Football Leaks: UEFA Investigation into Manchester City

.G. · 11-03-2019 10:40pm

gstack166 wrote: »

What are you talking about? That email from 2016 means nothing because the deal was cleared from UEFA in 2014, I wish you would ignore me Cos you’re talking bollocks.

Its not hard for most people but for you it clearly is.

The deal is ongoing yes?

Therefore the dodgy sponsorship is paid every season yes? As proved by the invoice for 2015/16 in that email.

Therefore any sponsorship money paid since 2014 is not covered by the investigation up to that point. Its a continual process that the books have to be legit, year on year. Its still happening now and happening in a way UEFA didn't know about back then. So they can investigate it for 2015-2019.

Bye.

TitianGerm · 11-03-2019 10:41pm

gstack166 wrote: »

You replied in jest that City’s sponsorship deal was less that Liverpool’s and in 2012 when the Nike deal was signed it was but don’t tell me the market rate for City now is £12m a year and Liverpool’s is more than double if you compare the success of the 2 clubs in the last decade.

Kit manufacturers probably care more about the size of the fan base than any other sponsors. Can't sell kits to trophies.

gstack166 · 11-03-2019 10:41pm

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Care to give a link to They can't since you say they can't where are you getting your legal expertise?

Since they are being investigated by a number of governing bodies do you know the legal reason why in each Country they are based in that they can't or are you just guessing on something you saw on Law and Order.

Go back through my posts, you’ll see my comments on the Etihad deals if youd bother to read them, because it doesn’t start with ‘city are guilty’ no one does, I’ve stated the Etihad deal as I know a few pages back.

gstack166 · 11-03-2019 10:42pm

TitianGerm wrote: »

Kit manufacturers probably care more about the size of the fan base than any other sponsors. Can't sell kits to trophies.

Cant sell kits when you’ve won **** all trophies either bud

gstack166 · 11-03-2019 10:43pm

~Rebel~ wrote: »

It's funny how you try to paint Liverpool ownership in a negative light. Probably the most ideal version of ownership in the league. As you mention, they've no interest in pumping money in - and were firm in their initial statement when buying in, that FFP was a major part of swaying them to take over the club. Over time they've gradually increased Liverpool's revenue through natural means - improved sponsorship deals, increased brand awareness, increasingly shrewd work in the transfer market. They made mistakes, and learned from them, and moved ever upwards without needing to go 'pet-project'ing with it. They've run the club the way any club should be run - self sufficiently.

So it's no surprise that they're firmly against a club that is built upon everything FFP is supposed to be preventing.

MOdel owners how? Trophies - 0. Net spend champions Maybe, give me the former any day of the week.

Another horse **** statement

Have to edit that because it’s so ****ing stupid. How long are they openers now? And they’ve won no trophy but apparently they’re the model owners of a club. **** off

citytillidie · 11-03-2019 10:46pm

gstack166 wrote: »

Cant sell kits when you’ve won **** all trophies either bud

Yep so much so NB have had record shirt sales for past 2 seasons with Liverpool.

In fact the current home top has sold out on the club site and limited available of away and 3rd kits

gstack166 · 11-03-2019 10:47pm

citytillidie wrote: »

Yep so much so NB have had record shirt sales for past 2 seasons with Liverpool.

In face the currently home top has sold out on the club site and limited available of away and 3rd kits

Course they’d have record sales, they make **** all other shirts besides Celtic & Ireland. Have a day off will you

citytillidie · 11-03-2019 10:50pm

gstack166 wrote: »

Course they’d have record sales, they make **** all other clubs shirts besides Celtic & Ireland. Have a day off will you

Record shirt sales with Liverpool did not mention Celtic, Ireland, Costa Rica, FC Porto or Athelic Bilbao.

gstack166 · 11-03-2019 10:53pm

citytillidie wrote: »

Record shirt sales with Liverpool did not mention Celtic, Ireland, Costa Rica, FC Porto or Athelic Bilbao.

