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

bobbyowenquiff said:
Having ploughed through all 175 pages I think the worst element of this whole saga is the contempt shown to City over the sponsorship deals at First Abu Dhabi Bank, Emirates Palace, and Etihad. If you read the incredible volume of correspondence it is clear that the PL and their financial people dragged their feet and put obstacle after obstacle in City's way. The Etihad deal was dragged out for almost 12 months. The PL told City it was "above market value" but refused to discuss how they arrived at their figures. City were told they couldnt see the comparison with other deals on the database.
The Judges slammed this despicable behaviour. These three delayed deals have probably cost City tens of millions of pounds. The PL didn't respond to letters and emails from City repeatedly. This was just pure obstruction driven by bad faith. No wonder City sued them. Just think about it. Three firms who want to invest in a business in North West England are obstructed at every opportunity. A total disgrace. No one has reported on this properly. There are pages and pages of the PL and its financial people just taking the piss out of City. It's in the link below starting at section 441.

Click to expand...
Ah but City are the ones that have been obstructing and prevaricating to the maximum level they can get away with… according to KFA’s regarding the 115.

Perhaps we were just following the PL’s lead in handling complex financial and legal communications by adopting the Master’s ostrich position.

It’s staggering the contempt and malevolence shown by the PL to City.
 
shemnel said:
Gosh some of the criticism aimed at this Stefan fella is pretty poor. It strikes me that it's a highly complex legal case that not many of us can get to grips with, and one that is highly unlikely to be polarised to a simple win/lose.

I suppose that's why people are siding with Samuel.
Click to expand...
I'm siding with City
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
Having ploughed through all 175 pages I think the worst element of this whole saga is the contempt shown to City over the sponsorship deals at First Abu Dhabi Bank, Emirates Palace, and Etihad. If you read the incredible volume of correspondence it is clear that the PL and their financial people dragged their feet and put obstacle after obstacle in City's way. The Etihad deal was dragged out for almost 12 months. The PL told City it was "above market value" but refused to discuss how they arrived at their figures. City were told they couldnt see the comparison with other deals on the database.
The Judges slammed this despicable behaviour. These three delayed deals have probably cost City tens of millions of pounds. The PL didn't respond to letters and emails from City repeatedly. This was just pure obstruction driven by bad faith. No wonder City sued them. Just think about it. Three firms who want to invest in a business in North West England are obstructed at every opportunity. A total disgrace. No one has reported on this properly. There are pages and pages of the PL and its financial people just taking the piss out of City. It's in the link below starting at section 441.

Click to expand...
Apparently the £9bn per annum Premier League were "short staffed". Come on mate, give em a break...
 
blueinsa said:
Problem with media appearances, no doubt paid and I’m not slamming the guy or anyone else for that btw, is that they invite along editorial lines and you are expected to go with the flow so to speak.

I’m in complete disagreement with his or any other assessment this is a score draw or a narrow victory for us that changes little and whilst Talksport might want to trot that line and have guests say similar, it doesn’t make it true.

City have briefed this morning where they stand. Anyone not listening is a fool imo.
Click to expand...

I honestly don't think it is that at all. I don't think he is toeing any lines. I don't even think he is 'trying' to stay impartial.

I just think he has a professional opinion, based on his reading and experience, and he gives it. He gives it honestly and without pretence. He seems invested in his field, and I don't think there's anything worth him compromising that principle, not even footballing allegiance. I don't know, but I wouldn't be surprised if he also had a professional code of conduct that covered stating things with honesty and integrity or something along those lines.

I am in complete disagreement with his main takeaway of this. Not the wider details he discussed, just the main summation of who won what, and why it would even matter through what 'lens' that is viewed.

But I don't question his reasons, reasoning or intention. Just his (in this case) opinion.

