It's crooked. It has worked for them, get the money in fair means or foul, build your club, become successful and in the end the media mainly have forgotten how it started.
City and Financial Doping | Charged by PL with 130 FFP breaches | Hearing begins 16th Sep 2024 | Concluded 9th Dec 2024 - Awaiting outcome
- Thread starter VanGaalEra
- Start date
I see people saying this a lot. Can we just caveat the net spend with the likelyhood that their net spend is likely a total lie. Considering how many underhand and off the books payments they are making to staff and who knows who else. They're obviously not accurately reporting their income and expenditure.
Let me save you the time - nothing is going to happen in this case. No penalties, no large fines, no point reductions. Nothing. And you know it.
The Ferran Torres transfer to Barcelona was incredibly dubious.
A £50 million fee for a nothing player and the money to pay for it was secured by a loan from an overseas account.
I agree. Also, the fact they were supposedly dying to buy him and City never sell unless they want to but now suddenly barca are happy to sell him a season later.
There's too much at stake for the FA. Slapping City with a heavy punishment - relegation, stripping titles and so on - would damage the PL brand so much that the whole edifice might crumble. Same with UEFA and their brand.
If they win the treble year after year that could be as damaging.
I think someone needs to look in to the operations of City Football Group as a whole as well to see if any wrong doing is going on, there is an Agentinian player called Taty Catellanos who has been passed around between 3 different CFG clubs so far and will probably end up joing Man City for a ludicrously low fee in the near future.
What about it is a lie, the sales? The fees paid for players seem fine. High, even.
Then virtually have been. Domestic trebles. 5/6 titles. 4 league cups in a row. Only European success has eluded them.
The fact that it doesnt include the massive agents fees, signing on fees, and intermeadiary fees they have paid makes it meaningless and it wouldnt suprise me if those fees added up to another billion on top of what was spent on transfer fees.
It’s the payments they make and wages they pay that aren’t recorded in the books. Things like paying Haalands Dad a big fee that doesn’t show up as part of the transfer fee. Paying wages to players that aren’t included in their official accounts.
Just look at the wages we had to pay Alexis Sanchez to get him to come to us over them. Yet a number of their players are on very modest salaries. When does a city player ever have a drawn out contract renewal? Why isn’t Ederson demanding to be paid what the best paid goalkeepers in the world get paid?
Pep or money.
It's obviously the only answer. No way anything dodgy is going on wage-wise.
I had a similar reaction to when they announced as the most profitable team in the world and top of the sponsorship revenue lists. If you’re gonna cheat don’t make it look like you’re cheating. Despite what the books say everyone knows they’re not a bigger brand than Real Madrid and have a lower pay roll than Liverpool. Do what Chelsea did put yourself 4th or 5th.
What do you think would drive the FA to bring over 100 charges against them, only to slap wrists?
What message would that send to other clubs?
Would they be accused of corruption, and sued by other clubs?
Would it risk clubs abandoning the FA as a governing body?
Why instigate all of this if the only outcome is that they look weak or corrupt?
I wonder if there’s an element of feeling like there’s guaranteed success at City whilst Pep’s there. I feel like it was similar under Ferguson.
It’s impressive how a club that can’t fill it’s own stadium and who’s fan base is dwarfed by not one but two other clubs within a 40 mile distance of their stadium can be the most valuable brand in the world.
Woah.
We've been terrible for football in other ways but big man, leave us out of this cooking the books chat
I do know it.
It is very frustrating. Everyone knows they're guilty. They know they're guilty. The people who will rule them innocent and defend them will know they're guilty. But we all know they'll get away with it, again
It's when things like that happen, I wish I had the personality to keep my football support casual but I can't.
What makes you think they are reporting on them truthfully and accurately?...
Exactly! even if City are not found guilty for all the FFP breaches and find ways around the charges due to time constraints and rule changes etc. Surely the fact they have been charged so many times, would make the figures they release highly questionable.
All their transfers should be seen with an asterisk above them, instead of being used as some standard bearer to bash other teams in the league who have not been charged with FFP.
Last edited:
You got a source on any of that?
Don't get me wrong. I hope the charges stick and City get the maximum punishment allowed. It's just that I have no faith in the FA to prosecute the charges to the fullest extent of the law, expecially when the Premier League brand could be irreparably damaged.
Exactly! even if City are not found guilty for all the FFP breaches and find ways around the charges due to time constraints and rule changes etc. Surely the fact they have been charged so many times, would make the figures they release highly questionable.
All their transfers should be seen with an asterisk above them, instead of being used as some standard bearer to bash other teams for the league who have not been charged with FFP.
