I don’t think it is just those clubs (or really any US owned clubs) who have an issue with what City have done so to put this as US owners against nation states running football
What are City supposed to have done? Most people you ask this question don't seem to know.
yes you are absolutely right, the businessmen at Manchester United Weresmaller and more incompetent, but they were still businessmen. Even though I didn't like them I had to admit they run their business efficiently. but now there is a business, Manchester city, which run their business so much more efficiently they are the 6th highest spender in 5 years, and the 4th in 10 years. And guess who is still at the top? United "we never bought success"
LOLthanks for that information. Shop
My word. Last changes I was really aware of were the Newcastle United ones. Can you refer me to a relevant description of how these February ones differ, oh wise one?
And as I said in another post, for somebody to break into the elite somebody else has to lose out, and this means losing even more money than ever before. US-owned clubs, with their eye on short-term profit, find it hard to compete with those owners who, coming from a different culture entirely, tend to invest strategically over the long term.
This seems to be the Donald Trump defence. Perhaps look at the 115 charges against them.
It wasn't meant aggressively. I just can't see the point of trying to comment on an issue whose details you admit to being unaware of, especially when all the info is out there.
www.bbc.com
to be honest, the players who mainly start off as working-class lads, I don't really object to getting there market value out of the trough. I don't see why we should always blame the players, when it is the Premier league, champions league, sky sports, and the way everything is driven by advertising revenue, and billionaires shear the sheep, like myself, who follow the sport.
again. It's a fucking thread on a bulletin board talking about fucking football. Unless people know the details of the February change in Premier League rules they shouldn't comment?
What I meant was that few people ever seem to be able to describe exactly what these 'charges' are.
"It has been alleged that City concealed payments made by their owner Sheikh Mansour through third parties and disguised them as sponsorship revenue, which in itself was inflated. "
Yes, that's the accusation. But those who spout '115 charges' can't usually name even one or two specific allegations.
Yes, as that BBC article makes clear, they are muktiple charges under 5 different categories but it doesn’t really make it any better to claim that there are only 5 rules they have not complied with.
Nothing has been proven yet as the commission that will consider the evidence has not met. Until then everything is pure speculation, no matter how much City may be deemed guilty in the (always reliable and just) court of public opinion.
Yes, but they couldn't do anything other than try to circumvent the rules so aggressively that they had to make a whole new rule to cover it. They had no choice, don't you understand.
Any club in the same position would try to circumvent rules designed to limit their growth. If they didn't there would be something amiss.
which if true is international money fraud by Citigroup, Etihad, and several other businesses, which would also be involved with tax fraud. Considering how Sheikh Mansour has run the rest of the business, is going to have the best accountants who can guide him how best to navigate those laws, and so prove the Premier league's case wrong. In a court of law. If it does come to that. And if Etihad company books showed international money fraud, do you think they would be becoming a public company where people can look at them books?
Pep Guardiola summed it up when the hundred and 15 charges were announced "as Julius Caesar said, there are no friends, there are no Enemies, only interests (economic)".Are you, by any chance, a Manchester City supporter?
Did he say the (economic) bit? How did he do the parantheses? I bet he did a wink and a cheeky little smile.
How did that work out for old Julius?
I found the video. He doesn't say (economic). Disappointing.
The Premier League have no ability to charge anyone for tax fraud. That would be a matter for UK or other governments to consider. Just because you think you might have good accountants doesn’t mean you haven’t committed tax fraud. Many countries have general anti-avoidance rules to get around such schemes if they so wish. Many public companies and their employees have been found guilty of fraud so being a public company or going public is no indicator that a company has not committed fraudulent behaviour.
