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

waspish said:
This was from April 30 last year

Premier League anchoring system: how will it work?
Andy PymontApril 30, 2024
Premier League Anchoring System: Will it hold back acquiring stars like Erling Håland?
Top English football clubs have agreed in principle to replace Profit and Sustainability rules with a new Premier League anchoring system. Whilst not all the details are yet clear, it’s no surprise to see things changing. The previous financial rules have been one of the big stories of this season.

Let’s take a look at what is happening and what it could mean for the league.

Big News after Shareholder Meeting

A number of outlets reported on anchoring yesterday after this tweet from Martyn Ziegler, the chief sports reporter for The Times:

The Current System: PSR

The Premier League currently regulates club finances via a set of rules called the Profit & Sustainability Regulations (PSR). These rules judge clubs on the amount of profit or loss that they make on their football operations.

Under PSR, each club may lose up to £5m per season. Owners can make investments covering a further £30m of losses each year. This is all assessed over three-year rolling periods, so the maximum a club can lose in any three-year period is £105m.

The Premier League has imposed points deductions on Everton and Nottingham Forest this season for breaching these limits. Everton successfully appealed for a reduction in their points deductions. An independent panel will hear Forest’s appeal in the next week.

Problems with PSR

The spotlight on PSR this season has highlighted a number of issues:

An unclear tariff for punishments. Whilst the rules on losses are reasonably clear, the tariff of penalties for breaching them is not. Everton highlighted this after their appeal on their second points deduction. The club highlighted the inconsistency of four different commissions issuing four different points deductions to the club this season.
The perception of unfair treatment. The Premier League announced 115 charges against Manchester City for breaches between 2009 and 2018 over a year ago. They have yet to announce any punishment. Meanwhile, the Premier League has quickly punished both Everton and Forest for more recent breaches. The Premier League insists they are working on the Man City case. However, many fans perceive the current system as unfair.
Unclear intent and impact on competitiveness. Less of a problem with PSR specifically, the discussion this season has highlighted the rules and what their intent is. The name “profit and sustainability” suggests it’s about stopping clubs getting into financial difficulty that risks the future of the club. However, no Premier League club is really in danger of that.
Reports that Aston Villa and Newcastle may have to sell players to comply with PSR have highlighted that the rules might actually limit the competitiveness of the league. Established clubs with big revenues are difficult to challenge and perhaps PSR could be entrenching a “Big Six” at the expense of other clubs that want to challenge them.

With criticism growing, it’s no surprise to see the Premier League exploring a change.

The Future: Anchoring

At the shareholder meeting the Premier League clubs have indicated their intent to change the system in the future. Clubs authorised the league to carry out an analysis and create a proposal for a new system with a spending limit linked to TV revenues.

The proposed system is a spending cap linked to the lowest TV revenue of any club in the league. This is where the term “anchoring” has come from. The League will update the cap each year to reflect TV revenues. Therefore the cap can grow in the future if, as it has done consistently over the past 32 years, the Premier League is able to increase the amount of TV revenues that the league and clubs receive.

Will Anchoring be a Hard Cap like the [emoji458] NFL?

The idea of a hard cap on spending is not new. The NFL, one of the other biggest sports leagues on the planet, uses such a system.

The NFL salary cap for 2024 is $255 million per team. Clubs breaching the cap be fined, lose draft picks, or even have the contracts of star players terminated or assigned to other teams. With this effective deterrent in place, only a handful of clubs have ever breached the rules.

Here’s an example of reporting on a team’s NFL salary cap situation:

The NFL is currently in its off-season. Here, the reporter is looking ahead to the 2024 season and what the club needs to do to maximise its options within the salary cap. Perhaps we’ll see more of this in English football with the Premier League anchoring system coming in.

NFL clubs don’t pay transfer fees – there aren’t really any rival leagues to buy players from, and clubs in the NFL trade players and picks with one another instead. But a Premier League system which has a hard cap for the total of transfer and wage spending probably makes sense as an NFL equivalent. The salary cap works and it contributes, along with other rules, to a very dynamic and exciting league.

Or will Anchoring be a Soft Cap like in [emoji461] MLB?

Another intriguing option for the Premier League is to introduce a “soft cap”, as used in Major League Baseball.

Baseball teams work within a total spending cap. Unlike in the NFL, however, top clubs often breach the cap. It’s an accepted part of the league’s operation. The clubs that spend more than the limit make a Competitive Balance payment to the clubs that didn’t breach. The balance payment, often called a “luxury tax” in reporting, increases as you exceed various thresholds of over-spending.

