PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[halfcenturyup]

Did any money actually have to move until the sponsor was ready to settle?
If we had invoiced Etisalat and booked a receivable, and they accrued an equivalent payable, why would that not be a normal practice to correctly reflect books at each end, and remove what is now perceived as this cloak & dagger 'payment' that the media is stoking everyone up to get excited about (again!).

I was going to give you a long reply but I am tired. A few points instead.

Yes, all things being equal, the accounting up to invoice creation by the club and invoice recognition by Etisalat was perfectly normal.

Why move cash? Presumably because the club had budgeted the cash inflow and needed it to pay expenses.

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter who paid who and when. The PL is saying the cash should have been shown as equity funding not sponsorship. To take that position they are effectively saying the sponsorship contract was a sham. That is going to be a hard thing to prove when the contract was fair value, when services were provided in full view of millions of people every other week and when the contract was paid in full. Especially when Etisalat is a well-respected publicly traded company and we will have statements from senior executives from Etisalat, the club and ADUG all saying that the sponsorship contract was signed and fulfilled in good faith. I really don't see what evidence they can actually have to support their disguised equity theory, apart from a couple of illegally obtained, out of context emails.

 

[jimharri]

Let's try to move on from our gooner pet. He won't be taking part in this thread again.

 

[Nicholas van Whatsisface]

I don’t think the PL are motivated by bashing City. I think they are pursuing this action as much ‘pour discourager les autres’. Regardless of whether they are successful or not in levelling the charges at City, they hope they’ll have achieved 2 objectives.

1. To demonstrate to the government their ability to self regulate and enforce the rules so as not to require independent regulation. Insofar as that is concerned, should they determine City have broken the rules and the evidence support that, they’ll want to act tough and impose sanctions. They’ll want to be not just enforcing the rules but be seen to do so.

2. To scare all other PL clubs shitless about even thinking of breaking the rules.

There’s a lot on the line for the PL. If they screw this up, they’ll lose credibility and be seen as weak leading inevitably to independent regulation. This is not all about City. There’s a much bigger picture and risk for the PL.

This is the PL, whose Chief Exec was interviewed by both United and Liverpool ahead of being appointed (both of whom are clubs you admit are directly challenged commercially by City, and both of whom hold a veto over the appointment) - and who was the fourth choice, after the three preferred candidates turned the job down due to the level of influence those two clubs had over the role?

And if you’d struggle to imagine a group of PL clubs attempting to force the League to take direct action against a single Club like that, and conspiring to remove City from a competition they had earned their place in, then you only need look as far as the nine Clubs who voted for City to be removed from the CL back in 2020 - at a point in time when we had still not been proven to be guilty of anything.

Or you could consider the letter written on your Club’s headed paper - and on behalf of Arsenal, United, Liverpool and Tottenham - which lobbied the League to implement exactly the set of rules limiting owner investment that specifically targeted City, and under which we alone are now being charged.

The PL is beholden to a set of Clubs who want to see City’s highly successful commercial model destroyed - returning them to their ‘rightful’ place at the top without actually having to work at being competent enough to beat us both on the pitch and off it.

And the leadership of the PL is directly accountable to both United and Liverpool.

It’s hopelessly naive given the above - and the acknowledged commercial damage City have caused United, Liverpool, Arsenal and Tottenham - to think bashing City specifically isn’t exactly the motivation here.

Although point one is absolutely valid, and in my view was critical to the timing of the PL’s action.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Let's try to move on from our gooner pet. He won't be taking part in this thread again.

Sigh. I try to explain to all fans of other clubs to stay out of this thread but they can't resist. It never ends well. The guy is a good poster generally, but on this topic whatever he says will just get people riled.

 

[Rory Bluelow]

I‘d have thought that the PL would want to maintain its money spinning position as the most attractive league in the world and City doing the treble surely can only enhance that being confirmation of its global pre-eminence?

