The “Commercial Suicide” Myth — Manchester City Are Not Too Big to Nail

There is, has been, a clear financial divide between the so called big six and the rest of the premier league. Why has this become a divide that grows every season. It is plain and simple, the big six earn more and can spend more under the rules. Each year they get richer because they win more, they achieve more, they earn more. They then spend on the biggest name players and the revenues grow.

The rest of the clubs haven’t a chance to compete because spending rules restrict them so much so each year they get relatively poorer. Accepted there are the anomalies that crop up now and again but it’s usually short lived. they have one or two exceptional players and the big six move in like vultures with huge cash incentives for those players to jump ship.

If you want a PL that gives all clubs a fair crack of the whip those clubs have to be able to keep their best players and build teams around them.

What needs to happen is a formula that allows the smaller clubs to spend more, if they have it, and the bigger clubs to be more restricted with their spending. Of course they will complain but the PL should stand strong and impose themselves.

Everton for example, Nottingham forest another, have big money owners who want to put money in but can’t because of financial restraints, not without creative accounting as displayed by Chelsea and Man City.

The PL needs to find a way of allowing the lower clubs to spend more while limiting the bigger clubs… F1 motor racing has achieved it. Why can’t the PL.

I agree the breaches must be addressed, regardless of City's commercial importance. But City's Abu Dhabi ownership links mean the consequences of a severe sanction could extend beyond football into wider UK–UAE economic interests.

That doesn't justify leniency,but it is a factor worth acknowledging.

I agree, Jerome, but it's all bluster and intimidation tactics. Abu Dhabi's investment in the UK hasn't been charity; they've benefited hugely in financial terms, of course, but also in terms of PR, hence all the "sportswashing" allegations.

We can't allow them to effectively say, "allow us to cheat or we're taking our ball home".

There’s a really good article in today’s Guardian by Jonathan Wilson. His analogy of winning trophies by default is spot on, who wants an FA cup win or Premier league 10 years after the spontaneity of being there and celebrating with the people around you at the point of winning? not any proper fan.

Leave blanks as the winners of those stolen trophies for all future generations to see and question why didn’t anyone win the 2012 FA cup or the 2014 Premier League, and many more.

Mentioned on another thread but my punishment would be 40 points per season for 5 years,( similar points deduction as us pro rata for similar breaches)that way they won’t qualify for Europe and may well get relegated, points loss is frozen if relegated, then kicks in again if promoted to PL, players leave and others won’t sign, proper long term punishment.

I also think pressure will be on in January when Everton v Burnley kicks off again in court, the EPL will not want Burnley winning that one.

great article lyndon, you have summed up exactly why man.cheaty cannot escape a proper and fitting punishment, maybe you should e mail it to mr masters ?
pete @1 what evidence do we have that tfg want to put money in - its not like dan the man and angus are always communicating with us and informing evertonians of their future plans and targets for efc.

Lyndon I see where you are coming from.I think City are going to pay and there will be plenty of fallout. They are going to try every trick in the book to put pressure on to get parts of the allegations reversed, but their arguments have already failed. Actually Everton had a better argument for their one breach.

the clubs in the PL aren't interested in keeping the game clean, or 'a fair crack of the whip' or anything like that. they just want their slice of the cake, and for the tills to keep on ringing.

How do we know this? they voted in the current spending limits, which prevent a club like Everton from ever escaping from mid table. Even if you escape, you immediately have to sell your players, villa style. Our owners don't care, they've already been bought off when they voted for this system. Those same rules prevent out billionaires from investing in the team, they are forced to just sit there and count da munny. How awful for them, but them the rules.

We were told that the new stadium would allow us to start competing again. We know now that was BS. It's all about the money.

Normally for every winner there are losers, whether it be one, or many.

But, unfortunately for us mediocre types, in this in instance, if City do get punished harshly and become a loser, then the only winners will be their nearest rivals.

IMO this is the bit that doesn't get said enough. The same clubs crying loudest about City are the ones who've built a system that makes sure nobody else can ever do what City did.

They want City buried. Not punished—buried. A single relegation isn't enough, they want a "prolonged absence." They're queuing up to sue for compensation. Everton could get £29m out of it. Fine. But look at who benefits most: Arsenal, Liverpool, United, Spurs. The clubs who've been finishing behind City for a decade.

And at the same time, they've voted through SCR rules that tie spending to revenue. Purslow of Aston Villa said it plainly: it gives a "huge sporting advantage" to the four or five clubs with £700m turnover. The anchor clause that would have capped everyone got binned.

So the message is: City cheated to get to the top, and they'll be destroyed for it. But if you're Everton, Newcastle, or Villa, don't even think about spending your way up. The door's closed. Stay mid table at best.

