PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

117 M34 said:
One thing the clueless fans accuse us of is having inflated sponsorships from Abu Dhabi based companies.

When ours don't get marked down, that shuts that argument up.
Click to expand...
“And what, City, did you do to ensure the AbuDhabi associated sponsorships were fair market value?”
—-”Er, we asked UEFA and they agreed they were fine.”
”Oh”
 
halfcenturyup said:
He can be as powerful as he wants to be. The clubs aren't in charge of what gets discussed at the meetings. He is. They aren't responsible for presenting documentation to the meetings, he is. If there is something asked for by the clubs which goes against the spirit of competition or that he thinks will be challenged on the grounds of illegality, he should be strong enough to say no and the clubs can vote him out if they don't like it.

He is a patsy. Platini was a patsy as well and that is how all this shit started. Ceferin, at least, has some balls. Masters needs to grow some before the PL is in big trouble in the courts. One way or another, he won't be around much longer, he must know that. He should stand up, show some backbone and do what is right for once in his miserable existence.
Click to expand...
That is the bottom line. Well said.
 
KS55 said:
The ideas are so vague that if any club challenges in court a ruling against them by the PL as being contract interference, the club will win. How does the PL prove that a deal has not been assessed for fair market value by the club? That would be an early question to the PL witness to which they would have no satisfactory answer. “ We compared the deal of the treble winners to a deal by Sheffield United” Pah!
Click to expand...

I can see them looking in their sponsorship databank and saying the Etihad deal should be at the same level as United's 1999 sponsorship :D

But yes, the whole thing is on pretty flimsy ground. They don't just want to disallow any income over their fair value estimate from the PSR profits/losses, they actually want a club to repay sponsorship money if they think it's above fair value. It really is madness.
 
bluemanc16 said:
Yesterday, somebody paid £25k for the shirt Colin Firth wore in Price and Predjudice, is that " fair value " ? Most people would say no but the person who paid for it would disagree, "fair value" is subjective . The Premier League are making themselves a laughing stock
Click to expand...
A painting by Hockney goes on sale this week with a reserve of £18m. Bargain.
 
blue b4 the moon said:
The thing is the biggest value exposure market I'd imagine now is America/UK, as the likes of India, Africa, China hasn't the disposable income so who has the big TV audience figures in the countries that matter?

I believe it's iccle City, nothing to see here regards us but a worry for Toon.
Click to expand...
Sponsors look for tv exposure but you can guarantee that the PL leave that out of their comparisons.
 
Meanwhile, we have two big games this week. Football, remember that?
22 guys run around a field kicking a ball……………..







And City win.
 
Chappie said:
Why does any of this matter too us ?
Our horse bolted a long time ago, we are the biggest attraction in the football world and as such we will attract the biggest sponsorship deals and as such all fair market values will be judged of what we are worth to companies.
So in essence smaller /underachieving clubs like United, Liverpool and Arsenal should receive smaller sponsorship deals until such times as they can match our achievements.
Click to expand...
Yes it’s not like we couldn’t find decent none Abu Dhabi based sponsors much shy of the amounts we get now
 
JASR said:
The TeamViewer one was even more inflated.

something like 10% of their entire revenue iirc.
Click to expand...
We used to use teamviewer (multiple gov contracts), as soon as they announced that deal a few us starting citing unsuitability to use until they were ditched. Petty yes, but same reason the last microwave cost me £30 more as I refuse to have sharp in the house ;)
 
Just a minor detour off main theme but related I believe. Torygraph today reports 100 (mainly Tory) MPs have signed a decleration opposing the UAE purchase of the publication. Legislation expected to allow foreign takeovers be ’assessed’ for suitability. Ex Oxford/ Cambridge or yank…tick; Jonny foreigner with mountains of cash to invest…. hang on a minute this could disturb our cozy, established power base.

Those nasties complaining are happy to see Torygraph sale to Paul Marshall, the hedge fund manager who bankrolls GB News. And the case against the UAE investment is predicated on loss of impartiality aand balance in reporting!!!!

A sister example of the establishment clinging onto historic power and control and introducing new rules and in this case legislation to keep out new money and retain the status quo with its ways of working that suit their purposes best.

An interesting development which should show soon how our owners are actually viewed by MPs and gvmt!
 
bluemanc16 said:
Yesterday, somebody paid £25k for the shirt Colin Firth wore in Price and Predjudice, is that " fair value " ? Most people would say no but the person who paid for it would disagree, "fair value" is subjective . The Premier League are making themselves a laughing stock
Click to expand...
Marxist commerce - an interesting development even for the PL.
Total laughing stock - playing whack a mole everywhere. Started something they can't possibly finish at the behest of the Jealousy Clubs, and now just look like idiots.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top