You really have to remember the timing of the charges. City were “struggling” by their recent standards and Pep had expressed his public displeasure and Arsenal had a good lead in the PL. United were even talking about a possible “quad”. The announcement was framed for maximum damage, the press was being briefed while City were still being informed about charges. They had zero expectation that City would land a pure treble at that point - it was thought more likely that Pep might walk away. I suspect the PL are now a little conflicted. Watching Masters’ performance at the HoC committee was an eye-opener - he was so unbelievably lightweight. Can’t see him surviving.
Football seems to be rapidly globalising and City happen to be sat right at the top of the tree, so I agree with your general point - though that was not how they thought things would turn out for one second. But, the die is now cast and they have to deal with it. Add the known geo-political realities into the mix (Mansour at the Coronation, Mansour with Erdogan in Istanbul, multi-billion UK investment pipeline etc) The PL is in way over its head.

 

[Rory Bluelow]

You really have to remember the timing of the charges. City were “struggling” by their recent standards and Pep had expressed his public displeasure and Arsenal had a good lead in the PL. United were even talking about a possible “quad”. The announcement was framed for maximum damage, the press was being briefed while City were still being informed about charges. They had zero expectation that City would land a pure treble at that point - it was thought more likely that Pep might walk away. I suspect the PL are now a little conflicted. Watching Masters’ performance at the HoC committee was an eye-opener - he was so unbelievably lightweight. Can’t see him surviving.
Football seems to be rapidly globalising and City happen to be sat right at the top of the tree, so I agree with your general point - though that was not how they thought things would turn out for one second. But, the die is now cast and they have to deal with it. Add the known geo-political realities into the mix (Mansour at the Coronation, Mansour with Erdogan in Istanbul, multi-billion UK investment pipeline etc) The PL is in way over its head.

Shit - I’ve just replied and it looks like old Jack has got thread ban !

 

[halfcenturyup]

Shit - I’ve just replied and it looks like old Jack has got thread ban !

Well, I liked it anyway.

 

[Big Dave Watson]

Sounds like a win to me, but I would doubt the tribunal has reached a verdict yet.

Unless this is all stage managed?

A bit like someone has to interview for a job they've already been told they have got?

Even so, that would be a brilliant outcome.

I can understand a fine but why the fuck would we accept any kind of transfer ban just for a non cooperation charge, way over the top IMO.

 

[tregyblue61]

I will always remember the Mottram toilet peeper, Martin Edwards saying:

"Smaller clubs are bleeding the game dry. For the sake of the game, they should be put to sleep.

Him, Scholar and Dein have a lot to answer for.

 

[bluenova]

You really have to remember the timing of the charges. City were “struggling” by their recent standards and Pep had expressed his public displeasure and Arsenal had a good lead in the PL. United were even talking about a possible “quad”. The announcement was framed for maximum damage, the press was being briefed while City were still being informed about charges. They had zero expectation that City would land a pure treble at that point - it was thought more likely that Pep might walk away. I suspect the PL are now a little conflicted. Watching Masters’ performance at the HoC committee was an eye-opener - he was so unbelievably lightweight. Can’t see him surviving.
Football seems to be rapidly globalising and City happen to be sat right at the top of the tree, so I agree with your general point - though that was not how they thought things would turn out for one second. But, the die is now cast and they have to deal with it. Add the known geo-political realities into the mix (Mansour at the Coronation, Mansour with Erdogan in Istanbul, multi-billion UK investment pipeline etc) The PL is in way over its head.

I realise you're not suggesting that the charges were timed as an attack when City were weak, but City's position at the time of the charges was totally irrelevant.

They were clearly timed in relation to the Govt White Paper discussing an independent regulator for football, which was due just a few days later.

 

[west didsblue]

Absolutely this
I notice that the WhatsApp wankers Delooney, Harris and McGeehan have been unusually silent about it all as well
Especially as they are usually all over anything slagging us like a tramp on chips
Wasn’t the latter even featured in the video?
If he’s involved then doubt it would be Qatar. That was a deliberate attempt at deflection/distraction imo by the Times, to try and hide the true identities of the culprits
Strange indeed the WhatsApp group silence. Almost like they are all collectively trying not to draw attention to themselves all of a sudden….

They’ve put their own video on YouTube. It’s an hour long so can’t be arsed watching it. Hatchet job on CAS from what I can see.

Apologies if this has already been posted and discussed or if this is the one people are already talking about.

 

[manimanc]

Nothing will come of it, i'm very confident of that. I like to come on here and read the stressheads opinions though.

You calling me a stresshead :)

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Apologies, I conflated the two. Etisalat is the one I’m talking about currently. Leaving the time barring issue to one side, how is ADUG effectively paying their sponsorship money for them for 2 years, not disguised equity funding?

