• Current Donation Goals

CFCnet Admin

Media / Press

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Ham said:

I'm not sure why anyone feels that the powers that be won't want to deal with this. If it was Barca or Real then maybe but city are nouveau riche with absolutely no European pedigree. 

On the one hand, this was all established long ago.  Everyone knows that PSG and City were cheating, that their "excuses" were clear rubbish, and that if UEFA had ever meant what it had said, it would have to ban them.  I don't think this news will change a single person in their conviction of PSG and City guilt.

And on the other I am not quite sure what City or PSG have done legally wrong.  FFP gives a huge amount of scope to clubs to get around it.  But transfer pricing (technical term, not footballers) and related party transactions are legislated upon clearly in every jurisdiction and there are clear rules on how to account for it.  The idea that Etihad can simply write cheques to City and get away with it as a loophole doesn't work.  The only way to get around it is for UEFA to fail to do its job.
FFP rules also give a ridiculous amount of scope to UEFA to treat transgression of FFP extremely mildly.  Part of that is that clubs that talk to UEFA and explain what they are doing, and claim that excess spending will soon be reversed won't get punished.

So in producing rubbish accounts and talking to UEFA, City and PSG have done nothing wrong (if their auditors approved them).  In letting them off, UEFA have done nothing (legally) wrong.  Unless someone can show the smoking gun of an out right and proven bribe, there is nothing more to see here, 

The real story is not what happened in 2014, let alone what happened pre-FFP.  The real story is the 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018 accounts which continue to be winked at.

Everytime someone says "it was a disgraceful murder" you should hear "I'm not going to talk about the serious stuff".  Everytime you hear "it seems City/PSG were up to some naughty stuff in 2012" you should know what that means too.

 

BTW if I recall right, City used the same team of big 3 accountants to prepare  and audit their books as UEFA used to write the FFP rules in the first place.

14 minutes ago, Lump Of Celery said:

I would have thought it is something the tax man might be interested in too, especially if these other companies have been cooking the books as well. HMRC have upped their regulations regarding money laundering which is what this sounds like.

On tax - that is precisely why there is such very very clear guidance on reporting related party transactions.
On money laundering - heaven help the City if HMRC ever starts to look at that.  HMRC may have upped changed regulations, they aren't catching anyone yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Ham said:

Good point. Are they, for example, showing outgoing sponsorship contributions of £35m as opposed to £8m?

For a company like Etihad I suspect there are so many ingoings and outgoings they just get lost. However this Fordham company seems to have been a shell company which pays City players there image rights (thus not showing on City accounts) and then the Sheikh reimburses them for doing so, sounds like laundering foreign money to me.

La Liga have said they will take it to the EU if Uefa do not investigate so it appears there is already pressure on them to do something. There is more to be exposed on Weds and Thurs too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ham   
6 minutes ago, Droy was my hero said:

On the one hand, this was all established long ago.  Everyone knows that PSG and City were cheating, that their "excuses" were clear rubbish, and that if UEFA had ever meant what it had said, it would have to ban them.  I don't think this news will change a single person in their conviction of PSG and City guilt.

And on the other I am not quite sure what City or PSG have done legally wrong.  FFP gives a huge amount of scope to clubs to get around it.  But transfer pricing (technical term, not footballers) and related party transactions are legislated upon clearly in every jurisdiction and there are clear rules on how to account for it.  The idea that Etihad can simply write cheques to City and get away with it as a loophole doesn't work.  The only way to get around it is for UEFA to fail to do its job.
FFP rules also give a ridiculous amount of scope to UEFA to treat transgression of FFP extremely mildly.  Part of that is that clubs that talk to UEFA and explain what they are doing, and claim that excess spending will soon be reversed won't get punished.

So in producing rubbish accounts and talking to UEFA, City and PSG have done nothing wrong (if their auditors approved them).  In letting them off, UEFA have done nothing (legally) wrong.  Unless someone can show the smoking gun of an out right and proven bribe, there is nothing more to see here, 

The real story is not what happened in 2014, let alone what happened pre-FFP.  The real story is the 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018 accounts which continue to be winked at.

Everytime someone says "it was a disgraceful murder" you should hear "I'm not going to talk about the serious stuff".  Everytime you hear "it seems City/PSG were up to some naughty stuff in 2012" you should know what that means too.

 

BTW if I recall right, City used the same team of big 3 accountants to prepare  and audit their books as UEFA used to write the FFP rules in the first place.

On tax - that is precisely why there is such very very clear guidance on reporting related party transactions.
On money laundering - heaven help the City if HMRC ever starts to look at that.  HMRC may have upped changed regulations, they aren't catching anyone yet.

Did you read the article? (Genuine question, not a pop).

Mansour is literally paying himself any FFP shortfall.  This goes beyond related parties.

Etihad, Etilsat, Abu Dhabi Tourist Board etc have to be falsifying their accounts to balance these books surely?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ham   

Two incredible points;

1) Der Spiegel claims that Etihad’s sponsorship was “apparently” supplemented by the Abu Dhabi United Group (ADUG)*. Chumillas is alleged to have written in one 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".

2) Der Spiegel has also  reported Manchester City lawyer Simon Cliff recalling a conversation between City chairman Khaldoon Al Mubarak and Fifa president Gianni Infantino, who was then Uefa general secretary, in which Khaldoon allegedly “said he would rather spend 30 million on the 50 best lawyers in the world to sue them [Uefa] for the next 10 years”, before adding that this was a chance “to avoid the destruction of the rules and organisation”.

 

*ADUG is basically Mansour himself

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ham   

Final one from me on the subject.  This article is just staggering.

