Generic small time football blather thread FOREVER

[LondonBlue 548]

 

I think these new rules make the boardroom almost more important than the pitch. Which feels crazy.

 

City have fantastic revenues thanks to the business acumen of our current owners, nothing like our old toilet paper magnate Peter Swales. That means we can spend more, perpetuating the cycle. Not fair i know.

 

I have no doubt that you'll get good sponsorship, etc, as everything looks good about Newcastle, but it'll take time.

 

The new rules still favors the established clubs. Fortunately we've clawed our way into that group just in time.

 

The red cartel and their pet (Spurs) are stilling trying to boardroom their way to the top.

 

 

 

[Gemmill 34627]

2 minutes ago, LondonBlue said:

 

City have fantastic revenues thanks to the business acumen of our current owners

 

 

 come on. I've no doubt these people are good at business, but you've got some pretty fucking lucrative related party shit going on too. Stuff that the new rules prevent us and anyone else from doing. 

 

[Dazzler 5553]

9 minutes ago, Gemmill said:

 

 come on. I've no doubt these people are good at business, but you've got some pretty fucking lucrative related party shit going on too. Stuff that the new rules prevent us and anyone else from doing. 

 

 

tbf is that not the shit there's a fraud investigation going on over?

[LondonBlue 548]

9 minutes ago, Gemmill said:

 

 come on. I've no doubt these people are good at business, but you've got some pretty fucking lucrative related party shit going on too. Stuff that the new rules prevent us and anyone else from doing. 

 

 

 

 

City always publish clear reports every year and it's an easy scan - see pages 67 and 68 for revenue https://www.mancity.com/annualreport2023/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/manchester-city_annual-report_2022-23.pdf

 

do you not think that an Abu Dhabi company would see it as an honour to be associated with Abu Dhabi royalty? that it would be strategic even? Etihad Airways has been growing massively in recent years thanks in part to exposure via us, last year it clocked 35% growth.

 

You and i both know that related party is just a way for the red cartel to reign in your spending. and it's unfair.

 

 

 

[LondonBlue 548]

23 minutes ago, Dazzler said:

tbf is that not the shit there's a fraud investigation going on over?

 

 

Yes. thats the first set of breaches below.

 

I apologize for this but details of the Premier League Rules that the Club is alleged to have breached are as follows:

 

1. In respect of each of Seasons 2009/10 to 2017/18 inclusive, the Premier League Rules applicable in those seasons that required provision by a member club to the Premier League, in the utmost good faith, of accurate financial information that gives a true and fair view of the club’s financial position, in particular with respect to its revenue (including sponsorship revenue), its related parties and its operating costs, namely:
(a) for Season 2009/10, Premier League Rules B.13, C.71, C.72 and C.75 (from 10 September 2009, Premier League Rules B.13, C.71, C.72, C.79 and C.80);
(b) for Season 2010/11, Premier League Rules B.13, C.78, C.79, C.86 and C.87;
(c) for Season 2011/12, Premier League Rules B.13, C.78, C.79, C.86 and C.87;
(d) for Season 2012/13, Premier League Rules B.16, E.3, E.4, E.11 and E.12;
(e) for Season 2013/14, Premier League Rules B.15, E.3, E.4, E.11, E.12 and E.49;
(f) for Season 2014/15, Premier League Rules B.16, E.3, E.4, E.11, E.12 and E.50;
(g) for Season 2015/16, Premier League Rules B.16, E.3, E.4, E.11, E.12 and E.50;
(h) for Season 2016/17, Premier League Rules B.16, E.3, E.4, E.11, E.12 and E.51; and
(i) for Season 2017/18, Premier League Rules B.16, E.3, E.4, E.11, E.12 and E.51.

 

2. In respect of:
(a) each of Seasons 2009/10 to 2012/13 inclusive, the Premier League Rules applicable in those Seasons requiring a member club to include full details of manager remuneration in its relevant contracts with its manager, namely:
(1) for Seasons 2009/10 to 2011/12 inclusive, Premier League Rules Q.7 and Q.8; and
(2) for Season 2012/13, Premier League Rules P.7 and P.8; and
(b) each of Seasons 2010/11 to 2015/16 inclusive, the Premier League Rules applicable in those Seasons requiring a member club to include full details of player remuneration in its relevant contracts with its players, namely:
(1) for Seasons 2010/11 and 2011/12, Premier League Rules K.12 and K.20;
(2) for Season 2012/13, Premier League Rules T.12 and T.20;
(3) for Seasons 2013/14 and 2014/15, Premier League Rules T.12 and T.19; and
(4) for Season 2015/16, Premier League Rules T.13 and T.20.