Because it was later reimbursed by Etislat and City were open about it. It was all accounted for. It has also been suggested on here by one poster that what happened is the contract was being renewed and the new contract going forward required the sponsor money to be paid direct to ADUG who then passed it on to City. Perhaps the reasoning was that a lot of our sponsors also owe payments to other CFG teams and City are only allocated their share so it has to be administered centrally. I am just speculating but as far as I understand what City did was not disguised in any way and the audits were fine. It wasn't illegal and doesn't look like a breach of any UEFA rules on FFP.

 

[manimanc]

Let's try to move on from our gooner pet. He won't be taking part in this thread again.

These gooners on here are a thorn in our side. They always show their true colours in the end.

 

[KS55]

I know exactly where’s you’re coming from Fuzzy.

And while we should (and will) leave no stone unturned to ensure as independent as possible a panel, I am also reassured by the fact that regardless of the integrity of the charges themselves, in our pocket, we are toting, in the words of our Chairman, in whom I place inexorable trust, ‘irrefutable evidence’.

The Irrefutable evidence is our audited accounts and the paperwork to back those up.
CAS agreed that there would have to have been a massive conspiracy by City, its auditors and its sponsors for that to happen and dismissed the idea.
But remember UEFA investigatory chamber saw the audited accounts and still found us guilty. Is the PL capable of such egregious behaviour?

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Exactly.

Been saying this for years, that there's a story (or even two or three..) to be uncovered and told about who's been driving this vendetta against City for the past decade and a half.

All it would take is for one of the lard-arse UK sports journalists, helped by an expert finance journalist or other, to either get off that lard-arse or else to grow the cojones (..or even both..) to do the hard yards and investigate it all, then bring into public discussion and awareness.

I hasten to add, I won't be holding my breath while they decide to do so..

The Times made a fool of themselves. The dirty tricks war being waged behind the scenes is a bigger news story than a re-heated piece of evidence from the CAS papers which has already been published by the Guardian in 2020. If Matt Lawton had any integrity he would investigate who produced the video and what their motives are. Why did the Times choose to share the story with a discredited individual like Piers Morgan?
Mind you the English press did not carry a single line of the damning evidence (involving clubs all over Europe) from the year-long Rui Pinto trial. They just ignored it because City were not mentioned. Perhaps as Jack Nicolson said in "A few good men" they "cant handle the truth.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Because it was later reimbursed by Etislat and City were open about it. It was all accounted for. It has also been suggested on here by one poster that what happened is the contract was being renewed and the new contract going forward required the sponsor money to be paid direct to ADUG who then passed it on to City. Perhaps the reasoning was that a lot of our sponsors also owe payments to other CFG teams and City are only allocated their share so it has to be administered centrally. I am just speculating but as far as I understand what City did was not disguised in any way and the audits were fine. It wasn't illegal and doesn't look like a breach of any UEFA rules on FFP.

 

[Gray]

So Jack is no longer allowed to “hack it?”

 

[Inter Me Nan]

You calling me a stresshead :)

Touche young man.

 

[1961_vintage]

What permantly pisses me off is the very one-sided coverage this gets and the farce of it all.

It's because the whole thing is an orchestrated smear campaign.

Those responsible and those supporting this campaign still see City as a Sheikh Mansour vanity project, with the Club being used as nothing more than a vehicle to promote the name of the UAE internationally.

Now they reason that by besmirching our name in this way, our owners will realise that their strategy of promoting the UAE via City has been foiled, and in fact the opposite has occurred - ie the UAE is seen as synonymous with foul practice and cheating. So naturally our owners will quickly sell-up and leave, removing the threat and returning the Premier League to the good old days of closed-shop cash cow dominance.

They are, clearly, utter fucking morons.

But nevertheless we owe them all a huge debt of gratitude because being unfairly treated brings out the utterly ruthless, dominant side of City throughout the Club. "We'll see. On the pitch". This attitude, this mindset speaks of one thing - serial fucking winners.

Compare that with the impact of blowing smoke up the arses of their commercially favoured red tops. Rules of the game bent and interpreted in their favour, backed by an obsequious and servile client media and which produces what exactly? It produces nothing more than arrogant, bloated, deluded, entitled wankers who will win absolutely fuck-all. Serial fucking losers.

So, cheers for smears!