Etihad's 2015 US filing contradicts Man City appeal defence — SkimNews
Get the Geopolitics newsletter
Daily geopolitics — wars, elections, sanctions, the diplomatic moves that move markets. Free.
- Manchester City lodged an appeal on Friday (2 October 2026) after an independent commission found them guilty of all charges tied to more than 100 Premier League financial breaches, involving £830m of disguised owner funding across nine seasons from 2009 to 2018
- City's appeal defence is expected to argue that the extra sponsorship money came from the Abu Dhabi government rather than majority owners Abu Dhabi United Group (ADUG)
- Etihad Airways' May 2015 filing to the US Departments of Commerce, Transportation and State declared: "The assertion that the Abu Dhabi government paid for Etihad's sponsorship of English Premier League football club Manchester City is equally false" and said the 2011 ten-year deal was "funded from its own liquidity"
- The independent commission already rejected the Abu Dhabi-government-funded explanation as "an explanation that the club had concocted well after the event in an attempt to conceal the realities of the Disguised Funding Scheme"
- Former Etihad CEO James Horgan testified at the CAS hearing for City's earlier UEFA Financial Fair Play appeal that sponsorship obligations to City were paid "out of Etihad's own funds" — directly contradicting the line City now plans to run
- The appeal timeline under new Premier League rules requires resolution within 12 weeks of Thursday's filing, a five-day hearing in a single block, and a 30-day judgment window, which Sky Sports News projects could push the ruling into the third week of January 2027
Why it matters: City's lawyers have chosen a defence the commission already rejected and that the sponsor's own 2015 US filing and former CEO publicly contradict — so the appeal panel inherits a written record in which Etihad's own words appear to demolish City's core argument before any new evidence is heard, while the 12-week clock and City's possible challenge to the new rules mean a final ruling may not arrive until January 2027.
Ask SkimNews