This can mean that big-spending, ambitious new owners like Steve Cohen of the New York Mets can end up handing out a lot of money to competitors:

This model might be attractive to the Premier League. Baseball is more like football than the other American sports. It has a history going back to the late 1800s. Most clubs have been successful at some point in their history, but there are definitely top, “big” clubs who are very well-supported and make and spend large amounts. This might make their model a better fit for the Premier League.

The Premier League could also be clever with how it uses the “luxury tax” payments in this type of system. The League recently failed to agree a new funding deal with the EFL. If it agreed to distribute luxury tax payments to lower-league clubs, it could solve two of its major headaches at once.

When does Anchoring come in?

We’ll know more about the Premier League anchoring system after the league’s Annual General Meeting in June. The clubs will review and approve the new rules at that meeting. The Premier League will then release more details to the public.

The existing PSR system will remain in effect for the upcoming 2024/25 season. The season after, 2025/26, is when we’ll all see how the Premier League anchoring system works in practice.
Click to expand...

I enjoyed this observation the most;

"The Premier League insists they are working on the Man City case. However, many fans perceive the current system as unfair."

Because, as we all know, fans are the best arbiters of what is fair and what's not.
 
Newman Noggs said:
I enjoyed this observation the most;

"The Premier League insists they are working on the Man City case. However, many fans perceive the current system as unfair."

Because, as we all know, fans are the best arbiters of what is fair and what's not.
Click to expand...

And Masters and the PL clearly have the best interest of City at heart in everything they control.
 
cheekybids said:
I remember that post but we’ve made a commitment to 2034, that’s the sort of deal that brings on partners for 10 years with the most marketable player in football I’d say the full term is going through.
Click to expand...

Not only does Haaland become the long-term face of City but also the long-term face of Etihad in their sponsorship. They have to be connected IMO.

Stefan's view about the APT case was that City had evidently extended Etihad for 24/25 on some basis, even if reduced, but the big problem was the 10 year escalator which automatically increased the sponsorhip amount each year where it could potentially double with the CAGR over the 10 years.

If City have (or are about to) resubmit the Etihad deal as they are allowed for re-assessment with something specifically linked to Haaland (long term increasing contract) it's 2 fingers up to the Premier League and they get the new sponsorship through in full irrespective of what the APT panel might rule re APTs at the end of Jan.
 
halfcenturyup said:
I can't help wondering if everything that is going on at the moment with the PL recently and all the positive soft signals on the 115 case means the PL are in trouble with the APT verdict.

I'm not buying the idea, for example, that the PSR assessments for last season were all rosy because City will be "getting away" away with a fine, or Chelsea will. These are very different cases to a purely financial breach.

And by "in trouble with the APT verdict", I mean serious trouble.
Click to expand...
Is it possible the PL have backed themselves into a series of illegal rule changes that all need starting from scratch.
They will also prove the city charge that the PL were simply tightening the noose around specifically city.
 
waspish said:
This was from April 30 last year

Premier League anchoring system: how will it work?
Andy PymontApril 30, 2024
Premier League Anchoring System: Will it hold back acquiring stars like Erling Håland?
Top English football clubs have agreed in principle to replace Profit and Sustainability rules with a new Premier League anchoring system. Whilst not all the details are yet clear, it’s no surprise to see things changing. The previous financial rules have been one of the big stories of this season.

Let’s take a look at what is happening and what it could mean for the league.

Big News after Shareholder Meeting

A number of outlets reported on anchoring yesterday after this tweet from Martyn Ziegler, the chief sports reporter for The Times:

The Current System: PSR

The Premier League currently regulates club finances via a set of rules called the Profit & Sustainability Regulations (PSR). These rules judge clubs on the amount of profit or loss that they make on their football operations.

Under PSR, each club may lose up to £5m per season. Owners can make investments covering a further £30m of losses each year. This is all assessed over three-year rolling periods, so the maximum a club can lose in any three-year period is £105m.

The Premier League has imposed points deductions on Everton and Nottingham Forest this season for breaching these limits. Everton successfully appealed for a reduction in their points deductions. An independent panel will hear Forest’s appeal in the next week.

