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

[slbsn]

If we chop off some branches and then the PL prune it, there isn't much left of the tree hence why it's a bigger win for us than the PL, no?

I'd say no. But other views are available.

 

[ufo]

Seen a lot of comments around from "journalists" and fans of other clubs that it wasn't a win for City as we only won a handful out of the 20(?) odd complaints that we raised at the tribunal. A Villa fan at my work gave me a classic analogy... (& a bit of a history lesson!)

Look at the Battle of Jutland in the 1st World War...

The Royal Navy's largest battle since Nelson at Trafalgar over 100 years earlier.

Numerically a German victory as they sank more British ships than the Royal Navy sank German ships (14 totalling 113000 tons, compared to 11 totalling 62000 tons), however, strategically a Royal Navy victory as the result was the German Imperial Navy returned to port....& never left for the rest of the war, removing a serious threat to Britain for good.

Just goes to show that quality is better than quantity (at least that's what I tell the Mrs!),

Here endeth the lesson! :-)

So your mrs likes quantity over quality or are you trying to convince her you are a quality rather than quantity?

 

[Thaksinssoldier]

Some of the stick Stefan gets is a bit unnecessary. He's asked to give his professional opinion on these matters, and doesn't deserve grief just because it's perhaps not what people want to hear! It's fine to disagree with him, forums are all about debate, but should at least be courteous.

It’s pretty clear we’ve some fans who have this stuff go right over their heads and lash out immaturely as a result.

 

[slbsn]

Or he could just accept he's someone who called it wrong initially but hasn't the cojones to accept that and move on.

What did I call wrong?

 

[ComfySeats]

This is saying one relatively minor detail of the rules is unlawful. It is important but not a major problem for the PL. This is not City's major win. The major win is ripping up the 2024 amendments. The major loss is probably on the matter of the test of transactions being before approval rather than after. I see it like a tree - we have won the right to chop off some branches but not to fell the tree. The PL will need to prune the tree but not replant it.

ohhh ok i think i and probably alot of others are reading that as all rules are unlawful based on that passage. Strange then that city have emailed all 19 clubs to say the prem are misleading them.

 

[Thaksinssoldier]

All a bit weird - I've been on here for 20 years, on Twitter for 15, writing on these topics for maybe 10 years, podcasts for 10? and watching City since 1982. So I do "it", in a lot of places. And I try and be objective. You do understand that the club are not trying to be objective don't you? It is not their job.

You need to be objective in city’s favour though buddy, you know how it works lol

 

[MCFC1993]

I was just about to comment similar to @Ric .

Stefan has to use the judgment to make a professional opinion. From the publicly available information it would be quite easy to build a narrative of a win for either side, it does depend on the lens and which points you deem more important. If you look around, many lawyers have been cautious to lean either way.

City will say 'we won the most important arguments which now allow us to put sponsorships through, see FMV judgments and seek compensation'.

The PL will say 'we managed to defend the majority of the legal arguments, clubs will still need APT approval prior to the deal taking place etc...'.

This City letter sent out isn't public, so impossible for Stefan to add that to the equation, especially when it was barely known about when he jumped on TS this morning. He has to use the facts available, his reputation depends on it.

For example, the Chelsea situation, he wasn't to know that the PL's rules were so poorly drafted that they were essentially allowed to sell a hotel to themselves. (If you read this Stefan, I'm aware that the process was more complex than that and perplexing that it took them so long to ratify the deal).

He technically did say on TS a score draw, maybe slightly in City's favour.

Personally I'd lean towards City getting the more favourable decision as they've managed to show the PL acting improper which may help us in the short and long term. I think we got the key areas ruled for us which is what we wanted, the rest may have been a smokescreen to keep the PL busy. However, I can fully understand somebody saying it wasn't a perfect judgment for either party as we don't know that for sure.

City going strong with the letter suggests they believe the PL are well out of line but again they have more information than us. It is promising that the club have reacted this way.

 

[blueste41]

Very significant this.

When he said it earlier he referred to “the cartel” and my head nearly fell off.

That’s not us on here being myopic city supporters, that’s a guy on national radio who’s been in and amongst PL football at the coal face and has seen how things work.

He’s a **** of the highest order but he’s right about this.

Shame it took him years to have the balls to say it.

Sure but he also said we (City) are attempting to become the new cartel, are you equally cool with this?

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

I don’t give a fuck who won or lost but all I care is corrupt pl is now exposed and that’s all it matters .
Now stock up popcorn

The first part of the objective successfully achieved, now the dismantling of the power wielded by the redshirt cabal within the PL, must surely be another target within the cross-hairs.

 

[ufo]

This is saying one relatively minor detail of the rules is unlawful. It is important but not a major problem for the PL. This is not City's major win. The major win is ripping up the 2024 amendments. The major loss is probably on the matter of the test of transactions being before approval rather than after. I see it like a tree - we have won the right to chop off some branches but not to fell the tree. The PL will need to prune the tree but not replant it.

We should’ve hired a head gardener than wasting money on lord pannick.

 

[.db.]

