Manchester City

[serghei]

Put it this way. To be able to sign consistently in the EPL you need XXX annual revenue.

Liverpool/Man Utd are 600-700m or so and that enables them, as per their FFP rules to spend more consistenly than Barcelona and Real, who blow them out of the water revenue wise.

So what Im saying is City, bought by the Dhabians (not a word, but let's make it one), why can't they make a capital injection of 500m for signings?

Once they can't do that, then they use their own companies to inflate their sponsorships. So what? As long as the money is paid and not just an IOU which never arrives, then I have no qualms about it. I don't like it, but once you open the door to investors then you open the door to them wanting to put money into their teams by hook or by crook.

The transfer merry go-round is far worse than inflated sponsorship deals.

Arthur Melo going for 40-50m and Pjanic for 60m is far worse. Just as an example.

Fairly obvious that EPL 'big boys' lobbied this to the higher chairs of the league management. Mind you they don't care City owners injected capital in their club. Their only beef is they put those money to good use and destroyed their competition to the point City became like Barca and Madrid in that league.

The rest of their so called big clubs went crying about it. A traditional big club won't cry about competition like that. But then I said many times EPL don't have actual elite clubs, so it was easy for City to hire top professionals and storm that league.

And people here say Barca or Madrid would have it hard in that league. Good joke.

 

[jamrock]

Jamque is right.

They just need a time horizon on how long they are allowed to inject their own money into their own asset.

With it tapering off over time.

Year 1 200m
Year 10: 50m

 

[serghei]

Jamque is right.

They just need a time horizon on how long they are allowed to inject their own money into their own asset.

With it tapering off over time.

Year 1 200m
Year 10: 50m

Yeah, just make sure you present these rules before taking their money.

Like, if you want to invest in this country, in this league, here are the rules. You don't draw me in and then expect me to be like a dog that plays fetch. Maybe I say no, I will take my money someplace else.

Eberybody and their dog knew City and PSG will inject capital like crazy. To pretend you didn't know this as a league when you agreed to let them in is to lie.

Someone shows with a Ferrari in your neighborhood and wants to buy a house and move in you think they will somehow change and drive a Fiat because you set community rules that limit spending for newcommers?

Like wow, nice car, welcome mister. Then in 3 years, listen we asked around don't want folks driving Ferraris here because we have some owners who drive BMWs and they will take offence.

What is this shite?

 

[Loki]

Big surprise, Rui Pinto uses his popularity and asks for money with a big sob story
Every imbecile with 100+ followers starts a go-fund-me now. The name alone is already repulsive to me, but there will always be enough idiots to use this site and give away their money, so they deserve to be scammed.

I always wonder, how is it that many baljeet scammers are so successful. People can't be that big of idiots to fall for it, right? Then I see cases like this and understand.

 

[Windhook]

Big surprise, Rui Pinto uses his popularity and asks for money with a big sob story
Every imbecile with 100+ followers starts a go-fund-me now. The name alone is already repulsive to me, but there will always be enough idiots to use this site and give away their money, so they deserve to be scammed.

I always wonder, how is it that many baljeet scammers are so successful. People can't be that big of idiots to fall for it, right? Then I see cases like this and understand.

Yeah, his post sounds sensational. Life threatening? Now? You're the hacker back from 2018 Der Spiegel article. You would've been long gone, if somebody wanted your head.

 

[Loki]

Yeah, his post sounds sensational. Life threatening? Now? You're the hacker back from 2018 Der Spiegel article. You would've been long gone, if somebody wanted your head.

And obviously his "witness protection" is dropping NOW, when the City case flares up, because it's logical that if he ever needed protection, he doesn't need it NOW anymore. And it was important to pre-announce a statement and gather people for everyone knows, when people act out of emotions, not out of reason, easy money is being made.

This is so fucking stupid, such an obvious scam. 3m

 

[Birdy]

Those are not excuses. I don't care about City, if you imply it. I'm not a Pep fanboy, either. But justice is objective and I'm taking a more conservative approach on how should they be punished, based on previous examples of sports arbitrary and the scope of the "crime". Your judgement in my view is more emotional. As you said - we'll see.

This "great English judiciary" theme you've been bringing up all week is actually irrelevant, because FA is the final arbitrary on this case. No CAS, no English court.

Institutions in general, and it will come to the juridical system eventually since City committed textbook financial crime.