* Infantino should resign or be sacked. He actively and deliberately undermined an investigation by his own organisation.

* PSG valued their sponsorship of Qatar at €215 per year over 5 years. (Almost €1bn). The true value was €3m in total.

* Similarly with City, their "sponsorship" was valued by them at 80 times it's true value. 

* Their response was to bully UEFA into backing down with a threat to bankrupt UEFA within weeks. 

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/financial-fair-play-manchester-city-and-psg-pact-with-the-sheikhs-a-1236414.html

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ham said:

Did you read the article? (Genuine question, not a pop).

I did read the first article you linked to.  There isn't a lot there you could take to a court.  And in the end, it is the auditors who take responsibility - I'm not sure the world can take the collapse of another big auditing firm.  

It does seem to me that City and PSG got away with that.  And the only point to be made now is about the current years.

Like you, I have made some repetitive points on FFP over the years.  Mine are:

  • It has always been illegal - against national and EU laws about restricting competition.  
  • Any one challenged could always get out by threatening to take it to court
  • There no real loopholes in the technical details - whether it is Mbappe loan fees or City sponsorship, there are a ton of rules and definitions to protect the taxman, minority shareholders and auditors that UEFA can use to prevent these kinds of cheating.
  • But UEFA always has the option of just saying "they are working their way back to self-funding". (and there are supposed to be secret meetings)
  • FFP was always fake.  A pretence at Fair play, not a real thing
  • It was an attempt to maintain the status quo and prevent Barca, BM, Man U and the like from real competition (and Chelsea got in just in time)
  • PSG and Man City through billions at it to break in, and UEFA has no real power to do anything.

The best you can hope for Ham, is that an actual bribe can be traced, and half the UEFA team get thrown out, and new guys come in to do the same.

1 hour ago, Ham said:

* PSG valued their sponsorship of Qatar at €215 per year over 5 years. (Almost €1bn). The true value was €3m in total.

* Similarly with City, their "sponsorship" was valued by them at 80 times it's true value. 

Hardly hot news.  We know that full well.  I'm pretty sure you have posted on it a dozen times.

Its part of the invisible news that everyone knows but no one ever refers to.  Like the Nato countries that fund ISIS or the links between Skripal and collusion in the 2016 elections to spy on Trump.  Or the England friendly in Trinidad & Tobago as part of its bid to host the WC.  Or how the Brexit agreements were always win/win and always going to be easy to sort out.  Or the Elephant curve.  There but no one talks about them.

Edited by Droy was my hero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ham   
35 minutes ago, Droy was my hero said:

 

Hardly hot news.  We know that full well.  I'm pretty sure you have posted on it a dozen times.

 

True that I've commented many times that I considered their sponsorships to be overvalued. 

The actual figures ARE hot news this week. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Ham said:

True that I've commented many times that I considered their sponsorships to be overvalued. 

The actual figures ARE hot news this week. 

What does actual mean.  Some bloke says they are 80 times over valued.  People in the past said they were 5 or 10 times overvalued.  We are just revising the PSG subsidy from EUR 180mn to EUR 210mn.  a year.

It is all as relevant as Clattenberg admitting he fixed that Chelsea Spurs game.  Everyone knew.  And just like Graham Poll a few years later, he was shuffled out of reffing very soon after.  But no one did or say anything in public.  
Has any major football figure said anything yet?  Other than "it was a terrible terrible murder".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ham   
5 hours ago, Droy was my hero said:

What does actual mean.  Some bloke says they are 80 times over valued.  People in the past said they were 5 or 10 times overvalued.  We are just revising the PSG subsidy from EUR 180mn to EUR 210mn.  a year.

It is all as relevant as Clattenberg admitting he fixed that Chelsea Spurs game.  Everyone knew.  And just like Graham Poll a few years later, he was shuffled out of reffing very soon after.  But no one did or say anything in public.  
Has any major football figure said anything yet?  Other than "it was a terrible terrible murder".

Actual means valued by Price Waterhouse Cooper. That's their job. 

There's a bit of a disparity, wouldn't you say? PSG themselves put forward that their sponsorship of Qatar was worth €215m a year even though they weren't expected to name the stadium after the country or even wear the name of the country on their shirts. What did Qatar get for the money?

La Liga chiefs have said things in public. PWC said something in public. The head of the investigation team quit because what he was saying was completely undermined by that conman Infantino. 

Why do you always have to take a contrary view on everything? What has Clattenberg not sending anyone off for to do with anything? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Ham said:

Actual means valued by Price Waterhouse Cooper. That's their job. 

There's a bit of a disparity, wouldn't you say? PSG themselves put forward that their sponsorship of Qatar was worth €215m a year even though they weren't expected to name the stadium after the country or even wear the name of the country on their shirts. What did Qatar get for the money?

La Liga chiefs have said things in public. PWC said something in public. The head of the investigation team quit because what he was saying was completely undermined by that conman Infantino. 

Why do you always have to take a contrary view on everything? What has Clattenberg not sending anyone off for to do with anything? 

 

If you want to be a cheer leader for "City and PSG are up to no good",  or "Clattenberg was a disgrace who risked the careers of our players to 'make a game of it;" then I am 100% right behind you.
On the other hand, if you think anything will happen as a result, I just don't believe it.

I don't think I am taking a contrary view on anything.  I think you are taking a contrary view in predicting something will happen as a result of this report.

 

33 minutes ago, Ham said:

There's a bit of a disparity, wouldn't you say?

Between what Der Spiegel says and what City claimed .  Yes.
Between what Der Spiegel says and what everyone previously knew - no difference at all 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now