Maybe not necessarily as low as League 2 but they'd have 100% been up and down the leagues
City and Financial Doping | Charged by PL with numerous FFP breaches
- Thread starter VanGaalEra
- Start date
Maybe not necessarily as low as League 2 but they'd have 100% been up and down the leagues
I wouldn't say that. There were a hell of a lot of bad/terrible signings until they brought in Birgistrani to start building for Pep.
You can discount Etihad straight away since they are also government owned and were outed in the leaks years ago as being a false sponsor.
OKX and Nexen are nowhere near blue chip brands and EA Sports is a wider deal where they sponsor everyone.
So you've got Nissan who are paying pittance, Asahi, and Puma, with the latter two not really being market leading names either.
Now compare that to the real big clubs.
Done a Bury FC
1. Roman wasn’t ever an oligarch. Those are people with high connections to government and are, pivotally, included in the Dasha system that makes it especially difficult to track who actually owns what money and assets. Roman is not a member of a Dasha, whereas figures like Deripaska have been members of Putin Dasha for decades. It is important, in my opinion, to distinguish and remember that people like Navalny who call all wealthy Russians part of a Kleptocracy are die-hard old school socialists, not democracy advocates. Roman got his oil shares through and American program.
2. When Roman “dumped” all that money into Chelsea there were no rules against it. That should be an important distinction. Because Clearlake had enough money to go in and dump money the same way, offer dizzying contracts to established stars. They do exactly that in other sports, but they are specifically trying to follow the rules and find a strategy within them.
City is NOT doing that. It isn’t that City is spending money, it’s that they were breaking real financial reporting laws, tax laws, and changing the way the structure of finance in European soccer works in addition to breaking rules.
Say two teams wanted Pellegrini as a manager. The other team and City both offer 4 year, 12 million contracts. But City also offers a secret side contract of an additional 10 million from sources connected to the owners but not reported.
THAT is what they have on City. They broke real, actual laws, not just FFP breaches. They actually have investors and sponsors that are not fake or owned by the owners, and in their false reporting they also committed fraud against them.
Could City have openly spent that money in 2003? Probably. But then other teams would have known what they were bidding against and could try and match them. Everyone was “allowed” to spend money then if the owner wanted.
What City did is vastly different.
There are still issues with all of this though. For the Puma deal, it is a £650 M, 10-year deal, but it is a deal with City Football Group, not just Manchester City. Per Forbes, in a previous deal 92% of such revenue was credited to City, so you can dock some from the amount you reported as attributable to City there. Etihad is a state-backed and founded company sponsorship, which is presumptively suspect. Yes, you can talk all day about third-party "fair value" assessments, but when such a loss-making business founded in 2003 decides to shell out multi-millions in sponsorship and eventually stadium naming rights about 5 years into its existence, it is going to raise eyebrows even though CAS deemed this not to be a related-party transaction, despite many suspicious governance and relationship overlaps. It's not unheard of, as a lot of Silicon Valley startups engage in dumb, expensive marketing shenanigans during their early, loss-making years in order to gain market share, but not too many of those companies are conceived of, financed and backed by a state. Notably, City engaged CAA to assist in the search for a new shirt sponsor in 2018, but after a presumed renewal after the initial deal expired Etihad still remains the sponsor in a deal for which the total value and duration are unknown or undisclosed (see Athletic below). Did the market not bear a more lucrative sponsorship deal than the one with Etihad?
