halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 12,091
That was the one, iirc, where the PL's KC said that removing the word evidently would increase the risk of a legal challenge, but they did it anyway. The idiots.
Here, I think;
City launch legal action against the Premier League | City win APT case (pg901)
- Thread starter denislawsbackheel
- Start date
That was the one, iirc, where the PL's KC said that removing the word evidently would increase the risk of a legal challenge, but they did it anyway. The idiots.
Here, I think;
lancs blue
Well-Known Member
According to Ziegler the panel will be issuing further findings on the case to clarify the status of the APT rules.
www.thetimes.com
Panel’s full findings on Man City may cause earthquake for Premier League
The ruling in the tribunal that caused such an impact on Tuesday may be only the first tremor: revealing the full explanation may have a devastating effect on the future of the top flight
www.thetimes.com
Sloppy language from me but the burden has always been on the PL on these on the “evidently not FMV” test and that doesn’t change. These were both being processed under the 2021 rules not the 2024 rules so the difference is only in respect of the access to information not the burden of proof changes.
Important to note the City APTs in the decision were only being reviewed under the old rules not 2024 rules
Rammy Blue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 23 May 2008
- Messages
- 30,615
cheekybids
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Messages
- 10,582
I know Nielsen do the benchmarking but what is their main commercial purpose of business? Are they contracted purely to measure the value of services or provide advice on how the client can negotiate more?
In my experience valuers of services work for the buyer & seller. 1 will concentrate on negatives & the other will focus on positives. Is it true they are employed by the Dippers?
Edit: just googled & it says this
“Our approach to comprehensive sponsorship media valuation leverages data and insights to maximize opportunity and provide greater ROI to rights holders and brands”
Yet they’ve essentially devalued the contracts. That’s why it would be vital to have the data behind the decision.
Last edited:
Maybe city think for then go of clubs and those shareholder loans are good for the games football clubs who have rich owners like sponsors are good for the game so clubs can good players to make the league stronger! The cartel are looking at it as it's not fair city can get these sponsors
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 12,091
According to Ziegler the panel will be issuing further findings on the case to clarify the status of the APT rules.
Panel’s full findings on Man City may cause earthquake for Premier League
The ruling in the tribunal that caused such an impact on Tuesday may be only the first tremor: revealing the full explanation may have a devastating effect on the future of the top flight
Interesting. More going on than we knew about. Who'd a thunk it?
Archive version: https://archive.ph/vL9FV
This is from The Lawyer. It's a legal publication. You'd be hard pressed to claim bias or misunderstanding from these. They pretty much echo what Stefan has been saying since the start.
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 12,091
Apparently they deliver end-to-end custom consulting solutions that are meant to compete.
Which means they are full of shit :)