Stellar host of teams there. If the roles were reversed & it was pointed out City gained the money from overselling them teams ye would have a field day.

Just accept that that’s Liverpool’s level now. Competing with Ireland, Celtic, Porto, Costa Rica & Bilbo’s for shirts sales.

On the pitch bar Celtic & Porto ye are the same. Also rans. Least Celtic & them win trophies.

marklazarcovic · 11-03-2019 10:56pm

gstack166 wrote: »

Ye need to grow up.

Quite the statement coming from you,you are obsessed with LFC and are a tad psycho about it tbh

citytillidie · 11-03-2019 10:56pm

gstack166 wrote: »

Stellar host of teams there. If the roles were reversed & it was pointed out City gained the money from overselling them teams ye would have a field day.

Just accept that that’s Liverpool’s level now. Competing with Ireland, Celtic, Porto, Costa Rica & Bilbo’s for shirts sales.

On the pitch bar Celtic ye are the same. Also rams. Least Celtic win trophies.

I would say fair play to Man City for getting it, where have I said anything else? I have just pointed out a few things.

Also Liverpools current owners took over in 2010, so they have won one trophy ok it was the League Cup but sure we seen that that means as a cup win in recent weeks

gstack166 · 11-03-2019 10:59pm

citytillidie wrote: »

I would say fair play to Man City for getting it, where have I said anything else? I have just pointed out a few things.

Also Liverpools current owners took over in 2010, so they have won one trophy ok it was the League Cup but sure we seen that that means as a cup win in recent weeks

If you would say then why don’t you say it? Done nothing but accuse them of lying on this thread

rob316 · 11-03-2019 11:06pm

gstack166 wrote: »

Cant sell kits when you’ve won **** all trophies either bud

I'd say Liverpool sell twice as many shirts as city annually. Your talking about a huge historical club with worldwide following vs the new kid on the block. It's not hard to understand

citytillidie · 11-03-2019 11:08pm

gstack166 wrote: »

If you would say then why don’t you say it? Done nothing but accuse them of lying on this thread

Where? I have said If Man City have did not say they did

marklazarcovic · 11-03-2019 11:09pm

gstack166 wrote: »

This isn’t a Liverpool thread you fool

Seriously?

dmigsy · 11-03-2019 11:12pm

gstack166 wrote: »

If you would say then why don’t you say it? Done nothing but accuse them of lying on this thread

Do you think there's nothing in the accusations? Lots of respectable journalists writing about it. Newspapers are generally quite cautious in accusing wealthy organisations of corruption or wrongdoing as they fear libel cases. None are in process today. Multiple investigations into Man City are. Do you think this is a witch hunt against one club by corrupt agencies?

Bobeagleburger · 11-03-2019 11:18pm

City in current form since takeover are 11 years old. It's amusing to think that they've all of a sudden become a global powerhouse. They haven't. Not saying they won't, but at least win a big European trophy.

qm1bv4p8i92aoj · 11-03-2019 11:22pm

City fanbase starting to feel the pressure? Certainly are if this city fan is anything to go by. Weird, hyper aggressive behaviour.

gstack166 · 11-03-2019 11:24pm

RoboKlopp wrote: »

City in current form since takeover are 11 years old. It's amusing to think that they've all of a sudden become a global powerhouse. They haven't. Not saying they won't, but at least win a big European trophy.

City won a FA Cup 66 years before Liverpool, they won a European trophy before Liverpool ever even played a game in a European competition. 11 years old in current form. You haven’t a ****ing clue. Football history doesn’t start in 1970. City actually have the longest span between winning their first trophy (1904) to their last (2019) 115 years. The biggest of any club, and you have the cheek to talk about history.

~Rebel~ · 11-03-2019 11:24pm

gstack166 wrote: »

MOdel owners how? Trophies - 0. Net spend champions Maybe, give me the former any day of the week.

Another horse **** statement

Have to edit that because it’s so ****ing stupid. How long are they openers now? And they’ve won no trophy but apparently they’re the model owners of a club. **** off

I don't say this very often.. very rarely in fact, but, lol.