 

3. In respect of each of Seasons 2013/14 to 2017/18 inclusive, the Premier League Rules applicable in those Seasons requiring a member club to comply with UEFA’s regulations, including UEFA’s Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations, namely:
(a) for Season 2013/14, Premier League Rule B.14.6; and
(b) for Seasons 2014/15 to 2017/18 inclusive, Premier League Rule B.15.6.

 

4. In respect of each of the Seasons 2015/16 to 2017/18 inclusive, the Premier League Rules applicable in those Seasons on Profitability and Sustainability, namely:
(a) for Season 2015/16, Premier League Rules E.52 to E.60; and
(b) for Seasons 2016/17 and 2017/18, Premier League Rules E.53 to E.60.

 

5. In respect of the period from December 2018 to date, the Premier League Rules applicable in the relevant Seasons requiring a member club to cooperate with, and assist, the Premier League in its investigations, including by providing documents and information to the Premier League in the utmost good faith, namely:
(a) for Season 2018/19, Premier League Rules B.16, B.19, W.1, W.2, W.12 and W.13;
(b) for Season 2019/20, Premier League Rules B.16, B.19, W.1, W.2, W.12 and W.13;
(c) for Season 2020/21, Premier League Rules B.16, B.19, W.1, W.2, W.12 and W.13;
(d) for Season 2021/22, Premier League Rules B.15, B.18, W.1, W.2, W.12 and W.13; and
(e) for Season 2022/23, Premier League Rules B.15, B.18, W.1, W.2, W.15 and W.16.

 

 

1 is sponsorship, so presumably Etihad & Etisalat
2 is Mancini & Fordham image rights
3 & 4 aren't about failing FFP necessarily but not submitting accurate accounts for both the PL & UEFA. Those obviously depend on 1 & 2 but the latter is unlikely to involve material amounts.

 

Most think that if the PL fail to prove 1 and 2, then 3 and 4 will automatically fail

 

SIX clubs (MUFC was one) but not us have been fined by HMRC for tax evasion via image rights. We had a dialogue with HMRC and chose to ditch Fordham on HMRC advice, but didn't break the rules.

 

Despite it taking the PL several years to put the allegations together, Man City had to correct the initially published list of charges as the PL and got some charges wrong.

 

Again sorry for that

 

[Dazzler 5553]

3 minutes ago, LondonBlue said:

 

 

Yes. thats the first set of breaches below.

 

I apologize for this but details of the Premier League Rules that the Club is alleged to have breached are as follows:

 

1. In respect of each of Seasons 2009/10 to 2017/18 inclusive, the Premier League Rules applicable in those seasons that required provision by a member club to the Premier League, in the utmost good faith, of accurate financial information that gives a true and fair view of the club’s financial position, in particular with respect to its revenue (including sponsorship revenue), its related parties and its operating costs, namely:
(a) for Season 2009/10, Premier League Rules B.13, C.71, C.72 and C.75 (from 10 September 2009, Premier League Rules B.13, C.71, C.72, C.79 and C.80);
(b) for Season 2010/11, Premier League Rules B.13, C.78, C.79, C.86 and C.87;
(c) for Season 2011/12, Premier League Rules B.13, C.78, C.79, C.86 and C.87;
(d) for Season 2012/13, Premier League Rules B.16, E.3, E.4, E.11 and E.12;
(e) for Season 2013/14, Premier League Rules B.15, E.3, E.4, E.11, E.12 and E.49;
(f) for Season 2014/15, Premier League Rules B.16, E.3, E.4, E.11, E.12 and E.50;
(g) for Season 2015/16, Premier League Rules B.16, E.3, E.4, E.11, E.12 and E.50;
(h) for Season 2016/17, Premier League Rules B.16, E.3, E.4, E.11, E.12 and E.51; and
(i) for Season 2017/18, Premier League Rules B.16, E.3, E.4, E.11, E.12 and E.51.

 

2. In respect of:
(a) each of Seasons 2009/10 to 2012/13 inclusive, the Premier League Rules applicable in those Seasons requiring a member club to include full details of manager remuneration in its relevant contracts with its manager, namely:
(1) for Seasons 2009/10 to 2011/12 inclusive, Premier League Rules Q.7 and Q.8; and
(2) for Season 2012/13, Premier League Rules P.7 and P.8; and
(b) each of Seasons 2010/11 to 2015/16 inclusive, the Premier League Rules applicable in those Seasons requiring a member club to include full details of player remuneration in its relevant contracts with its players, namely:
(1) for Seasons 2010/11 and 2011/12, Premier League Rules K.12 and K.20;
(2) for Season 2012/13, Premier League Rules T.12 and T.20;
(3) for Seasons 2013/14 and 2014/15, Premier League Rules T.12 and T.19; and
(4) for Season 2015/16, Premier League Rules T.13 and T.20.

