PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Invisible Man's Bandage]

The objections are more to do with foreign ownership per se, rather than the identity of the investor.

I disagree with that. All of the opinion pieces in the Telegraph from senior writers such as Charles Moore (ex editor of the Telegraph, Sunday Telegraph and the Spectator) are specifically about Abu Dhabi being undemocratic, misogynistic etc and that they would stifle any debate about issues that don't align with AD values.

All very hostile and backed up by very senior Conservatives saying the same. The point being that when push comes to shove all parties will do what they perceive to be in their best interests. So from being courted for investment last week Abu Dhabi and our owner are being vilified this week.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

What about Khaldoon's reputation? Not exactly an upstart.....

As Managing Director and Group Chief Executive Officer of Mubadala, Khaldoon Khalifa Al Mubarak has led the company’s significant evolution for two decades. Through organic growth, acquisitions, and mergers, Mubadala has become a $276 billion business with assets in more than 50 countries across six international offices. With a global and entrepreneurial mindset, Mubadala is a responsible sovereign investor that generates sustainable financial returns for its shareholder, the Government of Abu Dhabi.

In addition to his commercial responsibilities, Khaldoon holds a number of UAE Government and Abu Dhabi Government responsibilities, including: Member of the Abu Dhabi Executive Council since 2006; Founding Member of Abu Dhabi’s Supreme Council for Financial and Economic Affairs; Presidential Special Envoy to China since 2018; and Founding Chairman of the Executive Affairs Authority, which provides strategic policy advice to His Highness Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, President of the United Arab Emirates.

Khaldoon also serves on the Boards of several significant businesses, including the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC), and serves as the Chairman of the Boards of the Emirates Nuclear Energy Corporation, Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank, Emirates Global Aluminium and City Football Group.
Additionally, Khaldoon Co-Chairs the Abu Dhabi-Singapore Joint Forum and the UAE-France Strategic Dialogue.

He is also a member of the New York University Board of Trustees.

FFS. Now you've done it! He's told the DWP he's unemployed so has to claim Universal Credit.

 

[KS55]

I understood the goal they were aiming for; ensure the community entities like a football club were protected from reckless ownership. It makes sense to have rules to prevent an owner gambling the club's future on expensive transfers. A good comparison is us and Leeds in the 2000s. They spent their Champions League money on players, we did up our stadium. They didn't recruit well, league performance suffered and they tumbled down the leagues, ruining themselves financially for years.

Look at what's happened at Bury, Portsmouth, Brighton, Leicester. They were ran by cowboys and it was the fans, the non-football staff, that paid the biggest penalty. Managers and players move on, but people were losing their jobs because some dickhead owner couldn't balance the books properly. Everton have broken the rules and they should be punished, and if it wasn't for petty partisan rivalry I'd think 10pts is harsh because at the end of the day it's not the owners who'll suffer despite it being wholly their fault. But... y'know Scouse Mackems and all that.

I didn't think Man City were/are doing anything that Man Utd hadn't been doing for decades prior. Yeah, it is a bit like cheating on Football Manager, but given the nature of the headstart Man Utd and Liverpool have, it would take something like that to truly compete with them. They were happy enough to run a club riddled with debt for as long as they could and the minute someone comes along with the financial muscle to compete they throw their toys out of the pram?

There has to be a way to protect community entities, without ringfencing the established elite. I've heard people talk about a salary cap, but that's unworkable. The minute the PL brought that in, players would jump ship to La Liga or where ever else is paying the big bucks. People have talked about ensuring a majority of players must come from a predetermined geographical area, but that's unworkable for London clubs, or clubs without a sufficiently large population base. Take Newcastle for example, there was some kind of youth recruitment rule based on where a kid grew up, 50% of our catchment area was the North Sea.

Dunno what the answer is, but FFP isn't it. It perpetuates the strength of the top clubs and restricts the others.

I think you have to start from the position that clubs as businesses should be free to do whatever they want that is legal. On top of that, there has to be some form of protection for the game and the community. That is why i think that debt limits plus vetting of owners does 99% of the job. Add a few things like the owner cannot own the stadium separate from the club, clubs must be companies registered in the UK and the job is done.

 

[KS55]

I disagree with that. All of the opinion pieces in the Telegraph from senior writers such as Charles Moore (ex editor of the Telegraph, Sunday Telegraph and the Spectator) are specifically about Abu Dhabi being undemocratic, misogynistic etc and that they would stifle any debate about issues that don't align with AD values.

All very hostile and backed up by very senior Conservatives saying the same. The point being that when push comes to shove all parties will do what they perceive to be in their best interests. So from being courted for investment last week Abu Dhabi and our owner are being vilified this week.

