PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

chaddblue said:
No point being concerned about peoples opinions if we are cleared

Even if the PL came out and stated that City are 100% innocent and every single aspect of our finances are totally clean.... the public opinion would be that we've somehow forced the government to get the PL to back off or we've paid them off to clear us. The media won't say this directly but will imply it to brainwash the simpletons

All I'm bothered is that we're found innocent and afterwards I'll just laugh in the face of anybody who says otherwise
Click to expand...
Spot on. It’s beyond football fan rationale to look at it factually and say the PL got it wrong. It just isn’t in there to behave like that, and so the banter is thrown at us that we are cheats.
 
Paladin said:
The potential narrative that we got away with it, if this is how things eventually transpire, can easily be refuted.

If I am accused of murdering my wife, then my wife shows up at the police station alive and well, will I have got away with her murder?
Click to expand...
It’s impossible to say without photos mate, you know the rules.
 
eastmanc said:
Jordan proved yesterday that he believes in conspiracy theories. His take on City's 'charges ' are ridiculous, Stefan explained to him just how fanciful his belief of our guilt is.
Click to expand...
Even though Sheikh Mansour has comfortably made at least £3bn paper profit so far on his investments in City and the city of Manchester itself Jordan still claims his motivation for all this is “image washing.” He really is a moron when it comes to financial matters.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
I don't believe I've said anything like that regarding the sponsorship deals. CAS showed comprehensively that they're completely above board, which I've always maintained. Yet the PL have chosen to base their case around these, which beggars belief given the CAS outcome.

What I might have said relates to the image rights payments to the players. My initial reaction to these was that these could be problematic, but since then I discovered that UEFA had brought these up in 2015, and the arrangement ended in 2018. UEFA obviously didn't charge us with anything relating to these so we must assume there was no significant issue with them.

What I've said is that these payments (to Mancini and the image rights) aren't significant. The Mancini ones had a contract to support them and came at a time when we were reporting hundreds of millions in losses. £1.75m is barely a drop in the ocean and couldn't possibly involve an attempt to get round FFP, as has been claimed.

The image rights payments from Fordham started about the time we sacked Mancini and are probably less than £15m a year. But we didn't try to hide these away in an unconnected company. We sold the IP to them, declared it our accounts and Fordham was linked to us on the Companies House website. You'd hardly need to be MI6 to work out there was a relationship, and it would have been done on expert legal and financial advice.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the clarification, PB. You have helped clear the muddle that passes for both my brain and memory these days! I think I was confusing image rights with sponsorship and I thank you for clarifying UEFA's positions on these. I presume the independent commission would be foolish to take a view different from UEFA and CAS. Thanks, it is much appreciated.
 
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.