PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[slbsn]

Fair point about the Etihad funding, but I think you are coming at this from a different PL angle to me.

Unless I am mistaken, you think, quite reasonably, the PL came to the referred allegations based on the seriousness of the charges, the potential financial impact and there being a good likelihood of success.

I think they simply came to the referred allegations based on a list of unresolved issues arising from the leaked documents and from all the previous UEFA investigations. Otherwise, I find it hard to explain the Mancini allegation, for example, which must have a low likelihood of success, is immaterial, most probably time limited and is hardly serious at all in comparison to, say, the Etihad funding.

Tbh, I didn't address your other points because I didn't think they were relevant to my point. But if you are really interested, here we go.

You know the RP definitions. Imo, the PL will have been looking for evidence that Mansour, or a close member of his family, has significant influence, directly or indirectly, over the operations of Etihad. That evidence could come in many forms, it could have come from the investigation. Any suggestion would just be so complete speculation. But it could exist and it could have just come to light recently. Less conspiratorially, it's just as likely I suppose, that the club's counter-evidence wasn't sufficient to satisfy their experts.

As for FMV, that has no effect on the accounts of course, the only change in the accounts from a change in RP designation would be an additional note disclosure. And, of course, you are right that FMV only comes into play in the PL rules with FFP. I know that. Practically, though, I imagine UEFA still have their valuations from 2014 and, presumably, 2019. But again, I am not that bothered about the financial impact. I would be more worried by the reputational fall-out. The state-owned narrative would be relentless. Actually, if I was a conspiracist, I would say that's the point. Luckily, I'm not.

As anyway, as I said, I doubt it will get that far.

I don’t think any of that is very convincing. The main charges are the very serious allegations from the CAS case rather than whether the accounts needed more detailed RP notes. Surely you must see how unlikely it is.

And you haven’t addressed why wait 10 years to pursue RP? Or why not pursue since 2018? Or why not just a nice simple discrete charge about those issues? Or how City would be in possession of any of the documents showing the inner workings of Abu Dhabi or why any of it matters given we know that UEFAs own position was that Etihad was FMV. Honestly, the idea the PL never had any grounds to investigate the more serious matters or that it’s all trivial is just obviously wrong. Both parties would have guided that media away from the serious stuff years ago.

Last reply as going round in circles

 

[slbsn]

I prefer your more optimistic mode ;-)

My positions aren’t contradictory. It’s serious but City are confident. Honestly I’ve got no idea how anyone can think a 10-12 week hearing with 16 barristers is anything but a very serious process. I think some people have deluded themselves into thinking it’s all just theatre.

 

[johnny crossan]

My positions aren’t contradictory. It’s serious but City are confident. Honestly I’ve got no idea how anyone can think a 10-12 week hearing with 16 barristers is anything but a very serious process. I think some people have deluded themselves into thinking it’s all just theatre.

Notwithstanding, I persist in being encouraged by your detection of soft signals from so far unspecified sources!

 

[halfcenturyup]

So - looking at latest posts from @slbsn @ @Prestwich_Blue - it’s looking less and less positive. The technical detail goes over the head of most people so in simple terms - are we done?

Not at all. The allegations are serious but difficult to prove. Same as always. Don't confuse discussion for conclusion ....

 

[Sofiablu]

I spend a lot of time reading this thread but don’t post very often. However today I’m giving it a go. I particularly want to address the viewpoint of some, which I think is flawed and that is the trust in the legitimacy of the case against City and why the case was launched.
I don’t have the legal or accounting background of some on here, although I do have experience in 2 areas, that I think can throw a little light on some matters. Firstly I have run a successful business, in a field that was highly competitive and self regulated. Secondly within that field I was an elected member of the board that regulated the industry in question and also a member of the panel that wrote the rule book . I won’t be naming the industry.
I know from personal experience how the rules and regulations can easily be influenced by individuals and individual businesses. I also know how the executive of an industry can be completely manipulated by the more powerful organisations it is supposed to represent and regulate. It’s so easy for me to see parallels with the way the PL is run and the industry I was involved in.
Admittedly the industry isn’t as big as football but it impacted on almost every person in the U.K.
I’ll give one small example of what I mean. A newcomer to the industry came up with a new way of doing business. This immediately threatened the business model of my company and others. To stop this newcomer in its tracks we changed the rules under which business could be done. We did this by seeking help from other board members we’d worked with in the past and collectively put pressure on the executive to act.
We also went to the government department associated with our industry and via our contacts there persuaded them that the newcomers business methods were in breach of government regulations, this was highly debatable but we’d worked with the people in charge for years and had close business relationships with them. We persuaded them the newcomers methods were going to be more trouble than they were worth and they acted accordingly.
Once we’d changed the rules and persuaded government to act we then attacked the integrity of the newcomer business with their clients and they soon gave up and went away.
The point I’m, probably badly, trying to make is that businesses protect their own interests and that in many fields, including I believe football, specific interests can easily be portrayed as “looking after the interests of all parties”. Also it’s so easy for big players to influence any self regulated industry.
Obviously there’s a lot more to the scenario above but I’m aware I’ve already rambled on.
PS I’m not proud of what we did but want people without experience of business to understand how the world can work.

