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

[Vic]

Did someone post the City letter to clubs? I can't find it.

The one that says "give us a call if you want it explaining..."

 

[Manc in London]

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.

You could always point out that we are the second biggest brand in football in 2024. We were the biggest brand in 2023. Evaluation carried out by Brand Finance.

 

[meltonblue]

So if PIF had a controlling interest in Clearlake, who had a controlling interest in Newcastle, that would be OK?

No, clearly not.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

@slbsn did say on here yesterday, that like it or not, panja is connected and has good sources

He’s an egregiously bad faith actor, irrespective.

 

[Manc in London]

Has anyone got to the end of this thread yet?

 

[SilvaisSkyBlue]

That the assessments used to declare the sponsorships were not fair market value weren’t fit for purpose.

Does it state them as a no goer? Or does it set them aside?

 

[meltonblue]

I was until I read this fucking thread!! :-)

Ha! Emotional and rational thought rarely mix well, football and legal matters being a prime example :)

 

[johnevans]

Just noticed the remarkable similarity between this scenario and the Black Knight on Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
Go and watch it with City and the PL in mind.
(Sorry - don’t know how to attach things)

I've been observing events over the past 24 hours or so and my mind keeps referring back to a scene or two in 'The Godfather'.

At a gathering of the Heads of the Five Families in New York, Don Corleone asks 'How did we get to this?'

Then after some conversational to-ing and fro-ing he stifles his reaction/light bulb moment to Don Barzini's request that Corleone share his government contacts, that 'Don Corleone must allow us to draw water from the well..'

On the way home from the meeting, having made 'peace' with the Tattaglia family for the recent war, Corleone says to an incredulous Tom Hagen in their car, 'But I did not know until this day that it was Barzini all along..'

Clearly, no Marlon Brando moi but until yesterday and everything that has been revealed since then, I always had The Red Filth and The Red Scouse Filth as the prime movers of all this nonsense we've had to put up with since 2008. Now, it seems clear to me that if any club is 'Barzini', pulling the strings and stirring the pot, it's The Tarqunts..

F**k 'em, they'll get exactly what they (and their Red Cartel chums) deserve..

 

[Dribble]

You could always point out that we are the second biggest brand in football in 2024. We were the biggest brand in 2023. Evaluation carried out by Brand Finance.

That and the most watched football team globally, but no, Everton's First Division title in 1985 & the 39,000 they get at Goodison makes them a FAR bigger club than City will ever be... \0/

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

@slbsn did say on here yesterday, that like it or not, panja is connected and has good sources

I'd fundamentally disagree with that assertion. Panja's main sources are Gill & Parry, plus probably Nick Harris. That's not "good sources".

 

[Dribble]

No, clearly not.

What about a majority interest, which is different to a controlling interest?

 

[argyle]

If this decision was complex and has led to both sides claiming a victory, imagine what is going to happen with the charges!

I don't think it will be like the CAS verdict. I have a feeling it will be like this case and there will be decisions for and against us.

 

[meltonblue]

Does it state them as a no goer? Or does it set them aside?

I was saying no goer to the posters viewpoint rather than the judgement. In terms of the judgement though, they found that the PL were not wrong in their FMV assessment. They set aside the decisions due to the lack of availability from us to the data used to justify it. Given that data was assessed for them to come to the judgment on the FMV decision, I’m not sure how we’ll be able to now argue them and they then be allowed.

The more likely outcome is if they are to be allowed, it’s due to them having to negate all the rules, as per the email sent last night by the club. Whether that’ll happen, we’ve just got to wait and see.

 

[bluealf]

You could always point out that we are the second biggest brand in football in 2024. We were the biggest brand in 2023. Evaluation carried out by Brand Finance.

or he could have just dropped him with a right hook and went about the rest of the day with a smile.

 

[northendenton]

Not if she turns out to be a serial killer :)

Well give her a full English and hide the cornflakes in the morning

 

[cleavers]

Has anyone got to the end of this thread yet?

Yes, I just go to the last page when I revisit, I doubt I've missed much.

 

[LeonardoDaVnci]

Because the ruling is redacted we have no idea how much the three deals, Etihad, Emirates Palace and First Abu Dhabi Bank are being revalued by the PL/Nielsen. Looks like they are saying, by implication, Etihad has always been above FMV, since day one, circa 2009. Those down graded valuations may well reappear in the 130 hearing, along with Etihad spending a few days explaining why the deals were in fact exceptionally good value to them. What the Panel will do, who knows, I'd like to think the Nielsen 'analysis' will be inadmissible in the time frame 2009-2018.

 

[Elbow beards]

This from the Lawyer.
'... In other words, shareholder loans should be subject to the same rules as other APTs. Ironically, as the Premier League points out, City actually voted in favour of excluding shareholder loans in 2021'
Why did City vote in favour of excluding loans and then chang their mind and why would Arsenal vote to include them?
I don't get it.

 

[flb]

Maybe all clubs should be allowed to agree on everyone’s sponsorship who the fuck do the PL think they are? What’s to stop them saying sponsorship of bog rolls at United is worth more than City, fucking scandalous

We are the most successful club of the last decade , have the biggest revenue in the league , the most watched PL team in America , a social media following that eclipses Liverpool and Arsenal and will soon overtake Uniteds . We’ve broke every record set in football , we play a brand of football that is the envy the whole of Europe and beyond. What does surprise me though is why aren’t we attracting sponsorship deals that can’t even be lumped into the related party transactions element? So Amazon could in theory throw a £100m a year deal at us and no questions could be asked ?

 

[johnny crossan]

....Why did City vote in favour of excluding loans and then change their mind ...?

City were clearly setting them up for the Tribunal sting.