PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

You know what he means.
AI provides a definition
The term "woke terraces" is a derogatory slang term used to describe neighborhoods or housing developments perceived as having a high concentration of left-leaning or progressive residents. It is often used by right-wing commentators and social media users to mock or criticize these areas.
The term is considered offensive by many, as it is seen as a way to stereotype and dehumanize people based on their political beliefs. It is also seen as a way to dismiss or downplay legitimate concerns about social justice issues.
The term has been used to describe a variety of neighborhoods and housing developments, including those in urban areas, suburban areas, and even rural areas. It has also been used to describe specific housing developments, such as those built by developers who are known to be progressive or those that are marketed to progressive buyers.
The use of the term "woke terraces" is often accompanied by negative stereotypes about people who live in these areas, such as that they are all wealthy, white, and out of touch with the concerns of ordinary people. These stereotypes are often inaccurate and misleading, and they can serve to further divide and polarize society.
It is important to note that the term "woke terraces" is not a neutral or objective term. It is a loaded term that is used to denigrate and dehumanize people based on their political beliefs. It is also a term that is often used to spread misinformation and disinformation about these areas and the people who live there.
If you are interested in learning more about the term "woke terraces," I recommend that you do some research on the topic. There are many articles and blog posts written about the term, and it is also a topic that is often discussed on social media. However, it is important to be aware that the term is often used in a derogatory and offensive way.
 
True..
But because nobody dares question United accounts they always will get away with it, but allowing £40million in allowances for Covid 19 is crazy when others had been turned down or only claimed around £2 million, other clubs' allowances per week to United is not £2million a week,

Quick Question Stefan...

The Legal fees City has been involved in like the PSR win and Now the 115 charges can City put them in the allowances like United did with the sale of shares, I would like to know how much legal fees City have had over the last season
Our lawyers officially represent CFG at these hearings. Do City reimburse CFG?
 
Our lawyers officially represent CFG at these hearings. Do City reimburse CFG?

Legal fees fall onto the Premier League hands because we won the PSR fight or I think we did hahaha
Nothing has been said about the damages and losses we have had because of the ruling,

I heard the renewal of the Etihad deal was one of the sponsorships the Premier League blocked and it was BIG and for another ten years of being our major sponsor, this could have been anything from £800million to £1billion
 
Legal fees fall onto the Premier League hands because we won the PSR fight or I think we did hahaha
Nothing has been said about the damages and losses we have had because of the ruling,

I heard the renewal of the Etihad deal was one of the sponsorships the Premier League blocked and it was BIG and for another ten years of being our major sponsor, this could have been anything from £800million to £1billion
Costs were probably split in the APT hearing but we may never know. It would be a very good indicator who the Tribunal assessed as the overall winner.

Etihad has gone through for at least this season (look around) and it’s very large. We don’t know if City have successfully gone back on the rejected deal or simply accepted a lower amount as approvable. The ten year deal with the compounded uplifts in the later years will exceed £1bn.
 
Costs were probably split in the APT hearing but we may never know. It would be a very good indicator who the Tribunal assessed as the overall winner.

Etihad has gone through for at least this season (look around) and it’s very large. We don’t know if City have successfully gone back on the rejected deal or simply accepted a lower amount as approvable. The ten year deal with the compounded uplifts in the later years will exceed £1bn.

Yep.. it's gone quiet on the results of the hearing, City claimed a win and damages and losses could be available
But the Premier League also claimed a victory but the main rules had to be changed, in fact, they have been voted on by the members and the victory was in the hands of the Premier League to keep it with renewed rules

What was the first Etihad deal worth ten years ago £600million, So it had to be over £1billion spread across 10 years
I think Manchester City can now ask for any major company for sponsorship, We are good value because of the past 10 years, The best team should be able to pick the best deal for them,

Sometimes People forget we are not little old Manchester City with no fans. Our revenues are 2nd to none and stand up to the best in the world
 
Well I know a bit more about it now thanks to @Mr Fraser posting the AI generated definition. Doesn’t really seem related to football or a reason to walk away from the game.

Does the definition he gives accord with your meaning?
We are going somewhat off topic & tbh I really can’t be mithered to get involved in that particular debate.
 

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.