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

My summary for what its worth
PL block city sponsorship deals.
City take PL into dispute.
PL rules found unlawful.
PL amend rules .
City still dispute.
City PL come to a agreement regards said sponsorships.
City get what they need.

City can let Newcastle Villa etc to put some work in regsrds ownership loans why should we burden all of the load.

Finally red press spin it out of control
 
Coatigan said:
All depends on the detail of the 3rd challenge. The club seemed fairly confident the rules remained unlawful. Perhaps only around the backdating of shareholder loans, perhaps on more than that.

If indeed it Was just on the loans, then
a) this claim that the settlement now allows the Etihad deal through can't make sense, and
b) it also can't be any kind of a win, just conceding that they were right to begin with and our so confident a challenge was just for a bit of a laugh.
Click to expand...
I think your point a) was resolved by APT1 judgement which found PL’s APT rules unlawful. Thats when the Etihad deal became lawful as far as we’re concerned. The PL had to change the rules.
APT2 was a further challenge to try to get the issues that would hit the red cartel, backdated. Not hugely important because going forward, our deals are ok & their shareholders can no longer give interest free loans.
We’ve got what we want
 
Last edited:
bluemanchester said:
The thing I don't like and may probably annoy others is the fact, supporters after years of defending the club against other fans, listening to biased pundits on radio and television and having to read aggresive articles in the press and social media, the club have decided to go along the route of 'no comment' leaving supporters in no mans land after years of defending the trenches. The powers that be are becoming so detached from the fan base, other than scripted media releases there is nothing that considers the anger the fans have had to endure from all angles over the last few years. If we 'win' the 115 I hope they don't do the same.
Click to expand...

It’s a settlement agreement.

Nothing to do with being detached from the fanbase - they can’t comment on something that is confidential within a settlement agreement.

I want City to make the commercial/legal decision in the best interests of the club, which in this case is a settlement.

We have gone “to trial” in the 115 case, so no need to worry about a settlement.
 
Coatigan said:
Sure, hence my 'for once'.

It's not pessimism in the slightest mate btw. I am perfectly fine with it. 2 prior wins, (and remember I argued with others I saw them as wins), were a success. Maybe this one is too, but the statement certainly isn't framed with any effort to make it read so. In contrast to the previous bullish statements.
Click to expand...
Maybe not wanting to rock the boat more than it needs to be from our end.
I think this may be part of the deal to save the PL’s face.
I can’t help but thinking this does tie into the 115 case despite all the noise saying otherwise but no one will ever know I guess
 
slbsn said:
Over the 10 years? It is worth MUCH more than. MUCH. Even conservatively a 2024 starting point with a 5% CAGR increase each year equates to a total of £1.25bn and a £155m by year 10. And I understand the deal is more than that. Biggest deal ever in English sport
Click to expand...
I meant the difference between 5% and 8% in your example.If I remember correctly.
 
stan bowles said:
So we've spent millions on a legal challenge to the PL rules on APT and now we're happy for Keegan et al to leak it out that we're walking away with a significant win over the Etihad deal ? Doesn't add up to me.
Click to expand...
If the leak is spin and lies, the PL will surely release another statement to counter the Etihad deal supposedly being agreed to by both parties.


Same statement by the PL.


www.premierleague.com

Premier League statement

www.premierleague.com www.premierleague.com
 
A590 blues said:
My summary for what its worth
PL block city sponsorship deals.
City take PL into dispute.
PL rules found unlawful.
PL amend rules .
City still dispute.
City PL come to a agreement regards said sponsorships.
City get what they need.

City can let Newcastle Villa etc to put some work in regsrds ownership loans why should we burden all of the load.

Finally red press spin it out of control
Click to expand...
I wonder how this affects Newcastle should they wish to arrange sponsorships with associated parties if the rules are not amended. And what happens to subsequent City Emirati deals?

City must have achieved some concession for a settlement to have been arranged which is presumably as you have inferred.

I don't think it necessarily has any implication for the 115 case other than that the two parties are able to negotiate and find agreement.
 
Burtonblue said:
Maybe not wanting to rock the boat more than it needs to be from our end.
I think this may be part of the deal to save the PL’s face.
I can’t help but thinking this does tie into the 115 case despite all the noise saying otherwise but no one will ever know I guess
Click to expand...
This definitely a deal to save PLs face. We didn’t want to bring down the PL just bring it to heal.
 
slbsn said:
Yes but City will 100% have traded that statement for something. City had nothing to lose on APT2 but costs. Even a complete defeat on APT2 would just have put then in the position they already are. So to settle, the PL has offered something.
Click to expand...
Could you speculate on what that could potentially be?

Are we talking a financial incentive or could it potentially be in exchange for some leniency from the league if we are found guilty of some of the 115. If for example we were only found guilty of non co-operation they agree not to pursue a points deduction?
 
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