 

[slbsn]

Not at all. The allegations are serious but difficult to prove. Same as always. Don't confuse discussion for conclusion ....

The more this is just about some technical debate about FMV the less serious it is.

 

[1961_vintage]

I spend a lot of time reading this thread but don’t post very often. However today I’m giving it a go. I particularly want to address the viewpoint of some, which I think is flawed and that is the trust in the legitimacy of the case against City and why the case was launched.
I don’t have the legal or accounting background of some on here, although I do have experience in 2 areas, that I think can throw a little light on some matters. Firstly I have run a successful business, in a field that was highly competitive and self regulated. Secondly within that field I was an elected member of the board that regulated the industry in question and also a member of the panel that wrote the rule book . I won’t be naming the industry.
I know from personal experience how the rules and regulations can easily be influenced by individuals and individual businesses. I also know how the executive of an industry can be completely manipulated by the more powerful organisations it is supposed to represent and regulate. It’s so easy for me to see parallels with the way the PL is run and the industry I was involved in.
Admittedly the industry isn’t as big as football but it impacted on almost every person in the U.K.
I’ll give one small example of what I mean. A newcomer to the industry came up with a new way of doing business. This immediately threatened the business model of my company and others. To stop this newcomer in its tracks we changed the rules under which business could be done. We did this by seeking help from other board members we’d worked with in the past and collectively put pressure on the executive to act.
We also went to the government department associated with our industry and via our contacts there persuaded them that the newcomers business methods were in breach of government regulations, this was highly debatable but we’d worked with the people in charge for years and had close business relationships with them. We persuaded them the newcomers methods were going to be more trouble than they were worth and they acted accordingly.
Once we’d changed the rules and persuaded government to act we then attacked the integrity of the newcomer business with their clients and they soon gave up and went away.
The point I’m, probably badly, trying to make is that businesses protect their own interests and that in many fields, including I believe football, specific interests can easily be portrayed as “looking after the interests of all parties”. Also it’s so easy for big players to influence any self regulated industry.
Obviously there’s a lot more to the scenario above but I’m aware I’ve already rambled on.
PS I’m not proud of what we did but want people without experience of business to understand how the world can work.

Thanks for sharing. Would you say that you were in effect operating a cartel?

 

[JewelZee]

Last answer on this.

I’m afraid that the idea this whole thing has been some kind of half arsed prosecution or process is just wishful thinking.

If only these charges were about whether a party was related. I suspect the use of related there is a natural consequence of the main charge. If actually only £8m was Etihad and the whole thing was orchestrated by SM then inevitably Etihad was a RP because it would have been found that SM had controlled the whole thing. Your argument (and few others) seems to have the RP as a distinct main charge. That’s the disagreement - sadly I’m pretty certain the charges are simply far more serious than that. Hopefully you are right and they just ran a 12 week hearing to try and prove a highly subjective accounting point where evidence exists that even if RP, the main sponsor was FMV. Clearly, pretty unlikely even if the PL are as incompetent as you insist.

I agree the charges are far more serious but at the same time you've said yourself it would be very difficult for the Prem to basically prove that we've committed fraud. That being the case what are the Prem then up to? It does appear very plausible that they've gone big on a long shot while doing levels of damage all along the way. Based on everything we've been told by the subject matter experts, yourself included, regarding how difficult it would be for the Prem to prove the most serious charges why would anyone question the skepticism and cynicism of our supporters, myself included. As everyone uses their own experiences and instincts to form an opinion mine is that this whole thing stinks to high heaven of a targeted persecution. JM very strong O...

 

[slbsn]

I agree the charges are far more serious but at the same time you've said yourself it would be very difficult for the Prem to basically prove that we've committed fraud. That being the case what are the Prem then up to? It does appear very plausible that they've gone big on a long shot while doing levels of damage all along the way. Based on everything we've been told by the subject matter experts, yourself included, regarding how difficult it would be for the Prem to prove the most serious charges why would anyone question the skepticism and cynicism of our supporters, myself included. As everyone uses their own experiences and instincts to form an opinion mine is that this whole thing stinks to high heaven of a targeted persecution. JM very strong O...

Personally, I think the best thing to do is not to overdo the idea of PL bias or incompetence. In the scale of City’s defence team you can see City themselves took no chances and have treated it as seriously as possible.

 

[Sofiablu]

Thanks for sharing. Would you say that you were in effect operating a cartel?

I’d say we were being protectionist.