PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Silva2021]

I kind of enjoy reading this thread, not sure why!!

but we do have some brilliant posters who provide some thoughtful and educated pieces and we definitely seem better when the detail is discussed.

However, anyone with a slightly negative view kind of gets rail roaded a bit.

Overall, I don’t think we will be found guilty, based on for me most intelligent opinion I hear is Stefan who seems fair and articulate (so I’m basing mainly on this). I would love Stefan to have been a Liverpool fan and be saying the same thing as to ensure no confirmation basis (no offence Stefan, as of course we love having you as a fan).

My point is I do believe be it the United fan or Neville that is asking has our window been effected by the charges and I think it most certainly have.

Now, I’m not saying it means guilt but the facts on their own we have had a quiet window. The sale of Alvarez I think is based on the reasons Alvarez has said and is no way affected by the charges. The decision to replace or go with youth again could be effected by the charges.

We could get a points deduction
We could get relegated

So would any new signing want that over not having that uncertainty.

Would Bruno G want the risk of upsetting the Newcastle fans to join us and then have his PL dream lost due to no fault of his own.

Would Haaland renew now or wait and see what happens.

Same for Pep.

Whether we like it or not the litigation causes us issues that we either have to indemnify against or reassure to the point they do not feel they need them.

I think the club has made the decision that it’s better to get the litigation done and then hopefully we can be in a better situation to move forward on all the above.

 

[TedofChume]

Brilliant mate. Very informative and cuts through the normally lengthy articles we see on city and 115.

I do hope you are correct.

All the info is there if you look, but it takes time, so most people don't bother. I thought I'd still through it all just to see how bad it could be. The bit about depreciation swung it though.

 

[mcfcpride]

Cowards can't beat us on the pitch!

 

[TedofChume]

That's a lot of work. I will have a look when I have the time.

But are you sure your numbers are right? Aren't they claiming 60 million a year of equity investment disguised as Etihad sponsorship? In which case it would be an adjustment of 180 million for a three year period for Etihad alone?

All the reported values are £40m for Etihad and £10m for Etisalat deals.

There are various alleged payments from ADUG for £67m, £90m etc but if true without seeing what money went from City to ADUG it's impossible to draw any conclusions. I get the impression City leant ADUG money to invest and these are repayments.

 

[burning blue soul]

It's a daily struggle lol

They have certainly been on here swatting up for the script :D

 

[Norbiton]

Anyone thinking non cooperation will just be a fine will probably be disappointed. It obviously makes sense that such a minor offence is a fine, and it should be, but we can only go off past offences and judgments of the Premier League. There has only been one case that I know off thats been found guilty of non co-operation and that was the Everton case. In particular their appeal reduction was due to being found guilty of this charge but not actually being charged for this offence in the first place. So a complete legal fuck up. This is why they got a 2 points reduction (I think it was that right?) from their initial penalty. I seriously doubt it was a legal fuck up in the first place though and it's set them up to deduct us 10 points if they find us guilty on the charge.

My memory was that the panel laughed themselves sick at the non cooperation charge which included things like documents being provided in a different format from that requested, but my memory isn’t very reliable these days

 

[Metal Biker]

The PL are the native English and City are the evil great heathen army..

Incase anyone forgot how it turned out:

The Great Heathen Army lost...? Quite considerably, in fact.

 

[BerkshireBlue]

Or you could argue Evertons original 10 point penalty included the non co-operation charge, and it was reduced to 6 on appeal when the non co-operation charge was removed, so that element was worth a maximum of 4 points

Yep if that was right I could remember the exact numbers. 4 points it is then

 

[Blue_Lightsaber]

The Great Heathen Army lost...? Quite considerably, in fact.

No they won.

But like life.. not every battle is a final victory. The battles keep coming.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Hopefully this will cheer you all up!


