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

[MMA]

Feel free to add something useful to the conversation at some point if that's not beyond you.

It's a pretty funny reply he give to be fair..

 

[halfcenturyup]

You didn’t say who tbf!

Yes, but there’s a huge distinction between a carefully worded press release that some PR agency has been working on for days and a letter that stridently asserts a legal position to the members of the organisation that you have been in litigation with.

The former is necessary and designed principally to limit any damage; the latter is inherently more risky, elective, and would have to be founded (especially in this instance) on unequivocal legal advice.

So the former isn’t really a function of any legal advice, whereas the latter would only be sent following that advice.

I think it's a given that Cliff didn't write that letter?

 

[GSW Blue]

I suppose it's better than the 'Name your food themed City 11" threads.

Roger Palmer Ham

 

[JPAMCR]

To be honest whilst it's nice that Stefan Borson provides some kick back, he really does waffle and come out with some mealy mouthed drivel at times.

At the end of the day, we were told by Platini that the whole purpose of FFP was to stop owners pumping too much money into their clubs, to try to make the game more sustainable. The PSR rules are supposed to be a more lenient/watered down version of the same, as the allowable losses are higher.

However FFP insists owner loans have interest allocated at a FMV rate and PSR doesn't (or didn't).

Judging by the Premier League's stance on this point and losing in court on it, if Mansour had simply leant City £1.5Billion at 0% then they wouldn't be pursuing City for breaching PSR... dream on.....

The Premier League have been proven by this judgement and their immediate response to be completely corrupt and disingenuous.

These hefty preferential loans at clubs like Arsenal and Liverpool have been around for over 15 years, deliberately circumventing PSR. How can they write off historical issues of interest free orclow interest loans?

I've actually calculated Liverpool's 2010 0.5% £240m loan would now stand at £735m if an FMV interest rate of 8% had been applied. They would never have had the money to buy Mo Salah, let alone Van Dijk. Alisson, Fabhino and Keita. They wouldn't have won anything at all under Klopp.

Arsenal have spent way above their means over the last 8 years using this same mechanism, to build the side they have today.

When the PSR rules were written, I find it hard to believe high quality law firms were not involved because of the sums of money at stake. These firms will have provided sound legal advice as to the legality of this issue, and almost certainly advised against it. You'd have to assume they deliberately ignored it at the behest of Arsenal, Liverpool and United to give them a loophole whilst they try to "get City"

City have had two sponsorship deals stopped this year under the APT rules that have just been found unlawful and can claim compensation. I have no idea how much they're for, but axtypical deal of £20m over 5 years is £100m. So this alone could be considerable.

Yesterday the Daily Mail, when covering this story, suggested many smaller Premier League clubs had been trying to get the Premier League to drop the PSR case against City, and settle for damages out of court.

It is now very clear to me, City are going to win their PSR case either at arbitration or on appeal in a court of law. The legal costs and compensation are going to hit £1Billion or thereabouts for this whole affair.

On the one hand, we want our club vindicated and cleared, but we don't want to destroy competitive football and the Premier League.

This is why our owners are pushing for a football regulator.

I'd love to see the Glazers. Kroenke, FSG, Joe Lewis and Boehly booted out of football for good.

I wish Stefan Borson would show more balls.

Not the Glazers.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

The PL spent ten days preparing their damage limitation comms release. Their press release is no more than PR spin. I don't think many of the PL clubs at next week's meeting will regard it as a victory. It's going to cost the clubs a lot of money in legal fees and that's even before the PL faces a compensation claim from City and a potential legal action from Newcastle. This whole episode has been a disaster for the PL and I will be amazed if Masters survives in his job. Perhaps then some of the media stooges and idiots at the BBC will stop repeating the PR spin that the PL have won the case.

I'm amazed that some on here think it's a win for the PL.

Whats not in question is that City have gained from this ruling and the PL have lost quite a bit.

 

[ayrshire_blue]

I think it's a given that Cliff didn't write that letter?

We'll find out in 3 years time from Der Speigel.

 

[Phil1]

Well found.

From what I remember he was always careful not to go too far one way or the other due to not having all the facts. I think he’s been quite consistent on that fact and usually changes opinion slightly when more is known.
He usually caveats most of his opinions with him only going with what’s publicly available so at that point in his professional capacity he probably felt what he was saying to be correct.

Regardless, City have achieved what they set out to do and that’s the only important thing today.

 

[Gazza]

Roger Palmer Ham

Leroy Sane

 

[Asa's left peg]

Who would have thought that Masters was working for Tebas all along and not the cartel. Brilliant move by La Liga to bring the PL down.

 

[JASR]

Mark my words, you will be on strictly next year. This finance business is a stepping stone to the big time.

‘And performing the quickstep to Elvis’s Blue Suede shoes, it’s Stefan and his dancing partner Olga’