Because of UEFA and the PL. They decide the rules.Why wouldn’t it be legit?
I’m pretty sure our execs know what they are doing in this respect. The hateful 8, the PL, uefa have all thrown all their weight at us and found fuck allBecause of UEFA and the PL. They decide the rules.
He's right, anything deemed related party is poison, the truth doesnt matter, except when it comes to a law court.
Related party sponsorships are perfectly legal under FFP. They're just subject to a fair value testBecause of UEFA and the PL. They decide the rules.
He's right, anything deemed related party is poison, the truth doesnt matter, except when it comes to a law court.
Cost me 12.5 grand the bastard. Mrs Bozzie used to sit there with a face like a slapped arse every Sunday morning when 'Jimmy Hill's Sunday Supplement' was on. Got to the point where we had a conservatory built so that she didn't have to watch him, next minute he's sacked and replaced by Brian Woolnough! We still call it 'The Jimmy Hill Conservatory' to this day.Sorry to disagree about Chinny Hill. I lived in Coventry when he was in charge of the club. He ‘converted’ Highfield Road into an all seater stadium by cordoning off the Kop standing area. He also stated that to crack down on hooliganism, that fans had to buy tickets several days in advance of the match or else be charged three times the price.
He seemed to think that no football hooligan would buy advance tickets or pay over the odds? Very weird thinking.
I would agree that in his earlier spell as manager, he did come up with some progressive ideas including reintroducing the sky blue shirts. However as Chairman he had lost the plot.
Agree. And ours will be fine. It stops Newcastle throwing in a load in the championship as it can't be justified. As serial winners of the pl and CL finalists why should we not have the biggest sponsorships.Related party sponsorships are perfectly legal under FFP. They're just subject to a fair value test
That's my understanding about the hotel and the sponsorship. I originally thought Mandarin Group owned it but it's clear that they operate the hotel on behalf of the owners.How do you figure that? All I can see is a (probably) small sponsorship by a Hong Kong based company that runs a very prestigious hotel in Abu Dhabi. The land and the building itself may be owned by the government but the deal will be with the company. Do you honestly believe we are doing something wrong and shouldn't touch any deal from the Middle East just because someone may not like it?
What I mean is from the point of view of our detractors the deal might not seem to be legit. Like always they'll put 2 and 2 together and make 5. I suppose my post was a counter to those arguments rather than me personally questioning the legality of the deal, which I don't.Why wouldn’t it be legit?
Citizen M. Spot on and I would like to believe that this has been carefully thought out (unlike the last clock up with the withdrawal from the club after 48 hours). And is firstly, a fuck you to the prem and secondly a litmus test for deals under the new rules for the club.Related party sponsorships are perfectly legal under FFP. They're just subject to a fair value test
And I'd rather you weren't in charge of our finances. Fortunately your notThere’s certain things the club don’t or won’t do to improve our image, one of them is to get rid of Etihad and all the signage, get them off our kit, off our stadium name etc etc Etihad is pure toxic, it perpetuates the myth that the others cling to. I would rather we cut a less lucrative deal and juggle our books even if that means cutting a player or two, it’s now way past a joke. The Etihad deal is a millstone, my understanding is it’s about 10% of our total income and these days hardly represents a good deal.