Kevin#8

TFG's vote for the SCR was a bet on their own stadium project. They traded a system that had punished them for one that rewards the substantial, long-term revenue growth they are now positioned to generate. The new stadium isn't just a factor,it's the entire foundation of their financial strategy under the new rules.But one wonders if Everton is to become a Cash Cow ,rather than able to Progress to winning something, anything.

Jeff, 4, to answer your question, thousands over at Mordor. They're probably organising an open top bus tour as we write

Kevin@8, add them voting to keep VAR, because I’m absolutely certain that a very large majority of the match going fan, (I’m not sure it would be the same for those watching on television? Although I still think most people acknowledge that it has done absolutely nothing for the game) absolutely detests it.

In fact after the outcome of the eventual verdict on Manchester City, after all the appeals are over, then I think the fan groups of every football club, should already be having serious dialogue with each other, because it’s time the fans started reclaiming a little bit of what was once - “our fucking game”

I agree with the sentiment but I am not convinced this is actually true:

"Indeed, it would surely be more damaging to the Premier League’s standing and appeal if City are seen to be getting away with cheating than it would be to keep them in the division out of some misguided notion that the product is worth more with them in it."

I expect the Premier League would bounce back pretty quickly from all of this.

UK based fans largely seem to buy into whatever they are told by Sky's very effective propaganda machine. Sky are already positioning things very carefully.

Overseas based fans aren't arsed. They just want to see the big clubs, the famous names and lots of goals.

Football probably isn't quite rigged (although it wouldn't be a huge surprise to find reasonably widespread corruption and even match-fixing etc) but it isn't fair either. And it's a known known that it's used for laundering the reputations of regimes and politically sensitive individuals - and this has been tolerated every step of the way.

There was very little backlash from Everton fans against Usmanov, for example - with the main issue being that he was prevented from spending his money by financial rules.

I don’t want Liverpool fc, to win a raffle, but how can you just leave things blank, without sufficiently punishing the team that cheated?

I think most of us have broke rules, especially ones that we don’t consider fit for purpose, but to categorically take the piss the way Manchester City have, and to expect to effectively get away with it without being relegated, doesn’t make sense to me.

We all have our opinions but if City, are not relegated, my own view is that the rule makers should also be charged with bringing the game into disrepute, and as for a 40 points deduction a season, stopping City from qualifying for Europe, that would only be possible if you banned them from the cups, imo Jeff@5.

Tony yes, VAR is an abomination. It literally ruins football. You can't celebrate goals. As you suggest, they have bought the game off us and made it a money making behemoth. It's not our game any more. It's gone. We have no say. that's the subliminal message from the Friedkins, when they don't bother engaging with the fanbase. We don't matter as far as they are concerned.
What we've got now is as good as it's ever gonna get. Our place is 12th. Forever.

Lyndon, I am incredulous that anyone could actually try to offset the actions of City by recommending leniency dressed up as a financial settlement without a care for the material damage to clubs, fans even the Priemier League. But the game has been dragged into disrepute in such a way that can never be forgiven. For all the rules in place to prevent shonky owners, PSR, SCR all supposedly in place to protect clubs, fans and the integrity of the game, it was a club with unlimited wealth than didn't ignore the rules, far from it, they contrived a business model to rig the game and totally ignored the rules in place. They got so big, so successful, they believed the rules were meant to keep others in their place. Those clubs who rode the success of the league and City became ultra wealthy. But like a house of cards its falling down. Who will sell their soul and the league, down the river?

I agree with every word there Christine.
That world we thought we lived in though, of integrity, morals and doing the right thing, evaporated some time ago. The decision makers in this shitshow are not bothered in the slightest about any of that. All they are focussed on is how much of a bite out of city will the others be able to take, without harming the golden goose.
I think also though this is the beginning of the end for PL. Cos it's being exposed to the fans as the horrible entity that it is. So whilst it is incapable of self correction, the thing that gave it its' magic, the passion of the fans, will slowly be withdrawn. How can anyone get excited about the slop we are being given. the whole thing is a rotten fix, and people will eventually find a better use of their time.

Without doubt Kevin, people will look back a few years to see the fans at Goodison holding up cards with one word on and say, "Fair play, they were right"
How much bottle do the independent commission have with sanctions? After such a damming verdict, the sanction has to be equally damming for the very integrity of the league itself. Fall short and the league is finished.

I've mentioned before about the legal costs of just this City case.

The Premier League governing body will want to keep it under control, it could get huge. The PL governing body is financed by taking their expenses out before distributing what's left to individual clubs apparently, so all the clubs will want it over and done with as soon as possible.

What they should do is declare the City owners not fit to own the club and force them to sell, that would solve that problem. I think they will sell whatever the penalties are anyway.

But like it or not you have the political consequences to consider, for that reason I think the penalties will not be as harsh as they should be.

It's anybody's guess what the PL will do, brush it under the carpet would be their preferred option and pretend it's never happened.

Man City are not a major global football brand.

