PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[No One Understands]

Not sure I want that.

Will get pelters for this but I want the club to accept wrongdoing, make some changes to the hierarchy and commit to running the club honestly from here on out. Take the punishment on the chin so long as it's not stripping us of past titles. We can't keep doing this every few years.

End of the day, I'd rather a club I can feel proud to support.

I've been aching to add more people to my ignore list. Thanks mate

 

[ultimateharold]

Isn’t the fa a shareholder in the premier league
Anyway I’m tired now off to bed I pop

Hmm I would guess probably actually. I just wanted a cheap pop at the FA

 

[Metalartin]

I can see he understands it but I'm not sure like how he's phrased it because it causes confusion.

"Artificially inflating the income" sounds too much like "artificially inflated sponsorships".

If an owner is paying part of a sponsors income and doesn't disclose it, that would be disguised equity funding, if I remember the terminology right.

One breach relates to Fair Market Value and the maximum a related party sponsor can pay and one breach is dishonesty in accounting information from the ownership. I thought the latter was a far more serious breach because if a related party sponsorship was outside of FMV, then the remainder can be deducted from the break even calculations. So a club could potentially still fall within the break even limit in the case of an artificially inflated sponsorship.

 

[jrb]

Qatari relations with Saudi and the UAE/Abu Dhabi are at an all time low so a Qatari owned MUFC would still want us in the mud I assure you. Our only ally is Newcastle in this league.

I doubt very much they’d work with the owners of Arsenal and Spurs. As for Liverpool, depends who the owners will be and where they’re from. But I accept your point.

 

[Sky Blue Thinking]

Instead of hiring mr panic button
Wouldn’t it be cheaper to hire a computer hacker and wipe all the fas computers clean

Wonder if there are any clubs who could recommend one?

 

[BamberBridgeBlue]

Qatari relations with Saudi and the UAE/Abu Dhabi are at an all time low so a Qatari owned MUFC would still want us in the mud I assure you. Our only ally is Newcastle in this league.

Remember when we used to discuss football? Fatty Foulkes didn’t have to put up with this shit.

 

[Wretched Vengeance]

 

[Devil's Advocate]

What's their beef regarding Mancini then?

Deflating our costs and in breach of some PL rule or another.
It's made to sound like its the crime of the century but it's peanuts really.

 

[jrb]

I can see he understands it but I'm not sure like how he's phrased it because it causes confusion.

"Artificially inflating the income" sounds too much like "artificially inflated sponsorships".

If an owner is paying part of a sponsors income and doesn't disclose it, that would be disguised equity funding, if I remember the terminology right.

One relates to Fair Market Value and the maximum a related party sponsor can pay and one is dishonesty in accounting information from the ownership. I thought the latter was a far more serious breach because if a related party sponsorship was outside of FMV, then the remainder can be deducted from the break even calculations. So a club could potentially still fall within the break even limit.

He’s explaining it in basic terms so even the most biased and uneducated Rag, Scouser, and Cockney can get their heads around it.

 

[Silva2021]

I can see he understands it but I'm not sure like how he's phrased it because it causes confusion.

"Artificially inflating the income" sounds too much like "artificially inflated sponsorships".

If an owner is paying part of a sponsors income and doesn't disclose it, that would be disguised equity funding, if I remember the terminology right.

One relates to Fair Market Value and the maximum a related party sponsor can pay and one is dishonesty in accounting information from the ownership. I thought the latter was a far more serious breach because if a related party sponsorship was outside of FMV, then the remainder can be deducted from the break even calculations. So a club could potentially still fall within the break even limit.

He seems to give a fair assessment of what we’re up against.

Could maybe have doubled down on City deny all of this, but only a very small clip.