I have done some analysis of the PSR case based on the information provided by Rui Pinto and Der Speigel, here:

Manchester City's Cozy Ties to Abu Dhabi: Sponsorship Money – Paid for by the State

Since the sanctions imposed on Chelsea owner Roman Abramovich, links between English football clubs and authoritarian states have been in the spotlight. Internal documents show that Manchester City has received funding from a government agency in Abu Dhabi.

www.spiegel.de

Der Spiegel released the above information two months after City were charged, with the aim of driving the nail in the coffin, but their evidence really sucks and their analysis of it is just naive.

Firstly from reading the PDFs of the documents they share to download (RM.pdf, ADUG,pdf and FFP.pdf), I am pretty certain City haven't actually done anything wrong and should be cleared of all charges.

Allegation 1 is complicated to understand, but the evidence doesn't match what they are claiming at all and it just doesn't add up. A more logical explanation is the one I put forward. I might be wrong about this, but it makes sense to me, you might need to be an accountant to follow the argument though.

The other points I make should be a lot easier to follow.

I've done a worst case PSR calculation (Allegation 4), by going through City's accounts and adding it all up, and concluded that the sums would be:

2013-2016: -£108,113,000
2014-2017: -£75,263,000
2015-2018: -£66,157,000

The limit is -£105,000,000

In other words a minor breach of PSR in the first period of £3million (c.f. Everton £19m & Forest £30m).

Remember, this is if we have done everything they have accused us of and our combined sponsorship deals are re-valued at the Thomas Cook rate (£2m) that we had way back before the Eithad deal. Valuing the deals at say £3.1m or higher means City don't break PSR at all.

How could the Premier League have got this so wrong? Well, we know they rushed it all through, and I don't think they considered that City can adjust their earnings (AEBT) by the depreciation on the building of the Etihad Campus. This completely destroys their case.


Summary: Overview of the Allegations

The Flawed Case Against Manchester City: - Man City Stuff

A Deep Dive into Der Spiegel's Misguided Allegations On April 7th, 2022, Der Spiegel published an article aimed at substantiating the claims against Manchester City, drawing on a collection of redacted emails and scanned documents as their primary evidence. However, after closely examining the...

mancitystuff.co.uk

Allegation 1 Analysis : Inflated Sponsorship

Allegation 1 – Inflated Sponsorship Deals Paid for by ADUG - Man City Stuff

Part 1 - Financial Issues This section references the downloadable files found on this article at Der Spiegel - HERE In the complex and secretive world of football finance, discerning truth from manipulation is no easy task. The case surrounding Manchester City and the emails leaked by Rui...

mancitystuff.co.uk

Allegation 2 Analysis : Mancini and Toure

Allegation 2 – Mancini and Toure - Man City Stuff

This section references the downloadable files found on this article at Der Spiegel – HERE Preamble In the murky world of leaked documents and high-stakes legal battles, it's hard to discern what's authentic and what isn't. UEFA, in its case before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS)...

mancitystuff.co.uk

Allegation 3 Analysis : FFP - The Own Goal

Allegation 3 – The Own Goal – City Breached UEFA FFP - Man City Stuff

In the intricate landscape of football regulations, one of the key charges against Manchester City revolves around the allegations made by the Premier League is that the club breached UEFA’s Financial Fair Play (FFP) rules for three consecutive seasons. However, this charge by the Premier League...

mancitystuff.co.uk

Allegation 4 Analysis : It simply doesn't add up

Manchester City Allegation 4 – Analysis - Man City Stuff

A proper look at how the numbers add up. In the intricate web of football finance, where numbers and figures can often be as slippery as the pitches the players compete on, the case against Manchester City and the financial practices under scrutiny require a deep dive into the club's financials...

mancitystuff.co.uk

I've also got a video that I have put together showing how the Premier League have altered their statement on 06 feb 2023 multple times since and a few other points about this. I need time to finish them off. I will rpeort back when they are live!

Brilliant content. Thanks for posting it. It confirms what most of us believe: That City will be cleared unless the PL have some "smoking gun" evidence which is not part of the Der Spiegl articles, the CAS case, and the evidence which came out of the Pinto investigation. If you are right then City and all the PL clubs will have to pay huge legal costs (the PL clubs have to pay for the PL management structure). Who will pay this £500m (minimum) bill?