 

3. In respect of each of Seasons 2013/14 to 2017/18 inclusive, the Premier League Rules applicable in those Seasons requiring a member club to comply with UEFA’s regulations, including UEFA’s Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations, namely:
(a) for Season 2013/14, Premier League Rule B.14.6; and
(b) for Seasons 2014/15 to 2017/18 inclusive, Premier League Rule B.15.6.

 

4. In respect of each of the Seasons 2015/16 to 2017/18 inclusive, the Premier League Rules applicable in those Seasons on Profitability and Sustainability, namely:
(a) for Season 2015/16, Premier League Rules E.52 to E.60; and
(b) for Seasons 2016/17 and 2017/18, Premier League Rules E.53 to E.60.

 

5. In respect of the period from December 2018 to date, the Premier League Rules applicable in the relevant Seasons requiring a member club to cooperate with, and assist, the Premier League in its investigations, including by providing documents and information to the Premier League in the utmost good faith, namely:
(a) for Season 2018/19, Premier League Rules B.16, B.19, W.1, W.2, W.12 and W.13;
(b) for Season 2019/20, Premier League Rules B.16, B.19, W.1, W.2, W.12 and W.13;
(c) for Season 2020/21, Premier League Rules B.16, B.19, W.1, W.2, W.12 and W.13;
(d) for Season 2021/22, Premier League Rules B.15, B.18, W.1, W.2, W.12 and W.13; and
(e) for Season 2022/23, Premier League Rules B.15, B.18, W.1, W.2, W.15 and W.16.

 

 

1 is sponsorship, so presumably Etihad & Etisalat
2 is Mancini & Fordham image rights
3 & 4 aren't about failing FFP necessarily but not submitting accurate accounts for both the PL & UEFA. Those obviously depend on 1 & 2 but the latter is unlikely to involve material amounts.

 

Most think that if the PL fail to prove 1 and 2, then 3 and 4 will automatically fail

 

SIX clubs (MUFC was one) but not us have been fined by HMRC for tax evasion via image rights. We had a dialogue with HMRC and chose to ditch Fordham on HMRC advice, but didn't break the rules.

 

Despite it taking the PL several years to put the allegations together, Man City had to correct the initially published list of charges as the PL and got some charges wrong.

 

Again sorry for that

 

[LondonBlue 548]

33 minutes ago, Dazzler said:

 

don't blame you. 

 

it's all consuming with many City fans. I think the depression, mental breakdown and suicide rates must be at an all time high in Manchester (because football is obviously everything)

 

 

[Dazzler 5553]

1 minute ago, LondonBlue said:

 

don't blame you. 

 

it's all consuming with many City fans. I think the depression, mental breakdown and suicide rates must be at an all time high in Manchester (because football is obviously everything)

 

 

Surely, you're all just looking forward to winning the Vanarama National League North title with a record win % of 100%, stealing the Johnston Paint Trophy, and probably still winning the FA Cup - despite the inevitable ban from European competitions?

[LondonBlue 548]

1 hour ago, Dazzler said:

tbf is that not the shit there's a fraud investigation going on over?

 

ooh no, there is no "fraud" investigation.

 

they avoid the word fraud as that would enable city to take it out of the hands of the PL kangaroo court and into the law courts.

 

[LondonBlue 548]

Just now, Dazzler said:

Surely, you're all just looking forward to winning the Vanarama National League North title with a record win % of 100%, stealing the Johnston Paint Trophy, and probably still winning the FA Cup - despite the inevitable ban from European competitions?

 

actually i'm looking forward to seeing the red top media meltdown and associated boiling piss when we're cleared and awarded liVARpools 1 PL title as compensation

 

[Dazzler 5553]

1 minute ago, LondonBlue said:

 

ooh no, there is no "fraud" investigation.

 

they avoid the word fraud as that would enable city to take it out of the hands of the PL kangaroo court and into the law courts.

 

Could you not do that anyway? However they try to label it, they've accused you of fraud by it's very definition.

[Dazzler 5553]

1 minute ago, LondonBlue said:

 

actually i'm looking forward to seeing the red top media meltdown and associated boiling piss when we're cleared and awarded liVARpools 1 PL title as compensation

 

I'd take it if it meant Klopp had to quit knowing his one PL title was being taken away from him.

[LondonBlue 548]

Just now, Dazzler said:

Could you not do that anyway? However they try to label it, they've accused you of fraud by it's very definition.