So the long & short of it is (by my understanding) is, the PL brought in APT to stop sponsor companies associated to a clubs' owner, from agreeing inflated sponsorship deals as a way of getting money to the affected clubs through the back door. The thinking being this would unfairly distort the transfer market.

From City's viewpoint, we argued that the way APT's are judged is unlawful, because the PL adjudicate what they view as fair market value sponsorships, based on a database of previous sponsorship deals. HOWEVER, if a club disagrees with the PL's decision, they're NOT allowed access to the sponsorship database to challenge the decision.

On top of this, director loans aren't included in APT or PSR. Director loans currently held by Arsenal & others are interest free / very low interest, so City effectively argued why weren't these loans also considered to be a backdoor way of funding certain clubs. The independent review body found in our favour on these points.

It was also found that the amount of time the PL took to adjudicate against City regarding the Abu Dhabi bank & Etihad deals (2 & 3 months respectively) was unreasonably long, & found in City's favour in this respect.

City also alleged that these rules were created specifically to target owners from Gulf States, but the panel ruled in favour of the PL.

In terms of the legality of APT itself, the panel found it to have a legal basis, but with serious flaws with how it was constructed.

This is what's led to both sides claiming victory. APT remains, but must be amended so City & others can review the sponsorship database, & the PL must also include director loans in APT. OR the PL can scrap the lot & try coming at us with something else.

This is my short form understanding of the situation.

^^^

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

As usual, the more I think about this, the more my opinions form and the more I see different aspects to this.

One of the reasons that the APT rules were introduced is that the cartel felt that we weren't properly declaring related parties in our accounts. This was despite the fact our external auditor presumably agreed that companies like Etihad weren't related parties.

So they introduced the concept of an associated apparently party after the Newcastle takeover, which is basically a related party with a clause covering state/government/public body influence. But they could have simply taken the view that any agreement over a certain amount needed FMV approval, regardless of whether it's an associated party or arm's length. While the tribunal rejected the idea this was discriminatory against us & Newcastle, their intention was clear in inserting that clause, given the ownership of us and Newcastle.

But the question is, did any club with owner loans at preferential rates declare these as RPTs in their accounts? If they did then that's OK and they're fireproof. If they didn't....

 

[Man-chester copperpot]

I can’t keep up with this thread FFS. I’m still on page 981. Can you all stop fucking posting? I’ve got a job and a family.

Same here.
Can you catch up for me and send me the best bits/bullet points once the thread slows down and everyone goes bed?
Thanks

 

[Phil1]

My overriding opinion after everything that’s come out is we were fully justified in taking this case to court, we have achieved our goal of showing the rest of the world how the premier league operates and how unprofessional they have been in certain quarters and managed to win big in some areas that as a club we felt were the most important.
However you slice it, City will be feeling far more comfortable than Masters et al this morning and that’s good enough for me.

Now onto the next one. Let’s smash the cunts.

 

[Rory Bluelow]

This is saying one relatively minor detail of the rules is unlawful. It is important but not a major problem for the PL. This is not City's major win. The major win is ripping up the 2024 amendments. The major loss is probably on the matter of the test of transactions being before approval rather than after. I see it like a tree - we have won the right to chop off some branches but not to fell the tree. The PL will need to prune the tree but not replant it.

Regarding the “major loss”, I do understand the inconvenience of pre-approval and that it relies on the Regulator acting in good faith. However, pre-approval, if exercised in a timely and fair manner, is a better process than a challenge or dispute after the event. I think City were being very optimistic with their challenge and probably are unsurprised they didn’t succeed. In any regulated environment, pre-approval is generally the preferred approach.

 

[GSW Blue]

Same here.
Can you catch up for me and send me the best bits/bullet points once the thread slows down and everyone goes bed?
Thanks

Stefan has been relegated and Arsenal have been stripped of a couple of 2nd place finishes and a Charity shield!

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

Sure but he also said we (City) are attempting to become the new cartel, are you equally cool with this?

I think he is suggesting that City, and perhaps Newcastle , will have a stronger pressence and improved status with the PL and less subject to the control of the yank owned clubs with their completely different focus.

But I am not a mind-reader.

 

[Joe Donachie]

We should’ve hired a head gardener than wasting money on lord pannick.

Hahahaha proper made me laugh out loud that post hahaha, am gonna go down to London and hunt pannick down and present him with a black and decker leaf blower and tell him, take that into the hearing and blow the bloody doors off lol!!

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

I am sorry but I don't see how in anyway this can be seen as a win for the PL.

The PL bring in APR rules.

City challenge them and the panel finds that the way the PL have implemented them to be illegal.

That's it end of! the word Illegal should end any discussion.

They now have to rewrite the rules. Which will have major implications for several clubs.

How is that in anyway a PL win?

It's not!

 

[rabby]

What did I call wrong?

You ventured the opinion on one of your many talksport visits that we were highly unlikely to achieve any significant victories in the case.
If you still believe this then fine,but I think as more of this unfolds in the coming weeks that opinion will look even more ludicrous than it does now.