Manchester City’s flagship sponsor, Etihad Airways, has announced that it is weighing the possibility of taking legal steps against the Premier League following the league’s independent commission verdict. The commission concluded that the club had committed serious breaches of the Premier League’s financial regulations, a finding that has sent shockwaves through the football and business communities. According to the independent panel, between the 2009/10 and 2017/18 seasons City engaged in a series of so‑called “sham” contracts with various commercial partners.
These arrangements were described as part of a “disguised funding scheme” designed to artificially boost the club’s reported revenue by roughly £830 million. The panel’s report, released on a Tuesday, detailed how the alleged contracts were structured to appear as genuine sponsorship deals while, in reality, they served to funnel money to the club without proper accounting. City’s leadership has consistently denied any wrongdoing.
Chief executive Ferran Soriano dismissed the findings as a "Premier League conspiracy theory" in a video message addressed to players and staff, insisting that the club remains innocent of the accusations. The club’s legal team has signaled that it will challenge the decision through the appeal mechanisms available under Premier League regulations, arguing that the commission’s opinion contains material errors of law, principle and fact.
Etihad Airways, the Abu Dhabi‑based airline that has partnered with Manchester City since 2009, issued a strongly worded statement rejecting any implication that it was involved in improper commercial arrangements. The airline stressed that it was never consulted during the commission’s investigation and was not given the opportunity to present relevant information. As a result, Etihad is seeking legal advice to protect its reputation and commercial interests.
In its statement, Etihad said: "We categorically reject any finding, conclusion or implication that suggests the airline has ever been involved in improper commercial arrangements. The Premier League’s public communication of the commission’s findings, following a period of selective leaks and reporting, has created damaging implications for Etihad despite the airline not being named in the redacted published findings. At no time did the Premier League reach out to or engage with Etihad in the process associated with the commission’s opinion.
Etihad was therefore never given the opportunity to be represented, to provide relevant information, or to ensure the accuracy and fairness of information relied upon in reaching conclusions that may now be interpreted as reflecting adversely on the airline." Etihad also highlighted the longstanding nature of its partnership with the club, noting that the Etihad name has been prominently displayed on the stadium and in club branding for many years, linking the airline with millions of supporters worldwide. The carrier affirmed its continued commitment to Manchester City, its fans, and the broader Etihad community, while emphasizing that it will explore all legal avenues to safeguard its interests. The commission’s report also noted that the hearing process, which took place between September and December 2024, was unusually protracted, describing the delay as "regrettable." This extended timeline has added to the tension surrounding the case, as both the club and its sponsors have been forced to navigate a complex regulatory environment while maintaining their public images.
Other sponsors of Manchester City have largely remained silent. Representatives from Lucozade, Kellogg’s and Revolut declined to comment on the commission’s findings, indicating that they are waiting for the outcome of the ongoing proceedings before making any public statements. Sky Sports News correspondent Kaveh Solhekol provided additional context, reminding viewers that Etihad first signed a ten‑year, £400 million partnership deal with the club in 2011, a contract that has since been extended. He noted that the airline’s decision to seek legal counsel reflects its concern over the "damaging implications" of the commission’s judgment, which, although it did not name Etihad directly, suggested that the club’s sponsorship income had been artificially inflated through questionable deals.
Solhekol added that the airline’s move signals a broader strategy by Manchester City to fight back against the commission’s conclusions. He described the club as convinced of its innocence and determined to challenge what it perceives as an unfair and biased process. The spokesperson also highlighted Etihad’s stature as one of the world’s largest airlines, with a valuation around £4 billion, underscoring the significance of the dispute for a major global brand.
Manchester City’s own response, released on the same day as the commission’s opinion, expressed disappointment and surprise. The club asserted that it possesses a comprehensive body of irrefutable evidence supporting its position and that it will pursue all appropriate regulatory and legal forums. The statement emphasized that the Premier League’s process remains incomplete and that the club intends to appeal on the grounds of legal and factual errors, describing the opinion as "unsafe". Both Etihad and Manchester City have pointed out a common inaccuracy in the language used by the media: the body that issued the findings is an independent commission, not a Premier League commission.
This distinction matters because it underscores the independence of the investigative panel from the league’s governing structures. The unfolding legal and regulatory battle has broader implications for football finance. If Etihad succeeds in its legal challenge, it could set a precedent for how sponsors are involved in investigations of club finances and how their rights to be heard are protected.
Conversely, if the Premier League’s findings are upheld, clubs may face stricter scrutiny over sponsorship deals and greater transparency requirements. Fans, analysts, and industry observers will be watching closely as the case progresses. The outcome could reshape the relationship between football clubs and their commercial partners, influencing future sponsorship agreements and the governance of financial fair play across the sport.
In the meantime, Etihad has reiterated its pride in the partnership with Manchester City, stating that the airline’s name will continue to be associated with the club’s stadium and brand. The airline’s legal team is reportedly reviewing all options, from seeking an injunction against the publication of the commission’s findings to filing a defamation claim if the airline believes its reputation has been unjustly harmed.
The situation remains fluid, with both sides preparing for a protracted legal confrontation. As the case moves through the courts and any potential appeals, the football world will be keenly aware of the stakes involved—not only for Manchester City and Etihad, but for the broader ecosystem of sponsorship, finance, and regulatory oversight in the sport.