Problems with PSR

The spotlight on PSR this season has highlighted a number of issues:

An unclear tariff for punishments. Whilst the rules on losses are reasonably clear, the tariff of penalties for breaching them is not. Everton highlighted this after their appeal on their second points deduction. The club highlighted the inconsistency of four different commissions issuing four different points deductions to the club this season.
The perception of unfair treatment. The Premier League announced 115 charges against Manchester City for breaches between 2009 and 2018 over a year ago. They have yet to announce any punishment. Meanwhile, the Premier League has quickly punished both Everton and Forest for more recent breaches. The Premier League insists they are working on the Man City case. However, many fans perceive the current system as unfair.
Unclear intent and impact on competitiveness. Less of a problem with PSR specifically, the discussion this season has highlighted the rules and what their intent is. The name “profit and sustainability” suggests it’s about stopping clubs getting into financial difficulty that risks the future of the club. However, no Premier League club is really in danger of that.
Reports that Aston Villa and Newcastle may have to sell players to comply with PSR have highlighted that the rules might actually limit the competitiveness of the league. Established clubs with big revenues are difficult to challenge and perhaps PSR could be entrenching a “Big Six” at the expense of other clubs that want to challenge them.

With criticism growing, it’s no surprise to see the Premier League exploring a change.

The Future: Anchoring

At the shareholder meeting the Premier League clubs have indicated their intent to change the system in the future. Clubs authorised the league to carry out an analysis and create a proposal for a new system with a spending limit linked to TV revenues.

The proposed system is a spending cap linked to the lowest TV revenue of any club in the league. This is where the term “anchoring” has come from. The League will update the cap each year to reflect TV revenues. Therefore the cap can grow in the future if, as it has done consistently over the past 32 years, the Premier League is able to increase the amount of TV revenues that the league and clubs receive.

Will Anchoring be a Hard Cap like the [emoji458] NFL?

The idea of a hard cap on spending is not new. The NFL, one of the other biggest sports leagues on the planet, uses such a system.

The NFL salary cap for 2024 is $255 million per team. Clubs breaching the cap be fined, lose draft picks, or even have the contracts of star players terminated or assigned to other teams. With this effective deterrent in place, only a handful of clubs have ever breached the rules.

Here’s an example of reporting on a team’s NFL salary cap situation:

The NFL is currently in its off-season. Here, the reporter is looking ahead to the 2024 season and what the club needs to do to maximise its options within the salary cap. Perhaps we’ll see more of this in English football with the Premier League anchoring system coming in.

NFL clubs don’t pay transfer fees – there aren’t really any rival leagues to buy players from, and clubs in the NFL trade players and picks with one another instead. But a Premier League system which has a hard cap for the total of transfer and wage spending probably makes sense as an NFL equivalent. The salary cap works and it contributes, along with other rules, to a very dynamic and exciting league.

Or will Anchoring be a Soft Cap like in [emoji461] MLB?

Another intriguing option for the Premier League is to introduce a “soft cap”, as used in Major League Baseball.

Baseball teams work within a total spending cap. Unlike in the NFL, however, top clubs often breach the cap. It’s an accepted part of the league’s operation. The clubs that spend more than the limit make a Competitive Balance payment to the clubs that didn’t breach. The balance payment, often called a “luxury tax” in reporting, increases as you exceed various thresholds of over-spending.

This can mean that big-spending, ambitious new owners like Steve Cohen of the New York Mets can end up handing out a lot of money to competitors:

This model might be attractive to the Premier League. Baseball is more like football than the other American sports. It has a history going back to the late 1800s. Most clubs have been successful at some point in their history, but there are definitely top, “big” clubs who are very well-supported and make and spend large amounts. This might make their model a better fit for the Premier League.

The Premier League could also be clever with how it uses the “luxury tax” payments in this type of system. The League recently failed to agree a new funding deal with the EFL. If it agreed to distribute luxury tax payments to lower-league clubs, it could solve two of its major headaches at once.

When does Anchoring come in?

We’ll know more about the Premier League anchoring system after the league’s Annual General Meeting in June. The clubs will review and approve the new rules at that meeting. The Premier League will then release more details to the public.

The existing PSR system will remain in effect for the upcoming 2024/25 season. The season after, 2025/26, is when we’ll all see how the Premier League anchoring system works in practice.
Click to expand...
Wanchoring.
 
Pablo ZZZ Peroni said:
Not only does Haaland become the long-term face of City but also the long-term face of Etihad in their sponsorship. They have to be connected IMO.

Stefan's view about the APT case was that City had evidently extended Etihad for 24/25 on some basis, even if reduced, but the big problem was the 10 year escalator which automatically increased the sponsorhip amount each year where it could potentially double with the CAGR over the 10 years.

If City have (or are about to) resubmit the Etihad deal as they are allowed for re-assessment with something specifically linked to Haaland (long term increasing contract) it's 2 fingers up to the Premier League and they get the new sponsorship through in full irrespective of what the APT panel might rule re APTs at the end of Jan.
Click to expand...
.....or they announce FAB.

