Post

More from @SwedishRumble

The Swedish Rumble 🔰

@SwedishRumble

May 14

There is one reason and one reason only why this case is not settled yet. When the PL launched the procedure for the 115 charges, City made sure that it got stuck in the courts for almost 3 years challenging every technical aspect it could to delay it.

A summary:
November-December 2018: The Premier League write to City requesting certain information and documents in relation to potential breaches of their rules — known as the information claim. City object to the request — after what has been published by Der Spiegel/the Football Leaks.
21 August 2019: The PL issue a complaint against City, since it has still not received the documents and information it has the right to receive under the Premier League Rules and which City refuse to give the PL access to. City responds by challenging the PL's disciplinary system, challenging a technicality (only highly regarded barristers could be elected for the commission).
22 October 2019: With the documents and information not forthcoming, the PL begin arbitration against the club seeking a declaration that they are contractually obliged to provide them. The club try to stop the arbitration by arguing to the tribunal involved that the PL had no power to start it. They also claim that the tribunal does not appear impartial.
26 June 2020: City issue an application in the Commercial Court repeating their argument that the tribunal lacks jurisdiction on the information claim and is tainted with “bias”.
2 November 2020: City’s claim that it has no obligation to to pass on the requested information and documents to the PL — is rejected. It’s clearly stated in the rules that they must do so. The order to provide them is however postponed pending the outcome of the Commercial Court case.
17 March 2021: In the Commercial Court, Mrs Justice Moulder more or less summarily dismisses the club's challenge to the jurisdiction and impartiality of the tribunal, dismantling the City’s lawyers arguments clearly hinting that it was felt that it had abused the public court system. She refuses permission to appeal her judgment.
24 March 2021: Mrs Justice Moulder said her judgment should be published, in order to reveal the lengths to which City had attempted to resist passing on information to the PL. City successfully seeked permission to appeal the decision to make the information public in the Court of Appeal. So we get another delay (I think you are starting to get the drift by now, it’s an appeal of an appeal of an appeal about a pure nonsense technicality. On a side
30 June 2021: The Court of Appeal opens its hearing into the club's appeal against publication. The Court of Appeal handed down its decision dismissing the appeal.

So it took the PL almost three years to just have it sorted out that it has the right to receive the information the Premier League Rules clearly states that City must submit to the PL. After this, we know that City made another challenge of the impartiality of an experienced barrister in no way connected to the Premier League, in KC Murray Rosen. How much delay this caused is unknown.

During this time, City was also sentenced by UEFA for failing to produce requested information and delaying procedures.

I am sure we all come across City PR people, at twitter, during City’s PCs, and so forth, telling us that the reason no decision have been made against City is because it is quote “complicated“. Decide for yourself!

Lastly, in this entire shambolic procedure and abuse of the game of football, one person have done more than all fancy pundits, journalists and experts combined — to protect the integrity of the game — and should be singled out and that is Justice Dame Clare Moulder. Without her…

Despite what seems to be attempts for interference on the governmental level, she took the bold decisions set out above without which it’s perfectly possible that we still wouldn’t be aware of the charges and that still would have been caught in some court somewhere.

Someone cynical might speculate on that it was a blessing that she ended up drawing this case just before her retirement in 2022, when she had nothing to lose, but since I am not cynical/conspiratorial — I wouldn’t believe that. But it’s the one big loss City have had in the judicial system up until now despite some pretty horrible looking circumstances speaking against the club… 😅

Read 4 tweets

The Swedish Rumble 🔰

@SwedishRumble

Nov 19, 2023

💣💣🚨🚨With the Everton decision at hand, it is now possible to -- with far greater certainty than before -- predict the outcome of the Manchester City case.

In my view, it must now be expected that MCFC will get EXPELLED from the PL!! ⚠️

A 🧵.

What is MCFC charged for? The below table summarize the charges, they can be sorted under 5-6 categories, I would say that it is 32 charges, some will say 115 since each "X" regards several provisions in the PL Rule Book.

