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

Ric said:
Not really. It seems to suggest that the club will still face an uphill battle getting the renegotiated Etihad deal approved, unless our assertion that the rules are now null and void is correct. I think.
Click to expand...
Confidence in Nielsen is surely tarnished, as we asked them for a FMV and the PL asked them for a FMV a few years later. The PL valuation using the same methodology was much lower than the valuation we paid them to give us.

So as another poster said earlier, Nielsen will deliver whatever result their client pays for.
 
This thing is moving too fast to read everything, but has anyone made the point that City's next step, after the APT rules have been found to be unlawful, and possibly null and void since inception, for soft shareholder loans, is to arbitrate the lawfulness of the whole FFP shebang for the same reason? Imagine FFP being declared unlawful and null and void since 2013. Delicious and a huge fucking mess.

Anything wrong with that idea?

Edit: This "win" on the APT case (or score draw) could maybe become a big bargaining chip.
 
Last edited:
Rory Bluelow said:
Puts Neilsen right in firing line. All fingers pointing at them I think.
Click to expand...
You only have to look at the farce over the wildly differing valuations of PSG's sponsorship with Qatar Tourist Authority, when UEFA were looking at it. One valuation was €8m per annum and another was over €100m. In the end they settled at €100m (c£85m).
 
Paladin said:
Confidence in Nielsen is surely tarnished, as we asked them for a FMV and the PL asked them for a FMV a few years later. The PL valuation using the same methodology was much lower than the valuation we paid them to give us.

So as another poster said earlier, Nielsen will deliver whatever result their client pays for.
Click to expand...
The mad thing is, that if a consultant came up with 2 different valuations for the same thing, surely that would set a red flag and indicate a problem with the valuation process. Yet the tribunal are saying there's nothing wrong with the process. Utter bollocks
 
Paladin said:
Confidence in Nielsen is surely tarnished, as we asked them for a FMV and the PL asked them for a FMV a few years later. The PL valuation using the same methodology was much lower than the valuation we paid them to give us.

So as another poster said earlier, Nielsen will deliver whatever result their client pays for.
Click to expand...
Here is the required info, can you please give us your assessment?

Here is the required info, we think it’s unusually high, can you give us your assessment?

Can definitely get different responses depending on how the question is framed.
 
So let’s hope that one is in the database with a suitable adjustment for premier league versus French league and relative success of both clubs in Europe …..

‘You only have to look at the farce over the wildly differing valuations of PSG's sponsorship with Qatar Tourist Authority, when UEFA were looking at it. One valuation was €8m per annum and another was over €100m. In the end they settled at €100m (c£85m).’
 
Cobwebcat said:
The problem with forever changing complex rules is that they’re easily challenged as we have seen.

The PL have gone so far down the wrong road they can’t turn around but it’s a dead end. Whatever they do now someone will challenge it. Masters is finished for a start and that’s just the beginning.

Rule makers have to be independent and not put the rules up to be voted on by clubs with vested interests.
Click to expand...
the clubs need a motion to scrap PSR in it's entirety. I reckon most are just stick of all the bullshit now
 
ShedDweller said:
The mad thing is, that if a consultant came up with 2 different valuations for the same thing, surely that would set a red flag and indicate a problem with the valuation process. Yet the tribunal are saying there's nothing wrong with the process. Utter bollocks
Click to expand...

Always said it, they needed an accountant on the tribunal, instead of all these fucking lawyers.

@Prestwich_Blue was available, I believe. I could have carried his bags.
 
ShedDweller said:
The mad thing is, that if a consultant came up with 2 different valuations for the same thing, surely that would set a red flag and indicate a problem with the valuation process. Yet the tribunal are saying there's nothing wrong with the process. Utter bollocks
Click to expand...
I don't think the tribunal said this. They only said the PL were not wrong in relying on the evidence submitted to them.
 
halfcenturyup said:
This thing is moving too fast to read everything, but has anyone made the point that City's next step, after the APT rules have been found to be unlawful, and possibly null and void since inception, for soft shareholder loans, is to arbitrate the lawfulness of the whole FFP shebang for the same reason? Imagine FFP being declared unlawful and null and void since 2013. Delicious and a huge fucking mess.

Anything wrong with that idea?

Edit: This "win" on the APT case (or score draw) could maybe become a big bargaining chip.
Click to expand...

You sexy bastard.
 
M18CTID said:
Have a glance at Villa Talk mate. A few thick as fuck Villa fans siding with the PL and Red Cartel clubs and claiming that it’s City who are corrupt! Obviously only a small snapshot and I’ve seen Villa fans elsewhere back us.
Click to expand...

I spend a lot of my time in and around Villa fans. Broadly speaking I have about a quarter of them down as quite twatty and bitter, the rest range from ok to sound. It's not uncommon for the rest of their fan base to roll their eyes at the twatty ones but rarely do they call them out.
 
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