PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

You're right and I already knew that. Doh. The employees (or most of them) at one of the spun-off companies came back onto City's books. In my defence, it was late when I posted that.

Oh :). I didn't know that. But it probably makes sense that all those 2013 arrangements were unwound at the same time? Iirc, it ties into the year when Fordham's accounts become dormant, I think?
 
Update to the Fordham issue: There was something at the back of my mind about this so I went back to check something.

Our wage bill increased by over 30% for no apparent reason from 2016 to 2017. I couldn't understand or explain this at the time, as we'd won nothing in Pep's first season, so it couldn't be performance related, but I'd take a guess that this was the Fordham payments going onto the club wage bill. That doesn't necessarily mean they weren't declared to UEFA though.

The increase was aboit £65m from 2016's £197m, so around a third, which suggests all the Fordham payments from 2013 onwards were accumulated for that increase, as about £12-13m per annum seemed to be going through Fordham.

That means Fordham was not an issue after the 2016 financial year.
The Fordham thing for me will be or should be time barred anyway. Surely the Premier League knew of it way before 2018 (UEFA certainly did) and it's not a fraud situation it's a proper business transaction method. So we'd only need to show they knew about it and then the statute of limitations apply.
 
Despite one or two on this forum saying he was actually quite smart, he's always come across as limited in his understanding of many things to me and this backtracking just substantiated that. Throwing in a few big words ala Joey Barton does not make a person intelligent.
He’s a classic bluffer.
 
The Fordham thing for me will be or should be time barred anyway. Surely the Premier League knew of it way before 2018 (UEFA certainly did) and it's not a fraud situation it's a proper business transaction method. So we'd only need to show they knew about it and then the statute of limitations apply.

I don't think we know enough about the Fordham contracts and how they were fulfilled and paid and accounted for or any other clauses like the underwriting, or about Touré and how his contracts were accounted for, to be able to come to a conclusion on the image rights. We will have yo wait for the findings of the panel, I think.

One thing of which I am certain: these issues will have no effect on the true and fair view given by the accounts (which is all I care about, really) because the numbers just aren't material enough, but there may be some issues around disclosure to the PL. We really can't say based on the little we know, I think.
 

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.