PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[pauls]

Snide ****!

Used to find this guy quite informative but as suspected he's pandering to the masses Absolutely no need to make that comment and hope it comes back to bite him !

 

[Gordyola]

It was probably me but I'd ignored the Etihad/Etisalat sponsorships because there not a hope in hell of those being found in breach of the PL rules in my opinion. CAS made sure of that and the PL would have to have solid evidence that a load of people lied at CAS to overturn that.

Fordham was probably in the region of £12/13m a year for three years (2013/14 to 2015/16) and Mancini's contract was for £1.75m a year for the years 2009/10 to 2012/13.

So never more than £13m in any one year.

Over three years a total of >£40M
The PL gave the rags the same for Covid losses plus £35 more in relation to the sale of 27% of £1B of rags debt to Scruffy Jim

 

[Oldham Exile]

The UEFA judge was always going to find against City just like the City Judge was always going to find for City.

But this post and the one above it from @halfcenturyup - only add to the concern of some posters - and perhaps we are right not to take at face value this line that KCs will not be swayed in anyway etc.

If this is the true explanation then some of the more faint-hearted of us have some justification for our concerns

 

[cheekybids]

Used to find this guy quite informative but as suspected he's pandering to the masses Absolutely no need to make that comment and hope it comes back to bite him !

It’s more disappointing when it’s someone who should know better.

 

[Oldham Exile]

The German judge was simply following CAS practice of not voting against his nominator. Mad, but that seems to be the case. Later events, in which a junior in his practice issued a paper ‘proving’ City’s guilt, suggest he actually thought City had broken the rules. But just hang on to “There is no evidence that…etc”, eleven times.

But.............

And I will draw a line under this concern after this post....

Again can posters not see how this just adds to the concern.

Eleven times the CAS panel stated that there was no evidence - yet one of it's members voted against CITY purely because it was the tradition to vote in line with their sponsor

 

[give it to gordon]

But this post and the one above it from @halfcenturyup - only add to the concern of some posters - and perhaps we are right not to take at face value this line that KCs will not be swayed in anyway etc.

If this is the true explanation then some of more faint-hearted have some justification for our concerns

This worries me the UEFA judge voted in favour of his employer regardless of the facts. What's to say the 3 KC won't do the same ?

 

[Invisible Man's Bandage]

We just don't know what this cash injection is for. Could be anything; the stadium in New York, our stadium expansion, another acquisition or something else.

The thing that bothers me is that, whereas City generate huge cash flows, the rest of CFG gobbles up cash overall, with no end in sight. Of course the Sheikh can afford it and may even consider it a price worth paying to support some wider objective but it's a shit business proposition in my view.

Obviously we are the jewel in the crown and NYC may well be worth the huge investment in a new stadium eventually but the rest of CFG is hardly worth bothering with. I don't get the implied 5.5 billion valuation the new share issue shows. I also don't understand how the multi club model benefits Manchester City as I couldn't give a rats arse about any of the other clubs.

 

[Gone for a Burton]

But.............

And I will draw a line under this concern after this post....

Again can posters not see how this just adds to the concern.

Eleven times the CAS panel stated that there was no evidence - yet one of it's members voted against CITY purely because it was the tradition to vote in line with their sponsor

Lord Pannick will somehow raise and challenge this protocol as being 'outwith the spirit of the panel' who are there only to rule on the facts of the case, not to follow historical voting precedent.

 

[Gone for a Burton]

Obviously we are the jewel in the crown and NYC may well be worth the huge investment in a new stadium eventually but the rest of CFG is hardly worth bothering with. I don't get the implied 5.5 billion valuation the new share issue shows. I also don't understand how the multi club model benefits Manchester City as I couldn't give a rats arse about any of the other clubs.

Good night & leave the blinkers by the bed !!

 

[Oldham Exile]

Obviously we are the jewel in the crown and NYC may well be worth the huge investment in a new stadium eventually but the rest of CFG is hardly worth bothering with. I don't get the implied 5.5 billion valuation the new share issue shows. I also don't understand how the multi club model benefits Manchester City as I couldn't give a rats arse about any of the other clubs.

I don't want to go off-track, but I would think that there are going to be significant benefits for CITY from the multi-club strategy. Long-term, it must be greatly contributing to our global brand and more practically, the route though which Savinho was brought to the club seems to have been supported by our model.