Oil Money in Football | New City expose

[JohnnyKills]

What's more irritating is the faux outrage and disgust by big clubs supporters over City's alleged misconduct ,Martin Samuel of Daily Mail has written a brilliant article about this why FFP is big farce designed to maintain status quo and I for one is in complete agreement with him.

So you think clubs should be able to do whatever they like to break the status quo? Even breaking the rules?

Most people have no problem with new clubs breaking up the established elite, as long as they do it fairly (as Spurs, Liverpool, Atlético and others have all done in recent years).

 

[JohnnyKills]

What big clubs are those? Be specific and name examples.

Also the problem isn’t that City have a sugar daddy, the problem is that City’s sugar daddy is making fraudulent deals. That’s corruption and it shouldn’t be allowed regardless of who the ‘big boys’ are.
Thirdly, what City are doing isn’t taking down the ‘big boys’ or breaking up the elite, they’ve simply joined them and are actively trying to shake the tag of being considered a small club. So all they’ve done is join the group.
They haven’t bridged the gap or made it easier for other small clubs to follow in their footsteps.

Spot on.

They've actually made it harder for other clubs to join them by jacking up fees and wages. People act that they're some kind of disruptive force and they're just not.

 

[Champ]

I believe City's hand was basically forced they simply behaved in a manner most rich behave when something is denied to them they found a way around it ,yes City's dealing might not be above board but whole of premise of FFP is dodgy UEFA was coerced by Traditional Elite because they felt threatened and similarly they could have been bribed by City to get around it. Nobody comes out of it looking good.

Might not be above board?? It's abhorrent and basically cheating a system, they inflated naming rights for a stadium that they lease, from a company that has never made a profit!!
There's no conspiracy against City, if anything this 'leak' implies that UEFA positively assisted City in squirming their way out of trouble. Maybe to cover UEFAs own backs, but even so, it's clear that City hold some form of power against the so called Governing body of European football.
Corruption breeds even more corruption.

 

[Skills]

5 year European ban for both sounds about right.

 

[villain]

Juventus ,Milan ,Inter even United to name few regarding City's fraudulent deals you need to understand why it came to that because UEFA came up with farcical FFP almost making it impossible for smaller club's to ever compete with big boys.Of course end game for City is to join elite and become one of the big boys , you can't deny they have shaken up the status quo . Please elaborate how a small club could dream to compete with established elites if outside investment is throttled because that's what FFP ends up doing .

See you're conflating your stance now.
On the topic of United and most of the other 'big boys' you're referring to, we became attractive investment opportunities after we had periods of success.
We didn't get an influx of cash and then started buying all the shiny toys, we still spent within our means and invested wisely.
Almost every business out there needs to show its worth before investors will inject more cash to help sustain it.

Also, some form of regulation was needed to stop sugar daddies over spending, because despite United, Juventus, Milan, Inter having some semblance of wealth - we still had to spend within our means, because we didn't engage in fraud, because it's illegal and immoral and only leads to corruption.

So, while FFP was misguided in it's approach and roll out, the ideology behind it makes sense.
City can spend 500m every summer for the next 10 years and it won't dent the owners' wealth at all - but it will destabilise the market and price out everyone except PSG.

What City have done to circumvent that, according to these leaks amounts to fraud and leads to corruption - and yet you're suggesting that it 'might not be above board'?
The very idea that you're trying to find some equivalence between United & City's financial history is laughably ignorant.

Finally, any small club who could dream to compete will need to be successful, elite status isn't established within a few years. It took United, Madrid, Barca, Bayern, Juventus years of winning and success to be considered elite, and they represent 0.0001% of football clubs for that very reason, eliteness isn't something to be taken lightly, and it shouldn't be something that can be bought, especially from fraudulent means.

Also, having an owner who is rich/injects cash doesn't guarantee success, see; Leeds, Malaga & Newcastle.

Imagine being okay with fraud just because some clubs are elite, jealousy must be wild

 

[Handsome Devil]

Conspiracy hat on here folks! What if City deliberately leaked the emails in a way to make it look like a hack? No one would touch them if they appeared to be illegally obtained and they would be in the clear, for another while at least.

 

[Vadim]

Meanwhile at Bluemoon

just hope that some sour little c***/s down this rancid little chain is going to face financial ruin when we sue the bastard/s.

 

[villain]

Spot on.

They've actually made it harder for other clubs to join them by jacking up fees and wages. People act that they're some kind of disruptive force and they're just not.

Yep, everything about this has led to the market being the way that it is. PSG & their Neymar & Mbappe deals, and City spending £50m for 3/4 players almost every window.

Small clubs have no way of competing. Spurs, Leicester, Everton all falling short despite recent successes.

