UEFA FFP investigation - CAS decision to be announced Monday, 13th July 9.30am BST

[Brightwell Bros.]

Gang, the NYT sold their stake in Fenway 7 years ago.

I don't think the reporter nor the NYT has an agenda. He has sources in UEFA who are jabbering about what punishment they're musing. It's a tough guy act. The story makes that clear in fact -- some of his sources are worried about City pushing this to CAS, others are afraid they'll be seen as toothless and their reputations damaged personally if they don't do "something." They are in conflict -- there's not a consensus yet is my read.

He's probably had this story for awhile (a few other reporters have hinted at it over the last few days) but -- as I already wrote -- this is a prosecutor claiming he's going to ask for the harshest punishment the law can allow. That's a press conference type of statement. Doesn't say anything about the guilt or innocence of the accused; doesn't say anything about the prosecutor's ability to win the case.

Yes, the timing is geared for near maximum impact when eyeballs are already on us and the league. That's the paper's job -- to maximize eyeballs. Did City get smeared? Well, sort of -- I don't know that the article is especially balanced but we haven't given him much to work with in terms of official statements (not that he wanted nor asked for them).

The agenda is UEFA's, and complaints from dippers et al that City fans are some kind of "cult" because we believe so is laughable. I have an MBA, but I don't need one to know that FFP was designed to curtail exactly the kind of investment the Sheikh has made, not to prevent more Boltons. If you want to prevent Boltons, start with cash flow and leverage levels and an owners ability to fund the club -- and specifically the cushion a club has over its debt service -- not with "net income" or "losses" on a cumulative nor annual basis.

Entirely this. It's a faction in a broader political organisation trying to position themselves in a tangle. It'd be like taking the European Research Group or Momentum's statements as gospel. It shapes the terrain, for sure, but that's all it does.

 

[Bluemeanster]

The inside track that Liverpool (Fenway) could have on whats happening within the FFP investigation may be from former Liverpool CEO and Lifelong Liverpool Fan Rick Parry .
Mr Parry sits on the UEFA CFCB (Club Financial Control Body). The same body who are investigating City for breaches of FFP (Surely a serious conflict of interest). https://www.uefa.com/insideuefa/dis...rolling-body/investigatory-chamber/index.html
He is also CEO of New York Cosmos which could explain why this news article broke in the New York times. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Parry
Its probably no coincidence that this story has broke today , the day after we beat LFC to the title.

 

[razman]

The NYT article is probably accurate or well intended. I don't detect any bias in it anyway but recall this from only a few weeks ago when LFC were reportedly the chief agitant in demanding that the Premier League respond to the Der Spiegel allegations.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/f...emier-League-investigate-Manchester-City.html

I don't have the link to the article , but there was an article in the telegraph , which stated Liverpool reached out to city and said that the above was nonsense and they didn't ask or push the premier league for anything

 

[Marvin]

Gang, the NYT sold their stake in Fenway 7 years ago.

I don't think the reporter nor the NYT has an agenda. He has sources in UEFA who are jabbering about what punishment they're musing. It's a tough guy act. The story makes that clear in fact -- some of his sources are worried about City pushing this to CAS, others are afraid they'll be seen as toothless and their reputations damaged personally if they don't do "something." They are in conflict -- there's not a consensus yet is my read.

He's probably had this story for awhile (a few other reporters have hinted at it over the last few days) but -- as I already wrote -- this is a prosecutor claiming he's going to ask for the harshest punishment the law can allow. That's a press conference type of statement. Doesn't say anything about the guilt or innocence of the accused; doesn't say anything about the prosecutor's ability to win the case.

Yes, the timing is geared for near maximum impact when eyeballs are already on us and the league. That's the paper's job -- to maximize eyeballs. Did City get smeared? Well, sort of -- I don't know that the article is especially balanced but we haven't given him much to work with in terms of official statements (not that he wanted nor asked for them).

The agenda is UEFA's, and complaints from dippers et al that City fans are some kind of "cult" because we believe so is laughable. I have an MBA, but I don't need one to know that FFP was designed to curtail exactly the kind of investment the Sheikh has made, not to prevent more Boltons. If you want to prevent Boltons, start with cash flow and leverage levels and an owners ability to fund the club -- and specifically the cushion a club has over its debt service -- not with "net income" or "losses" on a cumulative nor annual basis.

Excellent summary. Hard to conclude otherwise. Worth bearing this in mind because it will spawn a whole host of duplicate spin-offs. Some reporters might make their own enquiries.

 

[CharliesRightPeg]

The NYT still seem to partner with Fenway Group on their American sports enterprises
Given that there is very little new or quoted evidence, it wouldn't surprise me if it is a Liverpool inspired hacket job

 

[colesy]

I read some of the article, and there really is no substance to it, and as it has been previously mentioned, it's the prosecutor saying what he would like to deliver. Again it appears to allude to something that we were already punished for, can we really be prosecuted twice for the same offence?

 

[TheThirdDeano]

Interesting isn’t it that we beat a club whose owner is American and now a new scoop has appeared, in the New York Times no less, saying we’re going to be banned.

Well get it over with you ****s; enjoy having a champions competition without the champions of the strongest league in the world.

 

[TonyM]

Makes us not being in the CL final a prize in itself. FFPuck you CL.

 

[PrezIke]

So the article comes from the NY Times. That would be based in America, remind me again who owns the Dippers and Manure....

Sorry, but the NY Times is a serious investigative newspaper and would not go about allowing such an article to be published without having real reason to believe it's sources to be legit.

I cannot see them ever being in the business of smearing City over Liverpool and Utd because they are American owned and risking their entire reputation over a sports article.

This is beyond fanciful and sad that we are at a point in time where this kind of reasoning is accepted as plausible nor can we parse the difference between those who post things on Twitter or periodicals" without strong cheques and balances within/reluctance to publish news without strong evidence versus a newspaper with such standing as the NY Times (not that the NY Times cannot be criticised, btw).

 

[Achillias]

I just want to see the same fighting spirits against those fuckers from UEFA as PSG have shown. Being mister nice is absolute the wrong tactic in this matters. Don't be nice and just fight them in courts.

FFP needs to get down. It's ridiculous that you can't even spend your own money in to your own club, because some cartel organisation from France and some fuckers who are scared of competition decided that it's wrong to spend your own money. It's unbelievable. How did the EU didn't halter this kind of unheard of self protection and corruption.

It was wrong to not connect with that Belgium lawyer who is fighting them as well in court. Hopefully the club have some very talented lawyers on this case. It's the only way to beat them. Take FFP down for good and don't settle. CAS it is.