If you net out the prorated portion of the CFG sponsorship attributable to other CFG clubs and add, say, £20M for EA Sports (just a generous guess), it takes you to just over £200M of commercial revenue accounted for in these deals you've listed. This site, citing R&D sports analytics and data company Sponsorlytix, places City's Retail, Merchandise, Apparel and Product Licensing revenue at ~£37M, significantly behind Arsenal, Liverpool, United and Chelsea. As noted in that article, there are many devils and details missing, but I'm just using some this to approximate some kind of picture of City's commercial revenue, given that a lot of this is not reported in a public and transparent way. That gap between ~£250M and £373M is not immaterial in the aggregate, even if individual deals might be. The Athletic lays out the complicated interweb of overlapping business and family connections at the heart of these other sponsorships. Mubadala is a shareholder in Masdar and Aldar Properties, for example. These types of connections go on and on. Another such example of a commercial sponsor is Noon, described as an e-commerce platform with operations in the Middle East, but with ambitions of being the Amazon of the region. It is founded by a guy who literally developed the Burj Khalifa after having started his career in the UAE Central Bank. City could legally maneuver their way out of all of these coincidences and apparent conflicts, but when you are running a business or have operations in a particular regions and have the specter of state control and retribution, it paints a cloud over the whole enterprise. In this case, you have a bunch of carrots and sticks to sort through. Piss off the state or people involved therewith and get the stick, play nice and get a carrot, whether a board seat, backing from a SWF or a myriad of other ways to get things done. Has anyone heard from Jack Ma lately?
Other snafus, suggest that City have, at times, been a bit haphazard and less than diligent in trying to drive up commercial revenue through these smaller, underreported sponsorship deals. It is true that a lot of clubs have been caught in questionable betting sponsor or crypto deals, but in City's case such deals seem to represent a comparatively larger portion their commercial revenue. I would probably grant you that City would likely not be undergoing as much scrutiny if they were not as successful and other clubs finances and sponsorships are not scrutinized to the extent that City's are.
There is a whole different debate to be had about whether City has breached the letter of these regulations versus the spirit of them and whether the initial impetus and intent of these regulations were really about financial sustainability, anti-competitively entrenching accumulated financial advantage and status, sporting equity or some combination thereof. But, even with the rationale of sporting success in the most financially prosperous league driving commercial growth, surely you can at least see why people might raise a few eyebrows at the numbers being reported?
don’t listen to these shitheads. they don’t know us, they don’t know our stories. they don’t remember those times when we were at main road together. we were there come rain or shine. unless we had things like the shopping to do, or our shoes were too wet to put back on after walking the dog in the morning.
they weren’t there when we doubled the fanbase in 2008 when colin and mikey accidentally walked into the village hall on the citizens supporter evening on wednesday instead of paedos anonymous on thursdays. they don’t remember how convenient it was for you that you could just turn up both days and not make such a faux pas. they weren’t there. we deserve our moment in the sun, it doesn’t matter how we got there.
Stop it rims you're hurting my brain
Rims is basically the troubled child you lock away in the cupboard whenever you have guests around just in case he tries to hump their leg again.
i should have known better than to try and use sound logic around a frenchman.
It's Lance Armstrong FC
As much as I despise City as a club, I feel sorry for City fans trying to defend the indefensible.
The reason for the 115 charges in summation is because City as a club did not earn the money to win every trophy they won since the takeover by the oil state.
Simply. They overstated Income and understated expenses.
Therefore the money came from the owners directly via different avenues.
Now they will have to face the consequences.
The owners will feck off when all is done and dusted. But the fans will have to deal with the results.
This is why I was dead against Qatar buying United.
The same shit would have happened.
We dodged a bullet.
The reason for the 115 charges in summation is because City as a club did not earn the money to win every trophy they won since the takeover by the oil state.
Simply. They overstated Income and understated expenses.
Therefore the money came from the owners directly via different avenues.
Now they will have to face the consequences.
The owners will feck off when all is done and dusted. But the fans will have to deal with the results.
This is why I was dead against Qatar buying United.
The same shit would have happened.
We dodged a bullet.
