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

[KS55]

I have quickly read the whole judgement. I came away with the impression that the tribunal were over sympathetic to the PL in some areas such as the use of Nielsen alone, and their view that there was no bias. I think that is not the end of those matters and while the decisions of the tribunal are binding, there is nothing to stop City arguing about their application if the club is in dispute with the PL over future APTs. I am still not clear over how the PL decide that a transaction is Associated. It seems to me the PL take the view that Mansour is so influential that ALL AbuDhabi companies constitute an Association. Can anybody give an example of how Mansour has influenced a company of which he is not a director or officer?

 

[halfcenturyup]

City’s letter is clearly designed to encourage clubs not to vote in favour of any hastily cobbled together new rules. If the PL try and fail to get 14 votes, they are truly in the shit.

Then they will have to put forward a vote that does get a majority, like shall we scrap APTs? Only takes a block of seven clubs standing firm.

As I said though, they will be lobbying for votes and won't put a motion forward until they have them, I imagine. They are already saying no vote next week, aren't they?

 

[lust overlord]

But can we get 7 votes? 1 City 2 Newcastle 3 Chelsea 4 Everton 5 Forest. Can't think of any others tbh.

Villa ? Ipswich.

 

[SalfordCityBlue]

Good man. Need another?

There'll be more. The pragmatists won't vote for something they know will be challenged again. Only the zealots would consider it, and I'm not sure even they would see railroading something through as a good idea. It won't come to a vote until it's watertight this time (if at all), and has City's assurances that they won't take it back to court..

 

[canyerdogputoutafire]

6 Villa

7 Southampton

 

[spacecadet]

Villa ? Ipswich.

Forgot Villa mate. Dunno re Ipswich, wouldn't trust them tbh.

 

[blue b4 the moon]

But can we get 7 votes? 1 City 2 Newcastle 3 Chelsea 4 Everton 5 Forest. Can't think of any others tbh.

It's a minefield, there's a six club swing every season as well.

 

[johnny crossan]

But can we get 7 votes? 1 City 2 Newcastle 3 Chelsea 4 Everton 5 Forest. Can't think of any others tbh.

Villa, Leicester, Southampton, Ipswich maybe ??

 

[halfcenturyup]

Would Leicester vote with City? They understand what incompetent dicks the PL are and don’t have American owners.

That's seven. Soriano needs to be working his charm on the other six. Oh no, wait a minute. He doesn't have any. Soriano needs to be leveraging the academy ......

 

[spacecadet]

I thought we could rely on Fulham too, but wow. How wrong can you be? Snakes.

 

[Manc in London]

But can we get 7 votes? 1 City 2 Newcastle 3 Chelsea 4 Everton 5 Forest. Can't think of any others tbh.

Villa being another.

 

[KS55]

Then they will have to put forward a vote that does get a majority, like shall we scrap APTs? Only takes a block of seven clubs standing firm.

As I said though, they will be lobbying for votes and won't put a motion forward until they have them, I imagine. They are already saying no vote next week, aren't they?

Yup. I can imagine Arsenal and Brighton voting against rules which include shareholder loans as APTs. They might only support a complete scrapping of APT rules and some other mechanism to stop excessive spending. What fun.

 

[Manc in London]

I thought we could rely on Fulham too, but wow. How wrong can you be? Snakes.

Khan (Fulham and Jags) will know Kroenke (Arsenal and Rams - haha) via the NFL ownership group.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

But can we get 7 votes? 1 City 2 Newcastle 3 Chelsea 4 Everton 5 Forest. Can't think of any others tbh.

You assuming Everton will still back us? Will they still given that they have the most shareholder debt.

Southampton West Ham and Fulham have no shareholder loans either so they won't be affected by the future interest payments.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Yup. I can imagine Arsenal and Brighton voting against rules which include shareholder loans as APTs. What fun.

Do they have a choice, by law they now have to be included going forward surely?

 

[spacecadet]

Khan (Fulham and Jags) will know Kroenke (Arsenal and Rams - haha) via the NFL ownership group.

Yeah, never thought of that Blue. Always thought of them as a honest club.

 

[SalfordCityBlue]

You assuming Everton will still back us? Will they still given that they have the most shareholder debt.

Southampton West Ham and Fulham have no shareholder loans either so they won't be affected by the future interest payments.

If they pass something without shareholder loans accounted for we will instantly go back to the tribunal, who will slap them down again. Won't happen.

 

[Roachy]

Would Leicester vote with City? They understand what incompetent dicks the PL are and don’t have American owners.

Didn't Leicester do the dirty on us a few seasons ago, seem to recall Pep naming them amongst others in a press conference.

 

[Stoned Rose]

It looks like an open goal to me. I will be amazed if Newcastle don't take action especially if City get significant compensation for the damage done to our sponsor deals.

Liking the cut of your jib today Bobby.

 

[spacecadet]

You assuming Everton will still back us? Will they still given that they have the most shareholder debt.

Southampton West Ham and Fulham have no shareholder loans either so they won't be affected by the future interest payments.

Alway thought Everton might be up for a ruck, not unlike our club or fanbase?