OKX: Manchester City’s Next Finance Scandal

OKX: Manchester City’s Next Finance Scandal

A lot has happened since this writer took to these pages. Manchester City FC has faced further Financial Fair Play charges, to which they will no doubt respond to as forcefully as the UEFA case. At this point, we shouldn’t lose sight that FFP itself is a corrupt, broken system. Created to keep new teams changing the old status quo. I make no apologies for stating this for the thousandth time: its proponents – or those who believe everything the agenda in the mainstream media prints – pivot away from this key point.

Manchester City’s biggest crime with FFP was trying to prove compliance within its ever-changing arbitrary rules instead of hiring lawyers to disassemble the system. FFP being removed entirely should have been the Bosman case for this generation.

With so much spotlight on Manchester City’s financial dealings, the club could do itself a few favours. A controversial area of finance is the crypto world. Often seen as the Wild West to the traditional banking system. In the United States, there is now a steady march forcing crypto companies into regulation. A catalyst for this has been the FTX scandal, and more recently, the collapse and bailout of SVB, a FinTech bank which held the real-world deposits for crypto firms. 

What the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) would like to do is declare all cryptocurrencies (aside from Bitcoin, which doesn’t meet the criteria in the Howey test) a security. It should also be noted, all the concerns the SEC has surrounding crypto sounds like concern for the consumer, but the allegations about its harmful potential are nothing the traditional banking system hasn’t already done or continues to do on a daily basis. It’s about keeping control of your money.

Admittedly, the United Kingdom appears less concerned with this type of crypto clampdown, so Manchester City may feel less pressure to examine the practises of its key business partners. But they won’t be able to claim it completely blindsided them like the Mercedes F1 Team, who were quick to remove FTX sponsorship from their cars last season.

We’ve had several warnings recently that not all crypto exchanges can be trusted.

With all this fully established, Man City display OKX as one of its key sponsors. OKX’s signage is burnt into the grass at The Etihad Stadium. Its advert scrolls around the stands, claiming to be your new favourite exchange. Its logo features on every background as Pep and the players take interviews. There’s no doubt advertising works. Eventually, after months of seeing OKX on match days, I took the plunge and visited the exchange.

None of this is financial advice – let’s make that abundantly clear – in my opinion, while someone still has a mortgage, that’s a better place to put disposable income and pay it off sooner. The idea of putting money into a cryptocurrency, to me at least, is akin to putting money on a football accumulator.

At first, there wasn’t anything that grabbed this writer about OKX. But with the relentless exposure at The Etihad, I went back to the app. I appreciate this is all freewill, but as a City fan, I have a couple of simple rules regarding sponsorship: if a company has been the main shirt sponsor for Manchester United, I can’t use them ever again (which means my dream ride of a Chevrolet Matiz will forever elude me; if someone is associated with City, I give them first dibs. Which is why I buy all my fax machines from Brother.

OKX offers a high APY (the yield or return on your investment) in its Earn section. The stablecoin Tether USDT currently offers a 16% return. No savings account will get anywhere near this, and being a stablecoin it should – as the name suggest – avoid price fluctuations. They are supposed to be pegged to the associated fiat money. With Tether USDT, it’s the American dollar. These sometimes lose their peg, but that’s an article for a different day. So, converting British pounds to USDT should be no different than converting money before a holiday.

Every crypto exchange adds a degree of “slip” at the point of sale. All cryptocurrencies are volatile. In the thirty seconds it takes to process the payment, it may jump a percentage. If they say they don’t add it, they’re liars (OKX said they didn’t). You wouldn’t expect any slippage on a stablecoin. Only the movement of the dollar against pound sterling should affect the conversion.

Deciding that a little bit of savings in a stablecoin sounded too good to be true, I forgot the golden rule: if it sounds too good to be true, it usually is. And this is aside from the fact all crypto kept on an exchange – “stable” or otherwise – isn’t really yours, they’ve just written an IOU that the FCA can ’t retrieve. I placed a deposit into USDT, with the sole intention of using the Earn feature.

OKX were transparent with a 2% fee – this was the last time they were open and honest regarding the transaction. There was 6% of the money missing. It was clear to see, as the value of USDT was also displayed in pound sterling. After two lengthy (because of the amount of hold time) chats on the in-app customer service, they claimed the missing money was a charge by my card issuer.

The card issuer denied this and has previously – and to this day – displays all card fees on the transactions page. Going back to OKX, I worked out that the “missing” money was because OKX added a 6% slip to USDT. 6% would be high for something like Bitcoin, it’s ridiculous for a stablecoin. The next in-app agent I spoke to agreed, and admitted this was where the money had gone. That person was the last to acknowledge the obvious. They said the relevant team would email. This never happened.

I emailed them instead. At this point, I added Manchester City to the email thread. The club should know unsavoury practises of its business partners. It was only because GBP to USD is a clearer conversion the 6% was noticed. I was using the Lite version of the app, where the slip can be added to the less experienced user without detection. On the Trading version of OKX, this couldn’t have occurred so easily. There are undoubtedly hundreds (maybe thousands?) of City fans, using the Lite version in OKX, buying a coin like Ethereum for the first time, have no idea how much £20 is represented as a fraction of that coin, and OKX takes its 2% fee and 6% slip every time.

Neither the club nor OKX responded to the email.

This week, OKX issued the same copy and paste response – they added no slippage, the card issuer took the disputed amount. This is a blatant lie. In the Wild West of the crypto world, the last thing a club like Manchester City needs is to be associated with a company that lacks transparency with its financial operations.

