City launch legal action against the Premier League | City win APT case (pg901)

So if I get this straight the Red vested interests, aka previous cartel owners, came after us for inflated sponsorship deals which were found to be ok but then the beast of unintended consequences reared their head and said before we go what about the murky way you finance your club and these free loans, the true cost if which should be hitting your p and l like a normal company. Let’s count that now.

And oops a daisy there goes Arsenal’s free ride. Beware what you wish for. Now let’s get the 115 done. And hope they go after leveraged debt funding model too.

Karma for the fucking hypocrites and cabal membership based upon entitlement, greed and jealousy.
 
Yeah but it isn't retrospectively applied. So they'll have to factor in an extra £20m for the loans or so however in reality what you'll see is a massive Walmart sponsorship deal at whatever value the Kroenkes can get away with so I don't think it affects Arsenal in reality as that will just replace the shareholder loans. It's the same money basically.

Smaller clubs without super wealthy owners who own other massive companies may feel it more though.

So what you are saying is, its ok for your Owner to invest money in the Club? Interesting.
 
This is what I have never understood, why doesn't Mansour loan us the money we need as per Arsenal/United?View attachment 134249

Mansour does even better than that, he invested equity in us.

Loans aren’t for the profit and loss, they’re for the balance sheet. What then shows on the profit and loss is any interest payable on those loans.

Some clubs don’t have any losses as the loan is interest free. If they now have to come under APT, then they won’t be allowed to do that (and anything that forces owners to put in equity rather than loans should be seen as a very very good thing for clubs financial stability - it’s what protects them from if an owner does want to leave or has their assets frozen like an Abramovic).
 
I recall him on talksport when this started that he expected us to lose this one. If I’m incorrect on that someone can correct me. I’m pretty sure he did say that though.

To be fair to him no one knew what was being challenged in court. They had suspicions but I think Stefan commented largely on the claims that emerged regarding the fact there was a collective of clubs looking to stifle others and xenophobia. He didn't see how a system that requires a majority vote could be seen to be unlawful.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.