Agent Coulson · 11-03-2019 11:29pm

gstack166 wrote: »

City won a FA Cup 66 years before Liverpool, they won a European trophy before Liverpool ever even played a game in a European competition. 11 years old in current form. You haven’t a ****ing clue. Football history doesn’t start in 1970. City actually have the longest span between winning their first trophy (1904) to their last (2019) 115 years. The biggest of any club, and you have the cheek to talk about history.

Liverpool first European game was in 64.

UrbanFret · 11-03-2019 11:32pm

IncognitoMan wrote: »

People can sit there and say it's fans jealous but the truth is the club isn't important, it could have anyone, it could be Newcastle, it could be SPAL. The problem remains the same, if you let a club run around financially doping their accounts and paying way over the odds for players there is a knock on effect and it's one that will destroy clubs.

Every club in Europe feels it. Look at the Neymar transfer, look what that did to the fees of just two decent players in Philippe Coutinho and Ousmane Dembele. It's insane. City paying 50m+ for a defender every 6 months, guess what happens to the going price of any decent or even potentially decent defender?

The people who will end up paying for it is the fans and they are already being squeezed tight enough. You can't have one or two clubs operating outside the rules everyone else works within. It completely destabilizes the market.

I actually think no one person or family should be able to own a football club. They should be self run with a board for the communities and wider they represent. None profit.

Not run as a way of improving your image with the western world.

Not because you are bored and want a toy.

Not because you see a business opportunity.

These clubs are worth much more than that and need protection.

That includes the likes of City and PSG who are one decision to pull funding away from disappearing into the abyss (there's no way either club are self sufficient). It includes leaches like the Glazers as well.

After that we can get started on football agents.

But for now I'll settle with Man City receiving the punishments they have earned. Then look into PSG.

You think City wouldn't have liked to pay less for these players?. the selling clubs were only too happy to inflate the prices. City didnt make utd pay £90 million for Pogba or PSG pay £200 million for Pogba or Barca pay £120 million for coutinho, come to think of it they didnt make Utd pay £30 million for a defender way back in 2002 either not to mention £30 million for some lad called veron around the same time.

gstack166 · 11-03-2019 11:34pm

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Liverpool first European game was in 64.

Hold my hands up on that one now that I’ve checked, fair dues. The rest that get called out on their wrong stements in this thread hide behind them. Always had it in my head I was right but I take it back.

givyjoe · 11-03-2019 11:40pm

~Rebel~ wrote: »

I don't say this very often.. very rarely in fact, but, lol.

Someones having a bit of meltdown

Bobeagleburger · 11-03-2019 11:43pm

gstack166 wrote: »

City won a FA Cup 66 years before Liverpool, they won a European trophy before Liverpool ever even played a game in a European competition. 11 years old in current form. You haven’t a ****ing clue. Football history doesn’t start in 1970. City actually have the longest span between winning their first trophy (1904) to their last (2019) 115 years. The biggest of any club, and you have the cheek to talk about history.

Read my post again.

City pre takeover were bang average. They'd still be bang average without it. That's not an unfair statement.

City won the cup winners cup nearly 50 years ago. Forest and Villa have eclipsed that in Europe. Domestically they have been superb since the takeover. They've flopped in the biggest competition.

IncognitoMan · 11-03-2019 11:43pm

UrbanFret wrote: »

You think City wouldn't have liked to pay less for these players?. the selling clubs were only too happy to inflate the prices. City didnt make utd pay £90 million for Pogba or PSG pay £200 million for Pogba or Barca pay £120 million for coutinho, come to think of it they didnt make Utd pay £30 million for a defender way back in 2002 either not to mention £30 million for some lad called veron around the same time.

No but the likes of City and PSG have pushed prices up all around. 90m for Pogba is about right when you look at what United make... 220m from PSG in the french league makes no sense and had a direct effect on the market after.

