PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

The pl brought this under pressure from the cartel. Either way the cartel are on a winner. City win the case, the pl is destroyed and opens the door for the super league without City. City lose, the cartel have got rid of us.
I`ve read some shit on this thread but by far and away that tops the fucking lot.
£100 million a year from Etihad will get some piss boiling and probably why the Premier League are trying to change the rules on related parties. If you look at it Etihad are getting very good exposure from their association from the club, they are posting record profits so why can’t they throw some extra money City’s way in sponsorships.
I guess ten years ago you could have argued that the sponsorship deal was over valued. However, in hindsight it was an absolutely inspired piece of business by Etihad. Just imagine how much our brand recognition has increased since that deal was signed and how beneficial that association has been to Etihad. How much would they have had to pay in advertising to reach that many people and have such a positive impact? Harris is in possession of these facts but seems not to want to take them into account. Why are these journalists so desperate to see City get screwed over?
It's becomes a problem when Company B then signs a contract to always fully disclose how much sponsorship income they get every year under threat of being punished if they don't.

Yea but what's it got to do with other companies ?

Who decides what's a fair price ? For example rags will always think their sponsorship should be more than little old City
This may be worth a listen - me v Nick Harris on the excellent Unofficial Partner podcast...

Top class performance. Fair unbiased view from Stefan. Harris tried to bate him on the email and the CAS 3 man panel.

Harris is wrong on his original claim that city broke ffp instead both parties agreed to a settlement. City themselves have denied breaking the rules and up to now we have no reason to doubt them.

The constant claim that city appointed 2 members at CAS is also wrong. UEFA had every right to say no we want another person to sit. They did not so nothing to see here, right? No wrong again!

The “layman view” is the overall takeaway from me:

City broke ffp rules- The media have driven the narrative to only include yes or no. Now that it’s with legal it will be complicated and not straightforward due to legal and accounting complexities.

Same with City are Cheats narrative. Again the media push for a yes or no. CAS said “no evidence” instead of accepting the prevailing view the conspiracies started, bribed them, 2 members on the panel etc.

The email looks bad on the face of it and any “layman” reading it would jump to something dodgy going on. When City presented the full picture to an independent CAS they again said no evidence of wrong doing on 11 occasions.

So what we have is layman scandalisation from bias agents acting in their own self interest, that includes Munich, Madrid, Barca, united, Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea, spurs etc using the sporting bodies to stop City competing and taking away their revenue and future fans.

Overall, a settlement between city and the premier league should have happened before it got to this point. City must be emboldened by the CAS verdict to say “bring it on”. The leagues motives are not clear, maybe they generally are being used by the Red clubs and maybe they want to stop an independent regulator and by stopping city they can achieve both aims. Will the brand be damaged or will it be enough that Masters goes and becomes another twisted Tebas.

Either way, the league is changing again just like it did in 92 and with the super league backdrop. It’s anyone’s guess what happens next.

On City, the league don’t seem to have evidence to back up their claim. The standard of proof is very high according to our legal experts.

I still think that once the evidence is put forward a settlement will be reached before the judgment is decided. It’s the only way both parties can win and lose. Tho I am only a layman so I could be wrong. I will wait to read from the medias unbiased truth seekers opinions once we thump United.
In fairness to Harris, I had no issue with his behaviour on this podcast. He was giving his opinion and making points and doing so in a largely non-inflammatory manner. If he could bring this attitude across into his social media posts, instead of the sensationalist nonsense he spews to garner clicks and likes from the red mafia, he actually might almost be worth listening to on this subject.
Each to their own my friend but I personally have no interest in fairness to Harris he tries to drag us through the gutter every chance he gets. I suspect his behavior was curtailed somewhat by the caliber of opponent,
Stefan explained it expertly this morning on TS emphasising the word profit. It's a shame that there are so many Muppets in the media chatting shit about FFP when they are utterly clueless and the masses lap it up.
It turned out that UEFA didnt understand their own rules, City too got them wrong. What chance journos who never read anything properly?
Harris is blinded by his hatred, he calls himself an investigative journalist trouble is he looks for evidence that in the slightest way supports his already determined conclusion
He’s just made himself look a total clown, virtually all the things he said were countered and corrected by Stefan
One example being his claim that City chose two of the CAS judges unfortunately for him Stefan explained the facts
Last edited:
That was a good listen, very factual and entertaining listening to you correct that goggle eyed prick countless times.
He came across as bitter imo, it was like the idiots on twitter coming out with absolutely nothing to do with proceedings.
Do you know what team he follows? Might explain his slapped arse take on all things city. If he classes himself as a journalist then that profession is well and truly in the gutter.

Thanks for putting it up, there's nothing more heart warming than listening to a blue who knows what they are on about.
I thought it was a Spiegel email.
As was pointed out, an email in isolation doesn't mean much (e.g. if the reply is "no, no, no, you can't do that")
I’m pretty sure that if a manager tried to submit an account that was clearly wrong, it would be rejected and never find its way onto the P&L. I have never seen this mentioned by any media, as though a stand alone email could tell the whole story.

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

  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.