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

[Prestwich_Blue]

But surely it should not concern UEFA that the EC was funding Etihad who utlised some of those funds to pay sponsorship as a normal expense to their business.

I don't think it should. As I've said before, what if they borrowed the money from a bank to fund it? That's no concern of UEFA's.

 

[Roachy]

A question.
Are City aware of the detailed reasons behind UEFA's decision?

I would suggest yes, as City attempted to submit a ton of stuff to them at the outset.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

So I've posted a while ago about why Chelsea aren't treated the way City are. I think it boils down to three things:

1) Unbelievably I think the biggest factor was during Chelsea's initial rise from 03-07 Ferguson was still going strong at United. All fears of dominant newcomers could be put to one side knowing that the 'great Fergie' would be the last bastion of justice and stand up to the mean upstarts. His successes in 07-09 sealed that opinion. A lot of the anti-City talk went into hyperbole from around 2014, after Ferguson had retired. If it weren't for Klopp now winning it with Liverpool the anti-City rhetoric I reckon would have been even worse, as crazy as that might seem, as the fears of domination would have been far more real.

2) Chelsea never looked as looming as City did. Sure they spent money on players and on their academy, but City built an entire state of the art new training and academy complex, expanded the stadium, developed a singular style of play through ALL of the teams, set up the CFG, and have developed much better financially all things considered, on top of hiring the most significant manager of the past 20 years. I reckon there's more here too.

3) And finally, Chelsea hadn't been the moneybags team for too long before City got money. And City got money that blew Chelsea's money out of the water. And those initial 3 or 4 years after Chelsea's spending had already slowed down made City a far more terrifying threat to the elite than Chelsea with big transfer outlays going up until 2011. Why fight both City and Chelsea?



Chelsea still get a rough time in the press, although Lampard's presence has slowed it down. It's just nobody is afraid of them so the vitriol is kept to a low. I do recall a Chelsea supporting friend of mine getting bothered during their last title win under Conte as he felt the media was trying to unsettle and undermine the players and the manager the whole time, although that's just his opinion.

I think that after City, Chelsea get the next worse coverage in the media. When we arrived at the top table it took the pressure off them. Look at the difference in coverage when media darlings Liverpool won the CL compared to Chelsea whose CL win was a 24 hour wonder in the press and then largely ignored. The UK media sucks up to their two cash cows United and Liverpool and everyone else gets crap coverage in my view. It's one of the reasons why most media firms are dying on their feet. They are ignoring the silent majority of sports fans who don't support United or Liverpool.

 

[Proy]

Fair fucks.

I’d be a dick to argue with that or bring any rivalry into it.

 

[SebastianBlue]

A question.
Are City aware of the detailed reasons behind UEFA's decision?

There’s no indication they have given City the full text of the decision or supporting materials (it’s possible, funny enough, that UEFA may not have had them ready when they made the announcement) but I am fairly sure the club know most — if not all — of their reasoning behind the ban and the supporting “evidence” they’ll present to CAS, as well as their argument for why their investigation was within their own rules (even though it likely wasn’t).

It will be some time before we as fans get to see it (if we ever really do), though.

 

[PepInYourStep]

Neville speaking sense there although he must've been keeping his FFP opinions quiet before now,,

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

But City’s current position is that the owner should be able to invest. The position is it didn’t happen and even if it did it has been settled previously

This legitimises the debate about Shiek Mansour ‘bankrolling’ the club

Gary Neville is right. FFP is entirely the wrong way to assess and monitor financial stability. When people say it wasn't designed to stop investment by owners like Sheikh Mansour, that's EXACTLY what it does and appears to be designed to do. What it should be doing is making sure investment is responsible and sustainable. Just looking at the P&L account and adding back or subtracting a few miliion here and there simply doesn't come close to achieving that.

The classic example of FFP is that you can have a club that makes a great profit, say £30m, in one year, then the owner starts to run it irresponsibly and it just breaks even the next. Finally. in the third year, it makes a £30m loss. That club would pass FFP yet just a cursory glance at the trend of the bottom line should be ringing alarm bells.

 

[sir baconface]

Fair play to rat boy Gary Neville. How amazing that an oft-criticised ex-rag is one of the very very few to speak up.

 

[John Wayne]

There’s no indication they have given City the full text of the decision or supporting materials (it’s possible, funny enough, that UEFA may not have had them ready when they made the announcement) but I am fairly sure the club know most — if not all — of their reasoning behind the ban and the supporting “evidence” they’ll present to CAS, as well as their argument for why their investigation was within their own rules (even though it likely wasn’t).

It will be some time before we as fans get to see it (if we ever really do), though.

Yes, City will have had a substantial decision promulgated and given to them. It is unreasonable to expect anyone to lodge grounds of appeal without a thorough and proper determination.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

I've just heard than **** Simon Jordan on the radio with Sean Custis, sports editor at Sun.