As the charges have shown, their commercial growth was artificially inflated. Also, the UK government will not have sleepless nights about upsetting a single Emirati state.

The Premier League will step carefully as the club have shown themselves to be highly litigious, willing to double-down on their stated position, and well funded.

But, this only going in one direction - expulsion from the Premier League, titles revoked, financial fines, executive bans and the option for their fellow clubs to seek compensation.

The proportionate punishment would ruin City. They'd be sent to the bottom tier, kicked out of Europe, have their trophies awarded to runners-up etc and have their owners barred from owning a Premier League club. The money tap would be turned off and they would end up where they were before the money - a West Ham standard yo yo club that has good spells and bad.

Then there's the compensation claims.

There's been a few charts and graphs circulating on LinkedIn which suggests we're due the most compensation (circa £28m) out of everyone - with the total bill being about £479m.

But...

Sure, it appears Man City are cheats, but I suspect they will be able to uncover more widespread cheating across the Premier League and beyond. Let's be honest, there's no way it's just them. Maybe not to the same extent, but still.

That's a massive problem for the Premier League, the Premier League clubs (and half of the Championship who appear to be owed money), the UK Government and UEFA / FIFA etc in relation to the European competitions.

Proportionate punishment would do a lot of damage to "the gravy train" and almost inevitably expose a whole host of wider corruption etc.

That's why I don't think the punishment will be anything like proportionate. I expect there is too much cheating going on generally for anyone to risk it. Almost everyone will want to cut a deal.

If I were to guess, I would say a relegation to the Championship (via points deduction), transfer ban, some compensation (but not the full £479m) and a forced restructure of ownership / greater transparency will happen - but nothing ruinous. I suspect they'll get to keep their trophies and may even continue to participate in the European Superleague (currently branded as the Champions League).

Otherwise, the Premier League could eat itself in claims and counterclaims, points deductions upon more points deductions and European bans. If that happens, wealthy owners might just say "fuck this" and pump all the money into Serie A instead. Or Saudi. Or the MLS. Or wherever. If the City owners are forced out of the Premier League - they can just buy AC Milan and turn them back into the best team in the world within a few years.

There's nothing so inherently special about the Premier League. A high proportion of the world's best players for the past 30 years or so never set foot in the Premier League.

Christine, is there any chance of you applying for a seat on the independent commission?

City are just one part of a huge investment portfolio owned by the Saudis. For Manchester City Council, the U.K Government, and anyone else in the portfolio, I think it would be business as usual. They will all just say that it is for footballing authorities to deal with. They will be tactful, neutral in public, and full.of charm and calm in contact with the Saudis.

To maintain it's relevance within, and relationship with, the footballing world, I think the PL will need to follow their equivalent in Italy. Whatever the decision making was around Juventus, that's the route to follow.

Kieran.
The Saudis don't own City mate.

A football organisation versus the rulers of a country that has massive investment in trade deals with the UK.

Imo, there won't be any relegation involved in the punishment.

John, fair point on the ownership. I was being simplistic. I just think that given the level and variety of investment, even up to Government level, a football club may be small potatoes for the people making the investment. They may hold the opposite view and take every last penny as a point of principle. It just depends on the pushback behind the scenes.

Kieran # 24. I think there is a huge amount at stake here. The City owners won't want a corruption type scandal. The point of owning Man City is to create a positive reputation, not taint it. There's no way they'll quietly accept punishment and carry on as they were.

Punishment is not just problematic now for City - it's problematic for Manchester and the UK government in terms of investment and geo-politics.

Danny O'Neill wrote a very good article about the German fan ownership model before his sad passing. It would certainly help avoid all of this nonsense. English football got greedy and it's got serious ramifications.

Football reflects life, and if City, don’t get relegated, then it’s clear that it will only be because of the financial clout that their owners hold.

This equates to someone or many different people being bought, (people in high places) but that’s just another thing that is as clear as a sunny day on the English Channel, to many of us.

Thanks for the responses to my response. It is then a sad reflection of football.in England if the footballing authorities bow to political pressures of this type. Football has literally become a quagmire.

There seems to be no way of predicting the outcome. Responses contradict responses. Football, the English FA, the PL, and 'lesser' clubs up and down the country may well all end up losing.

Fans will end up becoming more and more insulated, small minded and parochial in their views. It's sad, but with each disgrace, and mess, and scandal, inevitable.

I think City probably will be relegated by points deduction, Tony. That will be a compromise - and it will be positioned as breach of technicality (more serious than ours) rather than "cheating".

That would maintain the owner's reputation without completely undermining the credibility of Premier League.

That means City keep their titles etc and are back in the top echelons of the Premier League within 2 or 3 seasons.

I think the footballing world and fans generally would soon get over it. Sky and the rest of the media will conveniently forget to remind them.

The good news is that I suspect this reduces the chance of us actually needing to pay Burnley the £40m. Massive can of worms now.

