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

[halfcenturyup]

I think it’s a secondary advantage but not the main part. I think it’s absolutely highlighting that they couldn’t organise a piss up in a brewery ahead of this trial. Not only will they rush through unlawful rules at the behest of the chosen few, they’ll do it again & again. They aren’t acting independently for the benefit of the league.

You may be right.

But the aggressive response from Cliff (or from the legal team through Cliff) is so unlike City it makes me think there is more to it all. Maybe a strategy of get one unlawful judgment, have all the APT rules voided, get the outstanding cases cleared and then get new, more acceptable, APT rules. The PL knows all this and started working with the club on it, but have tried to bluff their way out of it under pressure from the reds, and City are keeping them on the tribunal hook.

May all be bullshit, but came to me last night and ties up one or two loose ends. In my mind, at least :D

 

[cheekybids]

Iirc, the panel said 52 sponsorship deals had been reviewed under the APT rules, with 41 of them cleared (presumably favourably) within the appropriate time. So that leaves up to 11 that were amended, I guess.

I still find it amazing that the PL can insist a valid contract between two parties has to be changed because .... well, just because they say so. I can understand why the PL would want that but there must surely be huge problems around that with the impact on directors' legal responsibility to shareholders, not to mention jurisdiction (how can the PL force a company not subject to the PL rules to do anything? Especially in a foreign country. They can't even force them to provide information to an investigation).

I said earlier, in some way I hope Etihad reduced their sponsorship by say 10 million a year and then refuse to increase it again and the club sues the PL for that amount for each of the next ten years. 100 million would be nice.

It’s fucking crazy beyond belief that you limit the growth of the most successful club in your league over the last decade. We question Masters ability as a CEO but the blokes background is Sales & Marketing, it’s insane he would say there is a limit that this record breaking club can achieve. How do you negotiate a better TV deal when you effectively saying a club doesn’t deserve a higher value after becoming the most watched team in the world. Hes dismissing brand recognition & the strength of his league.

 

[Bluekiwi]

Here it is

https://archive.md/Qp8lE

I've just read the letter and to my mind the PL should be running for cover as they are obviously incompetent. When the 115/130 charges are deemed to be inaccurate (or whatever word that should be) then City's lawyers can take the PL, media and the cartel to the cleaners suing them for damages etc., etc.

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

It’s fucking crazy beyond belief that you limit the growth of the most successful club in your league over the last decade. We question Masters ability as a CEO but the blokes background is Sales & Marketing, it’s insane he would say there is a limit that this record breaking club can achieve. How do you negotiate a better TV deal when you effectively saying a club doesn’t deserve a higher value after becoming the most watched team in the world. Hes dismissing brand recognition & the strength of his league.

I think the reality is he's had 3 or 4 other clubs telling him what to do and threatening to flounce off to a super league if he didn't comply. Then, the threat of oversight from an independent regulator.

 

[cheekybids]

You may be right.

But the aggressive response from Cliff (or from the legal team through Cliff) is so unlike City it makes me think there is more to it all. Maybe a strategy of get one unlawful judgment, have all the APT rules voided, get the outstanding cases cleared and then get new, more acceptable, APT rules. The PL knows all this and started working with the club on it, but have tried to bluff their way out of it under pressure from the reds, and City are keeping them on the tribunal hook.

May all be bullshit, but came to me last night and ties up one or two loose ends. In my mind and, at least :D

I do think that City have considered all responses & outcomes to ensure it plays out how they want, losing battles but winning the war. Like a grandmaster they’ll be many moves ahead.

 

[halfcenturyup]

I think the reality is he's had 3 or 4 other clubs telling him what to do and threatening to flounce off to a super league if he didn't comply. Then, the threat of oversight from an independent regulator.

Not sure the super league threat works any more, but a blackmail threat supported by plenty of emails, documents and minutes of meetings that show who he is actually working for, would work.

I like a good conspiracy theory, me ..... :)

 

[cheekybids]

I think the reality is he's had 3 or 4 other clubs telling him what to do and threatening to flounce off to a super league if he didn't comply. Then, the threat of oversight from an independent regulator.

But the benefit of a super league was not team dominance but increased revenue. The Rags have been lagging in a league made up of also rans in the premier league, they are writing off the opportunity to win trophy’s for the removal of relegation & yo compete with Madrid, Barca, Bayern etc

He should be saying when a club gets more it makes the negotiations for the next club negotiating to piggy back.

 

[SWP's back]

No - not approved. The rejection is set aside but City still need to show FMV unless they are correct that all APT rules now fall away pending replacement.

No, the PL need show it’s not FMV. The onus is now on them.

 

[halfcenturyup]

No, the PL need show it’s not FMV. The onus is now on them.

Evidently not FMV, assuming all the APT rules aren't null and void.

 

[cheekybids]

Evidently not FMV, assuming all the APT rules aren't null and void.

Not enough has been made of that. What was the response for removing evidently?