Some of these charges are really complex -- but not all!

MCFC for example admitted a breach to, and was sanctioned by, UEFA in 14' -- which is a breach of the PL rules.

The PL also claims that agreements have been made to pay wages and transfer fees under the table in 2010 and 2011, which seems to be supported by strong evidence.

Read 21 tweets

The Swedish Rumble 🔰

@SwedishRumble

Oct 30, 2023

🤔I see so many comments questioning ETH’s XI.

A 🧵on why those decisions were — completely irrelevant — and what indisputably cost us the game.

Can anyone disagree with the below?? And can anyone give even a suggestion of what ETH could have done different??? Comment 👇.

At the 16:15 mark, MUFC were in the games. It then changed completely. Why? After failing to play up from the back ONCE — MCFC controls the play for 4:07. At the 20:22 mark, when the ball goes out of play 👇, nobody would say that the game is even.

So what happens next? The exact same thing over again, we fail to play up from the back, MCFC gains control, and draws the FK — resulting in MCFC’s penalty at 22:45.

Read 10 tweets

The Swedish Rumble 🔰

@SwedishRumble

Oct 26, 2023

🚨🚨💣💣 #MUFC's Q4 report is out, part II. What is our FFP status? A 🧵 looking at (a) how much we can spend in January and (b) how much we can spend during the summer of 2024. Lets dive into it! 🔰

🔺First of all, what we spend in January, will impact our profit from the 23/24 season. In the summer of 2024, PL and UEFA will determine if we are compliant with their FFP provisions against this and other seasons.

Under the UEFA provisions and namely the Football Earnings Rule (#FER), during the summer of 2024, our aggregate earnings from 22/23 + 23/24 cannot be lower than -60 MEUR.

Read 12 tweets

The Swedish Rumble 🔰

@SwedishRumble

Oct 21, 2023

🚨💣A 🧵 covering all relevant questions on the takeover of #MUFC! I think it is safe to say that we now can answer what will happen to:
🔺 the Management Personnel;
🔺the Transfer Budget;
🔺 Old Trafford and Carrington; and
🔺 MUFC's position in a MCO.

Lets dive into it!💪

🔺IS IT DONE?
No. The proposed structure is complex and 'custom made' for this deal. A lot of details must be agreed on between Ineos and the Glazers. Before an agreement is in place, I would not trust the Glazers.⚠️

🔺HOW DOES INEOS OFFER WORK? (1/5)
It will have three components: (1) one share purchase, (2) one agreement between the Glazers & Ineos on management of the club, and (3) an investment injecting funds into MUFC.

The result of the purchase of shares an be assumed to be:

Read 30 tweets

The Swedish Rumble 🔰

@SwedishRumble

Aug 20, 2023

🚨🚨💣💣 Nine months into the sale process, its clear that the Glazers won't accept the bids made by 9-2 and Ineos during the spring! The sale of the club is entering a new phase. This is a 🧵looking at a handful -- of what must be seen as incontestable -- FACTS, at this point, that EVERY MEDIA OUTLET got wrong! During the coming months, we can't afford to keep making blunders like this. ⚠️ 👇

🔺1. Media's Truth: "Qatar buying Manchester United is a 'an end point for football'."

🟢Fact: Its very hard to come to ANY OTHER CONCLUSION that 9-2 from a "moral" point of view, is a much better option than Ineos.

A foundation named 9-2 controlled by Sheik Jassim has made a bid for MUFC. Basically NOTHING points towards 9-2 being a front of a state bid for MUFC. They have de facto needed a long time between bids to secure additional funding and there have been numerous reports of 9-2 struggling with showing proof of funds and getting the formalities in order.

Sheik Jassim is clearly a banker, who has been a board member for Credit Suisse and who today is the Chair of the Board of Qatari Islamic Bank, which is independent of the state of Qatar. 8 of the 10 biggest shareholders of the Qatare Islamic Bank are Nordic pension funds and Americans. The Qatar Investment Authority is a shareholder in the bank, but only owns 17.2% of the shares. Sheik Jassim has himself invested heavily in the bank, and owns a 5% stake worth 800m.