Jerome @2 and Lyndon @3 Get paid guys.

ADUG were always going to flex their Muscles, but there is so much at stake here. They simply cannot be allowed to bully their way through this.

As Christine put it recently, This is now a fight to the death. If City prevail. I see many people turning their backs on the EPL. I'll be among them

what I meant to include in my previous post is how culpable the premier league are in this fiasco by allowing man.cheaty to be bought by a sovereign wealth fund and in 2011 arsene wenger raised concerns about the etihad ground sponsorship deal compared to the emirates naming rights for arsenal.
as for asterisks against everything won by city it reminds me of michael sheen as brian clough meeting leeds utd.players in the film -the damned united - it went something like - ; I want you to get all your cups, all you medals and all your pots and pans and throw them all in the fuckin bin ! coz as far as i'm concerned you won them all by cheating !
dunno why bremner, giles, clarke took offence !

There was £25 billion trade with UAE and the UK in 2025, I think that's import and export. Then you have the Saudis owning 85% of Newcastle, countries should never be allowed to take control of any team.

If you think politics won’t come into the Premier League’s decisions I think you’re sadly wrong.

Andy Burnham said the government won’t interfere with any decisions but he's already stuck his oar in! There will be all sorts of secret pow wows going on, on how to smooth this over.

Raymond @ 33, yes £25 billion in imports and exports from the UAE as a whole. £9 billion of that is exports from UAE to the UK.

Do you really think that the emirati giovernments are going to risk a trade relationship for the dealings of one sheikh in a football club? The Emirati states work closely, and commercial decisions drive everything they do.

£900 million in false commercial deals is definitive, and no informal dialogues can finesse that away.

Steve#34

The one sheikh and the Emirati state are one and the same, UAE Sovereign Wealth.That is what the Independent Commission are arguing.

It is Abu Dhabi United Group that bought City Group.While ADUG is private, the same individuals and networks that govern it are deeply embedded in Abu Dhabi's sovereign wealth infrastructure. Sheikh Mansour is also Vice Chairman of Mubadala Investment Company, one of Abu Dhabi's principal sovereign wealth funds.City Football Group (CFG) is explicitly described as "a tool of Emirati soft power, combining sports, investment, and public diplomacy".

They are claiming they are separate companies in response.Eithard Airlines, owned by Mubadala Investment Company, that is a sponsor, where a number of problems arise, but is not named or has been contacted by the Independent Commission, is threating to sue for damaged to its reputation.

Steve 34.
Abu Dhabi produces £220 million of oil daily.
£9 billion is a months worth of oil give or take.

I also think you are misjudging the arab chatacteristics in business tbh.
They wont make any decisions based on money.Imo

I would like to see City punished by banning them for the EPL for 8 seasons, from the end of this season. They should start season 27/28 in League 2, with a 10 points deduction. Every season after, for another 7 seasons,a 10 point deduction. When they reach the Championship which they will, they cannot be promoted or take part in the play offs until, season 36/37. If they win any of the leagues, they should get the trophy.The fans cannot be punished.They should be banned from the FA Cup and League Cup for the same period.

A fine of £900m.

If we the fans really want to take our game back. We can. Send your Cancel you Sky Sports contracts, citing dissatisfaction of how the game is run and how Sky have enabled it to become the nonsense it now is. Boycott games involving the SLY SIX, That will concentrate the minds oft he 14 others on what we want - a fair competition, where every fan can dream again of glory and not just survival as the seasonal objective.

Get rid of VAR immediately, it is strangling the enjoyment out of the game. Football is there for the fans at the game itself, and not for TV companies / pundits / sponsors etc etc.By all means let TV show matches, let sponsors advertise let pundits, if you must talk bollocks but leave Kick Off time in the main to 3pm on a Saturday, say 8 games, 2 on a Sunday. Plus Highlights programmes of course.

I want the game back, that I grew up watching, as what is being put before us now is a mere shadow of what it should be.

Only a few guilty voices are claiming Citys innocence, they have to be sanctioned, punished proportionately to the rulings already meted out.

Most are agreed the current Prem structure is not fit for purpose.

How can a country be deemed suitable owners for a prem club, especially when these owners have political dealings, diplomatic immunity, unfair privilege, with the wealth, influence and capacity to obfuscate charges laid against them.

Its just wrong, the sport ceases to be a competition and becomes a vanity project.

A clear line has to be drawn regarding club ownership, and what being a fit and proper owner means.

Clear accounting and accountability in all business matters has to be mandatory, with full independant auditing every year.

Remove the doubt and the temptation to cheat, anything less is the death nell for football in this country.

John @ 36, as with PIL and Newcastle Ltd the aim of ADUG was sports-washing.

They will now feel that their investment in Man City will cause reputational damage rather than benefit them. Therefore, the confirmation of the penalties will likely see them put the club up for sale.

