Any new rules they bring in will have to be legally watertight, do clubs have vote in new rules? If so is it a simple majority?
Going to be tricky for some clubs, but if you make rules to benefit yourself and get called out on it,
Given Bishops rant against us if anybody wants tickets to his tour....
So we are in circular firing squad territoryYes, 14 clubs will be required to vote in favour of the proposed changed rules. This puts the PL in an impossible position-they need a minimum of 14 clubs to agree to change the rules so they comply with the law (as ludicrous as that sounds) and most clubs won't want a change because it will mean they fail PSR (equally ludicrous) they are fuked!
Yes, 14 clubs will be required to vote in favour of the proposed changed rules. This puts the PL in an impossible position-they need a minimum of 14 clubs to agree to change the rules so they comply with the law (as ludicrous as that sounds) and most clubs won't want a change because it will mean they fail PSR (equally ludicrous) they are fuked!
My guess is Everton and Chelsea just didn't consider the implications fully. It could still work in their favor, any changes to the APT laws will still need 14 votes. Everton*, Chelsea, Brighton and the others with large owner debts won't be voting through something that causes them problems. I've gone through a few scenarios in my head and I can't see any of them getting passed. That will create an impasse, is it legal for them to just revert to the pre-existing rules?If seven clubs vote down any changes, what do the PL do?
Remember, the question was why Everton and Chelsea would vote with City now, if they are going to be hurt by interest on their loans.
What they do is vote down any rule including shareholder loans in APT. The PL can't make the rules "legal" without a 2/3 majority so they would have to scrap APT rules in their entirety or run with rules found to be anti-competitive. Bye bye APT.
Tyranny of the minority.
Which would effectively nullify the rulesIf ‘they’ really are as bent as we believe, then we should expect the annual allowable losses will be increased to accommodate the impact/costs of the shareholder loans.
Will the other clubs vote for the rules to damage the Ars e and the others!Will Arsenal and Brighton and Everton vote for revised rules that hit them the hardest?
And the answer is...
Apart from diluting their investments and making future borrowing a little more difficult no their isnt, although that could be factored into the new rules, if those extra funds showed a sporting advantage and had an impact on relegation or european places then that opens up a different discussion againI’m assuming there’s nothing stopping owners converting debt to equity ?