There should definately be an asterisk over Julien Alvarez's transfer fee as their claim he was only €17m seems ludicrus, Man Utd pulled outof signing him as there were a number of intermeadiarys involved as well as the agents all of whom would have needed paying which made the deal unfeasable for us so I find it hard to believe for 1 second that City got him that cheaply.
Why would a club lie about how much they paid City or received from City?
Take Dortmund for example. Why would they report they only received 10M for Akanji when they actually received 30M? That shoots them in the foot from a FFP perspective.
Unless you're in this bubble where City are literally the feds and can infiltrate any club and manipulate figures to their desire, it makes no sense that net spend figures are doctored.
Agent fees and direct compensation are another matter entirely.
1st thought would be to avoid tax on profit?
Shooting themselves in the foot with regards to FFP and undervaluing other players they hope to sell in the future? And how much tax would they be saving? And isn't that tax fraud, underreporting income received?
I don't buy it.
Their leaked emails are in this twitter thread. Particularly of note are their south American shell company discussing underage players being paid excess funding but considering them to have an "R.O.I."
I dont think other clubs are. Agent fee's, direct compensation and making up sponsors or other income seem far more likely. I mean they own about 5 clubs so its possible theres some feckery there.
Last edited:
People mostly aren't talking about fees to clubs, but about agent fees, intermediaries, third parties, etc.
United always, from what I recall, reported their total fees paid to include agent fees and whatnot. Take Veron for example - United paid 28.1m (2001 figures) but some of that, think it was about 2.1m was for various fees and like 26m to Lazio for the player's registration. What did Lazio report as received? Surely it would not be 28.1m unless United were including those additional fees as direct payment to Lazio for further allocation to the applicable parties. Guess that depends on how each club handles their miscellaneous payments in a transfer agreement.
If City paid 10m to Dortmund that that is what Dortmund would claim on their income sheet. If City paid 20m in other fees directly to third parties then City must claim it, Dortmund would have no need to do so that I'm aware of. But, if City did cook the books, surely Dortmund and/or the player would know if additional fees paid as part of. And if any club or player or person received fees not recorded and not claimed that would open each up to tax avoidance laws, which who knows if that is happening. We've witnessed Messi and Ronaldo get caught up in tax fiascos, may be more rampant than we know or will ever know.
It does seem a rather easy trail to audit, perhaps, but I'm no financial accountant and maybe it's more in-depth than I'm making it out in simplistic view. If City is not recording such when miscellaneous fees are paid, I presume that violates the financial rules, assuming they are not recording them under some other sort of business practice that falls under the football operations/player amortization area. I presume all fees within a transfer do fall under the amortization and account towards the financial cap or whatever it is.
They were not cleared of the charges at all. CAS acknowledged their guilt but revoked the ban on the grounds that the evidence was obtained illegally. UEFA state that evidence obtained illegally cannot be used in a case.
The FA/Premier League have no such clause, and therefore they will review the same evidence, presumably reach the same conclusion and this time CAS won't be able to help overturn on a technicality.
The argument coming through from their fans about Citys net spend v other clubs is ludicrous. So much that Im amazed it's even being put forward as an argument at all.
The bought Ferran Torres for 20m, then sold him on for 55m. So the made 35m net profit.
If they have cooked the books to get the 20m into the club in the first place then people can't then put forward the argument "Yeah but we made 35m when we sold him", like it somehow washes the illicit 20m away in the first place.
Apply this to every player they have bought and sold on for profit.
It's a joke.
The bought Ferran Torres for 20m, then sold him on for 55m. So the made 35m net profit.
If they have cooked the books to get the 20m into the club in the first place then people can't then put forward the argument "Yeah but we made 35m when we sold him", like it somehow washes the illicit 20m away in the first place.
Apply this to every player they have bought and sold on for profit.
It's a joke.
Last edited:
I think you're missing the point. There are other fee's to agents and club members that are never reported on or are paid under a different guise. Also if you think they're aren't shady deals between clubs then you poor sweet child, I present to you Barcelona and Juve, two of the biggest clubs in world football. If you think Man city haven't done something similar to these two in the past then we'll have to agree to disagree and see what the evidence from the verdict brings about.
I mean PSG didn't pay 1€ to get Neymar. The country behind them gave money to Neymar to buy himself out and then sign for PSG under the pretence that he became an ambassador/mascotte/whatever for Qatar World Cup.
All under the Sun. Everybody knows and nobody did a thing. I mean Al Kelaifi took over from Andrea Agnelli as ECA head
Cheers!
Yeah media swept that under carpet
Football’s a joke how is such a blatantly and openly corrupt venture is allowed to operate is beyond me