Anyone that denies City have got where they are by cheating are deluded and season ticket holders at the Bell end of the Emptyhad. It's odds on that the PL will cock this up one way or another. When you're up against this much money and influence, more is at play than facts. The Barclays share episode is an example of how they work. In 2008 after the crash, Barclays went looking for investment abroad as they didn't want a UK government bale out as that would mean no juicy bonuses for the board. Abu Dhabi investment fund coughed up and then it gets murky with sweeteners in Mansours name and then not in his name, shares sold at rock bottom prices to Mansour and then not Mansour. Barclays slipped up and originally told shareholders that Mansour was personally responsible for the £3bn investment but 24hrs later it was International Petroleum Company (guess who's the Chairman?).Read this and make up your own mind if it's not questionable.
https://www.euromoney.com/article/b...h-about-barclays-and-the-abu-dhabi-investment
There was also a Panorama programme investigating this but that has mysteriously disappeared.
https://www.euromoney.com/article/b...h-about-barclays-and-the-abu-dhabi-investment
There was also a Panorama programme investigating this but that has mysteriously disappeared.
The City fans don't care. The record books are filling with entries with no asterisks or references to "plastic team" or any such stuff. It just says "Manchester City - Winners."
They have enough money to keep this in the courts for years and years.
I will be amazed if they suffer any kind of sanction.
They have enough money to keep this in the courts for years and years.
I will be amazed if they suffer any kind of sanction.
Same. I'm not sure where all this talk of a expulsion from the PL is coming from as I just cant see it. City have money and power and at the end of the day, money and power always wins.
Abu Dhabi have money and power, City are merely the dead zombie vessel for them.
The FA may have brought the charges. But it is not because they suddenly grew a conscience.
The FA is as corrupt as FIFA. Otherwise they would not have allowed a leveraged buyout by the Glazer whoresons.
It is the other clubs that had enough.
They will not keep quiet until there is follow through on the charges.
The FA is as corrupt as FIFA. Otherwise they would not have allowed a leveraged buyout by the Glazer whoresons.
It is the other clubs that had enough.
They will not keep quiet until there is follow through on the charges.
It's not always been the case that they've been allowed to do that, though. When JH Davies saved Newton Heath and they became Manchester United in 1902, he was very much limited by what he could do because of the players' pay limits and other things. When he built Old Trafford in 1910, the FA prevented him from gifting it to the club, as they deemed it too advantageous and uncompetitive, so they forced United to take out a mortgage to pay for it out of their income. The same rules clearly have not been applied in recent years.
The way people go on you would think Man Utd were the first to float on the stock market but thats not trues it was Spurs 8 years earlier in 1983 and by the end of the 1990's more than 20 clubs had done it.
It was also Spurs who brought in the big money to the Premier League in 1992 when then Spurs chairman Lord Alan Sugar used his contacts at SKY (his company Amstrad made all of SKYS decoder boxes) to convince them to make a huge offer for the Premier Leagues broadcast rights after the other clubs had agreed to accept an offer tabled by ITV.
What I do find ridiculous is the fact that Shiekh Mansoor was somehow allowed to purchase Man City when he already had £3.5bn invested in Barclays who were the Premier Leagues Chief Sponsors.
Crazy how quick these lot reinvented themselves. Had a fleeting thought today about how not long ago their legends were Craig Bellamy, Richard Dunne and Shaun Wright Phillips.
Navalny a die-hard old-school socialist 
I swear every City fan I've met genuinely prefers those days, even moreso the Maine road days
Lots do but it’s very easy to get over it when you’re pissing out premier league titles.
Just like the proverbial racehorse, that same piss has been smelt and inquests have begun.
Manchester City have posted a Premier League record revenue of £712.8m for the 2022-23 financial year, all definately above board of course
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/67420414
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/67420414
Record revenues.
"Off the pitch there were new record profits from record revenues of £713 million.
In short, last season saw Manchester City achieve the greatest football and commercial year of its storied history."
"It also confirms on 6 February 2023, City were referred to a commission for a "number of alleged breaches of Premier League rules". The club repeated its statement in response that it "welcomes" the review and that it has "irrefutable evidence" to support its position."
