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

ManCitizens. said:
I also wonder if our approach here could suggest things are going well in the current hearing? I’m no expert but is this another way of keeping the Premier Leagues legal team very busy during the 115 hearing?
Click to expand...
Nah, we will be smashing them all over the park in the 115 too, flexing our muscle when the time is right, and that time is now.
 
JASR said:
Yeah this is the red flag of all red flags from KFA’s.

If we had the ability to bribe our way out of it, then why didn’t we bribe to not have the rules in the 1st place, or even have rules that assist just us.
Why would we only bribe at the final stage of a process that sees the clubs reputation dragged through the mud for years/decade.

It makes no sense… which is the point. If anyone states that, their views can be ignored as insane and ungrounded in reality.
Click to expand...
…..and if we are bribing the tribunal and virtually everyone else then why do we need to spend squillions on a top flight legal team when a bunch of ambulance chasers who advertise on talkshit would do the job on an already ‘won’ case?
 
johnny crossan said:
Stefan has just thrown us under a bus - judgement 'not significant' and it's left to Lord Jaw Jaw to point out the obvious. Really disappointed with this lad.
Click to expand...
He’s a lawyer & they never put their arse into the wind. Everything and anything is possible in law that’s how it works for them
 
tweety said:
Listening to Talkshite and as much as I respect Stefan's opinions I think his sit on the fence opinion today isn't useful.
Click to expand...
He doing his best to be balanced so they don't throw back at him he's a blue.

Unlike their southern rag chief football correspondent and the blonde Scottish woman spitting feathers this morning.
 
Really_here said:
from the BBC

'Concerns that clubs could be hit with additional costs'​

BBC News sports editor Dan Roan
Both sides are claiming victory, and in truth the judgement contains something for both City and the Premier League.
League sources are emphasising the fact that most of City's challenges to the APT rules failed, and that the wider system was endorsed by the panel.
They also seem confident that the rules will be swiftly amended by the clubs within two weeks in order to make them lawful.
But the panel's ruling that the exclusion from the rules of interest-free loans from owners to their clubs (shareholder loans) was unlawful, has led to concerns that clubs could now be hit with additional costs that they were not anticipating.
This could mean some are in danger of breaching PSR regulations. The suggestion is that such loans will now be subject to commercial market rates of interest.
That could have major ramifications for those clubs that owe tens (or even hundreds) of millions of pounds to their owners.
The Premier League seems relatively relaxed about that issue, along with speculation that City and other clubs could seek compensation for any losses suffered by the rules.
On shareholder loans, league officials believe a fair market value analysis of such borrowings would be placed on the cost of the loan (i.e. the interest rate), not the value of the loan itself, and that the impact on clubs, therefore, would be minimal.
They also feel that such loans will only come into the scope of APT once the rules are amended, and will not be applied retrospectively, so only future loans will be affected.
However, BBC Sport has learned that City’s lawyers believe that not subjecting previous shareholder loans to a Fair Market Value assessment (while continuing to apply it to previous sponsorship deals) would be unfair, and that they may seek an injunction to prevent the Premier League from doing so.
But there will be fears from some in the game that any weakening of APT rules designed to preserve fairness and competitive balance could lead to certain clubs being able to sign more lucrative commercial deals.
There is also the question over whether this could have an impact on the 100-plus charges the league has brought against City for alleged financial rule breaches. City deny wrongdoing, and a hearing into the case continues.
Whatever the consequences, what is clear is that this dispute has reinforced the sense of division among the clubs over the financial regulations they are subject to.
Click to expand...

Well, fuck me. An injunction to stop the PL making interest free shareholder loans only interest bearing pro-actively? The club isn't planning to mess around.
 
Good Morning to all the other premier league clubs just waking up

Breaking News.....

Manchester City have agreed to a new 20-year sponsorship deal with The Flintstones, But the Premier League don't understand it, But in Abu Dhabi they dooooooooo
 
IcriedwhenTueartleft said:
Are you being serious? He has his professional reputation and integrity to watch out for, he's not going balls out for City on financial matters unless he is 100% sure he is right. He has defended us countless times on radio, podcast and social media.
Click to expand...
I keep seeing posts slamming Stefan for no particular reason other than he doesn't wear his City scarf on TS? Whose dog did he run over?
 
GSW Blue said:
When an independent tribunal finds that a governing body has “abused its dominant position”, shouldn’t there be some repercussions in terms of those responsible being removed from post?
Click to expand...
You would think! Fallout is coming with the first glimpse probably at next weeks emergency PL meeting. I assume Sorriano is already rehearsing or perhaps the big gun might feel it necessary to attend & assert some much needed authority to proceedings
 
Last edited:
paulchapo said:
I've been disappointed in his mutual response considering he's a Blue. Martin Samuel's gave us better support.
Click to expand...

Stefan is a lawyer first and a City fan second, which is why he's a credible voice.

Yes, it's nice to see the PL and the ragtops squirm as their confidence drains away but that is incidental to the facts. The facts are as @slbsn explained. In the big picture, this judgement doesn't mean too much for the future as the rules will be tweaked to comply. That's the correct position for a legal person to take imo, he's not a cheerleader.

The really interesting part here to me is that it has been legally established that the PL broke its own rules in how it dealt with City.
 
give it to gordon said:
How interest free loads been allowed in the first place ?
Click to expand...

Interest free loans they then get massive dividends from! So an owner loans there club 200m takes out a dividend that's better than any bank would give! Arsenal owner loan they pay around 2% interest on which is well under half but they get a dividend back that exceeds the 2% so makes them money! The way that got voted through as well was all pally by the usual clubs!
 
brazilians hurt said:
He’s a lawyer & they never put their arse into the wind. Everything and anything is possible in law that’s how it works for them
Click to expand...
Stefan is enjoying his time in the sun but too many people are putting too much stock in everything he says, it is no coincidence that he keeps on getting invited back to talksport and is now quoting panja to football insider
 
Oldham Exile said:
They very quickly went from anger when the news initially broke yesterday to absolute certainty that we have totally failed and it is a win for the PL - desperate to believe the PL smoke and mirrors

Post after post stating that CITY are trying to spin the outcome to try and avoid admitting that it is a PL victory

Then you have ones like this which shows their certainty that CITY are fucked on the 115/130 - they cannot understand that they are separate cases:

"It wouldn`t surprise me if an approach is made by Pannick on their behalf to see what a settlement could look like. I am convinced that the arbitration was a major part of the strategy. If they had succeeded in any way to undermine the FMV rules then this would have had a big impact on the 115(130). The fact is that it hasn`t and they will now need to take stock."

They are still praying for our demise - as this answer demonstrates:

"I’d be all for a settlement. I’d settle for Man City to be expelled from the premier league, they are fined to the extent of how much owner funds they have smuggled into the club and they have to start again at the lowest tier in football, plus state ownership is banned.
I’d settle for that."
Click to expand...
Dream on cunty bollocks!
 
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