At least based on how I read what I have read. Which is not the full 175 page document, just to be clear, but the two statements, and the summary page verdict.
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
Having ploughed through all 175 pages I think the worst element of this whole saga is the contempt shown to City over the sponsorship deals at First Abu Dhabi Bank, Emirates Palace, and Etihad. If you read the incredible volume of correspondence it is clear that the PL and their financial people dragged their feet and put obstacle after obstacle in City's way. The Etihad deal was dragged out for almost 12 months. The PL told City it was "above market value" but refused to discuss how they arrived at their figures. City were told they couldnt see the comparison with other deals on the database.
The Judges slammed this despicable behaviour. These three delayed deals have probably cost City tens of millions of pounds. The PL didn't respond to letters and emails from City repeatedly. This was just pure obstruction driven by bad faith. No wonder City sued them. Just think about it. Three firms who want to invest in a business in North West England are obstructed at every opportunity. A total disgrace. No one has reported on this properly. There are pages and pages of the PL and its financial people just taking the piss out of City. It's in the link below starting at section 441.

Click to expand...

And these cunts have charged us with non-cooperation.
 
LeonardoDaVnci said:
There are more questions than answers...

The article in The Lawyer ends with this nugget...

As is often the way with cases like this, if you want to know who really won, wait for the costs decision.

So, why the delay re costs ?

Also the PL will have to reconsider the sponsorship deals they rejected ie Etihad and First Abu Dhabi Bank. So what are the PL doing, are they just saying "No, not at FMV rejected" or are the saying the deals should be capped at a maximum value of their choosing? Anyone know...

It's looks like if the PL don't sign off the sponsorships there will be another tribunal. Buy they are taking the piss because that means more months will pass without us receiving the funds to which we are legally entitled.
Click to expand...

Assume they’ll provide us with the benchmarking analysis and the databank and then it’s on us to make an argument.

I doubt we’ll be able to argue they’re at FMV as a consequence of getting that to be honest, which is partly why I don’t see it as a big win on those decisions as much as others.
 
shemnel said:
Gosh some of the criticism aimed at this Stefan fella is pretty poor. It strikes me that it's a highly complex legal case that not many of us can get to grips with, and one that is highly unlikely to be polarised to a simple win/lose.

I suppose that's why people are siding with Samuel.
Click to expand...

Agree.

I don't think it does us any favours at all to become too tribal on issues where it's clearly complex even for those with appropriate and relevant degrees and experience in the subject of sports law.

Of course we want to defend our club, but if we start piling on those who offer some balance just because balance is not what we want to hear, that's a dangerous and unnecessary path to go down.
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
Having ploughed through all 175 pages I think the worst element of this whole saga is the contempt shown to City over the sponsorship deals at First Abu Dhabi Bank, Emirates Palace, and Etihad. If you read the incredible volume of correspondence it is clear that the PL and their financial people dragged their feet and put obstacle after obstacle in City's way. The Etihad deal was dragged out for almost 12 months. The PL told City it was "above market value" but refused to discuss how they arrived at their figures. City were told they couldnt see the comparison with other deals on the database.
The Judges slammed this despicable behaviour. These three delayed deals have probably cost City tens of millions of pounds. The PL didn't respond to letters and emails from City repeatedly. This was just pure obstruction driven by bad faith. No wonder City sued them. Just think about it. Three firms who want to invest in a business in North West England are obstructed at every opportunity. A total disgrace. No one has reported on this properly. There are pages and pages of the PL and its financial people just taking the piss out of City. It's in the link below starting at section 441.

Click to expand...
As well as us suing the Premier League I'm wondering if said sponsors had a case for suing the Premier League too?
 
A song about the red cartel:

The red cartel
The fuckin red cartel
We hope you burn in hell
We hope you burn in hell
The fuckin red cartel.

The red cartel
The fuckin red cartel
We hope you burn in hell
We hope you burn in hell
The fuckin red cartel......

Repeat repeat repeat.

Need something simple with real venom.
 
JASR said:
Ah but City are the ones that have been obstructing and prevaricating to the maximum level they can get away with… according to KFA’s regarding the 115.

Perhaps we were just following the PL’s lead in handling complex financial and legal communications by adopting the Master’s ostrich position.

