PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Stoned Rose]

I was told by somebody who works for the club last year that the etisalat deal was problematic in terms of perception. I don’t know anymore than that I’m afraid.

You need to stop listening to the kids behind the till in the city store.

 

[blueparrot]

You phrase it like it is an issue for them.
When in reality if a club is not investigated it cannot be found guilty.

They don't need to be investigated,they hand in their accounts they fail or they don't.

 

[ufo]

I was told by somebody who works for the club last year that the etisalat deal was problematic in terms of perception. I don’t know anymore than that I’m afraid.

et tu julio?

 

[BeerIsTheBest]

I was told by somebody who works for the club last year that the etisalat deal was problematic in terms of perception. I don’t know anymore than that I’m afraid.

Maybe this is issue - been bubbling for a while. Credit Wiki for detail.

Just shows how potentially complicated all of this is! Much easier when a bloke who sold and rented telly’s was the main man!

And look at the final sentence. Not like the Yanks or even us stoic Brits have a history of repressive activity and espionage!!!

“As of 2023, Etisalat owns a stake of 14.6% in Vodafone Group one of Europe's largest telecommunication groups.In 2024, the British government warned that e&’s association with Vodafone poses a national security risk. Robert Buckland and Oliver Dowden also urged for measures to address national security concerns. They also asked for the establishment of an independent committee to monitor the risks associated with the stake held by e& in Vodafone. Dowden said the committee should consist of Vodafone employees, while Buckland said the it should be independent of both e& and Vodafone. Buckland said the committee members should be experts in national security, telecoms and human rights, pointing at the UAE’s “history of repressive activity and espionage”.

 

[Xhavenjoe]

et tu julio?

He"s down by the schoolyard

 

[manimanc]

I was told by somebody who works for the club last year that the etisalat deal was problematic in terms of perception. I don’t know anymore than that I’m afraid.

Did he have a black moustache, bulbous nose and dark rimmed glasses on?

 

[Kippax Street 1880]

Maybe this is issue - been bubbling for a while. Credit Wiki for detail.

Just shows how potentially complicated all of this is! Much easier when a bloke who sold and rented telly’s was the main man!

And look at the final sentence. Not like the Yanks or even us stoic Brits have a history of repressive activity and espionage!!!

“As of 2023, Etisalat owns a stake of 14.6% in Vodafone Group one of Europe's largest telecommunication groups.In 2024, the British government warned that e&’s association with Vodafone poses a national security risk. Robert Buckland and Oliver Dowden also urged for measures to address national security concerns. They also asked for the establishment of an independent committee to monitor the risks associated with the stake held by e& in Vodafone. Dowden said the committee should consist of Vodafone employees, while Buckland said the it should be independent of both e& and Vodafone. Buckland said the committee members should be experts in national security, telecoms and human rights, pointing at the UAE’s “history of repressive activity and espionage”.

Sheikh Mohammed actually did his military training at Sandhurst.

 

[Scaring Europe to Death]

Didnt he used to repeatedly slate us!?

He's a Brighton fan and is normally quite level headed and objective.

However he frequently appears on Talksport or Stretford Paddock and his response to their "what happens if City are found guilty" is then posted on YouTube, and usually without the actual question

Funnily enough he's never asked about City's potential innocence.

 

[asahartford1]

They don't need to be investigated,they hand in their accounts they fail or they don't.

No , not at all. Definitely no.

They had a 260 million loss over 3 years, the Premier league accepted the exceptional losses which meant there was no charge.
They did not investigate those exceptional losses or verify them.

50 million of costs for one owner paying the other owner for buying shares, all costs coming out of the club accounts.

Expect more exceptional losses this time,
1. Repairs at Old Trafford.
2.work on the possibility of a new stadium, ( some might remember the 60 million Liverpool "spent" on this.
3.More carrington spending.
4 exceptional costs for sacking 250 employees.

 

[blueparrot]

No , not at all. Definitely no.

They had a 260 million loss over 3 years, the Premier league accepted the exceptional losses which meant there was no charge.
They did not investigate those exceptional losses or verify them.

50 million of costs for one owner paying the other owner for buying shares, all costs coming out of the club accounts.

Expect more exceptional losses this time,
1. Repairs at Old Trafford.
2.work on the possibility of a new stadium, ( some might remember the 60 million Liverpool "spent" on this.
3.More carrington spending.
4 exceptional costs for sacking 250 employees.

So all you are saying is you don't believe their accounts are true, fair enough but like those that don't believe our accounts.I'm not qualified or in a position to know.