But Sheik Jassim is a Sheik and he is a Member of the Royal Family? Of course the Royal Family and Qatar are always the same thing? A simple googling shows that the Royal Family of Qatar has 20,000 members! An Al-Thani Sheik bought Malaga, and have since gone bankrupt. Was that also the state of Qatar making an investment?

Another simple googling shows that Sheik Jassim is only a VERY distant relative to the Emir of Qatar. His Grandfather's Grandfather was a little BROTHER to an Emir of Qatar.

But isn't Sheik Jassim's father a puppet of the regime? Jassim's dad, "Hamad bin Jassim" (aka HBJ), is a former price minister between (07'-13') and a famous Qatari business man. But one of the first thing the current Emir did when he came into power was to kick out HBJ from all former positions. And all you need to do is check his Wikipedia page to find out that it wasn't entirely without friction.

But HBJ, who today lives in London, has built his own investment business and there is no reason to doubt that Jassim is acting in the capacity of a wealthy banker and with support of his immediate family when making a bid for MUFC.

Perhaps we have the benefit of hindsight right now, but why exactly did EVERYONE assume that 9-2 = equal to the Qatari state? And everyone did do it.

Jassim was part of the Royal Family, but nobody checked up what that meant? People claimed that he had "unlimited wealth" and someone that wasn't backed by the Qatari state wouldn't have that? Why do we think 9-2 has unlimited wealth?

Sure, its a big investment, but if he gets 100% of the shares of the club for 4.4-5bn and 9-2 has pledged to invest a little less than £1.6bn in the Club, its £6.6bn investment in total. 9-2 could easily recuperate like half of that by taking on minority investors, utilizing their Qatari connections to entering into partnerships regarding redeveloping OT, the land owned by the club and so forth. The rest can easily be be financed by 9-2 loaning money.

But, wait, wouldn't 9-2's bid be depth free? Yes, they wouldn't tack any debt onto the club. The notion that Sheik Jassim, a banker, who have worked his entire life financing transactions -- think he was like 18 when he first got a job as an investment banker -- wouldn't include any debt in a big investment is just absurd. Reports from El Pais have the Qatari Islamic Bank funding the takeover.

INEOS on the other hand is perhaps the biggest proponent of Fracking in Europe. We don't have to get into what that means here -- but it IS not allowed in Europe for a reason.

When you look into it more deeply, Jassim comes across as a very wealthy and pretty innocent banker and Ineos do have big environmental issues. Right? Is it not a MASSIVE BLUNDER by the media to get this wrong?? Let me know what you think! 👇

🔺2. Media's Truth: "Manchester United MUST get SUPER WEALTH to be able to Compete with Manchester CIty and ONLY QATAR can offer that'."

🟢Fact: This is the perhaps the DUMBEST notion put out there during the entire Takeover Process and it has been massively damaging for our chances of getting #GlazersOut.

First of all, because what the heck is meant with "super wealth"? If you as someone who covers this team as a full time job only can come up with the conclusion that the club must get some abstract term with no meaning, its just not acceptable. We have a ton of data out there on what type of support MUFC must get, the wealth of the bidders involved and what type of funds have been injected to our rivals.

Second of all, no, you don't need unlimited money support MUFC sufficiently. There is absolutely no objective argument that can be made to support a claim like that.

Both Boehly and Ratcliffe made legally binding pledges to ivest £1.75bn in Chelsea over 10 years. The QSI/Qatar has invested app. £1.2bn in PSG over 12 years. Sheik Mansour has invested app. £1.6bn in City over 15 years. Abrahmovich over 20 years leant a sum to Chelsea that together with accrued interest amounted to app. £1.6bn when the club was sold.

9-2 has pledged to invest app. £1.55bn into MUFC, clear the £730m debt and invest 1bn Eur.

