UEFA FFP investigation into 2014 filings - CAS rule City's appeal is "inadmissible"

Discussion in 'Bluemoon forum' started by razman, 7 Mar 2019.

  1. SilverFox2

    SilverFox2

    Joined:
    27 May 2014
    Messages:
    3,505
    Location:
    Almeria
    Hi PB, great to see you back on the Forum,

    I am tempted to infer that some sort of deal could be done between our Chinese owner and Etihad Airlines that benefitted both parties especially after the TC fiasco pre season which left Etihad being the eventual team carrier into China.
     
  2. nmc

    nmc

    Joined:
    9 Jan 2006
    Messages:
    11,861
    Location:
    Manchester
    United’s next sponsor will no doubt be Eastern European- to reflect where they spend Thursdays - although the Europa League is now an aspiration for them.
     
  3. petrusha

    petrusha

    Joined:
    6 Aug 2011
    Messages:
    3,409
    Location:
    Sportswashing for Vladimir Putin
    I'm in the middle of a particularly hectic and difficult day at work so don't have time to look now. And I may be wrong anyway, of course. But from memory, there was something in the Der Spiegel stuff that quoted an email purporting to state a total Etihad sponsorship figure of £ X (I can't remember the precise figures). On the next line, a figure of £ Y was noted against Etihad's name and below that, a figure (significantly larger than £ Y) of £ Z against ADUG's.

    IIRC, Der Spiegel somewhat disingenuously implied that this more or less had us bang to rights and proved that ADUG itself was to provide the cash direct, which would be a disguised shareholder investment in breach of FFP. Yet the interpretation would be equally viable that ADUG was to procure the funds from elsewhere. Indeed, given that (as PB said above) information is in the public domain that the Abu Dhabi Executive Council part-funded this sponsorship in the past, this is surely the more likely turn of events. And that basically amounts to a shareholder opting to fund an obligation of a business it owns, which is perfectly legitimate and happens all the time in the corporate world for all kinds of reasons.

    If ADEC paying the lion's share of the sponsorship is what happened, there might be certain corporate law, accounting and tax ramifications in the UAE, but something tells me they'd probably be OK on that score. And it would be irrelevant in terms of FFP compliance so would be none of UEFA's business.
     
  4. Newman Noggs

    Newman Noggs

    Joined:
    27 Dec 2009
    Messages:
    5,768
    Location:
    Gone fishin'
    Looking at the state of United and Arsenal, you can see exactly what they feared from City. If this attempt to hobble us fails, they are in deep, deep shit.
     
    cookster likes this.
  5. Prestwich_Blue

    Prestwich_Blue

    Joined:
    26 Jan 2006
    Messages:
    48,748
    Location:
    Wherever I lay my hat that's my home
    If they lose on Sunday, they would go into the bottom 3 if:
    • Norwich beat them 3-0 (or more);
    • Brighton & Everton draw 2-2;
    • Newcastle beat Wolves;
    • Southampton beat Leicester.
     
    Thomas Hearns likes this.
  6. nmc

    nmc

    Joined:
    9 Jan 2006
    Messages:
    11,861
    Location:
    Manchester
    These 2 dinosaurs still haven’t come to terms with the fact that they can no longer bully every other club in the league and simply help themselves to all the best players. I suspect (and hope) things will get an awful lot worse for Arsenal and United before they get better. The likes of Leicester and Wolves have better footballing models, better managers and access to the kind of funds that mean they can certainly match United and Arsenal in the short term. In 5 years time the likes of City and Liverpool will be in mother stratosphere to united and Arsenal... then see them moan.
     
  7. SilverFox2

    SilverFox2

    Joined:
    27 May 2014
    Messages:
    3,505
    Location:
    Almeria
    Even worse than they predicted because other teams around them have also overtaken them.
     
  8. Newman Noggs

    Newman Noggs

    Joined:
    27 Dec 2009
    Messages:
    5,768
    Location:
    Gone fishin'
    In my view that's "fox in the hen-house" syndrome. All is fine and dandy with the fattest fowl ruling the roost until the fox gets in and then, it's headless chicken time.

    These clubs have never had to compete properly. Just show up and the money rolls in. Now they haven't got a clue how to react and properly managed clubs can overtake them. In fairness to Liverpool, in their limited way, they have risen to the challenge. Spend a lot of money getting a solid team with solid players, play a consistent, if not particularly attractive game, and aim to be the best of the rest and hope we either slip up, don't get "the rub of the green" at crucial moments or they can introduce rules to remove us.
     
  9. Pablo ZZZ Peroni

    Pablo ZZZ Peroni

    Joined:
    19 May 2014
    Messages:
    1,143
    This is from Der Spiegel:
    "That money is then "routed through the partners and they then forward onto us," wrote Finance Director Andrew Widdowson in an email. That, at least, is how things were done in 2015: At the time, the deal with Etihad was bringing in 67.5 million pounds annually. But Chief Financial Officer Chumillas emphasized in an email to Pearce: "Please note that out of those 67.5m pounds, 8m pounds should be funded directly by Etihad and 59.5 by ADUG."

    This from Reuters:

    In an August 2013 email, Jorge Chumillas, then chief financial officer at City Football Group, the company through which Sheikh Mansour controls Manchester City Football
    Club (MCFC), asked Pearce about the arrangement by which money flowed through Etihad, an airline owned by the Abu Dhabi government
    "I need to understand the mechanism by which additional sponsorship flows through ADUG.
    Is it ADUG Shareholder->ADUG->Etihad->MCFC?
    Or is it rather ADUG Shareholder->Etihad->MCFC?," Chunillas wrote.
     
    KS55 and petrusha like this.
  10. Jordie

    Jordie

    Joined:
    26 Jul 2009
    Messages:
    2,131
    Location:
    In the corner of the morning in the past
    That's a lot of 'ifs', and would certainly damage our 'SOO' campaign if they come in ;-)
     

Share This Page