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

Coatigan said:
What happened to all the conspiracy claims that this was a pre-arranged dance with City giving the PL an easy public win, so that when we bribe them to clear us of the 115, they can use it to sae face and claim fairness?
Click to expand...
Apparently we're bribing everyone to sort this too. Strange we never similarly bribed the PL to not bring the charges in the first place and also bribe them to make the APT rules to our liking in Feb.
I can only assume that as we couldn't get our sponsorships over the line our brown envelope fund was exhausted.
 
The reporting of the APT case from the usual suspects, is as pathetic as it is predictable. Senior 'journalists' stooping to Liverpool Echo esque levels of delusion. They may as well title the articles 'Why City's ATP victories are good for the the Premier League' and be done with it.

Unfair. Unlawful. Unreasonable. It's in black and white in the findings, City are now entitled to damages.

Side note, but the same 'journalists' are also reporting that Premier League clubs with high levels of borrowing are now in danger of breaching Profitability and Sustainability Rules.... Some victory for the Premier league, lads.
 
The term ‘useful idiot’ has been applied, as a derogatory term, across the political spectrum for years, often associated with Westerners doing the bidding of Russia.
It presumes that a person fights for a cause that they don’t fully understand, without realising that they are being continually manipulated by the leaders of a group.
Present day politics is littered with them sadly, but they can now officially welcome a new member to their ranks.
I give you: Richard Masters, hand picked by the management from Klanfield and Swampland. 3 others either turned the job down or were, more likely, vetoed by those 2 self appointed bastions of fair play, no doubt with the tacit support of other US owned clubs.
The fact that this has never been a story that journalists ever really ran with, essentially tells you all you need to know, in regards their priorities.

Of course, sadly for Masters, he’ll discover the extent of that loyalty when a sacrifice is needed…….
 

lancs blue said:
Our defeat was so bad the PL have called an emergency meeting to celebrate it...

One thing that made me chuckle in the judgment pdf was that after all the social media crap about our expensive lawyers the PL chose to ignore the advice of their own no doubt expensive KC and remove the word "evidently" from the clause relating to sponsorships being in excess of FMV, consequently making the amended APT rules in breach of competition law in the view of the panel.

This point was also recognised in the advice of Helen Davies KC: “The standard of ‘evidently in excess of FMV’ should ensure that it is only obviously abusive transactions that are prevented and thus that there is no unintended collateral adverse effect on competition.”
Click to expand...

& only Martin Samuel has pressed on with the point why. Why would you ignore your own legal advice? Why would you make changes to the clause?

I’ll say it again, we’ve had so much unjustified innuendo thrown at us & yet they are getting the benefit of the doubt.
 
bridgeno1 said:
Whether they do or not I don't know. But there's a difference between a club's hierarchy and its fans. I've been getting dogs abuse on here (it's fine I'm thick skinned and I'm on a Man City forum after all so it's a case of Alice isn't in Kansas any more) but I'm not a representative of Arsenal Football Club I'm just a fan and have been my whole life so I think it would be cool if people could make that distinction. Making things personal isn't cool.
Click to expand...
There’s an easy solution to this but I think you like the attention a little to much to simply fuck off to an Arsenal podcast where you would be just another fan, which is unfortunate for us as we have to endure your never ending sly digs.
Look up Arsenal’s history & the definition of the word “hypocrisy” and digest. Then reference Kladoon’s “people in glass houses” statement
Your lot messed with the wrong crowd fella! You’re fucked you just don’t know it yet!
 
Bellamy's Caddy said:
The reporting of the APT case from the usual suspects, is as pathetic as it is predictable. Senior 'journalists' stooping to Liverpool Echo esque levels of delusion. They may as well title the articles 'Why City's ATP victories are good for the the Premier League' and be done with it.

Unfair. Unlawful. Unreasonable. It's in black and white in the findings, City are now entitled to damages.

Side note, but the same 'journalists' are also reporting that Premier League clubs with high levels of borrowing are now in danger of breaching Profitability and Sustainability Rules.... Some victory for the Premier league, lads.
Click to expand...
The levels of intellectual dishonesty required to report this as anything other than a defeat for the PL are pathological.
 
Tim of the Oak said:
I don’t think Talkshite would be reporting that Everton are one if the four all powerful and rich football clubs, threatening the future of English football
Click to expand...
God that narrative is so fucking boring, we are so mired in the quaint idea of tradition and that everything was better before that any time there is the threat of change or movement in the established order of anything that their is widespread outcry in the msm and social media about how we are losing our way and it is threatening the very fabric of our being and you know what happens? Fuck all happens, things change, we adapt, sometimes they are better sometimes not and we all move on till the next percieved horror.
 
manimanc said:
Just read an absolute whopper of an article from sky's Rob Harris about yesterday.

news.sky.com

Man City and Premier League both claim victory in legal battle over rules on commercial deals

The case is separate to the 115 charges facing City under Premier League rules, which they allegedly breached by failing to provide accurate financial information over a nine-year period.
news.sky.com news.sky.com

Absolutely nothing to do with what the outcome was.
Click to expand...
It is a whopper as you say, just like him. I'm sure we'll see plenty more articles like this over the next few days as the ant City PR bandwagon revs up. It's a tad frustrating that the masses fall for it, but Harris and co know their audience. They can spin it how they want, but ultimately the victory is ours.
 
This just shows how the PL are either corrupt or void of any common sense. On shareholder loans they argued that it's not discriminatory to not apply interest for PSR because any club could undertake them! Really, every single club has shareholders that could hand over millions of pounds? Using that logic it's not discriminatory for Etihad to sponsor us for 1 billion a year because any club could undertake the same deal!
 
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese said:
Apparently we're bribing everyone to sort this too. Strange we never similarly bribed the PL to not bring the charges in the first place and also bribe them to make the APT rules to our liking in Feb.
I can only assume that as we couldn't get our sponsorships over the line our brown envelope fund was exhausted.
Click to expand...
Don't you dare talk logic and point out their nonsense.
 
Can I just check if my understanding of things is roughly correct?

Depending on your allegiances/agenda you can essentially cherry pick parts of the ruling to claim an overall victory in the court of public opinion. The PL "won" on some points and City on others.

PL claiming victory on the finding that the concept of FMV is lawful (though I'm not sure City disputed that?)

City claiming victory on the finding that their current implementation is unlawful.

People can argue about the spin of it on forums and twitter but what is the actual outcome and impact on clubs?

It seems that clubs who favour cash injections from related parties via sponsorship (e.g. City, Newcastle etc) will benefit as the rules around FMV are likely to be loosened and they will therefore see a boost to their p&l?

It seems clubs who favour cash injections from related parties via interest free loans are now going to have to see those rules applied evenly to them and they will therefore see a big hit to their P&L every year.

So regardless of who appears to be winning any argument online or in the press, the long and the short of it is that the ruling has a net benefit to clubs like City. We'll be making more and Arsenal will be making less?

This has always felt inevitable when rules were being made not in the name of fairness, but in the name of protecting those with a head start. Loopholes left in by design were always susceptible to challenges like this.


Edit: sounds like clubs relying on loans could evade the interest fees by converting to equity. Which makes sense but would also require the agreement of existing shareholders.
 
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