"Off the pitch there were new record profits from record revenues of £713 million.
In short, last season saw Manchester City achieve the greatest football and commercial year of its storied history."
"It also confirms on 6 February 2023, City were referred to a commission for a "number of alleged breaches of Premier League rules". The club repeated its statement in response that it "welcomes" the review and that it has "irrefutable evidence" to support its position."
Storied history.
Which started in 2008.
Which started in 2008.
Of course, there's no break-up available of commercial revenues to decipher how much is contributed by Abu Dhabi
The most valuable club brand in the world and they can’t even sell out their stadium.
but but but its all about social media now innit
"by the end of the season the Club’s social media accounts had a total of 132 million followers – with the Club’s main social accounts facilitating almost 7 billion video views"
The more I read their annual statement, the more i'm flabbergasted how these bastards are so blatant with their cheating and revelling in the fact they know they can get away with it! Oh how I dream of the day they get their comeuppance!
I hope whoever is investigating them between 2012 and 2018, also has a division keeping up with all the current day bullshit too.
record yearly revenues, you’ll never sing that.
I was going to ask this, since they’re privately owned whats stopping them just making this up?
The gall they have. Unbelievable.
do you really think we’d be sat here with our huge hogs swinging between our legs, making things up?
Embarrassing club They're a nonentity.
They're a nonentity.We're living in the age of misinformation
Yeah I'm sure they miss losing twice in the league in one season to my boys Wycombe Wanderers!
These current days must barely compare.
Christ on a crutch. Imagine waking up one day as the Manchester City fan. You wake up and your radio begins the day with "roll with it" by Oasis, you go through to the bathroom and brush your teeth with aquafresh toothpaste (but you have to get rid of the red bit and only use the blue and white because you're not going to use that rag scum), then going down to breakfast after letting your dogs Sergio and Niall out the back door to have a wee. You put the telly on and there's the news and it's official: Manchester City are the biggest grossing team in world football.
"Fantastic", you think to yourself, "Finally our ascension gets recognised" as you hear the postman. A thick envelope pops through the door "Must be my 10 free season tickets arriving again, same as last year" you exclaim. I've been struggling to convince the wife to go, and the homeless people I gave the last 9 to apparently burned them for heat, but this time, as the treble winners, surely it will be different. Unfortunately, no, most of them are still rag scum and your kids friends in Stockport primary school seen to still be putting on those dirty manc jerseys all the time. To hell with those rag scum, it's all about the girls these days innit. But apparently they don't seem to agree with the whole "being owned by multiple husbands" or "not being allowed things like being able to drive a car" thing. But your lads (a team of mercenaries from all over the world) best THEIR lads (a worse team of mercenaries from all over the world plus some Salford scum) lately. So none of it makes ANY SENSE.
But this 790m revenue thing? That makes sense. That makes the most sense of all, you chuckle as you eat your blue mouldy toast and do a little Poznan to yourself.
"Fantastic", you think to yourself, "Finally our ascension gets recognised" as you hear the postman. A thick envelope pops through the door "Must be my 10 free season tickets arriving again, same as last year" you exclaim. I've been struggling to convince the wife to go, and the homeless people I gave the last 9 to apparently burned them for heat, but this time, as the treble winners, surely it will be different. Unfortunately, no, most of them are still rag scum and your kids friends in Stockport primary school seen to still be putting on those dirty manc jerseys all the time. To hell with those rag scum, it's all about the girls these days innit. But apparently they don't seem to agree with the whole "being owned by multiple husbands" or "not being allowed things like being able to drive a car" thing. But your lads (a team of mercenaries from all over the world) best THEIR lads (a worse team of mercenaries from all over the world plus some Salford scum) lately. So none of it makes ANY SENSE.
But this 790m revenue thing? That makes sense. That makes the most sense of all, you chuckle as you eat your blue mouldy toast and do a little Poznan to yourself.