OKX can’t be trusted, and Manchester City shouldn’t encourage – by agreeing to a sponsorship deal – its fanbase to trade on such an opaque platform. It’s not like investigators won’t be taking a keen interest in this relationship. In addition to the aforementioned sponsorship agreement, OKX made a $20M deal to become City’s training kit sponsor. In a sense, every fan who gets hoodwinked on the exchange platform is paying for this directly out of their own pockets.

Manchester City accepted the unfairness of FFP, it shouldn’t expose supporters to the whims of a dodgy crypto exchange.

Advertisement

Is Project Restart Already Void?

Is Project Restart Already Void?

Before the problems with Project Restart are placed under the microscope, let’s make something clear: this is one writer who actually wants to see this season completed. While nothing would humour me more than watching Liverpool being denied a title due to a void campaign, the reality is football needs to come back.

This opinion will be immediately met with disdain. For many, the suggestion sport returns before coronavirus has been eradicated is preposterous. They see it as the money in football coming before the nation’s health.

There are valid points in such arguments against the resumption of the Premier League. But with any risk, the handling of it is played off against the side effects of continued suppression. There has to be a point where the advantages of resuming football – or sport in general – outweighs the potential negatives.

Addressing the financial elephant in the room. Yes, there should be enough money in the game to survive such a setback. FIFA has a billion in its rainy day fund. But sport is business and businesses can be self-serving. Not all clubs will make it through the other side if the delay continues for too long.

Resuming the top flight could have a knock-on effect when it comes to redistributing wealth to the lower leagues. It’s easier to make the rich more benevolent when it’s a condition of them making money again.

A return of televised games would also help pacify a restless nation. With each passing day, the chances of people sticking to the stay at home guidelines diminishes. If they made games free-to-air – say, a couple each day as they chew through the outstanding games in the pile – it will subdue a large portion of the nation.

To make it work safely – and this is where the Premier League cannot get it wrong – it would be ideal to have a single location for all teams and support staff. Hosting all games in a closed village, with everyone tested going in and remaining in complete isolation from the outside world. It’d be a World Cup style tournament with Premier League and FA Cup games.

Integrity

The problem with this idea is teams will say playing at neutral venues calls into question the integrity of the competition. It is a valid point. Why should a club like Watford face relegation because they lost home advantage? The argument it’s the same for everyone is weakened by the fact it hasn’t been the same throughout the entirety of the competition.

Even if officials agreed to allow teams to play behind closed doors at their usual stadium, the question of integrity still stands. The International Football Association Board (IFAB) has amended the rule on the number of permitted substitutions for competitions that will be completed within this calendar year.

Being able to make five subs instead of three puts a different take on the game. Those with bigger squads will clearly benefit and it’s a major rule change that only affects a part of the season. All the rules have to be the same from start to finish. The Premier League do not need to adopt this rule, but you can bet they will.

IFAB has also stated VAR can be turned off for the resumption of competitions. It’s the only coronavirus death that’s worth celebrating but further evidence that the proposed returning Premier League will be too far away from the competition that began last August.

There’s also the problem of player contracts. The squads submitted for the Premier League will become invalidated if players move upon expiration of their contract. A little more of that remaining integrity slips away.

So it seems there are two clear choices:

Bring back football, behind closed doors but using existing grounds, keep VAR (never thought I’d type that), and ignore IFAB rule changes.

Or,

Void the season as it can’t be completed in a manner that maintains the competition’s consistency and sporting integrity.

No clubs should be relegated, no titles handed out. Champions League places determined by average-points-per-game to calculate remaining fixtures. Although, there’s surely a UEFA coefficient system that can be used to ensure clubs like Leicester miss out but Arsenal and Manchester United can return.

However they wrap up this season (or don’t), some forward-thinking needs to occur before a new campaign begins. There’s a chance coronavirus could have a winter revival. The next Premier League season needs to be set up in a way it can deal with another lockdown without its integrity being called into question.

The country needs the distraction of sport but it needs competitions to be safe, sustainable and authentic.

UEFA and F1 to Complete Seasons Together in Abu Dhabi

UEFA and F1 to Complete Seasons Together in Abu Dhabi

An agreement has been made between UEFA and liberty media to ensure the commercial and sporting integrity of the Champions League and Formula 1 survive during the coronavirus outbreak. Plans have been drawn up for a closed-doors Super Tournament in Abu Dhabi. The state will host a truncated Champions League tournament from a single venue, with multiple matches staged each day.

The Abu Dhabi F1 circuit will be used for sprint races on the days between football matches. The track has several configurations and the belief is the spectacle of numerous shorter races – something seen in junior formulae – will go some way to make up for the loss of the high-flying global tour.

UEFA will invoke Clause 14.7 from its combined agreement with member associations to void domestic leagues to ensure their crown jewel competition can be completed. It’s understood there are reservations to the move in Madrid and Germany over fears Sheikh Mansour, a member of the Abu Dhabi royal family, could use the tournament for political favour following Manchester City’s trouble with Financial Fair Play.

Both Liberty Media and UEFA will increase their respective prize funds – with the assistance of the Abu Dhabi royal family – to convince teams and nations the benefits outweigh any downsides.

Once the deal is officially ratified, it’s expected the first two weeks in August will be revealed as dates for the tournament. Football will then go into a shortened pre-season phase, Formula 1 may pause the season again in the hope it can be revived later in the year.