PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Churchlawtonblue said:
I think most fans think like this. None of my mates who are a mix of Arse, utd, Chelsea or Liverpool fans ever mention the charges. Its only the Internet warriors that focus on this in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Yes. Social media are not typical in any sphere, they just represent people with a strong view, often nonsensical. Let’s not fall into the trap.
Dribble said:
Not quite. Read A again. I never invested in my son's business, I paid his bill personally to help him out, not from my company's account.

As for the rest, you're arguing with yourself because I've repeated most of it already, but added scenarios which you haven't addressed.

The short & tall of it is we're essentially being accused of financial fraud. BUT it's financial fraud based on UEFA/PL "rules", NOT UK Law.

If what we'd done was against UK Law, do you really think the PL wouldn't have already called the Plod, FCA, HMRC & the SFO?

This is the point everyone's making, & you keep going round in circles with. The PL can believe what they like.

When they produce irrefutable empirical evidence, then it's time to start cacking our pants. In the meantime, just trust the process & the serious ultra professionals involved on City's behalf.
Click to expand...

Eebo said:
Just read in the Times that in addition to Scruffy Jim buying 25% of existing shares he is also making a new equity investment of $300m which will allow them to spend big (again) and avoid issues with FFP that they would otherwise have had.

I understood that owner equity wasn’t allowed against FFP and it was purely revenue based. Am I wrong or is it The Times that don’t understand FFP or are there just different rules for red shirt clubs?
Click to expand...
The owner can lend to the club without ffp probs. See Abramovich, Mansour. Interest is included in the expenditure for ffp, as is any application of the loan to a purchase.
 
Dribble said:
I thought sine FFP it was only new owners like Todd Bowlegs at the Chavs?
Click to expand...
I think just lending is ok but ffp arises if the club spends that money. So a loan for infrastructure is free of ffp, whereas a loan to buy a player is not. The new owner rule is about being allowed to overspend provided a plan to get on an even keel within 3 years is in place.
PS I have not yet caught up with the latest rules, so this might be bollocks!
 
KS55 said:
I think just lending is ok but ffp arises if the club spends that money. So a loan for infrastructure is free of ffp, whereas a loan to buy a player is not. The new owner rule is about being allowed to overspend provided a plan to get on an even keel within 3 years is in place.
PS I have not yet caught up with the latest rules, so this might be boolocks!
Click to expand...
Yes infrastructure is unlimited. FFP only affects first team players & wages.
 
Dribble said:
Not quite. Read A again. I never invested in my son's business, I paid his bill personally to help him out, not from my company's account.

As for the rest, you're arguing with yourself because I've repeated most of it already, but added scenarios which you haven't addressed.

The short & tall of it is we're essentially being accused of financial fraud. BUT it's financial fraud based on UEFA/PL "rules", NOT UK Law.

If what we'd done was against UK Law, do you really think the PL wouldn't have already called the Plod, FCA, HMRC & the SFO?

This is the point everyone's making, & you keep going round in circles with. The PL can believe what they like.

When they produce irrefutable empirical evidence, then it's time to start cacking our pants. In the meantime, just trust the process & the serious ultra professionals involved on City's behalf.
Click to expand...
Don’t forget the endless list of corrupt companies all willingly concealing evidence of our alleged fiddling! Just so little city can win a few trophies.

Etihad already lied to CAS so spinning a tale to the premier will be no problem! All those high end CEO’s will be gathering mountains of evidence to support their own position incase the old bill turn up.

I would be very surprised if city’s case isn't water tight. Not one person involved with city from a 3rd party commercial aspect has anything to gain by city getting charged but a lot to lose so I would imagine they have their statements ready to go backed up with irrefutable evidence.

Not 1 company has distanced themselves from the club. Tells you they know what this is all about.

Political games at play that all this is. Unfortunately city fans are caught in the crossfire. Khaldoon is a juggernaut and won’t be so easily swayed now he has got the measure of this ffp/p&s nonsense.

Apologies for the rant. Getting rightly on here -:)
 
Last edited:
CC1 said:
Just looked at the link & it’s quite shocking that they have such entrenched beliefs about what we’re supposed to have done. They don’t actually know & don’t give any details - but they have a list of the punishments we can expect.
The media are to blame - & they’re just as bad.
Click to expand...

The media encouraged by Gill and Parry et al have created this whole agenda - (the 115 charges was created for media consumption) that we are cheats, that we are guilty etc (they even discuss our punishments) and they have offered absolutely no evidence to support these unsubstantiated allegations. The reporting of the allegations against us mirrors that of Nazi Germany or Putins Russia, there is no balance, no discussion of the facts, not a single journalist has fought our corner, it’s just mob rule with plenty of undertones of xenophobia, serving up a stream of hatred and bile for the redshirt masses.
 
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.