To more than double the previous record shows something isn't right. Clubs didn't suddenly become twice as rich in the space of a season. Well not legitimately anyway.

And the selling clubs inflated those prices because they know City will pay and City will pay because they know they don't have to fear FFP. A vicious circle.

ozzy jr · 11-03-2019 11:45pm

A little-known European Union agency called Eurojust is looking into the information released by Football Leaks with particular emphasis on “serious tax evasion, collective fraud, embezzlement, corruption and money laundering.”

Full article below.....

https://www.forbes.com/sites/bobbymcmahon/2019/03/11/how-a-little-known-organization-called-eurojust-may-become-manchester-citys-next-big-problem/

gstack166 · 11-03-2019 11:45pm

IncognitoMan wrote: »

No but the likes of City and PSG have pushed prices up all around. 90m for Pogba is about right when you look at what United make... 220m from PSG in the french league makes no sense and had a direct effect on the market after.

To more than double the previous record shows something isn't right. Clubs didn't suddenly become twice as rich in the space of a season. Well not legitimately anyway.

That £220m from PSG in the French league has no connection with City. They don’t make PSG pay any money, the most Coty have paid on a player was Mahrez for £65m?

You can’t justify PSG’s spending on another team

Bobeagleburger · 11-03-2019 11:47pm

ozzy jr wrote: »

A little-known European Union agency called Eurojust is looking into the information released by Football Leaks with particular emphasis on “serious tax evasion, collective fraud, embezzlement, corruption and money laundering.”

Full article below.....

https://www.forbes.com/sites/bobbymcmahon/2019/03/11/how-a-little-known-organization-called-eurojust-may-become-manchester-citys-next-big-problem/

The net is closing in.

gstack166 · 11-03-2019 11:47pm

RoboKlopp wrote: »

Read my post again.

City pre takeover were bang average. They'd still be bang average without it. That's not an unfair statement.

City won the cup winners cup nearly 50 years ago. Forest and Villa have eclipsed that in Europe. Domestically they have been superb since the takeover. They've flopped in the biggest competition.

Every English team has flopped in it since Chelsea won it, considering all this waffle about Liverpool’s commercial power & world status that you burn the ears off us with, then what’s their excuse for flopping too?

IncognitoMan · 11-03-2019 11:48pm

gstack166 wrote: »

That £220m from PSG in the French league has no connection with City. They don’t make PSG pay any money, the most Coty have paid on a player was Mahrez for £65m?

You can’t justify PSG’s spending on another team

No I'm saying that PSG spending 220m changed the market. Raised prices up way above what they should be. City have done it with their defenders. 50m a piece for players that never would get near that price if FFP was being followed.

ozzy jr · 11-03-2019 11:49pm

RoboKlopp wrote: »

The net is closing in.

Nah, gstack says the leaks can't be used and citys lawyers will destroy everyone in court.

gstack166 · 11-03-2019 11:50pm

IncognitoMan wrote: »

No I'm saying that PSG spending 220m changed the market. Raised prices up way above what they should be. City have done it with their defenders. 50m a piece for players that never would get near that price if FFP was being followed.

But yet you’ll swear blindly VVD is worth £75m.

UrbanFret · 11-03-2019 11:51pm

ozzy jr wrote: »

A little-known European Union agency called Eurojust is looking into the information released by Football Leaks with particular emphasis on “serious tax evasion, collective fraud, embezzlement, corruption and money laundering.”

Full article below.....

https://www.forbes.com/sites/bobbymcmahon/2019/03/11/how-a-little-known-organization-called-eurojust-may-become-manchester-citys-next-big-problem/

There's a reason they're little known. Non story. In fact bull****.:rolleyes:

Bobeagleburger · 11-03-2019 11:51pm

gstack166 wrote: »

Every English team has flopped in it since Chelsea won it, considering all this waffle about Liverpool’s commercial power & world status that you burn the ears off us with, then what’s theirexcuse for flopping too?

I don't think 5 wins is considered flopping. If it is fair enough. Madrid probably think it is.

