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

[slbsn]

That talks about RPTs and FMV but not specifically soft loans.

Oh. Given 19/20 agreed to loans being excluded I doubt they worried too much about a challenge

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

This has proved things without doubt. We have a judgement like below and a significant number of the press pack who are completely happy to ignore the facts of the case and spout bile to press a pre ordained narrative of the Cartel

It is incredible that the BBC online team has ignored the judgement summary which spells out in stark terms that the PL has acted illegally and unfairly. This can’t be an accident. This can only be bad faith.

 

[Claytop]

This thread today is just like the starter for what it will be like on 115 day.

Absolute carnage & chaos either way!

 

[MCFC1993]

@slbsn has put some decent stuff on his twitter page.

That excerpt is ridiculous and I'm not surprised City decided to do something about it. One of our sponsorships went from 'evidently above FMV' according to the PL, then they sought professional advice and were told that it was 'not above FMV'.

So basically they had no clue what FMV was but rejected it.

They are not fit to govern this league or these issues.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

I’ve always been an ex ante man, myself.

 

[homerdog]

Barney Ronay is a mendacious ****, made clear by his claims that the PL statement and ours were "notable for their contrasting tones":

The Premier League went for airy and vindicated, not angry just sad. Manchester City stuck with terse, hostile and finger-pointy.
So on the one hand we have: “The Premier League welcomes the Tribunal’s findings, which endorsed the overall objectives, framework and decision-making of the APT system.” But wait. What’s this? “The Club has succeeded with its claim: the Associated Party Transaction (APT) rules have been found to be unlawful.”

He obviously missed the bit where our statement opened with:
"Manchester City Football Club thanks the distinguished members of the Arbitral Tribunal for their work and considerations and welcomes their findings."

Terse, hostile and finger-pointy, my arse! Go fuck yourself Ronay!

 

[BobbyBoy]

Is there any suggestion of why they’ve done that? Makes no sense at face value

I assume negotiating/agreeing on what is and isn't redacted. It's impossible to read some sections due to the sheer volume of redactions.

Edit, also the timing is a factor. No PL games for 2 weeks, it's a brand after all, distractions aren't necessary.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

What’s the **** saying? That tweet doesn’t make any sense. His, not yours.

 

[calumdown]

I’ve always been an ex ante man, myself.

ex post dislikes this post.

 

[TedofChume]

I think this TalkSport article drives a juggernaut through the City PSR case:

Why Man City's sponsorship win is a blow for Arsenal and Liverpool

Manchester City’s win in their legal battle against the Premier League over Associated Party Transactions [APT] is set to be bad news for their rivals. After a long tribunal, the panel of thr…

talksport.com

I know the ruling is about the recent changes to ATP rules, but if not counting owners loans is unlawful, it must also be unlawful under preview PSR rules?

Surely, you can't have a situation where clubs like Arsenal and Liverpool would have breached PSR quite significantly if their owners loans were revalued at an FMV, and then punish City for breaches during the same period?

Can you have a situation where half the league have been funded by their owners circumventing PSR by a mechanism that is now deemed unlawful?

What will happen if clubs like Brighton, Everton, Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea. Leicester, Brentford, Wolves, Palace, Bournemouth refuse to vote through the changes to the rules to make them lawful because it's against their interest to do so?

This is a dogs dinner, but we always knew it was