Sky Sports is reporting that fellow premier league clubs do no expect to see Man City in the Premier League next season. As I posted earlier in the thread, expulsion from the Premier League seems certain, with titles revoked, financial fines, executive bans and the option for their fellow clubs to seek compensation.

Let's see.

The less favourable the Premier League gets to external investors, the more likely the creation of a formalised European Superleague which we will not be part of.

Pros and cons...

Steve,

Thats all we can do, wait and see.
I would be very surprised if they were relegated tbh.

Very good point Robert. Something else which nobody really talks about is how the Premier league, have been complicit in helping these external investors obtain clubs, through complete leverage.

Which owners would you sooner have for our club? The Arabs, who are prepared to spend as much of their own money as possible to obtain success, or Americans, like The Glazier’s, who have saddled the club they own with enormous debt?

You could argue that a certain Mr Bill Kenwright, was the very first person to buy a premier league club, with leverage, but what a visionary he turned out to be, sending The Sheikh’s, straight down the M62, instead!!

I would genuinely swap our last 10 years for City's last 10 years.
That includes if relegation is involved.

Robert (40), let them create a super league and good riddance to them.

We would all enjoy our football a lot more and would have more chance of winning things.

City are guilty of nine seasons of systemic cheating on a grand scale and must be punished accordingly.

Demotion from the premier league should be just the start.

that's big of you John, would you really take their Championship wins, and just hand over our relegation fights, and expect nothing more in return?

I'd expect to be drunk for 10 years Kevin.
Not quite with you there mate?

It seems the Premier League must have known about this cheating for some time and it was the Portuguese hackers info. that gave them a push to finally make them say what the wrongdoing was.

Peter, Id be delighted if the red trio went off to form part of a Super League. With the proviso that they couldnt also compete in an English League.

That isn't how the European Superleague would work. The participants would all still be involved in their domestic leagues - but TV rights and global appeal would switch focus to the Superleague.

Those left behind (including us) would become poorer and weaker.

It would be like relegation - but instead of dropping down to the division below, we would have another division plonked ahead of us (and with little or possibly no chance of promotion).

A truly level playing field is tne only solution

To me the issue of punishment is less about points deductions and relegations than it is about enforceability. As Lyndon says, "ADUG appear hell-bent on pursuing their scorched earth policy to a very bitter and far-off end."

They have no reason not to. These emirs have spent the past 50 years manipulating world oil markets with zero legal accountability and unlimited financial rewards. They truly believe they had every right to do what they did, cannot be held accountable, and are justified in leveraging their assets -- $1.8 TRILLION -- to defend themselves.

Whatever penalties the Premier League or the other clubs decide to assess, whether relegation or forced sale or ejection from the league, a governmental entity with a checking account 50 times the value of the entire PL itself can at any time choose to overwhelm its opponents with an onslaught of legal challenges that could take years to untangle while draining the league's resources.

I profoundly hope that City pays consequences, and soon, for misdeeds that rank as the largest corruption scandal in world sports history. But that will only happen if, and when, Abu Dhabi chooses to allow it to happen. If they choose earth-scorching, no one in the football world has the power to prevent it.

Robert #49, I'm not sure that's the case. LIV skimmed many of the world's top golfers, but the PGA and European tours banned them in response, and they not only didn't become "poorer and weaker" but thrived without them. Some are trying to slink back with their tails tucked as LIV spirals.

I think you reckon without the possibility that the leagues could kiss off the defectors, and fan interest -- and TV ratings -- in the Manchester derbies and the Barca-Real Clasicos would flag if they were happening once a month instead of three or four times a year.

That’s what I was thinking Mike. If they are going, the door should be shut behind them, instead of letting them back in to also play in their own countries domestic leagues.

Good-Riddance. Take your SCR, take VAR, put an end to the sanitation of the English game and let’s see who actually prospers the most?

Mike and Antony, I totally agree.

A European super league would be another name for the champions league.

Let them go, play each other at least 4 times a season, and watch the attendances dwindle very quickly.

I just want to watch some decent football and enjoy the game again.

I not really caring what happens to Man City all I want is all our points back and all the money we had to give to Leeds and Burnley back. Then for the epl to leave us alone and not attack us at every opportunity

Guy, I don't even care about the points or the money. We got enough points on our own to stay up in those seasons.

And the money will mean nothing to Friedkin.

All I want is a fair chance.

Careful speculating on the current breaches. City got the old APT rules declared unenforceable ( due to shareholder loans), but the PL replaced them in Nov 2024. City challenged the new rules, then settled Sept 2025, accepting they're valid, though terms are unknown, so can't be sure it was amicable.

The 115 charges cover 2009–2018, before APT. Separate battle. Doesn't get City off the hook, just shows the league patching holes while clubs fight the rulebook. Everton fans know how that plays out.

Roughly 80 of the current rule breaches are in relation to Sponsorship,exactly relevent to what APT was set up to police.

