Man City found guilty of all serious Premier League financial charges
Manchester City have been found guilty of all serious charges related to breaches of Premier League financial rules between 2009-10 and 2017-18, according to a damning 40-page independent commission report. The club inflated sponsorship income by £830.69m and used 'sham' deals. City will appeal.
- Verdict: Guilty on all serious financial charges, one non-cooperation element not proven
- Inflated sponsorship: £830.69m overstated across 2009-10 to 2017-18
- 'Sham' deals: Commission ruled commercial agreements were shams, including 'The Fordham Arrangement'
- Witnesses: 27 heard over 42 days; some gave knowingly untrue evidence and were dishonest
- Appeal deadline: Manchester City have until Friday October 2 to appeal
The numbers
- £830.69m – overstated sponsorship income
- £24.5m – income overstated via Fordham Arrangement
- £49.414m – expenses understated via Fordham Arrangement
- 27 – witnesses heard by the commission
- 42 – days of evidence in the last quarter of 2024
- 40 – pages in the commission's document
- 2009-10 to 2017-18 – seasons under investigation
'Disguised funding scheme' and 'sham' commercial deals
The independent commission repeatedly concluded that a number of City's commercial agreements were "shams". City used a "disguised funding scheme" where Abu Dhabi United Group (ADUG) partially funded sponsorship fees. This allowed the club to avoid breaking the record for the largest single-season loss in Premier League history.
The club filed accounts that the commission found concealed the true nature of their finances from auditors and football regulators. City overstated their sponsorship income by £830.69m with agreements that were "far in excess" of fair market value.
The commission concluded that City's financial statements for the seasons between 2009-10 and 2017-18 "did not show a true and fair view" of the club's financial position. It also found three separate remuneration agreements that were omitted from City's accounts and paid by ADUG.
'The Fordham Arrangement'
City used a third party, Fordham, as a device to overstate income by £24.5m and understate expenses by £49.414m. The commission described 'The Fordham Arrangement' as being "little more than a front for ADUG".
The Fordham Arrangement was, the commission contended, "a further device by which ADUG funds could be paid into the club in a manner that concealed their true origin" and which enabled "the club to remove operating expenses from its financial statements".
The Fordham Arrangement was part of a system called 'Project Longbow' which "was a multi-strand project whose purpose was to explore how the club might boost its revenues and reduce its operating losses". But while "many of the strands of Project Longbow were genuine, legitimate attempts to achieve those aims. One was not. That was the Fordham Arrangement".
'Dishonest witnesses' and obstruction
The independent commission heard factual evidence from 27 witnesses over 42 days in the last quarter of 2024, with a core bundle of key documents running to "many tens of thousands of pages".
The commission says the club made concerted efforts to stop and frustrate the investigation. It also found some witnesses on behalf of the club gave false evidence, while other City witnesses were found by the commission to give knowingly untrue evidence and so had been dishonest.
City 'intended to circumvent PL rules'
The commission found City had breached UEFA and Premier League financial rules, while also ruling that "by its conduct the club clearly intended to circumvent the PL rules".
The Premier League said it regarded City's conduct as having "extremely serious, significant, sustained and intentional or reckless breaches of rules critical to the proper and fair operation of the Premier League's league competition".
What was said
"did not show a true and fair view"
"little more than a front for ADUG"
"a further device by which ADUG funds could be paid into the club in a manner that concealed their true origin"
"the club to remove operating expenses from its financial statements"
"was a multi-strand project whose purpose was to explore how the club might boost its revenues and reduce its operating losses"
"many of the strands of Project Longbow were genuine, legitimate attempts to achieve those aims. One was not. That was the Fordham Arrangement"
"by its conduct the club clearly intended to circumvent the PL rules"
"extremely serious, significant, sustained and intentional or reckless breaches of rules critical to the proper and fair operation of the Premier League's league competition"
Why the Fordham Arrangement was the smoking gun
The commission's language leaves little room for interpretation. "Little more than a front for ADUG" is not a technical accounting criticism; it is an allegation of deliberate concealment. The £24.5m income overstatement and £49.414m expense understatement were not rounding errors—they were, in the commission's view, the mechanism by which City removed costs from their books and kept losses below the Premier League's record threshold.
The wider £830.69m sponsorship inflation matters just as much. By overstating income from related-party deals, City presented a picture of commercial health that regulators say was false. The commission found the statements did not show a true and fair view, which undermines every financial submission made across nine seasons.
The finding that witnesses gave knowingly untrue evidence takes this beyond a financial matter. It goes to the credibility of the club's defence and could weigh heavily if the appeal panel reviews the commission's reasoning. City's intention to appeal is confirmed, and they have until Friday October 2 to lodge it.
Talking points
- If £830.69m of sponsorship income was overstated, do City's domestic and European titles from that era carry an asterisk, or is that a step too far?
- The commission found witnesses were dishonest. Should that trigger a separate disciplinary process for individuals, not just the club?
- An appeal by Friday October 2 is confirmed, but what punishment fits? Points deduction, fine, or both—and for which seasons?
- Can the Premier League credibly police related-party sponsorship if a club can conceal ADUG funding for nearly a decade?
What happens next
Manchester City have confirmed they will appeal against the ruling and have until Friday October 2 to do so. The appeal will determine whether the commission's findings stand and what sanctions follow. The Premier League's regulatory credibility is on the line, and City's on-field future—including potential points deductions—hangs on the outcome.
Frequently asked questions
What did Man City do wrong?
They were found guilty of serious breaches of Premier League financial rules between 2009-10 and 2017-18, including overstating sponsorship income by £830.69m and using "sham" commercial deals such as The Fordham Arrangement.
When is Man City's appeal deadline?
Manchester City have confirmed they will appeal and have until Friday October 2 to do so.
What is The Fordham Arrangement?
The commission described it as "little more than a front for ADUG" used to overstate income by £24.5m and understate expenses by £49.414m, as part of 'Project Longbow'.
Related Articles
Filed under: Latest News | LA Premier League Home