 

[EyeInTheSky]

See you're conflating your stance now.
On the topic of United and most of the other 'big boys' you're referring to, we became attractive investment opportunities after we had periods of success.
We didn't get an influx of cash and then started buying all the shiny toys, we still spent within our means and invested wisely.
Almost every business out there needs to show its worth before investors will inject more cash to help sustain it.

Also, some form of regulation was needed to stop sugar daddies over spending, because despite United, Juventus, Milan, Inter having some semblance of wealth - we still had to spend within our means, because we didn't engage in fraud, because it's illegal and immoral and only leads to corruption.

So, while FFP was misguided in it's approach and roll out, the ideology behind it makes sense.
City can spend 500m every summer for the next 10 years and it won't dent the owners' wealth at all - but it will destabilise the market and price out everyone except PSG.

What City have done to circumvent that, according to these leaks amounts to fraud and leads to corruption - and yet you're suggesting that it 'might not be above board'?
The very idea that you're trying to find some equivalence between United & City's financial history is laughably ignorant.

Finally, any small club who could dream to compete will need to be successful, elite status isn't established within a few years. It took United, Madrid, Barca, Bayern, Juventus years of winning and success to be considered elite, and they represent 0.0001% of football clubs for that very reason, eliteness isn't something to be taken lightly, and it shouldn't be something that can be bought, especially from fraudulent means.

Also, having an owner who is rich/injects cash doesn't guarantee success, see; Leeds, Malaga & Newcastle.

Imagine being okay with fraud just because some clubs are elite, jealousy must be wild

It's pathetic like. Imagine being ok with criminality because other clubs don't move aside and let you win...

 

[villain]

It's pathetic like. Imagine being ok with criminality because other clubs don't move aside and let you win...

"City aren't exactly above board, but United, Madrid, Juve & Barca wouldn't let them play with their football! It's not fair"

 

[Zoo]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Treble]

Martin Samuel is up City's arse and is hard to be taken seriously. City should be punished (if proven wrong) by taking them out of the CL for a season or two.

That said Samuel is raising legitimate questions which any sane person would ask. Were the FPP rules just in the first place? Or rather a weapon of the established big clubs to defend their status? To prevent the owner of a club to invest his own money in the club is a highly dubous act in the first place. No wonder that UEFA changed that rule, it doesn't make any business sense.

The problem is that European club football has become huge business by going global. Thus it has attracted (business) interests from all over the world and some of the richest persons on the planet are willing to invest money and to use it for business or PR interests. The big clubs in Europe want to make big money from the globalization of the game but want to preserve their status and stop rich persons from making other clubs big and powerful. Is that just?

City should be punished but football stinks from the top. The globalization of the game has its important downsides. Some European clubs want only the positives of that process and don't care that traditionally strong leagues like those in South America have been destroyed or that there is little to no competition in Germany and Italy. When was the last time when Bayern and Juventus won 6-7 league titles in a row? Obviously, there is a problem in how football works. The big clubs get bigger and bigger and form an oligarchy that is bad for football. That's the problem and not that rich persons buy smaller clubs and want to make them big and powerful. The latter is an inevitable effect of the globalization of the game.

 

[Barca84]

5 year European ban for both sounds about right.

Plus a demotion to level 9 of the football league for City.

That'll give us 10 years to get our shit together which might just be enough.

 

[Skills]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

But I thought City’s income was just the work of their amazing commercial team, at least that’s what @M18CTID and some other city fans on here said.

This is hilarious tbf. Etihad (the national airline of the Emirates - the one company to which city will hold most value) only value them at 8m a year

 

[Beachryan]

Some serious mental gymnastics going on here to justify actual criminality. Just a sign of our times I fear, look to politics to see how people justify just about anything as long as 'their team' wins.

FFP was designed to protect the elite. It was flawed, small-minded and never going to work forever. But even if you don't like the laws, breaking them is still not allowed within competitions. Just because the offside rule's current intepretation is idiotic, doesn't mean we don't still have to play to it, and that violating it will still result in a foul given.

Personally I just agree most with the sentiment that I hope things change in European football so that United (and everyone else) don't need to have a sugar daddy just to compete. Look at how much Liverpool have spent, they have the perfect manager for them, a front 3 that has gelled amazingly and is almost never injured and they're still nowhere near at City's level. Basically they've done everything the 'right' way, fates are helping them but they're still unable to get to City's level. Now imagine being in the French league!!!

 

[Adisa]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Handsome Devil]

Where does the FA stand with all this? Should they not be investigating?

 

[Class of 63]

I think FFP isn't really a good thing, I'm not a fan of it.
But the idea that state sponsored clubs should be allowed to spend what ever they want is insane. These are clubs backed by funds running into hundreds of billions. It doesn't make sense.
The thing is there isn't much UEFA can do apart from ban them from their competition.
The law isn't on UEFA's side .

Or use bent Referees to officiate their matches in the Champions League, not that there are such people out there, but if there were.

