New PL Commercial rule passed (pg4) | City rumoured to be questioning the legality

[waspish]

All this makes me wonder if silverlake could end up with more of a stake and influence at city. They are a huge entity in the USA, the prem and uefa can’t ban sponsors from Middle East and the USA!

what do they own at present is it about 20 percent?

23

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

If one of the abstainers had voted no, it wouldn’t have been approved. There normally needs to be 14 clubs saying yes, but with 2 abstaining they only needed 12 as the rule is two-thirds of those not abstaining have to approve. Fuck.

It does show there is a lot of opposition to the changes though. Another master stroke from Masters and his cronies. He has created a bitter division between the PL clubs which could end up in court. He is totally out of his depth.

 

[Newman Noggs]

The ESL moves a step closer. Carefully orchestrated by 3 clubs and their weedy sidekick Spurs

 

[Xhavenjoe]

All this makes me wonder if silverlake could end up with more of a stake and influence at city. They are a huge entity in the USA, the prem and uefa can’t ban sponsors from Middle East and the USA!

what do they own at present is it about 20 percent?

23

I see the confusion.
23 is equivalent to 20% of the 115 charges

 

[Phil1]

It was much more fun following City when it was about the football and a business degree wasn’t warranted.
Seriously, there’s as many threads these days talking about fucking finances as there are about what’s happening on the pitch.
It’s depressing.

 

[Gordyola]

All this makes me wonder if silverlake could end up with more of a stake and influence at city. They are a huge entity in the USA, the prem and uefa can’t ban sponsors from Middle East and the USA!

what do they own at present is it about 20 percent?

This isn't about banning any sponsor its related parties Take Etihad as an example, owned by the Abu Dhabi government, Sheikh Mansour has no monetary interest nor management influence and this is enough to say in accounting rules and accepted by CAS that they aren't a related party. My guess is that this proposal is to change the PL's own rules that would make them a related party, because his relatives do have responsibility. It could also mean that if one of the companies that Silver Lake have a major investment is could also be deemed a related party thus ruling them out as sponsors

 

[Tricky_Trev]

It was much more fun following City when it was about the football and a business degree wasn’t warranted.
Seriously, there’s as many threads these days talking about fucking finances as there are about what’s happening on the pitch.
It’s depressing.

It is tiring that as a City fan we’re expected to be a lawyer, an accountant, know our geopolitics and be an auditor all before simply knowing football and tactics.

 

[Holcombe bloo]

This isn't about banning any sponsor its related parties Take Etihad as an example, owned by the Abu Dhabi government, Sheikh Mansour has no monetary interest nor management influence and this is enough to say in accounting rules and accepted by CAS that they aren't a related party. My guess is that this proposal is to change the PL's own rules that would make them a related party, because his relatives do have responsibility. It could also mean that if one of the companies that Silver Lake have a major investment is could also be deemed a related party thus ruling them out as sponsors

So say Adug sold up completely to silverlake. Etihad could sponsor us still for 100 million no probs. Or any silverlake business could do similar the other way round? If so I’m sure a deal could be done some in some way. If the prem get their way with related company sponsors that is.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

So say Adug sold up completely to silverlake. Etihad could sponsor us still for 100 million no probs. Or any silverlake business could do similar the other way round? If so I’m sure a deal could be done some in some way. If the prem get their way with related company sponsors that is.

I wonder if it is that simple? Sheikh Mansour transfers the club to Moonbeam and we carry on as normal.

 

[Iassel]

You don't think City, Chelsea and Newcastle would have voted against?

If you think it’s an illegal motion, 100% you’re abstaining in my personal opinion.

 

[Gordyola]

So say Adug sold up completely to silverlake. Etihad could sponsor us still for 100 million no probs. Or any silverlake business could do similar the other way round? If so I’m sure a deal could be done some in some way. If the prem get their way with related company sponsors that is.

City are 100% owned by CFG which is owned by Newton Investments and Development LLC, 81.84% and Silver Lake 18.16%.

So if Newton sold to Silver Lake then yes the Etihad deal could in no way be deemed a related party under any rules

Silver Lake rarely, if ever, have controlling interest in any business

We will have to wait and see the details

 

[Gordyola]

I'm pretty sure that this was defeated on previous occasion and City abstained then, also the warning about the legality was also made

 

[Elbow beards]

Fucking cunts. They'll do anything to stop us. Surely everyone can see now the clear attack on our club.

 

[Inter Me Nan]

What the fucks all this now?
As my mum would say, always summat isn't there!

 

[halfcenturyup]

If you think it’s an illegal motion, 100% you’re abstaining in my personal opinion.

Not saying you are wrong, but why? These votes aren't a surprise, everyone knows how everyone else is going to vote, so why would any of the three abstain and the rule is passed?

 

[Sibierskii]

So the Premier League and the red shirts are trying to introduce rules contrary to British law? Let’s get em.

 

[give it to gordon]

Getting sick of all this shit me

That's just what the American red tops want.
The ordinary fans of other clubs to get fed up and walk away. Means these clubs have smaller fan base and smaller income. Putting these teams in a weak position so have to agree with the terms of the American red tops.

I think we have seen the best of English football and it's on a steady decline now. It's not about football anymore its 100% about money and stopping clubs competing against the American red tops.

I'm lucky to have lived through the shit times and now the good times. But so many fans of other clubs can never dream of good times now. This isnt football, football is about dreaming that one day your club will be top dog take this away and what's the point ?

Who wants to spend their hard earned cash on the pl knowing the league is decided between the American owners over dinner ?

 

[journolud]

If one of the abstainers had voted no, it wouldn’t have been approved. There normally needs to be 14 clubs saying yes, but with 2 abstaining they only needed 12 as the rule is two-thirds of those not abstaining have to approve. Fuck.

Maybe we abstained because we wanted it to pass so that we could issue the legal challenge and put an end to all the nonsense

 

[Random Precision]

So as was expected all along, the PL are using illegal tactics to get at City, If this goes to court it would suddenly mean all charges are frozen and when the court decides to back current trading laws, which they would have to, surely most of the charges are then wiped??

It’s about Competition Law, governing bodies should organise competitions and not involve themselves in any clubs commercial activities, which FMV does.

 

[halfcenturyup]

City are 100% owned by CFG which is owned by Newton Investments and Development LLC, 81.84% and Silver Lake 18.16%.

So if Newton sold to Silver Lake then yes the Etihad deal could in no way be deemed a related party under any rules

Silver Lake rarely, if ever, have controlling interest in any business

We will have to wait and see the details

It's not related as defined by % ownership, it's "associated" as defined by the PL, probably on an ad hoc basis depending which club it is.