PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

bobbyowenquiff said:
It all points to the PL repeating the mistakes of UEFA and making allegations against City with little or no evidence. The main purpose of this witchunt has been to undermine City driven by a hostile (and in come cases racist) media.
We still don't know why the PL would put its own reputation at risk to do this. When Richard Masters came in he had an opportinity to review this politically-motivated investigation and find a way to stop it and save some face.
Instead he chose to go nuclear. It's not clear why he did this but you can only assume he was under severe pressure from the Directors at MUFC and LFC who actually vetted his appointment. We still don't know why three other candidates (who were offered the PL job) pulled out. Perhaps part of the deal with Masters was that a condition of taking the job was that "he should do something about City." Something smells about the entire case.
Click to expand...
Not just the racist, bigoted media, anti-City agenda is also driven by the YANK CARTEL. Below are articles you may find interesting:

Optus Sport

sport.optus.com.au sport.optus.com.au
www.knupsports.com

How the Premier League Became Dominated by U.S. Owners

American ownership in the English Premier League has advanced greatly in the last 20 years. Here's how teams were purchased, and rapid growth!
www.knupsports.com www.knupsports.com
www.buzz.ie

Eamon Dunphy concerned by growing influence of American owners on Premier League

Money is the only thing driving American owners like Todd Boehly
www.buzz.ie www.buzz.ie

sportsconflict.org

Do American Owners Understand the EPL Landscape? - Sports Conflict Institute

Jacksonville Jaguars’ owner Shad Khan recently purchased a controlling interest in an English Premier League (EPL) soccer club Fulham in a deal thought to be worth between $250-300 million. During the last decade Americans have acquired a controlling interest in three fabled clubs (Arsenal...
sportsconflict.org sportsconflict.org

If I don't post before Saturday, it wasn't suicide!
 
Blue_Lightsaber said:
FxtHTCOWwAEuF5l
Click to expand...
the hero on the left is only there because of that greedy git in the middle and the fans still worship him
 
Jim Tolmie's Underpants said:
Click to expand...

It's a great pity that the EPL couldn't investigate the running of the club during the Swales years, of how a club at the top of the league was ripped apart and brought to the edge of ruin. That would have been a more useful exercise, one that might have protected other clubs going our way and allowing asset strippers into the game. The EPL should really be thankful for what has happened in Sheik Mansour's ownership.
 
abu13 said:
I say a quote over on the Caf where they are discussing the charges, one guy is talking about revenue and how we can be anywhere near matching their numbers, one point he made is that they have a worldwide fan base of millions where we proberbly have maybe 100k.

So lets think about that, 1 in every 2 City fans in the world attend every home game? Do they honestly believe the shit they come out with, the biggest issue they miss is that they can't let go of us being some little club. Like they have failed to recognise how we have transformed the team they have also failed to see what we are doing on a global basis in growing the club.
Click to expand...
probably 75% of their fanbase never put a penny into the club

I know for a fact that 75% of the rags I know who live near me don't put a penny into the club and they live less than 8 miles from the shithole
 
halfcenturyup said:
While you are here PB, what is your view on the wording of the first set of breaches?

"provision by a member club to the Premier League, in the utmost good faith, of accurate financial information that gives a true and fair view of the club’s financial position".

There is no requirement that annual accounts be accurate, as far as I know, only that they show a true and fair view. Certainly, no annual accounts I ever audited were accurate in all respects, but as long as the true and fair view given by the accounts wasn't impaired, they got a clean audit report nevertheless. And the PL handbook doesn't talk about accurate financial information either, only about annual accounts with an unqualified audit opnion, and certain other information (interim/forecasts) prepared on the same basis. So what are they getting at with this "accurate" comment, do you think?
Click to expand...
I agree that's there's no specific requirement in the PL rules re "accurate" or "true and fair" accounts but the latter falls within the normal requirement for audited accounts. You've obviously read the relevant rules, as I have, and I'd guess that they're potentially referring to sponsorship revenue that (in their view) is disguised equity investment. Well, on the basis of the CAS hearing, I simply can't imagine them landing that breach.

I originally thought it also included charge 2, regarding player & manager remuneration, but then why wouldn't they include that in the first charge? In the case of those payments, I've said I don't think they'd be classed as material.

Like me, you've audited accounts and there's no real concept of "accurate", as you say. There's various accounting treatments and interpretations that can be applied to things like revenue and stock. I audited a brickworks, where the annual stocktake always seemed to happen on the day before I was told to turn up. Now they were never going to count every single brick but came to an approximate number, which I'd either accept, or query and we'd agree a compromise, but how "accurate" was that?

So as I said, I'd guess it's about disguised equity investment, which they presumably claim has been treated as revenue rather than a balance sheet item.
 
abu13 said:
I say a quote over on the Caf where they are discussing the charges, one guy is talking about revenue and how we can be anywhere near matching their numbers, one point he made is that they have a worldwide fan base of millions where we proberbly have maybe 100k.

So lets think about that, 1 in every 2 City fans in the world attend every home game? Do they honestly believe the shit they come out with, the biggest issue they miss is that they can't let go of us being some little club. Like they have failed to recognise how we have transformed the team they have also failed to see what we are doing on a global basis in growing the club.
Click to expand...
Nor can they monetise those billions of fans.
 
laserblue said:
Millions of fans worldwide, the vast majority of whom buy knock off shirts and other merchandise that puts the square root of fuck all into the rags' coffers.
Click to expand...

Not even fans. It was a credit card survey from one of their sponsors, MasterCard.

The question was had you heard the name Manchester United?

560m apparently said yes. For context, Kim Kardashian has almost 100m followers across her socials.

I've heard of plenty of things I know fuck all about!
 
tolmie's hairdoo said:
Not even fans. It was a credit card survey from one of their sponsors, MasterCard.

The question was had you heard the name Manchester United?

560m apparently said yes. For context, Kim Kardashian has almost 100m followers across her socials.

I've heard of plenty of things I know fuck all about!
Click to expand...
I saw one guy interviewed in the Far East. When asked which team he supported, he said:
”Manchester.”
 
tolmie's hairdoo said:
Not even fans. It was a credit card survey from one of their sponsors, MasterCard.

The question was had you heard the name Manchester United?

560m apparently said yes. For context, Kim Kardashian has almost 100m followers across her socials.

I've heard of plenty of things I know fuck all about!
Click to expand...
Another one was "Have you ever watched a Manchester United match on TV?" If any of us had been asked that we'd have all said yes.
 
tolmie's hairdoo said:
Not even fans. It was a credit card survey from one of their sponsors, MasterCard.

The question was had you heard the name Manchester United?

560m apparently said yes. For context, Kim Kardashian has almost 100m followers across her socials.

I've heard of plenty of things I know fuck all about!
Click to expand...
That was just before they had a share issue or something like that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top