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

[The Colonel]

As you've read, the "less firm ground" comment was in relation to fighting FFP at CAS as some other clubs have done. The precedent is that there will be no joy there and effectively CAS are not interested. Wenger is with FIFA not UEFA but in any case and his comments will not have any bearing on this. Hypocritical as he is it is still interesting that there is likely to be a groundswell of opinion in the football world recognising that investment is essential.

Yep my mistake, Wenger a FIFA mouthpiece now.

 

[KS55]

I think it will be reduced to one year, I actually think City have done no wrong but there are too many of The Elite that are desperate to see City banned so it will be a compromise and sadly The Reigning Champions League Winners will be banned for the 20/21 Season and whoever wins it next year will do so by not beating The Holders....... So Fuck the lot of you

The elite's desperation may be reflected in their effort, but if they have nothing substantive, CAS wont be persuaded.

 

[bluemanchester]

Trawl through anyone's email correspondence you'll probably find all kinds of incriminating information. If it's about sponsorship, money, and you're an Arab Sheikh it's not difficult to do a hatchet job. context is important.

I trust City are on their guard now.

I certainly agree incriminating stuff can be found in emails I just think carelessness, pressing the wrong button, in Cooks case but in the Pearse email I just cant see what a person in his position was thinking when he wrote his email, unless the blacked out parts after carried a rider about the comment, we will soon find out if the whole email is ever published.I would hope everybody at City are now on their guard. Heres hoping.

 

[City Raider]

Does the burden of proof apply here eg we need to prove we didn’t rather than UEFA prove we did? So any stalemate falls in UEFAs favour?

 

[Gordyola]

Some interesting things here, inc confirmation of the cost of a few pictures of a proposed new stadium
The introduction of FFP was one of the key factors that convinced John W Henry and Tom Werner to buy Liverpool when the club was in financial disarray nearly a decade ago.

The premise was simple — you could largely only spend what you generated. It was supposed to stop heavy losses and limit the injections of cash from rich benefactors like Roman Abramovich and Sheikh Mansour.

The Liverpool owners were vocal supporters. When Manchester City stood accused of financial doping after unveiling a £400 million sponsorship deal with Etihad Airways in 2011, Henry tweeted: “How much was the losing bid?” Etihad Airways were chaired at the time by the half-brother of City’s owner. Henry believed it was City’s way of circumnavigating the regulations. It’s been a theme ever since.

Liverpool’s owners have long since felt that they were playing by a different set of rules and were frustrated by what they saw as UEFA’s failure to truly punish overspending.

“The biggest challenge for us has been the ignoring of Financial Fair Play,” Henry said back in 2014. “It makes it very difficult to compete. We really don’t have Financial Fair Play, or at least people are not abiding by it.”

When City were fined just £17 million (with a further £32 million suspended) in 2014 for FFP breaches, Henry viewed it as an inadequate slap on the wrist.

Liverpool were themselves cleared of breaching FFP rules in 2015. UEFA investigated after the club registered a £49.8 million loss for 2012-13 after a deficit of £40.5 million for 2011-12. The governing body accepted that Liverpool had spent £49.6 million on stadium costs which is allowable expenditure. FSG had to write off £35 million after scrapping the doomed plans of previous owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett to build a new stadium in nearby Stanley Park.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Some interesting things here, inc confirmation of the cost of a few pictures of a proposed new stadium
The introduction of FFP was one of the key factors that convinced John W Henry and Tom Werner to buy Liverpool when the club was in financial disarray nearly a decade ago.

The premise was simple — you could largely only spend what you generated. It was supposed to stop heavy losses and limit the injections of cash from rich benefactors like Roman Abramovich and Sheikh Mansour.

The Liverpool owners were vocal supporters. When Manchester City stood accused of financial doping after unveiling a £400 million sponsorship deal with Etihad Airways in 2011, Henry tweeted: “How much was the losing bid?” Etihad Airways were chaired at the time by the half-brother of City’s owner. Henry believed it was City’s way of circumnavigating the regulations. It’s been a theme ever since.

Liverpool’s owners have long since felt that they were playing by a different set of rules and were frustrated by what they saw as UEFA’s failure to truly punish overspending.