As for my judgment, any punishment that leaves their titles intact is a joke and actually encourages future offenders to do it again.
Any punishment should serve two goals: 1) to reinstate justice and the according sentiment to the general population, 2) to serve as an example so as to deter future offenders from committing the same crime

The strong language employed by both Premier League and FA in their announcements gives me hope for both 1 and 2

 

[Birdy]

Put it this way. To be able to sign consistently in the EPL you need XXX annual revenue.

Liverpool/Man Utd are 600-700m or so and that enables them, as per their FFP rules to spend more consistenly than Barcelona and Real, who blow them out of the water revenue wise.

So what Im saying is City, bought by the Dhabians (not a word, but let's make it one), why can't they make a capital injection of 500m for signings?

Once they can't do that, then they use their own companies to inflate their sponsorships. So what? As long as the money is paid and not just an IOU which never arrives, then I have no qualms about it. I don't like it, but once you open the door to investors then you open the door to them wanting to put money into their teams by hook or by crook.

The transfer merry go-round is far worse than inflated sponsorship deals.

Arthur Melo going for 40-50m and Pjanic for 60m is far worse. Just as an example.

I think you should be having qualms about it.
I do, and I am sure a great proportion of football fans worldwide also have.

FFP restrictions were invented precisely to safeguard from state funded clubs (or oligarchs of immense wealth like Abramovic) who sought to financially unbalance the league by gaining competitive advantages of unprecedented scale against their opponents. Any league and any game, in order to be fair, has to maintain a certain balance between the power of the protagonists. Without FFP, within few years, it would be impossible to compete against state clubs unless you became another state club.
FFP is saving football from that doomsday scenario

Even from a moral pov, it is also the case that these predator 'investors' sought to buy success in one night without giving a damn about rules and without the basic respect for the values of the countries they invested in. It's easy to question legacy clubs, but their history were built over decades and decades of slow and painful building, ups and downs, that's how they created their mythology and their fandom nationwide and worldwide.

PS: Melo-Pjanic swap should be the subject of the prosecutor as it is based on fake valuation of both players to balance the books of both clubs

 

[serghei]

Come off it. In the last 10 years in the Premier League the transfer balance for the biggest clubs is this:

United: - 1366 million
Arsenal: - 1099 million
City: - 1099 million
Tottenham: - 1066 million
Chelsea: -990 million
Liverpool: - 899 million

People act as if City outspent everyone by a mile. The reality is far from it.

You know what the transfer balance is for EPL as a whole in the last decade? -10234.48 million.

 

[Barcaman]

Smartest man alive.

He lies again. Not taking anything from his career but as a person.. pep is one the most conniving top managers of recent times.

Flick is way more genuine.

 

[Jamologist]

I still have my faith on the English juridical system, which still seems to protect their core values.

You mean the same juridical system that blatantly and consciously allowed 250k british females (including girls starting from age 4) been methodically gang raped and sent into permanent sex slavery due to "racism concerns" for half a century?

Well i get that these cases are not comparable, because accusers are ultra rich people with power and defendants are not just "poor downtrodden" 60 IQ bio weapons just imported by ruling class without anybodies consent that need to be soothed for their daily "sexual emergencies", but an actual financial powerhouse (although of the same race that customarily rape white girls, whenever possible).

The thing is though that what would really influence the English court is neither justice, fairness or common good, but whether or not the City Of London (still the seat of the banking elite and Rotchild nexus) have these sheiks in good standing and want then continue their oil money influx.
I bet there's something to do with arabs starting to run out of oil money due to obvious circumstances that English elites are well aware, as they are vassals to the cause of it.

That's literally the only thing that these pedophile Epstain regime judges would take cues from. They have no agency at all. The law is an absolete term in these times. The money is the law. Mammon is the god of every single politician, lawyer, office-holder and journalist. The decision will be made such that it would make all these classes of despicable get maximally less punishment and maximally less financial loss and in the end it will be forgotten by the next media cycle. Everything else, any kind of moral of fairness concerns were thrown out of the window decades ago.

 

[Jamologist]

Put it this way. To be able to sign consistently in the EPL you need XXX annual revenue.

Liverpool/Man Utd are 600-700m or so and that enables them, as per their FFP rules to spend more consistenly than Barcelona and Real, who blow them out of the water revenue wise.

So what Im saying is City, bought by the Dhabians (not a word, but let's make it one), why can't they make a capital injection of 500m for signings?

Once they can't do that, then they use their own companies to inflate their sponsorships. So what? As long as the money is paid and not just an IOU which never arrives, then I have no qualms about it. I don't like it, but once you open the door to investors then you open the door to them wanting to put money into their teams by hook or by crook.

The transfer merry go-round is far worse than inflated sponsorship deals.

