The GLAZERS and MANCHESTER UNITED…17 threads. An interpretation of events covering: - £1.4 billion transfer spend - tax avoidance (not illegal) - "disintegration of Old Trafford" - the 2013 squad - 2nd biggest debt in Europe - sale of 52m shares for $814m - exec pay; and more👇

Did Abu Dhabi help regenerate east Manchester? Zero affordable housing units were inc in Manchester Life developments, despite the council’s own guidance for 20% – the equivalent of 294 housing units

Idea City were only spending as others is complete crap From 2009-18 over wages, transfer amortisation and impairments, City spent: • £272m more than United (despite United hiring far more staff) • £301m more than Chelsea • £802m more than Arsenal • £840m more than Liverpool

‘Why did the Prime Minister say it would be “a shame” if Man City were forced to sell?’ @Lewis_Goodall questions @AlexJJNorris on whether Andy Burnham is ‘too close to the UAE and the owners of Manchester City'.

This stinks. Our politicians are sell outs 👇

Been common knowledge in Manchester since it was given -also considered unfair by developers not favoured by the Labour administration of Manchester

Some cracking lines in this thetimes.com/uk/crime/articl…

Was only a matter of time before media was onto this thetimes.com/uk/politics/art…

Since Abramovich arrived in 2003 and Abu Dhabi in 2008, Chelsea and Man Cty have won 13 of the 23 league titles. Their previous combined total was 3. Chelsea in 1955 Man Cty in 1937 & 1968. They had no history of league success in any era. English football was sold 23 years ago.

Really good this

Burnham has well and truly put Manchester in the spotlight and his passion of Football. How much of Manchester did he sell off? As his time as Mayor. All this is very much under the spotlight Now. Expect some deep search coming to light soon.

Man City latest / Chair of the Business, Innovation, Science & Trade Committee @liambyrnemp writes to the Financial Reporting Council asking how it “intends to examine the potential accounting & audit failures identified in the Manchester City judgment” bbc.co.uk/sport/football/art…

head loss at about 4.50 is marvellous.

1. The key point to understand here is that Appendix 15 contains most of the evidence we need (along with Appendix 7) to judge the IC's reasoning for rejecting MCFC's arguments, for ourselves. 2. Those appendices are confidential under PL rules: all that can be published is the Core Decision. 3. In the unredacted bit of the Core Decision, we only have the 2013 example (where City were £9.9m short for UEFA FFP purposes and then scrambled to make up the shortfall under the Disguised Funding Scheme). But Appendices 7 and 15 will contain a vast trove of additional evidence. 4. Appendix 15 apparently contains the rebuttals to City's claims around the entries in their bank statements. Because its redacted, all we are hearing right now is MCFC side of the story on the funds flow; the PL/IC side sits in the Appendices which won't be published until the matter is concluded. So there is a huge asymmetry in PR, which MCFC's outriders are exploiting to the full. 5. Page 69-78 of the Core Decision has a massive blob after which the IC rejects MCFC's explanation of the Financial Assistance/State Aid argument. Again, once unredacted, people would see the IC justification. 6. Besides the flow of funds debate which MCFC have used, there is the "Substance over Form" evidence too: potentially existence of "Sponsor Payments" where the Sponsors themselves were not approached (!) - hence use of the word "Sham". This appears true in 2013 matter / £9.9m shortfall when Sponsor income was magicked out of thin air. There is also the fact that MCFC want people to believe that 90% of Sponsorship amounts came from State Aid! 7. So there is a huge amount of evidence behind this judgement. Consequently, I maintain that if the IC ruling is overturned on appeal, the PL, its Disciplinary Code & structure are completely fucked. The IC was handpicked by Murray Rosen & comprised of qualified people. If they made errors which were the foundation of an evisceration of MCFC and Abu Dhabi's reputation, every PL club has a right to be worried how fit for purpose the PL itself is as a governing body. Evertonians have long known the answer to this question. Fair fucks to City if their lawyers do overturn it. But they will not escape the label of cheats because once all of the evidence finally drops, the public will be able to judge for themselves how Abu Dhabi operates. Two things to draw to your attention on Abu Dhabi: Miguel Delaney's book States of Play and the Guardian article on Sheikh Tahnoun (brother of Sheikh Mansour). Frightening stuff.

This is significant.

But we are told that City aren't state-owned, right?

This is from one of the University of Sheffield professors who analysed 'Manchesterism' and found council land sold on the cheap + rental income sent to offshore companies owned by Abu Dhabi

This was never just about football + that is why state ownership of clubs should be banned "UAE officials warned the UK government that the severity of Man City’s punishment could undermine their appetite for future grand-scale commitments in Britain" bloomberg.com/news/articles/…

Curiouser and curiouser As @DamianHastie points out, in 2015 the US depts of Commerce, State + Transport launched an inquiry into whether Etihad were receiving govt subsidies Etihad statement to commission was: "The assertion that the Abu Dhabi government paid for Etihad's sponsorship of English Premier League football club Manchester City is … false. In 2011, Etihad and Manchester City entered into a 10-year sponsorship agreement, which included naming rights for Manchester City's stadium. Etihad funded this sponsorship from its own liquidity’

"UAE officials have warned the UK Government.." Also, look how cosy Khaldoon is with Burnham

Something not right about Burnham and Manchester City’s Money, taken into No10 with very special treatment to meet PM and business sec. Bypassed security treated like royalty by spads. Much more to this than football!