“The biggest challenge for us has been the ignoring of Financial Fair Play,” Henry said back in 2014. “It makes it very difficult to compete. We really don’t have Financial Fair Play, or at least people are not abiding by it.”

When City were fined just £17 million (with a further £32 million suspended) in 2014 for FFP breaches, Henry viewed it as an inadequate slap on the wrist.

Liverpool were themselves cleared of breaching FFP rules in 2015. UEFA investigated after the club registered a £49.8 million loss for 2012-13 after a deficit of £40.5 million for 2011-12. The governing body accepted that Liverpool had spent £49.6 million on stadium costs which is allowable expenditure. FSG had to write off £35 million after scrapping the doomed plans of previous owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett to build a new stadium in nearby Stanley Park.

Does that suggest that nearly 15M was on the existing stadium?
Not sure what the "had to write off £35M" means from a FFP point of view.

 

[FrankSwift1]

Some interesting things here, inc confirmation of the cost of a few pictures of a proposed new stadium
The introduction of FFP was one of the key factors that convinced John W Henry and Tom Werner to buy Liverpool when the club was in financial disarray nearly a decade ago.

'The premise was simple — you could largely only spend what you generated. It was supposed to stop heavy losses and limit the injections of cash from rich benefactors like Roman Abramovich and Sheikh Mansour.'

The Liverpool owners were vocal supporters. When Manchester City stood accused of financial doping after unveiling a £400 million sponsorship deal with Etihad Airways in 2011, Henry tweeted: “How much was the losing bid?” Etihad Airways were chaired at the time by the half-brother of City’s owner. Henry believed it was City’s way of circumnavigating the regulations. It’s been a theme ever since.

Liverpool’s owners have long since felt that they were playing by a different set of rules and were frustrated by what they saw as UEFA’s failure to truly punish overspending.

“The biggest challenge for us has been the ignoring of Financial Fair Play,” Henry said back in 2014. “It makes it very difficult to compete. We really don’t have Financial Fair Play, or at least people are not abiding by it.”

When City were fined just £17 million (with a further £32 million suspended) in 2014 for FFP breaches, Henry viewed it as an inadequate slap on the wrist.

Liverpool were themselves cleared of breaching FFP rules in 2015. UEFA investigated after the club registered a £49.8 million loss for 2012-13 after a deficit of £40.5 million for 2011-12. The governing body accepted that Liverpool had spent £49.6 million on stadium costs which is allowable expenditure. FSG had to write off £35 million after scrapping the doomed plans of previous owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett to build a new stadium in nearby Stanley Park.

The premise was simple — you could largely only spend what you generated. It was supposed to stop heavy losses and limit the injections of cash from rich benefactors like Roman Abramovich and Sheikh Mansour.

So basically they were upset because they signed up for a cartel with a licence to print money without any competitive. In fact competition was legislated against and frowned upon. How upsetting that the Billionaire owners didnt have it all there own way and had to run there business competently.

This doesnt happen in any other industry in fact its illiegal. The way that parts of the media put forward this argument and fawn over Liverpool is galling.

 

[Rammyblues]

Expect the worst, hope for the best.

 

[King KdB of Belgium]

The time has now come to scrap FFP in its current form. It is totally stupid that you can make a profit and fail FFP. While a club across the city can lose millions and pass FFP. This is totally beyond my comprehension.

The whole board of UEFA needs a root and branch clean sweep. Every person on a UEFA board needs to be removed and replaced. With younger blood and with those who have played the game at the highest level.

I am worried that when and if CAS clears us, that UEFA will not try again to ban us from their competitions. Those guys on both the IC and AC committees of UEFA won't try something else to get us banned. They just hate are guts they maybe even racist.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

The time has now come to scrap FFP in its current form. It is totally stupid that you can make a profit and fail FFP. While a club across the city can lose millions and pass FFP. This is totally beyond my comprehension.

The whole board of UEFA needs a root and branch clean sweep. Every person on a UEFA board needs to be removed and replaced. With younger blood and with those who have played the game at the highest level.

I am worried that when and if CAS clears us, that UEFA will not try again to ban us from their competitions. Those guys on both the IC and AC committees of UEFA won't try something else to get us banned. They just hate are guts they maybe even racist.

First part - not sure they can without some very curious behaviour. So it's tosh.
Second - utter tosh.
Third part - complete and utter tosh.