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

Stockton Heath Blue said:
Is it not that loans can be repaid, equity can’t be withdrawn?
Click to expand...
Very rare for any club to repay one of these owner loans. Liverpool did but think that was interest bearing. Interest free loans are almost always quasi equity in football. And of course, dividends can be paid if there is excess cash
 
bridgeno1 said:
Read my posts, I specifically used the phrases 'what I've heard' and 'it's just as likely to be bollocks as not'.

I'm far from an expert on the charges and to be honest have no real interest in it. I'm pretty certain if City are found guilty they won't be relegated though as that would be commercial suicide on the part of the PL if they boot out its best team at a moment where there's now 40m Americans tuning in to certain games not to mention the massive worldwide interest in the PL.

That's not me being an expert on football finance but is based on decades of working in large enterprises who value profit above all and knowing that turkeys don't vote for Xmas. On this point I'm absolutely bloody certain.
Click to expand...
What I’ve heard is that Margot Robbie is desperate for threesome with me & Mrs JASR.

That’s bollox, clearly. Based on hope, not facts.


It doesn’t matter what job you may have, it doesn’t matter what team you support, what matters is facts.

You can’t attempt to dress it up by saying ‘what I’ve heard…’ because it’s been pointed out on numerous occasions in replies to you to actually read impartial facts (eg the CAS verdict), which directly and completely demolish your ‘what I’ve heard…’ spiel.

If you reply in the same vein or post similar again, I’ll have to report you as a WUM, which would be a shame as Ric would like more ‘other’ fans as posters… but you really do yourself no favours by repeat spouting bollox.
 
Bluearmy said:
This has proved things without doubt. We have a judgement like below and a significant number of the press pack who are completely happy to ignore the facts of the case and spout bile to press a pre ordained narrative of the Cartel
Click to expand...
It is incredible that the BBC online team has ignored the judgement summary which spells out in stark terms that the PL has acted illegally and unfairly. This can’t be an accident. This can only be bad faith.
 


@slbsn has put some decent stuff on his twitter page.

That excerpt is ridiculous and I'm not surprised City decided to do something about it. One of our sponsorships went from 'evidently above FMV' according to the PL, then they sought professional advice and were told that it was 'not above FMV'.

So basically they had no clue what FMV was but rejected it.

They are not fit to govern this league or these issues.
 
Barney Ronay is a mendacious ****, made clear by his claims that the PL statement and ours were "notable for their contrasting tones":

The Premier League went for airy and vindicated, not angry just sad. Manchester City stuck with terse, hostile and finger-pointy.
So on the one hand we have: “The Premier League welcomes the Tribunal’s findings, which endorsed the overall objectives, framework and decision-making of the APT system.” But wait. What’s this? “The Club has succeeded with its claim: the Associated Party Transaction (APT) rules have been found to be unlawful.”

He obviously missed the bit where our statement opened with:
"Manchester City Football Club thanks the distinguished members of the Arbitral Tribunal for their work and considerations and welcomes their findings."

Terse, hostile and finger-pointy, my arse! Go fuck yourself Ronay!
 
Last edited:
DeepBlueSea said:
Is there any suggestion of why they’ve done that? Makes no sense at face value
Click to expand...
I assume negotiating/agreeing on what is and isn't redacted. It's impossible to read some sections due to the sheer volume of redactions.

Edit, also the timing is a factor. No PL games for 2 weeks, it's a brand after all, distractions aren't necessary.
 
Last edited:
I think this TalkSport article drives a juggernaut through the City PSR case:

talksport.com

Why Man City's sponsorship win is a blow for Arsenal and Liverpool

Manchester City’s legal battle against the Premier League over Associated Party Transactions [APT] is set to be bad news for their rivals. An arbitration panel has declared that some of the P…
talksport.com talksport.com

I know the ruling is about the recent changes to ATP rules, but if not counting owners loans is unlawful, it must also be unlawful under preview PSR rules?

Surely, you can't have a situation where clubs like Arsenal and Liverpool would have breached PSR quite significantly if their owners loans were revalued at an FMV, and then punish City for breaches during the same period?

Can you have a situation where half the league have been funded by their owners circumventing PSR by a mechanism that is now deemed unlawful?

What will happen if clubs like Brighton, Everton, Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea. Leicester, Brentford, Wolves, Palace, Bournemouth refuse to vote through the changes to the rules to make them lawful because it's against their interest to do so?

This is a dogs dinner, but we always knew it was
 
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