It's a rum situation, neither the Prem, League or our government will want to throw City out of the League, so don't hold your breath for a decision.
Andy @ 50, wants a level playing field, I second that but there's never been one and there never will be. The rules have made it worse not better, but there will always clubs bigger and richer whatever you do.

The rules were brought it to supposedly prevent bankruptcies and supporters clubs disappearing, the idea was right but it's proved a strangle hold for the top clubs at the time.

There's two sides to VAR, sure it's a pain in the backside in some ways but can you imagine the uproar there will be if a goal is allowed and it's shown to well or even slightly offside, especially in crucial games.

Mike..all I want is for every game to kick off at 3pm on a Saurday.
Or 7.30 on a Tuesday.
And replays in the FA Cup
And to play in ambre and blue, away, when we NEED to change.
And to be able to pass your ticket onto a mate if you're in hospital, prison, dead etc without the ticket police hounding you
And Id like a crack at Nicole Kidman
And I'd like John Prine to come back so I could see him perform

Raymond #58

Financial rules like FFP/PSR and the new SCR are restrictive by design, yet they may escape competition law prohibition if they pursue a legitimate objective, such as for financial stability and sporting integrity.

But this does not mean they are not designed to manage the market for the bigger revenue participants.

The PL brought in SCR to specifically aline with Ueafa Rules.In the Premier League Anchor payments where rejected, which would have helped PL lower table teams compete in a more equitable bases with higher revenue Clubs.

Jerome, you have obviously studied the situation and the rules more than most of us. What's your best guess on what penalties the powers that be will inflict on City.

A very difficult question I know and it's probably too early to form an opinion, but have a stab at it.

I saw Nicole Kidman at Nandos recently Alan, and she was asking after you.

Mike # 52, there is no way the Premier League would let go of:

- Man Utd (220m+ followers worldwide)
- Man City (160m+ followers worldwide)
- Liverpool (159m+ followers worldwide)
- Chelsea (150m+ followers worldwide)
- Arsenal (112m+ followers worldwide)

The global revenues are too huge - and the appeal of what is left behind is way too limited.

Like I say, there is nothing inherently special about the Premier League. A lot of the games are really boring. The reason people watch the Premier League is overwhelmingly to see the 5 big clubs above play (and ideally play each other). A very large proportion of fans watch, say, Arsenal v Palace in the hope of seeing a decent spectacle where Arsenal's big names put on a show and score a load of goals.

If that lot were kicked out the Premier League it would, you can argue, create a vacuum which would be filled by Everton, Villa, Newcastle, Leeds and one or two others with big (or potentially big)

However, it would only generate big global audiences / revenues if Everton, Villa, Newcastle, Leeds also had enough money to buy the worlds' best players. Unfortunately, I don't think they would.

The best players would all gravitate to the Superleague because that would have all the TV attention and therefore the money to spend on fees and wages for the world's best players.

It would be Championship +, not the Premier League as we know it. And it would be weaker and poorer than the Superleague.

Which is why those 5 clubs and Spurs would be allowed to continue playing in the Prem. Otherwise it fucks up the gravy train for everyone.

Raymond#61

The most likely outcome IMO isn't clean justice. It's a negotiated, diluted, delayed resolution both sides can live with, because the Commission won't be the only one in the room. The UAE, the government and the IFR all have a stake.

So the realistic goal isn't a sever sanction and oblteration.. It's a settlement: a substantial fine, a suspended or reduced points deduction, and a compensation fund for affected clubs. Not expulsion, not relegation.

That may be the best achievable outcome, it's a legal mine field, even if it looks like two-tier justice to everyone outside the top six.

I think you have nailed it Jerome @ 63, I also think the owners will try to find one or more of their employees as fall guys. That might not be possible though the evidence might refute that, but I think they will try.

Raymond #64

Someone may fall on his sword if required, but they will be well looked after. I have seen it before as far as Abu dabi is concerned,and far worse than anything that could happen in Man City.

To my way of thinking, it's the Premier League who is between a rock and a hard place, not the City owners.

Jerpme @63, spot on. To be honest, kicking City up and down the street will change very little. Clubs may be a little more clever, they may discretely ease off on the rule breaking, continue with creative accounting, and it will be business as usual for all past, present and future PL clubs. That includes Everton.

No one has lost too much face. No one has lost too much equity as stakeholders, Coty will bounce back quickly, job done.

Anyway, dynasties don't last forever. Ask Man. Utd, ask Liverpool last and this season, ask Arsenal before last season's title win. For City, it may all just be written off in part as the reset post Pep.

You know what, if there is a slush fund, and we get a lump sum out of it, happy days. If it gives us an advantage, an impetus, further along a positive trajectory, then in a way we've won.

