City launch legal action against the Premier League | Club & PL reach settlement | Proceedings dropped (p1147)

TedofChume said:
I know when FSG bought Liverpool, there were two debts to pay to Kop Holdings (a fabricated loan of Hicks and Gillette) and Nat West. I can't remeber which way round it was, they were both around £220 & £240m. FSG settled one as their purchase of the club, then settled the other by lending Liverpool the money at a discretionary rate of 0.5% a year. It seems FSG had taken mortgage out on Anfield (now a separate company to Liverpool FC) at a market rate to fund this. Bearing in mind at the same time Sullivan and co were lending West Ham money at a Fair market Value of 8%, it struck me that 7.5% of £220-240m was £16-17m a year saving, and that was owner investment. It allowed Liverpool to reduce the FSG loan and almost pay it off (down to £70m) before Klopp and Covid came along. I have always oncsiderd this to be "financial doping" by the back door. An extra £16m x 3 years on PSR would make a massive difference to whether they stay within £105m loss. I never understood how they could get away with it.
Click to expand...

There’s nothing wrong as such with an interest free loan, it’s only an issue now due to the APT rules.

What really should happen is owners should be forced to put in equity, that’s what a regulator whose main motivation was the financial stability of clubs would be advocating for…
 
Elbow beards said:
So we have it in black and white that the cunts are racist, trying to stop owners from "gulf States" it's a fucking disgrace the way the Premier League is run, heads should roll after this. And the red cartel have the audacity to call us the cheats.
Fuck em.
Click to expand...
Don’t think the panel agreed with that claim
 
Has anyone got a DailyMail account and can read this?

The comments are free and an interesting read!

www.dailymail.co.uk

Revealed: How Arsenal and United plot to take down City backfired

MIKE KEEGAN: One word, delivered by the three experienced and former high-ranking retired judges on the panel, screamed out. The rules are 'unlawful'. This was a victory for City.
www.dailymail.co.uk www.dailymail.co.uk

How Arsenal, Liverpool and Man United's plot to take down Man City spectacularly backfired and now puts THEM in the crosshairs, reveals MIKE KEEGAN​

  • Seismic ruling could have major financial and sporting implications for the clubs that gave evidence against the Premier League champions
  • Join Mail+ for more exclusive scoops, in-depth reporting and analysis from around the top flight
By Mike Keegan

Published: 14:18, 7 October 2024 | Updated: 16:48, 7 October 2024
 
I have some limited MOJ historic work experience. I am sure the (retired) judges were persuaded to use some nice wording to assist the PL for political/media reasons. There have been rumours about a settlement. Perhaps some more knowledgeable posters can comment. City won well despite the spin
 
SebastianBlue said:
Aside from the newfound scrutiny and the expense of doing so.
Click to expand...
It will be interesting to see what happens now. If a club like Brighton, for instance, has to take £375m of debt servicing on their books at say 8%, thats £30m a year in debt servicing costs. How can they sustain that ?
 
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