It’s staggering the contempt and malevolence shown by the PL to City.
Click to expand...

If they delayed as suggested, is this something we could reference in the 115 case? They claim we haven't cooperated but going by their standards, we have done?
 
JASR said:
Ah but City are the ones that have been obstructing and prevaricating to the maximum level they can get away with… according to KFA’s regarding the 115.

Perhaps we were just following the PL’s lead in handling complex financial and legal communications by adopting the Master’s ostrich position.

It’s staggering the contempt and malevolence shown by the PL to City.
Click to expand...
Some of the stuff in that document is unbelievable. A collective madness has taken over the PL. Their job is to encourage investment into football not to behave like the Gestapo. There was a long wrangle over whether the new Etihad deal was above "fair market value." The Judges agreed with the PL and eventually ruled that it was above market value. Presumably because the Judges were allowed to see how the PL had used the database to make their conclusion. But City were not allowed to see how Nielsen (acting for the PL) had arrived at their figures. Think about it. City were not allowed to accept external investment for their own business on the say-so of a group of PL appointed officials and City were not even allowed to discuss the details of the decision. Remember none of this is illegal. This is financial insanity. The Government needs to intervene urgently to stop this insanity which is damaging the UK economy.
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
Having ploughed through all 175 pages I think the worst element of this whole saga is the contempt shown to City over the sponsorship deals at First Abu Dhabi Bank, Emirates Palace, and Etihad. If you read the incredible volume of correspondence it is clear that the PL and their financial people dragged their feet and put obstacle after obstacle in City's way. The Etihad deal was dragged out for almost 12 months. The PL told City it was "above market value" but refused to discuss how they arrived at their figures. City were told they couldnt see the comparison with other deals on the database.
The Judges slammed this despicable behaviour. These three delayed deals have probably cost City tens of millions of pounds. The PL didn't respond to letters and emails from City repeatedly. This was just pure obstruction driven by bad faith. No wonder City sued them. Just think about it. Three firms who want to invest in a business in North West England are obstructed at every opportunity. A total disgrace. No one has reported on this properly. There are pages and pages of the PL and its financial people just taking the piss out of City. It's in the link below starting at section 441.

Click to expand...

The Etihad deal wasn’t deemed to have been delayed though, the FAB and the EP ones were.
 
meltonblue said:
Assume they’ll provide us with the benchmarking analysis and the databank and then it’s on us to make an argument.

I doubt we’ll be able to argue they’re at FMV as a consequence of getting that to be honest, which is partly why I don’t see it as a big win on those decisions as much as others.
Click to expand...
Mmmmm... You see the issue with this is sponsorship is only valued at what someone is willing to pay. This is where everything gets murky.

I was having it with a braindead Rag today, & said to him that the PL came to the conclusion that our sponsorship level is around or below that of Everton, Villa & WHU.

I shit you not, he said those clubs have a storied histories & loyal global fanbases, with packed grounds every week & fans that will follow them everywhere, hence why the PL placed our sponsorship level beneath theirs!

Obviously I was setting a trap for him about our rejected level of sponsorship, as the details have never been revealed to my knowledge, but this illustrates the lobotomised level of dialogue City fans have to deal with in defence of our club.

Pointing out that we'd won 5 of the last 6 PLs, were reigning World Champions & former CL & UEFA Super Cup champions, & were rated by OPTA as the best football team in the world didn't matter. Everton winning the 1985 First Division title under Howard Kendall was a bigger achievement than anything we've ever managed in our history.
 
Have to say , Stefan has trumpeted the cause for City for a long time now when nobody else has stood in our corner ever since the charges were brought , have a look again at todays talkSPORT debate now some of the dust has settled , at the end of the day he’s a lifetime blue with a different professional opinion based on his professional career at the top end of football finance , I’d rather congratulate him for standing our corner throughout all of this shit , so keep up the good work Stefan.
 
Sorry if it’s been asked already but can the sponsorship deals we had refused with Abu Dhabi bank and extra Etihad deals now be announced?
 
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