Jerome, also, the key word is achievable. If you're the PL,other clubs, the F.A, and even to some degree City, do you really want this dragging along for years? Legal costs, time and effort, image, varying pressures from everywhere and anywhere. They all add up, and take their toll. An agreement that everyone can live with, a middle ground of some description, may be the best outcome.

A question all Evertonians should ask themselves is, do we really want clear and proper justice served? Because if you do, then get in line with all the other clubs to have our crimes and sins judged. Anyone who thinks the Kenwright and Moshiri regimes were sneaky clean speak now.

Kieran 68, didn’t Usmanov pay us something like £30 million just to have first dibs on naming BMD Stadium? With more to come once the Stadium’s name was secured with a long term sponsorship deal.

Yep, funny arrangement alright Jeff. It rings a bell alright so may well be true. Here's a lump of cash for something that may happen at some vague time in the future.

In addition to the current position, City's original stadium situation surely gave them a commercial advantage in the first place.

They moved into a publicly funded stadium under a long-term agreement rather than having to finance the construction of a comparable stadium themselves.

City avoided the enormous upfront cost of building a new stadium from scratch. To be fair, the money that they have poured into the 'campus' surrounding the stadium has made an enormous contribution to improving East Manchester.

In principle, money not spent on stadium construction could have been invested in players, wages, facilities and other parts of the club.

Rivals who had to finance stadium construction themselves might argue that differences in stadium costs and financing affected the competitive playing field.

It's all a mess...

Everton are officially up for sale, so TFG where actually trying to make a quick buck selling Armstrong, sell off the assets before departing, and to think Mike Gaynes has continually told us they where here for the long haul, that they’ve never sold a business ever before, now they’re scarpering before they’ve really got started, not sure who would be interested? Most likely a venture capitalist group.

Kieran# 67/68

Achievable is the right word. Nobody wants this dragging for years. But the frame isn't justice, it's a regulated market. ATP, SCR and UEFA FFP exist to protect the value of the game by limiting how owner money becomes sporting advantage.

Except that market doesn't just happen to produce a two-tier system. It's built to. When clubs voted on reform in November 2025, SCR and SSR passed, but top-to-bottom anchoring was rejected 12 votes to 7. Anchoring was the only mechanism that tethered the richest to the poorest in absolute terms. SCR is relative: 85% of your own revenue. The gap doesn't close. It's fixed.

So when clubs with the most to lose voted anchoring down, they weren't blocking reform. They were defending the hierarchy. City's diluted settlement isn't an anomaly, it's the system working as intended.

And yes, speak now on Kenwright and Moshiri, they weren't clean. Everton overspent, gambled, and paid: 10 points, cut to 6, plus 2, and £26m to Burnley out of our own pocket. But that was mismanagement, self-reported and cooperated with.But by a fluke they got a new stadium.. City's is nine seasons of disguised owner money, 114 of 115 charges, 80 of which are related to spinsorship,bad faith and four years of non-cooperation, getting into the top tier. If those land in the same place, the difference between badly run and dishonest stops meaning anything.

So no, I don't want clean justice, it isn't available. I want a fair shot under SCR with the new stadium for Everton. Which TFG voted for.

Actually the one thing that wS managed well was the building of the Stadium .They let Denise organised yours with blue balloons and it seems nothing else.

Jeff#72.They are looking for new investment partners to bring in more allowable finance and comply with Ueafa Multi Club rules, that they are in breach of since March this year.

Wrong Jerome, they are not looking for investment, they are looking to sell as has been widely reported since 8am today.

Jeff#74.

Didn't see that until Paul the Esk put up a article.The information I researched should they needed investment partners for the reasons I gave you, but it did occur to me that the changes in 2025 regarding SCR /Anchor and the Uefa Multi Clubs set the bar higher for Everton to progress as TFG wanted, given the legacy base they where working from, which would be a tuf sell to any such investment partner.

They obviously have decided to Concentrate on Roma and have told Ueafa.

Jerome, if you’re going to make big points on here, you’re going to have to get up early and be on top of that days news and topics, saying TFG are looking for partners, 7 hours after they said they want to sell is not topical.

Jeff#74

I had a idea that they where going to look out a week ago when I did my research , but hoped they would get Investment partners, which they had been looking for and needed.

The fact they are looking out is not good news.The legacy of what they inherited still exists today .TFG are the only owners in the Premier League in a Multi Club situation , who did not make a adjustment to comply before the Ueafa March deadline.

Maybe there was another reason for this Jerome. It doesn’t make sense not to make those adjustments either way, so hopefully they have had a buyer waiting🤞

Tony#78

They had the information in 2025.The SCR and Anchor happened in 2025 and other Clubs had their Multi Club adjustment done before the March deadline..

They are selling a majority stake and may maintain a minority stake under the Multi Club ownership.threshold..They still own Pursuit Sport and Insight tech and metrics analytics.