When we look at the Club's finances, its OBVIOUS that the Club needs app. £1.5-2bn to ensure that the club can rebuild OT and compete with -- ANY -- other club out there. Meanwhile, if say 3bn is invested in the club, its just a waste because we could spend much more than anyone else on transfers and would still make massive profits every season of which a large chunk would be paid in taxes.

Facts are that the cost for an investor that contributes 1bn to an investment and loans 5.5bn, then buys the Glazers shares for 5bn and invests 1.5bn into the club through a Rights Issue (which would dilute the minority owners heavily), would own like 80-90% of the club for a yearly cost of app. 180m., and could surely make a nice profit after 5-10 years if the club is sold again. That is more or less what Boehly is doing with Chelesa.

So no, we don't need "unlimited wealth" that only a state can provide. We need a 1.5-2bn investment in the club from someone that can afford to buy the Glazers shares. Sure, that can be labeled "super wealth", but the term has not been used in that context, the message delivered in the biggest outlets have been that we only can make do with what quote "Qatar" can provide.

So, to learn if someone has enough resources, we must establish if they can invest the 1.5-2bn in the Club over a 10 year period. I would take a fighting chance with a 1bn investment, but then it becomes harder. But still a heck of a lot better than the Glazers. And no, many other investment vehicles can afford an £6.5bn investment, its not just the oil states.

If anything, the Oil states wealth has been overestimated around the MUFC sale. A pension fund for state employees in Florida has more money than the entire country of Qatar.

Many outlets have worked really hard to whip up a really HOSTILE ENVIRONMENT against any bidder that isn't Qatar, declaring Ineos "the enemy of the club" and what not. Someone like Ineos will invest in MUFC to get positive publicity. It will of course have a MASSIVELY NEGATIVE IMPACT for Ineos or any other bidders' willingness to pay money to get GlazersOut -- if they know they will get 1bn fans against them if they are successful. As a fan of this club, I REALLY question this approach.

And a claim that is just mind-boggling is that a buyer of the club won't care what the fans think, won't take notice if there is a massive hate storm directed against them during the bidding process. Its of course the complete opposite, the reason they buy the club is to get the positive PR.

And lastly, we of course have -- no idea -- if 9-2 has the resources to be able to win the auction and support the club (I don't think they would win the auction and then NOT be able to support the club, Sheik Jassim and co are really shrewd business people and buying this club and then NOT supporting it would be a horrible business decision). But trying to make an educated guess, I would bet on that the avg. successful sheik in Qatar perhaps will have a wealth of maybe £20-30m. There is ABSOLUTELY no guarantee that someone will have many billions of pounds to invest in a football club just because you are a Sheik.

And by the account of things, it definitely seem like 9-2 has a limited budget in relation to the overall cost of the club. Right?

And -- for that matter -. we can definitely NOT be certain that INEOS has the funds either. I review this in depth on my YT channel, but its impossible for anyone to get meaningful insight into the Ineos Group, with a parent company that doesn't even announce an Annual Report. The sub branches of the group look really healthy -- but there is still uncertainty regarding the parent company that could carry a lot of debt and which is all that matters since the sport investments lies under the parent.

The fans should be critical of anyone coming in and bidding for the club. The worst options long term are probably the US consortium's. But to based on very limited evidence declare a clear favorite and effectively do everything to drive away everyone else is just ill-advised.

Let me know what you think! 👇

(And lastly, no, Ineos would not keep the Glazers onboard. Every single credible outlet has from Day 1 reported on how in which it takes full control over the club from Day 1 but just acquires the Glazers shares in two tranches. And NOTHING else makes sense, for the Glazers. Being the minority owners for MUFC must be a horrible prospect for them any anyone else)

Read 6 tweets

Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

The Swedish Rumble 🔰

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @SwedishRumble

The Swedish Rumble 🔰

The Swedish Rumble 🔰

The Swedish Rumble 🔰

The Swedish Rumble 🔰

The Swedish Rumble 🔰

The Swedish Rumble 🔰

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Send Email!