I bow to your superior knowledge, not having read most of those articles.
Even so, would the attitude be any different if the investor were a French media company, for example?
French and German companies control most of our retail energy market which is more vital than the Torygraph. No objections voiced there.
Also, I didn’t see any objection to AbuDhabi investing billions in energy etc.

 

[Bez]

What about Khaldoon's reputation? Not exactly an upstart.....

As Managing Director and Group Chief Executive Officer of Mubadala, Khaldoon Khalifa Al Mubarak has led the company’s significant evolution for two decades. Through organic growth, acquisitions, and mergers, Mubadala has become a $276 billion business with assets in more than 50 countries across six international offices. With a global and entrepreneurial mindset, Mubadala is a responsible sovereign investor that generates sustainable financial returns for its shareholder, the Government of Abu Dhabi.

In addition to his commercial responsibilities, Khaldoon holds a number of UAE Government and Abu Dhabi Government responsibilities, including: Member of the Abu Dhabi Executive Council since 2006; Founding Member of Abu Dhabi’s Supreme Council for Financial and Economic Affairs; Presidential Special Envoy to China since 2018; and Founding Chairman of the Executive Affairs Authority, which provides strategic policy advice to His Highness Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, President of the United Arab Emirates.

Khaldoon also serves on the Boards of several significant businesses, including the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC), and serves as the Chairman of the Boards of the Emirates Nuclear Energy Corporation, Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank, Emirates Global Aluminium and City Football Group.
Additionally, Khaldoon Co-Chairs the Abu Dhabi-Singapore Joint Forum and the UAE-France Strategic Dialogue.

He is also a member of the New York University Board of Trustees.

He sounds well dodgy that Khaldoon geezer.

 

[Chi-town blues]

What about Khaldoon's reputation? Not exactly an upstart.....

As Managing Director and Group Chief Executive Officer of Mubadala, Khaldoon Khalifa Al Mubarak has led the company’s significant evolution for two decades. Through organic growth, acquisitions, and mergers, Mubadala has become a $276 billion business with assets in more than 50 countries across six international offices. With a global and entrepreneurial mindset, Mubadala is a responsible sovereign investor that generates sustainable financial returns for its shareholder, the Government of Abu Dhabi.

In addition to his commercial responsibilities, Khaldoon holds a number of UAE Government and Abu Dhabi Government responsibilities, including: Member of the Abu Dhabi Executive Council since 2006; Founding Member of Abu Dhabi’s Supreme Council for Financial and Economic Affairs; Presidential Special Envoy to China since 2018; and Founding Chairman of the Executive Affairs Authority, which provides strategic policy advice to His Highness Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, President of the United Arab Emirates.

Khaldoon also serves on the Boards of several significant businesses, including the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC), and serves as the Chairman of the Boards of the Emirates Nuclear Energy Corporation, Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank, Emirates Global Aluminium and City Football Group.
Additionally, Khaldoon Co-Chairs the Abu Dhabi-Singapore Joint Forum and the UAE-France Strategic Dialogue.

He is also a member of the New York University Board of Trustees.

Just a bit longer than my resume.

 

[bluebanana83]

Mention of Everton, they were champions at the time of Heysel which got English clubs a European ban. By the time of English clubs being invited back, Everton were well past their best and their one big chance of growing that club's finances was gone. If anyone should have been financially punished then it should have been the dippers with directed compensation going to Everton. Being one of England's most favoured red shirts though then that would never be allowed to happen as it might have happened elsewhere.

Also the likes of Oxford United, Coventry City, Norwich City, Luton, Wimbledon, Notts Forest, Sheffield Wednesday, Southampton all missed out as well United and Arsenal too.

 

[The Fish]

I think you have to start from the position that clubs as businesses should be free to do whatever they want that is legal. On top of that, there has to be some form of protection for the game and the community. That is why i think that debt limits plus vetting of owners does 99% of the job. Add a few things like the owner cannot own the stadium separate from the club, clubs must be companies registered in the UK and the job is done.

I think that from a sporting point of view it makes sense to prevent the richest clubs in the world from simply hoovering up all the talent by virtue of having the most available funds. However, when the playing field was so uneven before, it's blatant hypocrisy for the likes of Liverpool, Man Utd etc. to insist that other clubs mustn't spend a lot.

A debt linked spending policy is fair, it would prevent clubs being run into the ground because of irresponsible owners, it would incentivise prudent financial planning and it would force the wealthier clubs to look at more sustainable recruitment policies (i.e. investing in their own pool of young talent instead of spending £36m on some moody teenager from Monaco). Vetting of the owners shouldn't be limited to "can they afford it" and more testing for evidence that the prospective owners are worthy stewards of whichever club they buy.

 

[SilverFox2]

Add that to the 115 for not controlling our accountants.

Even Al Capone found that difficult.

 

[SilverFox2]

Just a lightweight, then.