period, services were provided under a legally binding heads of agreement, invoices were properly issued and were recorded as income in the accounts.

The only tricky thing is that, iirc, the new contract stipulated that Etisalat should pay monies to ADUG and ADUG should transfer the money to the club (unclear as to why, probably UAE fiscal reasons, but a contract is a contract). For these two years, ADUG paid the money to the club in advance of the receipt of the money from Etisalat. These are the payments the idiot Morgan is talking about. At the end of the two years, once the new contract was finalised, ADUG had received the money from Etisalat.

To me, this is a big nothing burger. The sponsorship revenue was genuine, at fair value under legally binding contracts, and properly recorded in the accounts. There is nothing in this that affects the true and fair view given by the accounts. Quite the opposite. Taking the money out of revenue and putting it into equity would NOT give a true and fair view.

 

[M18CTID]

I think you misunderstand what happened. It was all set out in the CAS award: the club signed a sponsorship at fair value with Etisalat, services were provided in full but for a two year period payments from Etisalat were held up by finalisation of a new contract. During that period, services were provided under a legally binding heads of agreement, invoices were properly issued and were recorded as income in the accounts.

The only tricky thing is that, iirc, the new contract stipulated that Etisalat should pay monies to ADUG and ADUG should transfer the money to the club (unclear as to why, probably UAE fiscal reasons, but a contract is a contract). For these two years, ADUG paid the money to the club in advance of the receipt of the money from Etisalat. These are the payments the idiot Morgan is talking about. At the end of the two years, once the new contract was finalised, ADUG had received the money from Etisalat.

To me, this is a big nothing burger. The sponsorship revenue was genuine, at fair value under legally binding contracts, and properly recorded in the accounts. There is nothing in this that affects the true and fair view given by the accounts. Quite the opposite. Taking the money out of revenue and putting it into equity would NOT give a true and fair view.

All covered here in this article by David Conn. City were up front about ADUG paying the money and it being reimbursed later. Not exactly the behaviour of having something to hide. Ultimately it didn't get considered by CAS due to the time-barring though so I guess we don't know for sure which way that would've gone. However, if there was any wrongdoing on the part of the club surely they would've come up with an easier get out than being so up front about it!

Mansour's payments and a U-turn by Uefa: key Manchester City findings | David Conn

Court of arbitration for sport judgment also finds no Uefa bias and shows why an alleged FFP breach was unsubstantiated

www.theguardian.com

 

[cheekybids]

Not a chance Pep names Levy if Levy wasn't involved somewhere along the line. Hopefully we have something cast-iron on the ****. As Khaldoon said, people talk in this game......

Pep calls our Daniel Levy in February & by July Joe Lewis is charged for insider trading…..

 

[M18CTID]

Pep calls our Daniel Levy in February & by July Joe Lewis is charged for insider trading…..

Not sure if they're both linked to be honest but it would be piss funny if they were!

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Not sure if they're both linked to be honest but it would be piss funny if they were!

i think there’s more than an outside chance they were.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Probably nothing more than click-bait bullshit, but it got me clicking.

Ex-Everton chief Keith Wyness has claimed Man City have an astonishing team of 30 in-house lawyers as they fight 115 potential breaches of Premier League rules.

The 66-year-old, who served as CEO at Goodison Park between 2004 and 2009 and now runs a football consultancy advising elite clubs, revealed the Toffees didn’t have a dedicated legal representative during his tenure at the club.

Ex-Everton CEO blown away by what he's heard about Man City FFP case

Football Insider has been told by ex-Everton CEO Keith Wyness that Man City could have up to 30 in-house lawyers as they fight 115 potential breaches of Premier League rules.

www.footballinsider247.com

I am sure our legal team works for the entire CFG. We have thousands of employees and lots of complex legal requirements. Keith Wyness won't get much work as a consultant if he continues to show such a total lack of discretion.

 

[Gordyola]

Let’s face it, deep down we know this will be a kangaroo court, our fate has already been decided. ‘The balance of probability’ is the equivalent of ‘clear and obvious’ in VAR that allows thinly veiled cheating. If the media leaks are correct nothing will happen this season, my best guess is our punishment will be handed down next season in time for any appeal to be complete by the end of next season. Make no mistake they want us out of the Premier League and have the power to do it.

sorry for the gloomy assessment but I think we have all been kidding ourselves if we think this is similar to the CAS appeal, that was truly independent, this one isn’t.

The PL have passed it to an independent commission comprised of KC not much different that CAS

To expel City from the PL will take some extraordinary judgement and wont happen