PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

tolmie's hairdoo said:
Can't see Red Bird Capital putting the screws on Liverpool, although one of their funds is being bankrolled by our owner for the Telegraph purchase?
Click to expand...

I think that's what he spoke about yeah, definitely Red Bird was mentioned. It made sense to a lay person when Pablo Peroni mentioned it on here, but heard nothing since so maybe nonsense?
 
tolmie's hairdoo said:
Not if found guilty of fraud. We would take it to High Court, forget tribunals and Premier League rules at that stage.
Click to expand...

I wonder why we don't poach Ed Woodward and directly sue the people responsible for this witch hunt.

Just make it super expensive for them individually!

45B609F200000578-0-image-a-9_1509046520826.jpg
 
M18CTID said:
Just thinking about this and might Newcastle be better off hanging on to all those players and taking the 10 point hit? Selling them all could end up costing them a lot more than 10 points
Click to expand...
can't see it myself - considering they can't buy a point from anywhere even with them
 
Colin Bell (genuine name) said:
In theory Newcastle could buy a squad of 22 Mbappes and Haalands at £200m each and pay them £1m a week for 10 years at a total cost of £12.5b. They could then do it again a further 24 times before they would start to feel the pinch and yet the current PSR is forcing them to sell to avoid failing the spending regulations.

My proposal would be that teams are limited to a maximum net spend over 3 years rather than limiting losses over 3 years. If it is set at say £500m for clubs with established owners who have been there for a set period and maybe £750m for the first 3 years for new ambitious owner.

It would allow for the transfer market to remain fluid and limit transfer spending at the same time.
Click to expand...
There's not enough liver for all those Haalands, and who would go in goals?
 
tolmie's hairdoo said:
Not if found guilty of fraud. We would take it to High Court, forget tribunals and Premier League rules at that stage.
Click to expand...

We wouldn't be found guilty of fraud though.

We'd be found to have not in acted the utmost good faith, of not providing accurate financial information that gives a true and fair view of the club’s financial position, in particular with respect to its revenue (including sponsorship revenue), its related parties and its operating costs.
 
TheMagicDragon said:
If a guilty verdict comes in (NOT SAYING IT WILL), most fans of Liverpool, Arsenal etc are saying that stripping of titles etc is an absolute must. That'd be absolutely devastating, wouldn't it? Can't see it myself.
Click to expand...
Why on earth would anyone be concerned about what the fans of (Fill in the team) say about anything City related, let alone a complex legal matter?!

The absolute desperation of those two teams in particular is especially gratifying!

I’m going to go out on a limb and say the IC will find us guilty of not rolling out the red carpet and nothing else. They’ll give us a fine for non-cooperation and that’ll be that.

All the know nowts will declare “City found guilty, but only fined! The fix is in! Abu Dhabi has either bribed or threatened the Govt…or both!” and yet the sun will continue to rise in the east.

Heads will explode and much piss will be boiled.
 
cheekybids said:
There’s another important reason why we able to spend a billion. We cost fuck all, what was it about £200m & yet it’s never mentioned. A club with prime realestate, one of the newest stadia in the country, massive support, major City with infrastructure for pittance.
Click to expand...

Newcastle was only £280m nearly 15 years later.
 
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.