The Friedkin Group (TFG) has a deep and established network of American sports and private equity contacts

· David Beeston (Pursuit Sports CEO): A private equity and Fenway Sports Group veteran, he was appointed CEO of TFG's team ownership arm, Pursuit Sports, in early 2025.

· Christopher Sarofim (Minority Investor): A Houston-based billionaire and co-owner of the NFL's Houston Texans, he became a minority investor in Everton's parent company in April 2025.

· Jason Kidd (Minority Investor): The NBA Coach joined Roundhouse Capital Holdings (part of TFG) as an investor in Everton in April 2025.

· José E. Feliciano (Co-Investor): A billionaire and co-founder of private equity firm Clearlake Capital,

· Stan Middleman (Fellow Bidder): The President/CEO of Freedom Mortgage. He was a competing bidder alongside TFG for the Boston Celtics.

· William Chisholm (Fellow Bidder): The co-founder and CIO of Symphony Technology Group (STG), he was also part of the bidding group for the Boston Celtics.

· Amit Bhatia (Investment Pool): A businessman who led a pool of new shareholders that included Jeff Bezos to invest in Everton.

· Joe Lacob (Co-Investor): The owner of the Golden State Warriors was reportedly part of a consortium with Friedkin to invest in an MLB team.

· Copilot Capital: TFG has backed this private equity firm, which was seeded with a £160m fund.

The Friedkins are clearly well-connected in the American sports investment scene, actively networking with other billionaire owners, PE veterans, and investment banks as they explore opportunities and potential exits.

· David Beeston (Pursuit Sports CEO): A private equity and Fenway Sports Group veteran, he was appointed CEO of TFG's team ownership arm, Pursuit Sports, in early 2025.

· Christopher Sarofim (Minority Investor): A Houston-based billionaire and co-owner of the NFL's Houston Texans, he became a minority investor in Everton's parent company in April 2025.

· Jason Kidd (Minority Investor): The NBA Coach joined Roundhouse Capital Holdings (part of TFG) as an investor in Everton in April 2025.

· José E. Feliciano (Co-Investor): A billionaire and co-founder of private equity firm Clearlake Capital,

· Stan Middleman (Fellow Bidder): The President/CEO of Freedom Mortgage. He was a competing bidder alongside TFG for the Boston Celtics.

· William Chisholm (Fellow Bidder): The co-founder and CIO of Symphony Technology Group (STG), he was also part of the bidding group for the Boston Celtics.

· Amit Bhatia (Investment Pool): A businessman who led a pool of new shareholders that included Jeff Bezos to invest in Everton.

· Joe Lacob (Co-Investor): The owner of the Golden State Warriors was reportedly part of a consortium with Friedkin to invest in an MLB team.

· Copilot Capital: TFG has backed this private equity firm, which was seeded with a £160m fund.

I suspect they will sell a majority shareholding to A Sports Private Equity firm.It is probably in the pipeline as you say

Apologies duplucated by research.They are not quite well connected.

I started googling sports equity firms and saw that one company had purchased 55% of Atletico Madrid, but couldn’t work out if it was for $2.9 Billion, or that was what the overall value of that club was?

If you get the right people to purchase Everton, and they can bring success on the pitch, then they would make a lot of money, but is there even more money in real-estate to be made around the stadium?

I’m not sure, it’s why I ask, but I’m sure there are vast amounts of money to be made out of real estate - even though Liverpool, isn’t quite London, they say!

Didn’t TFG purchase the Nelson ? Dock adjacent to BMD? I wonder what will happen with that space when they sell up.

Peel, own the land Jeff, I didn’t realise they paid £770 million, to acquire a lot of the Liverpool waterfront, and I thought they sold Moshiri, Bramley Moore, for £30 million, but this doesn’t seem true, according to this very dangerous new tool that a lot of us lazy bastards, are using more and more, called A/I.

A 200 year term contingent on planning consent, but probably the catalyst for every single piece of land around that area, to absolutely skyrocket.

TSF, had talks with Peel, but probably walked away when they heard the price?

I have always thought that Moshiri’s boss, must have engineered a very profitable deal with Peel, enabling him to acquire more land at a reasonable price, because it was the building of the stadium, that kickstarted everything, especially when Moshiri, suddenly bought The Liver Building. But this was just pure speculation on my part!

So Tony, are you saying as far as you know TFG have not purchased any land around BMD?
It’s just something in the back of my mind recalls them at least having an interest in an adjacent dock area.

It was reported in the press that they were in talks regarding the adjacent Nelson Dock, Jeff, but it’s apparently still owned by Peel Holdings.

Tony and Jeff.

Chong said Everton were in talks to acquire Nelson Dock, to develop tangible assets to the Stadium. The was called the Blue plan. There is a Mayoral plan under consultation regarding development of the North Liverpool Dock on the go at the moment, and Everton as an anchor tenant best placed in the Dockland development.

He’s gone quite lately, Colin Chong, is he still at the club?