IncognitoMan · 11-03-2019 11:52pm

gstack166 wrote: »

But yet you’ll swear blindly VVD is worth £75m.

I'll swear blindly that that's now the going rate thanks to clubs spending money they could never generate if you want?

gstack166 · 11-03-2019 11:52pm

RoboKlopp wrote: »

I don't think 5 wins is considered flopping. If it is fair enough. Madrid probably think it is.

Read again, since Chelsea won it. Stated clearly, can’t help but move the goalposts once again.

Bobeagleburger · 11-03-2019 11:53pm

ozzy jr wrote: »

Nah, gstack says the leaks can't be used and citys lawyers will destroy everyone in court.

Doesn't matter what anyone else thinks. City are under investigation, despite people refusing to accept it.

Bobeagleburger · 11-03-2019 11:55pm

gstack166 wrote: »

Read again, since Chelsea won it. Stated clearly, can’t help but move the goalposts once again.

But why only start the clock since Chelsea won it? What about football history etc etc ? I'm not the one moving the goalposts..

gstack166 · 11-03-2019 11:56pm

RoboKlopp wrote: »

But why only start the clock since Chelsea won it? What about football history etc etc ? I'm not the one moving the goalposts..

Same can be said for the premier league so and Liverpool bottling it? You posted on your thread that that’s bull ****?

Not going from this statement it isn’t

Bobeagleburger · 11-03-2019 11:59pm

gstack166 wrote: »

You are a simpleton lad. I’m the one that’s said from the start let them investigate and then see, but people won’t be happy with the outcome. Absolute wet wipe you are man.

No idea why you have to personally abuse people. It's a soccer forum. People have different opinions, big whoop. Much more important stuff in life.

But yeah, they will be investigated. It's about time too, it's been coming tbf.

citytillidie · 11-03-2019 11:59pm

Well since Chelsea won the Champions Leauge in 2012 only one English team has made the final wonder who that was

gstack166 · 12-03-2019 12:00am

RoboKlopp wrote: »

No idea why you have to personally abuse people. It's a soccer forum. People have different opinions, big whoop. Much more important stuff in life.

But yeah, they will be investigated. It's about time too, it's been coming tbf.

Because you won’t listen. I’ve stated since my first message wait till the investigation is over & I don’t know if they’re guilty or not and time again you post insinuating that I don’t accept that they are under investigation.

Can you not understand why posting drivel like that after what I said would get on my nerves?

UrbanFret · 12-03-2019 12:01am

citytillidie wrote: »

Well since Chelsea won the Champions Leauge in 2012 only one English team has made the final wonder who that was

You really need to change that username.

gstack166 · 12-03-2019 12:01am

citytillidie wrote: »

Well since Chelsea won the Champions Leauge in 2012 only one English team has made the final wonder who that was

What trophy did they lift for that honour?

citytillidie · 12-03-2019 12:02am

UrbanFret wrote: »

You really need to change that username.

Why?

Bobeagleburger · 12-03-2019 12:03am

gstack166 wrote: »

Because you won’t listen. I’ve stated since my first message wait till the investigation is over & I don’t know if they’re guilty or not and time again you post insinuating that I don’t accept that they are under investigation.

Can you not understand why posting drivel like that after what I said would get on my nerves?

I never said you don't accept they are under investigation. You just made that up or are you mixing me with up with someone else?

citytillidie · 12-03-2019 12:03am

gstack166 wrote: »

What trophy did they lift for that honour?

Again where did I say they won it?

gstack166 · 12-03-2019 12:05am

RoboKlopp wrote: »

I never said you don't accept they are under investigation. You just made that up or are you mixing me with up with someone else?

Who were you referring to when saying ‘despite some people refusing to accept it’ then?

Bobeagleburger · 12-03-2019 12:06am

gstack166 wrote: »

Who were you referring to when saying ‘despite some people refusing to accept it’ then?

City the club. Denying everything. Thought that was obvious.

Football Leaks: UEFA Investigation into Manchester City

Comments