I have been on this thread virtually every day since it began and on the FFP threads regularly since I joined. My view has not changed since the introduction of Platini's regulations: they are clearly inconsistent with European competition law so cannot be enforced, I cannot believe how stupid the world of football is to fall for the claim that these rules are in any way fair play and I cannot see how football administrators can claim that owner investment is in any way a threat to the financial stability of a club. I hope that a part of City's case has been a full frontal assault on the validity of FFP. But I do accept that this case also involves proving that we haven't actually broken the damned rules at all, or at least showing that UEFA's claim that we did is improbable.
My knowledge and understanding of accountancy and related fields amounts to no more than listening to my mother's complaints when she was involved in the auditing of (small) companies in and around Manchester way back in the 60s. I remember discovering that the audit was a great deal more than a verification that the book keeper could add up accurately and that receipts were required for virtually every biro and paper clip purchased, so I have to wonder at the lengths and depths the auditors have to go to at City. I am grateful for the information and insights PB, projectdriver and others have made available to people, like me, who's understanding in these areas is, shall we say, very limited.
I don't actually know any more than I did a week ago and I'm certainly a lot more nervous but, funnily enough, still very confident. UEFA has been over our accounts and found us in breach of FFP in 2014. We denied any wrongdoing but were punished and punished severely. They now want to punish us again!!!! This surely cannot be permissible. We don't know but it deems that we are supposed to have inflated sponsorship deals - presumably the Etihad sponsorship to conceal owner investment - apparently according to emails which appeared in Der Spiegel. My club tell me these claims "are not true, simply not true." I believe my club and I do not know how UEFA can possibly expect to use such "evidence" to contradict audited accounts which "are a matter of legal record". Our accountants must surely have checked receipts etc and been satisfied that the accounts were a faithful and complete record. To suggest they are not is a very serious matter indeed?