Arthur Melo going for 40-50m and Pjanic for 60m is far worse. Just as an example.

This is also a good point. What kind of "values" really block uber rich investor, whom your country has already sold out to, put its money into an estate? Where's the logic? You already allowed foreigners buy up your cultural heritage. For what, if not for the coins they throw at your organization? Or is it also just for brownskins owning your arses, while giving nothing in return.
Bottom line, couldn't give a shit about the outcome. It's just another faction war between bigwig pedos.

 

[TomCat]

An even bigger question is why the English and/or Manchester governments didn't get involved and investigate in 2018 after 100+ documents were leaked indicating financial wrongdoing? Why wait 8 years?

It's almost as if these politicians recognized the financial benefit of the oil money to the local economy and therefore closed their eyes to the wrongdoing.

 

[Birdy]

Come off it. In the last 10 years in the Premier League the transfer balance for the biggest clubs is this:

United: - 1366 million
Arsenal: - 1099 million
City: - 1099 million
Tottenham: - 1066 million
Chelsea: -990 million
Liverpool: - 899 million

People act as if City outspent everyone by a mile. The reality is far from it.

You know what the transfer balance is for EPL as a whole in the last decade? -10234.48 million.

You have to understand the concept of FFP, it does not have to do with + net spent in transfers

Not understanding what this is all about and downplaying it is whitewashing the crime

 

[TomCat]

@serghei

You go first

 

[TomCat]

He lies again. Not taking anything from his career but as a person.. pep is one the most conniving top managers of recent times.

Flick is way more genuine.

While I agree that he comes across as disingenuous, it's part of the job when journalists will use just about anything you say or do against you if given the opportunity to do so.

So sure, call it conniving, but if we were in the same spot, wouldn't we use the same strategy?

 

[Birdy]

He lies again. Not taking anything from his career but as a person.. pep is one the most conniving top managers of recent times.

Flick is way more genuine.

Pep reached a record low for me with his statement this week about being behind 'his owner' 'his president' 'his CEO', 'we are gonna get over this together' and all that humiliating crap...

When he in fact clearly stated a few years ago that he will stop 'being their friend' (sic) if it was found out they were lying to him about the finances.
Mate, you did not read the news? The Independent committee reached, after 3 years, a verdict that you club, your owner, your president and your CEO LIED to you about the finances.

Or, didn't they?
And you knew all along?
But wanted to throw a show every time?
and pretend to be a little innocent boy?

Sickening...

 

[GG1989]

Pep reached a record low for me with his statement this week about being behind 'his owner' 'his president' 'his CEO', 'we are gonna get over this together' and all that humiliating crap...

When he in fact clearly stated a few years ago that he will stop 'being their friend' (sic) if it was found out they were lying to him about the finances.
Mate, you did not read the news? The Independent committee reached, after 3 years, a verdict that you club, your owner, your president and your CEO LIED to you about the finances.

Or, didn't they?
And you knew all along?
But wanted to throw a show every time?
and pretend to be a little innocent boy?

Sickening...

He spent 10 years of his life in that club, he had to defend his legacy, everyone would have done the same thing.

Yes City cheated with money, but they didn't fix any game, they pressed the fast forward button to success.

This does not mean that any other manager could have done just as well as Pep.

 

[Don Money Laporta Estruch]

I wonder what a big Spanish club like Sevilla, that have won the Uefa Cup 7 times and are now a floundering minnow, think about English Clubs, that helped cause their massive decline by plundering their best players with nothing more than financial doping, now complaining about ................. Financial Doping !

Yeah, my is tiny to non existent on this one.

 

[TomCat]

You have to understand the concept of FFP, it does not have to do with + net spent in transfers

Not understanding what this is all about and downplaying it is whitewashing the crime

Spending is relevant, for it highlights how merely acquiring the right team allows an owner to compete at the highest level without having to worry about FFP implications. In essence it's therefore less about spending money and more about who's spending it (and how it affects EPL's Big Guns).

Some may say that a club like Manchester United spent decades building up its organic revenue; therefore it's only fair that it may outspend the competition, but this argument falls flat when random billionaires without any connection to the club can just purchase Manchester United and thereby make FFP irrelevant (something that one can buy himself out of).

They should really call it Financial Play, for it's hardly fair when owners face different FFP outcomes depending on which club they own.

If it were up to me, I'd set a spending cap and apply it to all clubs equally. That way, we'd bring the fair into financial play without pretending that FFP is anything other than a dishonest attempt at protecting the status of EPL's top legacy clubs.