 

the premier league is a club and they've accused of breaking club rules.

 

we're not accused of breaking the law. it wouldn't be illegal for Sheikh Mansour to deliver a lorry load of gold to the Etihad but it would be against the PL rules.

 

if we could do that we would. IF the kangaroo court negligently ignore evidence and find us guilty then we can possibly take it to court based on negligence.

 

 

[thebrokendoll 7110]

1 hour ago, LondonBlue said:

 

actually i'm looking forward to seeing the red top media meltdown and associated boiling piss when we're cleared and awarded liVARpools 1 PL title as compensation

 

 

 

there wouldn't be enough candles in the world.

[aimaad22 3472]

6 hours ago, LondonBlue said:

 

I think these new rules make the boardroom almost more important than the pitch. Which feels crazy.

 

Ummm. That happened way before PSR or any financial rules came into place. The only reason Chelsea and City have any success in the last 20 years is because you got wealthy owners that wanted to have some fun. Everything good on the pitch happened as a result of it.

 

I don't blame you for it, it's just the modern game, and we're now hoping for the same thing. I also think PSR is protectionist bullshit. But it's not like money was not the most important thing in the game before that. 

[LondonBlue 548]

23 minutes ago, aimaad22 said:

 

Ummm. That happened way before PSR or any financial rules came into place. The only reason Chelsea and City have any success in the last 20 years is because you got wealthy owners that wanted to have some fun. Everything good on the pitch happened as a result of it.

 

I don't blame you for it, it's just the modern game, and we're now hoping for the same thing. I also think PSR is protectionist bullshit. But it's not like money was not the most important thing in the game before that. 

 

oh 100%.

 

but with the slight difference that you used to be able to freely use your own money.

 

now you have to beg sponsors for it or use income from winning stuff. we get loads from the champions league and that's set to rocket next year. hardly fair.

 

 

[The Fish 9015]

4 hours ago, LondonBlue said:

 

oh 100%.

 

but with the slight difference that you used to be able to freely use your own money.

 

now you have to beg sponsors for it or use income from winning stuff. we get loads from the champions league and that's set to rocket next year. hardly fair.

 

 

 

What I don't understand is that PSR/FFP has strayed so far from it's original remit, I don't see why it's still being spoken about like it's anything other than a way to stymie ambitious clubs with wealthy owners. 

 

It should be a measure to prevent clubs spending more than they can afford. There are better, more flexible ways to achieve that. If Forest want to spend £60m on a Brazilian left back, they should be forced to prove they have those funds liquid, and the funds to cover his wages across the term of his contract.

 

If they can? Then all power to them. 

 

Is it buying success? Well yes, just as it's always been. But for any club to launch a serious assault of the increasingly entrenched 'elite', they must be allowed to flex whatever advantage they may have. To deny them that right is to be anticompetitive.

Edited April 12 by The Fish

[Howmanheyman 26974]

Just sitting on my break with sky news in the background, just saw a clip of a grinning Klopp giving a Liverpool shirt to a sports presenter with 'Jacqui' on the back and she's squealing like a little girl shouting 'no way!' before hugging him. She's been around for years and is an experienced sports journalist. Think I've just added a little bit of sick to the cappuccino I was drinking. 

[Alex 30458]

3 hours ago, Howmanheyman said:

Just sitting on my break with sky news in the background, just saw a clip of a grinning Klopp giving a Liverpool shirt to a sports presenter with 'Jacqui' on the back and she's squealing like a little girl shouting 'no way!' before hugging him. She's been around for years and is an experienced sports journalist. Think I've just added a little bit of sick to the cappuccino I was drinking. 

 

[Howay 12462]

I see Chelsea sold one of Boehlys hotels for £75m from “blueco” to “blueco 22” both Boehly owned holding companies, and it’s apparently counted as a £75m gain for FFP 

[MrRaspberryJam 206]

https://twitter.com/GGFN_/status/1779158758687449403

[Gemmill 34627]

 

@Howayre Boehly selling a hotel to himself to get out of PSR bother. Sounds like that shit is not gonna fly. 

 

[ewerk 26473]

Putting aside how dodgy it is, you can’t keep doing it because eventually you’ll run out of family silver to pawn.

[PaddockLad 14638]

@wykikitoon is this you and your mates this weekend? 😆

 

 

[Howay 12462]

4 hours ago, Gemmill said:

 

@Howayre Boehly selling a hotel to himself to get out of PSR bother. Sounds like that shit is not gonna fly. 

 

Good, fucking disgraceful by those charlatans. It’s honestly hilarious that they’ve done all this to end up with a squad that’s probably worse than they started with.