 

[Trizy]

What good is removing them from the CL for a season or two? They'll still win everything domestically, illegally.

What happened Rangers is what should happen them since they're literally a billion in debt if you take away the fraud monies.

 

[Skills]

Where does the FA stand with all this? Should they not be investigating?

They haven't tried to cheat the FA, as the FA have no rules similar to FFP

 

[Dr. StrangeHate]

Juventus ,Milan ,Inter even United to name few regarding City's fraudulent deals you need to understand why it came to that because UEFA came up with farcical FFP almost making it impossible for smaller club's to ever compete with big boys.Of course end game for City is to join elite and become one of the big boys , you can't deny they have shaken up the status quo . Please elaborate how a small club could dream to compete with established elites if outside investment is throttled because that's what FFP ends up doing .

UEFA came up with FFP to stop clubs from going into administration by using money they don't have or can't pay back. UEFA did not even consider sugar daddy clubs in it.

 

[marukomu]

Where does the FA stand with all this? Should they not be investigating?

Too busy driving their new Jaguars around the Bahamas to care.

 

[Dr. StrangeHate]

They haven't tried to cheat the FA, as the FA have no rules similar to FFP

A club who cooks the books is breaking rules. I doubt FA rules allow financial criminals to operate without impunity.

 

[Skills]

Is it that much of a leap to think that they've been paying bonuses/additional salaries into their players offshore accounts to keep them happy? That would be something worth a criminal investigation.

There's a reason you don't ever hear of peep from their players wanting to leave. Tax free money into offshore accounts would explain a lot of it.

 

[Trizy]

Is it that much of a leap to think that they've been paying bonuses/additional salaries into their players offshore accounts to keep them happy? That would be something worth a criminal investigation.

There's a reason you don't ever hear of peep from their players wanting to leave. Tax free money into offshore accounts would explain a lot of it.

You can bet your fecking house that KDB isn't on ''just'' 250k a week.

 

[villain]

Is it that much of a leap to think that they've been paying bonuses/additional salaries into their players offshore accounts to keep them happy? That would be something worth a criminal investigation.

There's a reason you don't ever hear of peep from their players wanting to leave. Tax free money into offshore accounts would explain a lot of it.

Yeah I think that's a leap.
I wouldn't be surprised if they splurged on the players in other extravagant ways, and that's what keeps them happy.

But funnelling money to dozens of players & staff through off shore accounts is a lot of loose ends, and frankly would be quite sloppy.

However, as a result of this, their reputation and integrity is in pieces, so it's unsurprising that these theories come to mind.

 

[Adisa]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Adisa]

Yeah I think that's a leap.
I wouldn't be surprised if they splurged on the players in other extravagant ways, and that's what keeps them happy.

But funnelling money to dozens of players & staff through off shore accounts is a lot of loose ends, and frankly would be quite sloppy.

However, as a result of this, their reputation and integrity is in pieces, so it's unsurprising that these theories come to mind.

Although I think it's unlikely their funneling money to their players, I don't think it's unlikely that they are massively understating their wage bill.

 

[Skills]

Yeah I think that's a leap.
I wouldn't be surprised if they splurged on the players in other extravagant ways, and that's what keeps them happy.

But funnelling money to dozens of players & staff through off shore accounts is a lot of loose ends, and frankly would be quite sloppy.

However, as a result of this, their reputation and integrity is in pieces, so it's unsurprising that these theories come to mind.

Fair enough. But it's worth remembering that they're both basically state sponsored clubs - so I don't imagine it would be too difficult for them to do it without leaving a trail behind.

Although I think it's unlikely their funneling money to their players, I don't think it's unlikely that they are massively understating their wage bill.

I think this is already well known. I think only the squad counts towards their published wage bill, all other staff are paid by the 'City Group' or something along those lines.

 

[Adisa]

Fair enough. But it's worth remembering that they're both basically state sponsored clubs - so I don't imagine it would be too difficult for them to do it without leaving a trail behind.



I think this is already well known. I think only the squad counts towards their published wage bill, all other staff are paid by the 'City Group' or something along those lines.

I have a feeling even that might be understated.

 

[villain]

Although I think it's unlikely their funneling money to their players, I don't think it's unlikely that they are massively understating their wage bill.

Yep I agree with that.

Fair enough. But it's worth remembering that they're both basically state sponsored clubs - so I don't imagine it would be too difficult for them to do it without leaving a trail behind.

Hmmm yes & no, I wouldn't be surprised if the City players have ties in investment groups & accounts that could potentially be traced back to their owners/owners family that return higher than expected returns for example.
There are many creative ways to 'gift' money.

Off-shore accounts is too easy.

