PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

The Future’s Blue! said:
There is another side to the fair price sponsorship debate and it’s a bit more unscrupulous. If the PL are able to look into a clubs commercially sensitive material, that gives those on the PL boards a commercial advantage, knowing how the sponsorship is structured. And who is on these boards, undoubtedly there’ll be somebody from the Red tops picking through the detail.

This was, and is still a huge concern to us and why we will not fully cooperate with what the likes of UEFA and PL ask. We are a business first and foremost and giving your competitor critical data is something to be avoided at all times.
Click to expand...
Could be a legal way to oust then from the boards?
 
GaudinoMotors said:
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.
Click to expand...
Brilliant - the best summary of PL's recent predicament I've seen.
 
Stoned Rose said:
If the sponsor themself is happy / willing to pay whatever the amount is, surely it follows that the sponsor sees it as “fair value”?
Click to expand...
Agreed, although Chevrolet almost immediately sacked the nobhead that signed off on that agreement, so it would seem to me that the majority of their board were either gaslighted (by misleading stats) or not consulted (can't see that).
 
The Stockport Iniesta said:
Everyone knows the clubs are behind it, but Scudamore didn't allow them to break the league. Scudamore was much more even handed than Masters, who seems hell bent on overseeing a PL civil war, at the behest of his paymasters.
Click to expand...
It seems like Master's job interview involved him getting spitroasted by John Henry and Joel Glazier and he loved every second of it.
 
The Future’s Blue! said:
There is another side to the fair price sponsorship debate and it’s a bit more unscrupulous. If the PL are able to look into a clubs commercially sensitive material, that gives those on the PL boards a commercial advantage, knowing how the sponsorship is structured. And who is on these boards, undoubtedly there’ll be somebody from the Red tops picking through the detail.

This was, and is still a huge concern to us and why we will not fully cooperate with what the likes of UEFA and PL ask. We are a business first and foremost and giving your competitor critical data is something to be avoided at all times.
Click to expand...
Imagine building the most innovative commercial operation in club football and then having to hand it over for other PL clubs to copy.
 
feedmpenzaandhewillscore said:
They are stopping investment coming into the game at the top level. What it will do is have an adverse effect on the trickle down of money to the lower leagues. Parry and Masters were hauled before a parliamentary select committee to discuss this, no one seems to be asking them why they are doing something that will kill the game in this country.
Click to expand...
El senor Masteros is colluding with Teabag for the further globalization of La Liga.

*Lol*
 
ZanteWeatherman said:
Agreed, although Chevrolet almost immediately sacked the nobhead that signed off on that agreement, so it would seem to me that the majority of their board were either gaslighted (by misleading stats) or not consulted (can't see that).
Click to expand...
Not just Chevrolet. TeamViewer ended their sponsorship early after pressure from their investors, who said the original deal was "appalling judgment".
 
feedmpenzaandhewillscore said:
They are stopping investment coming into the game at the top level. What it will do is have an adverse effect on the trickle down of money to the lower leagues. Parry and Masters were hauled before a parliamentary select committee to discuss this, no one seems to be asking them why they are doing something that will kill the game in this country.
Click to expand...
Elbow beards said:
Yep, we want you to be sustainable by not letting you have a multi million pound deal that will enable you to compete, instead you can have 500k and be happy. What sort of universe are they living in.
Click to expand...
Indeed the whole house of cards is in danger of crashing down. Limiting owner/shareholder investment was to protect clubs from dependency on owners pumping money into clubs at levels which were "unsustainable" (even though this was a problem at only a few (Italian?) clubs. But limiting spending to "acceptable" sources was no more successful, even though no club has gone bust or into administration since sustainability was never the goal. So the income of certain clubs had to be targeted by limiting their ability to increase "acceptable" revenue. The trouble is that the regulations have to have teeth and a deterrent effect. Hence the clubs likely to be sanctioned are (the PL hopes) City and (possibly/probably) Chelsea, but caught in the crossfire are Aston Villa (showing signs of being undesirably competitive), Everton (using the transfer market not very successfully to try and build a better team and give their fans something to cheer. How disgraceful) and Nottingham Forest (back in the PL after 20 odd years and spending to tryi to stay there). It seems Wolves might avoid sanctions, but even so that means just under a third of PL clubs are facing future changing sanctions from the governing body for infringing P&S rules, though no-one can say that they have done anything wrong. All they can say is that rules are rules, but they cannot say why Everton's spending is more a threat to their sustainability than Manchester United's £1 billion debt is to the rags sustainability. Already a third of the PL is threatened and doon the simple fear factor will have its effect. Hopefully the independent regulator will end all this nonsense in the immediate future. If not the threat to more and more PL clubs to protect the position of a small clique of clubs should lead to the sweeping away of these ridiculous rules that are neither use nor ornament.
 
ZanteWeatherman said:
Agreed, although Chevrolet almost immediately sacked the nobhead that signed off on that agreement, so it would seem to me that the majority of their board were either gaslighted (by misleading stats) or not consulted (can't see that).
Click to expand...
Chevrolet also reduced the deal as I think it would have ended up in court if united hadn't agreed.
 
StillBluessinceHydeRoad said:
Indeed the whole house of cards is in danger of crashing down. Limiting owner/shareholder investment was to protect clubs from dependency on owners pumping money into clubs at levels which were "unsustainable" (even though this was a problem at only a few (Italian?) clubs. But limiting spending to "acceptable" sources was no more successful, even though no club has gone bust or into administration since sustainability was never the goal. So the income of certain clubs had to be targeted by limiting their ability to increase "acceptable" revenue. The trouble is that the regulations have to have teeth and a deterrent effect. Hence the clubs likely to be sanctioned are (the PL hopes) City and (possibly/probably) Chelsea, but caught in the crossfire are Aston Villa (showing signs of being undesirably competitive), Everton (using the transfer market not very successfully to try and build a better team and give their fans something to cheer. How disgraceful) and Nottingham Forest (back in the PL after 20 odd years and spending to tryi to stay there). It seems Wolves might avoid sanctions, but even so that means just under a third of PL clubs are facing future changing sanctions from the governing body for infringing P&S rules, though no-one can say that they have done anything wrong. All they can say is that rules are rules, but they cannot say why Everton's spending is more a threat to their sustainability than Manchester United's £1 billion debt is to the rags sustainability. Already a third of the PL is threatened and doon the simple fear factor will have its effect. Hopefully the independent regulator will end all this nonsense in the immediate future. If not the threat to more and more PL clubs to protect the position of a small clique of clubs should lead to the sweeping away of these ridiculous rules that are neither use nor ornament.
Click to expand...
I'm not so sure.

The Premier League is clearly the most successful league in football, and six rich teams is probably enough to sustain things. It's not popular because Villa or Everton might make a run into the top four once a decade.

There's no major reason why United and Chelsea shouldn't be able to challenge again, given their current financial size. Spurs new stadium has pushed their revenue up massively, and we've seen that Arsenal are again able to compete. With a fifth CL spot it'll be even easier for the rich six to sustain.

The six gives some semblance of competition, and it's certainly more than any of the other big leagues. People always used to talk about cycles, but the financial gaps have become so great, that I don't see how other European leagues could catch up, and if the PL remains the most popular, then the money continues to flow in.
 
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