'Erling the FABulous face of FAB'
 
waspish said:
This was from April 30 last year

Premier League anchoring system: how will it work?
Andy PymontApril 30, 2024
Premier League Anchoring System: Will it hold back acquiring stars like Erling Håland?
Top English football clubs have agreed in principle to replace Profit and Sustainability rules with a new Premier League anchoring system. Whilst not all the details are yet clear, it’s no surprise to see things changing. The previous financial rules have been one of the big stories of this season.

Let’s take a look at what is happening and what it could mean for the league.

Big News after Shareholder Meeting

A number of outlets reported on anchoring yesterday after this tweet from Martyn Ziegler, the chief sports reporter for The Times:

The Current System: PSR

The Premier League currently regulates club finances via a set of rules called the Profit & Sustainability Regulations (PSR). These rules judge clubs on the amount of profit or loss that they make on their football operations.

Under PSR, each club may lose up to £5m per season. Owners can make investments covering a further £30m of losses each year. This is all assessed over three-year rolling periods, so the maximum a club can lose in any three-year period is £105m.

The Premier League has imposed points deductions on Everton and Nottingham Forest this season for breaching these limits. Everton successfully appealed for a reduction in their points deductions. An independent panel will hear Forest’s appeal in the next week.

Problems with PSR

The spotlight on PSR this season has highlighted a number of issues:

An unclear tariff for punishments. Whilst the rules on losses are reasonably clear, the tariff of penalties for breaching them is not. Everton highlighted this after their appeal on their second points deduction. The club highlighted the inconsistency of four different commissions issuing four different points deductions to the club this season.
The perception of unfair treatment. The Premier League announced 115 charges against Manchester City for breaches between 2009 and 2018 over a year ago. They have yet to announce any punishment. Meanwhile, the Premier League has quickly punished both Everton and Forest for more recent breaches. The Premier League insists they are working on the Man City case. However, many fans perceive the current system as unfair.
Unclear intent and impact on competitiveness. Less of a problem with PSR specifically, the discussion this season has highlighted the rules and what their intent is. The name “profit and sustainability” suggests it’s about stopping clubs getting into financial difficulty that risks the future of the club. However, no Premier League club is really in danger of that.
Reports that Aston Villa and Newcastle may have to sell players to comply with PSR have highlighted that the rules might actually limit the competitiveness of the league. Established clubs with big revenues are difficult to challenge and perhaps PSR could be entrenching a “Big Six” at the expense of other clubs that want to challenge them.

With criticism growing, it’s no surprise to see the Premier League exploring a change.

The Future: Anchoring

At the shareholder meeting the Premier League clubs have indicated their intent to change the system in the future. Clubs authorised the league to carry out an analysis and create a proposal for a new system with a spending limit linked to TV revenues.

The proposed system is a spending cap linked to the lowest TV revenue of any club in the league. This is where the term “anchoring” has come from. The League will update the cap each year to reflect TV revenues. Therefore the cap can grow in the future if, as it has done consistently over the past 32 years, the Premier League is able to increase the amount of TV revenues that the league and clubs receive.

Will Anchoring be a Hard Cap like the [emoji458] NFL?

The idea of a hard cap on spending is not new. The NFL, one of the other biggest sports leagues on the planet, uses such a system.

The NFL salary cap for 2024 is $255 million per team. Clubs breaching the cap be fined, lose draft picks, or even have the contracts of star players terminated or assigned to other teams. With this effective deterrent in place, only a handful of clubs have ever breached the rules.

Here’s an example of reporting on a team’s NFL salary cap situation:

The NFL is currently in its off-season. Here, the reporter is looking ahead to the 2024 season and what the club needs to do to maximise its options within the salary cap. Perhaps we’ll see more of this in English football with the Premier League anchoring system coming in.

NFL clubs don’t pay transfer fees – there aren’t really any rival leagues to buy players from, and clubs in the NFL trade players and picks with one another instead. But a Premier League system which has a hard cap for the total of transfer and wage spending probably makes sense as an NFL equivalent. The salary cap works and it contributes, along with other rules, to a very dynamic and exciting league.

Or will Anchoring be a Soft Cap like in [emoji461] MLB?

Another intriguing option for the Premier League is to introduce a “soft cap”, as used in Major League Baseball.

Baseball teams work within a total spending cap. Unlike in the NFL, however, top clubs often breach the cap. It’s an accepted part of the league’s operation. The clubs that spend more than the limit make a Competitive Balance payment to the clubs that didn’t breach. The balance payment, often called a “luxury tax” in reporting, increases as you exceed various thresholds of over-spending.

