Look, at the end of the day, I don't understand the financials and the legalities of it all. I'm sure Beamrider has done stellar work, as per, and has nailed all the information. I'm happy to take his word on the ins and outs.
What I do know, however, is how the world works. Sometimes the simplest outcome is most likely. Where there's money there is power, greed and corruption. City have an awful lot of money. The Premier League, at the end of the day, are interested in money and their "brand". The outcome is obvious. Just as it has been with previous "charges" thrown at City.
City will grind everything down with their hotshot team of lawyers to such a point that there will be endless appeals, filibusters and general lack of cooperation. We will be waiting years/decades for any potential meaningful outcome. At which point, what will suit all parties is perhaps some monetary fine, a transfer ban maybe, some sort of suspended punishment. The Premier League can then say they've cracked down on transgressions while lining their coffers, but without bringing their brand into significant disrepute, upsetting the structure of the league, or upsetting one of their golden geese. They will have also avoided a political/diplomatic nightmare between the UK and the Middle East by handing down such a ruling.
I'm very aware that a lot more effort and consideration has gone into Beamrider's posts, but this is what's going to happen. By hook or by crook. The horse bolted decades ago. There will be the odd show of dominance against clubs like Everton and Forest - clubs just the right size of which to make an example. Any bigger and it gets too messy. Any smaller and nobody cares.
City will be fine.