According to Jordan we have falsified broadcasting revenue for the Champions League this year.

"There's no way City can earn £88m and more than Liverpool did for winning it."

I want City to bury this twat.

The broadcasting revenue is the revenue, we don't have a say in it.

The dumb fuck chooses to ignore we got a bigger share of the pool as champions of England.

Jordan has been making one defamatory comment after another for months. I don't understand why we have not taken action against him. His comments have been broadcast and repeated online. It would be easy to stop him not least because it prejudices our chance of a fair hearing. He has told lie after lie. He can't prove any of it so would lose against any action we take.

 

[nmc]

I've done 3 in the last 3 days. Bolt From The Blue is my usual home, I did Ian Cheeseman's Forever Blue on Sunday, where we mainly talked about home game issues but I did a 10-minute vlog beforehand on this, and I've just come off the Man City Show. All are always worth listening to.

can I have your autograph?

 

[SebastianBlue]

Yes, City will have had a substantial decision promulgated and given to them. It is unreasonable to expect anyone to lodge grounds of appeal without a thorough and proper determination.

You’re not familiar with UEFA, I gather?

 

[Blue Hefner]

Gary Neville is right. FFP is entirely the wrong way to assess and monitor financial stability. When people say it wasn't designed to stop investment by owners like Sheikh Mansour, that's EXACTLY what it does and appears to be designed to do. What it should be doing is making sure investment is responsible and sustainable. Just looking at the P&L account and adding back or subtracting a few miliion here and there simply doesn't come close to achieving that.

The classic example of FFP is that you can have a club that makes a great profit, say £30m, in one year, then the owner starts to run it irresponsibly and it just breaks even the next. Finally. in the third year, it makes a £30m loss. That club would pass FFP yet just a cursory glance at the trend of the bottom line should be ringing alarm bells.

I agree but that line of defence won’t help City at this stage or will it?

 

[Bazzmand Show]

Fair play Neville and Carra defending us on Sky, basically saying FFP is a load of shit.

 

[John Wayne]

You’re not familiar with UEFA, I gather?

Not even they would be tha......hang on a sec

 

[BluessinceHydeRoad]

"...The investigation will focus on several alleged violations of FFP that were recently made public in various media outlets" (UEFA statement 7 March 2019) was all the information given about the scope of the investigation, but it does say "several" violations and it does specify that that these charges arise out of media reports, almost certainly Der Spiegel. Stefan Borson argues that UEFA cannot reopen a case where the time limit has expired and I pray that he is right. The only thing that worries me is Chumillas's email. Conn's details of Khaldoon's membership of the executive council is not a cause for concern because he is not part of the ownership structure at City? And a "US aviation industry document" is nothing like authoritative enough on its own to call into question City's or Etihad's accounts. But can the Chumillas email be used as evidence that City misled the original investigation and that the investigation can be reopened? Would this amount to City "overstating sponsorship revenue" both in our accounts and the break even information even if the information in Chumillas's email could be proven to be accurate? Would the fact that the scope document appears to have been passed on to City only after the referral decision make any difference apart from suggesting a very flawed process?

 

[SebastianBlue]

Gary Neville is right. FFP is entirely the wrong way to assess and monitor financial stability. When people say it wasn't designed to stop investment by owners like Sheikh Mansour, that's EXACTLY what it does and appears to be designed to do. What it should be doing is making sure investment is responsible and sustainable. Just looking at the P&L account and adding back or subtracting a few miliion here and there simply doesn't come close to achieving that.

The classic example of FFP is that you can have a club that makes a great profit, say £30m, in one year, then the owner starts to run it irresponsibly and it just breaks even the next. Finally. in the third year, it makes a £30m loss. That club would pass FFP yet just a cursory glance at the trend of the bottom line should be ringing alarm bells.

This.

It should also be an assessment of debt *and* revenue, not just revenue.

The fact that debt is almost entirely ignored is a very obvious indicator of why FFP was designed in the way it was.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Fair play to rat boy Gary Neville. How amazing that an oft-criticised ex-rag is one of the very very few to speak up.

That was great by Neville. To have the balls to stand up and say things against his old club is impressive. He is 100 per cent correct and the fact he has spoken out will do a lot to help City. He didn't have to say anything. I hope he shames some of the twats in the media who have hung our club out to dry without any evidence.

 

[bobmcfc]

sorry If already mentioned but @Karen got quoted lol

 

[Exeter Blue I am here]

Maybe I’ve become too accustomed to matchday or post-defeat threads but I actually think most of the response on here has been pretty measured.

However some people (not you) are looking for clarity where it doesn’t exist. Not even our most knowledgeable members are in possession of the full picture.

Yeh, doubtless true. Doesn’t sit well with the control freak in me though!