This can mean that big-spending, ambitious new owners like Steve Cohen of the New York Mets can end up handing out a lot of money to competitors:

This model might be attractive to the Premier League. Baseball is more like football than the other American sports. It has a history going back to the late 1800s. Most clubs have been successful at some point in their history, but there are definitely top, “big” clubs who are very well-supported and make and spend large amounts. This might make their model a better fit for the Premier League.

The Premier League could also be clever with how it uses the “luxury tax” payments in this type of system. The League recently failed to agree a new funding deal with the EFL. If it agreed to distribute luxury tax payments to lower-league clubs, it could solve two of its major headaches at once.

When does Anchoring come in?

We’ll know more about the Premier League anchoring system after the league’s Annual General Meeting in June. The clubs will review and approve the new rules at that meeting. The Premier League will then release more details to the public.

The existing PSR system will remain in effect for the upcoming 2024/25 season. The season after, 2025/26, is when we’ll all see how the Premier League anchoring system works in practice.
Click to expand...
I lost concentration after the underlined bit.
The NFL doesn’t have other league competitors. It’s stupid to try hindering your own league teams teams in Europe, by going down that road.
 
mancity2012_eamo said:
I lost concentration after the underlined bit.
The NFL doesn’t have other league competitors. It’s stupid to try hindering your own league teams teams in Europe, by going down that road.
Click to expand...
Exactly. The comparison should be with other leagues in Europe. Baseball and NFL are irrelevant.
 
Two day hearing to decide if the APTs as a whole are unlawful. Decision due in February.
Behind a paywall.
www.thetimes.com

Manchester City await verdict as panel weighs up sponsorship rules

Three retired senior judges will hold two-day hearing before final decision on Associated Party Transaction rules that could have big impact on Premier League
www.thetimes.com www.thetimes.com
 
lancs blue said:
Two day hearing to decide if the APTs as a whole are unlawful. Decision due in February.
Behind a paywall.
www.thetimes.com

Manchester City await verdict as panel weighs up sponsorship rules

Three retired senior judges will hold two-day hearing before final decision on Associated Party Transaction rules that could have big impact on Premier League
www.thetimes.com www.thetimes.com
Click to expand...

What a shit show that this has been allowed to drag on as it has with hearings, rulings & still no one the wiser.
 
cheekybids said:
What a shit show that this has been allowed to drag on as it has with hearings, rulings & still no one the wiser.
Click to expand...
It takes time. The PL were found out and tried to cover it up with a dodgy PR exercise. We called them out and they have to go again, seeking a compromise that doesn't damage the cartel in the way they have tried to damage us. When corruption finds you, and you know that your accuser will not let it lie, the squirming is very real.
 
Last edited:
cheekybids said:
What a shit show that this has been allowed to drag on as it has with hearings, rulings & still no one the wiser.
Click to expand...

It was getting time to settle this. Judgment published in a month for a two-day hearing is about right, I suppose.

Still think there maybe a few nasty surprises for the PL out of this. Fingers crossed :)

Edit for those who want to read it: https://archive.ph/NkJI1
 
Last edited:
oldius said:
It takes time. The PL were found out and tried to cover it up with a dodgy PR exercise. We called them out and they have to go again, seeking a compromise that doesn't damage the cartel in the way they have tried to damage us. When corruption finds you, and you know that your accuser will not let it lie, the squirming is very real.
Click to expand...

I realise that but when you realise that the premier league have not played with a straight bat then why expect them to start now.
 
oldius said:
They are pretty much out of the loop now. The case is in the hands of three judges.
Click to expand...

Yes but it was in the hands of the 3 judges, why didn’t they have the foresight to know a stakeholder they described as acting unlawful, unreasonable & unfair would suddenly find a workable solution.
 
cheekybids said:
Yes but it was in the hands of the 3 judges, why didn’t they have the foresight to know a stakeholder they described as acting unlawful, unreasonable & unfair would suddenly find a workable solution.
Click to expand...
New judges, and the 'process'.

The outcome is expected in February and will effectively determine how much companies associated with clubs can pay them via sponsorship deals.
 
oldius said:
They are pretty much out of the loop now. The case is in the hands of three judges.
Click to expand...
If the right decisions are reached for the right reasons, it's ok(ish).

The same applies to the trumped up PL/Cabal charges....the right outcome being the most important matter.

The UAE protocols would've had decisions in both cases within 28 days of the cases concluding.

Masters & his masters would be paying for their own accommodation in a desert slammer now !!
 
oldius said:
New judges, and the 'process'.

The outcome is expected in February and will effectively determine how much companies associated with clubs can pay them via sponsorship deals.
Click to expand...

Is it new judges? I thought it was the original judges but if it’s new I’m asking why did it get to this.
 
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