Etihad Airways, the flagship carrier of Abu Dhabi and the primary sponsor of Manchester City since 2009, has announced that it is contemplating legal measures against the Premier League following the league’s independent commission’s verdict. The commission, which operated separately from the Premier League’s own governance structures, concluded that Manchester City had committed serious violations of the competition’s financial regulations. Specifically, the panel determined that between the 2009/10 and 2017/18 seasons, the club had orchestrated a series of fabricated agreements 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 an estimated £830 million.
The ruling has been met with outright denial from the City hierarchy. Chief executive Ferran Soriano dismissed the findings as a "Premier League conspiracy theory" in a video addressed to players and staff, insisting that the club had done nothing wrong. In parallel, Etihad released a strongly worded statement rejecting any implication that it was involved in improper commercial practices. The airline stressed that it was never consulted during the commission’s investigation, was not afforded an opportunity to present relevant information, and was therefore unfairly implicated by the public release of the findings, even though its name was omitted from the redacted decision.
Etihad’s statement highlighted several key grievances. First, the carrier accused the Premier League of failing to engage with it at any stage of the disciplinary process, thereby denying the airline a chance to defend its reputation.
Second, the airline argued that the league’s selective disclosure of information and the manner in which the findings were communicated had caused "damaging implications" for its brand, despite the absence of any direct mention of Etihad in the published report. Finally, the carrier announced that it is seeking legal counsel to explore all available avenues to protect its interests and to challenge the way the findings have been presented to the public. The fallout from the commission’s decision has reverberated across Manchester City’s sponsorship portfolio.
While some partners have remained silent, others have issued brief comments or declined to comment altogether. Lucozade, Kellogg’s and Revolut told Sky Sports News that they would not discuss the commission’s findings while the process is ongoing. Majestic Wines indicated that it would not comment on the future of its partnership with the club.
Sky Sports is still awaiting responses from a range of other sponsors, including Sure, Durex, EA Sports, CP Company, Britvic, SilentNight, OKX, Gaucho and Champneys. Industry observers note that Etihad’s move to consider legal action is significant because it underscores the broader commercial stakes involved in the Premier League’s financial compliance regime. The airline, valued at roughly £4 billion, has invested heavily in its association with Manchester City, most visibly through the naming rights of the Etihad Stadium and a long‑term sponsorship deal originally signed in 2011 for £400 million over ten years, later extended. The partnership has been a cornerstone of the club’s global branding strategy, linking the Etihad name with millions of fans worldwide.
Sky Sports chief correspondent Kaveh Solhekol explained the situation, pointing out that the commission’s judgment labeled several of City’s sponsorship deals as "sham" contracts, implying they were not genuine commercial arrangements but rather financial artifices. Although Etihad was not specifically named in the published decision, the airline argues that the broader narrative has nonetheless tarnished its reputation.
Solhekol added that the club appears determined to fight the ruling vigorously, asserting that Manchester City believes the process was neither fair nor impartial. The independent commission also expressed regret over the length of time it took to reach its decision, noting that hearings spanned from September to December 2024. Manchester City responded with a statement expressing disappointment and surprise at the commission’s opinion. The club claimed to possess a comprehensive body of irrefutable evidence supporting its position and vowed to pursue all regulatory and legal avenues, including appeals on grounds of material errors of law, principle and fact.
The statement emphasized that the club had respected due process for eight years, trusting that the Premier League’s board and executives would act as an independent, impartial regulator. Both Etihad and Manchester City have highlighted procedural shortcomings. Etihad contended that the Premier League failed to engage with it, while the club argued that the league’s process remained incomplete and that significant elements of the investigation were still unresolved.
These parallel grievances suggest a broader dispute over transparency, fairness and the proper handling of high‑profile financial investigations in English football. The situation remains fluid. Etihad’s legal team is reportedly reviewing the commission’s published opinion and the Premier League’s public communications to determine the most appropriate course of action. Meanwhile, Manchester City is preparing to challenge the findings through the appeal mechanisms available under the league’s regulatory framework.
Fans, sponsors and industry stakeholders are watching closely, aware that the outcome could set precedents for how financial compliance, sponsorship arrangements and corporate reputations are managed in the world’s most lucrative football league. As the saga unfolds, the broader football community is reminded of the delicate balance between commercial ambition and regulatory oversight. The case underscores the importance of clear, transparent processes and the potential reputational risks that can arise when major brands become entangled in disputes over financial governance.
Whether Etihad proceeds with legal action, and how the Premier League responds, will likely shape the future relationship between clubs, sponsors and the governing bodies that seek to ensure a level playing field across the sport.