 

[Dr. StrangeHate]

See you're conflating your stance now.
On the topic of United and most of the other 'big boys' you're referring to, we became attractive investment opportunities after we had periods of success.
We didn't get an influx of cash and then started buying all the shiny toys, we still spent within our means and invested wisely.
Almost every business out there needs to show its worth before investors will inject more cash to help sustain it.

Also, some form of regulation was needed to stop sugar daddies over spending, because despite United, Juventus, Milan, Inter having some semblance of wealth - we still had to spend within our means, because we didn't engage in fraud, because it's illegal and immoral and only leads to corruption.

So, while FFP was misguided in it's approach and roll out, the ideology behind it makes sense.
City can spend 500m every summer for the next 10 years and it won't dent the owners' wealth at all - but it will destabilise the market and price out everyone except PSG.

What City have done to circumvent that, according to these leaks amounts to fraud and leads to corruption - and yet you're suggesting that it 'might not be above board'?
The very idea that you're trying to find some equivalence between United & City's financial history is laughably ignorant.

Finally, any small club who could dream to compete will need to be successful, elite status isn't established within a few years. It took United, Madrid, Barca, Bayern, Juventus years of winning and success to be considered elite, and they represent 0.0001% of football clubs for that very reason, eliteness isn't something to be taken lightly, and it shouldn't be something that can be bought, especially from fraudulent means.

Also, having an owner who is rich/injects cash doesn't guarantee success, see; Leeds, Malaga & Newcastle.

Imagine being okay with fraud just because some clubs are elite, jealousy must be wild

Completely disagree. The level of injection Abu Dhabi and Qatar have made has never been seen in any sport ever before. The investment has been at all levels. Infrastructure, surrounding areas of the club, buying of clubs all around the world, buying of a club for Guardiola's brother just to ensure he stays at City, player fees and salaries, operating costs (excluding player fees and salaries). This level of investment over the course of a decade guarantees success.

United have operating costs (excluding player fees and salaries) of £130 million according to the latest annual financial report. City owners pay that out of pocket without affecting FFP. City owners also pay for youth and first team infrastructure out of pocket. That means City have an advantage of around one Mbappe over United (the richest club in the world) every year. This guarantees them success. Having a rich country funding you guarantees success. If it wasn't for the press's disdain for United, City would have been called the frauds they are consistently.

 

[Adisa]

Yep I agree with that.



Hmmm yes & no, I wouldn't be surprised if the City players have ties in investment groups & accounts that could potentially be traced back to their owners/owners family that return higher than expected returns for example.
There are many creative ways to 'gift' money.

Off-shore accounts is too easy.

So many ways. Offering investment opportunities at bargain basement prices. As you say, too easy.

 

[VanGaalEra]

Quite interesting it's one release a day for 4 days, they must have a lot of information.

City asses must be twitching.

 

[jderbyshire]

We've known they're a corrupt bunch for years.

Etihad Stadium, anyone??

 

[VanGaalEra]

On a side note, did anyone see Stu Brennan's twitter feed yesterday with his replies?

Embarrassing, but at least he knows where his bread is buttered from.

 

[Adisa]

First of all I want to ask, have City been accused of paying bribes or offerings incentives in anyway to influence decision making?
Beacuase if not, they haven't actually done anything illegal. FFP is not a legal construct.

 

[villain]

Completely disagree. The level of injection Abu Dhabi and Qatar have made has never been seen in any sport ever before. The investment has been at all levels. Infrastructure, surrounding areas of the club, buying of clubs all around the world, buying of a club for Guardiola's brother just to ensure he stays at City, player fees and salaries, operating costs (excluding player fees and salaries). This level of investment over the course of a decade guarantees success.

United have operating costs (excluding player fees and salaries) of £130 million according to the latest annual financial report. City owners pay that out of pocket without affecting FFP. City owners also pay for youth and first team infrastructure out of pocket. That means City have an advantage of around one Mbappe over United (the richest club in the world) every year. This guarantees them success. Having a rich country funding you guarantees success. If it wasn't for the press's disdain for United, City would have been called the frauds they are consistently.

I'm not disagreeing with any of that, @gajender was implying that the only way small clubs could compete with big clubs was through having a rich owner.
I was stating that having a rich owner wasn't enough and has proven to be the case in the clubs I mentioned.

The methods that the City owners have chosen to employ, goes beyond that and therefore his assertion that it is equivalent to what other big clubs have done in the past is laughable at best.

 

[Adisa]

On a side note, did anyone see Stu Brennan's twitter feed yesterday with his replies?

Embarrassing, but at least he knows where his bread is buttered from.

He's not even pretending to be a journalist.
This click/revenue system has been a disaster for journalism.

 

[b20times]

On a side note, did anyone see Stu Brennan's twitter feed yesterday with his replies?

Embarrassing, but at least he knows where his bread is buttered from.

I didn't see it, what was he saying? Was he sticking up for man city by any chance?