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

[Prestwich_Blue]

As a Newcastle fan, I questioned this. Say I was a millionaire, or even a billionaire and I wanted to sponsor Newcastle Inited for £50m, and the Premier League said no, but I asked to sponsor Liverpool for that amount and they said yes, surely I have the ability to take action against the Premier League.

To me, giving Newcastle £50m would be worth it. It could buy us a player to compete, or it could be the difference between winning something, and not winning it.
Giving Liverpool that money would mean the opposite, Liverpool likely get that player ahead of Newcastle, and likely go on to win something with that money.

Naturally you all as Man City fans would feel the same about sponsoring Man City.

So who is it for the Premier League to say how I can and can’t spend my money, and how 2 teams who have an equal share in the Premier League are having 2 different limits of funding sources placed on them?

Surely in competition law, there is laws preventing that, as well as the Premier Leagues ‘Everyone is equal, and has equal opportunities’ rules.

To me, there's a number of elements in assessing fair value:

1. What is the sponsor paying?
2. What are they proposing to get for that?
3. Is what they're paying commensurate with what they're getting?
4. Is it a genuine transaction?

That's pretty well the tests used by CAS.

If the sponsor pays £50m and they just get a quarter page in the programme, that would fail test 3, and probably 4 as well. If the sponsor is paying £5m and getting their name on the front of the club's shirt, that would fail test 3 if it was City or Liverpool. Ashley's arrangement at Newcastle would probably fail test 3, as he was getting far more exposure for Sports Direct than he was paying for.

On the other hand £5m to sponsor, say, Hull City wouldn't be out of place. You have to consider the exposure the sponsorship gives. City are 7 times PL champions, having won the last 4 titles in a row, a treble in the last few seasons and are one of the hottest properties in football. That's why we'd always attract a premium.

And, as @gordondaviesmoustache said earlier, you also have to consider what the sponsor gets out of it, beyond their name on the shirt. In other words, what's their return on investment? Warrior, when they blew Adidas out of the water for Liverpool's kit deal in 2012, got a high-profile entry into the football kit market. That had to be worth more to them than to the already globally-established Adidas. Ultimately they failed on distribution, so Liverpool went to Nike. But if Warrior got other high-profile deals out of the Liverpool one then it would have been well worth the premium they paid in 2012.

The point is that you can't just look at a database and say "Well united only got £50m for a shirt naming deal from a mobile phone chip manufacturer so that's the benchmark".

 

[The Stockport Iniesta]

Sounds a bit dodgy that.

 

[Eebo]

You have to love how Martin Samuel puts it:

"Unlawful, unlawful, unlawful, unfair, unfair, unreasonable, unreasonable. The seven conclusions of the arbitration panel governing Manchester City’s case against the Premier League make for sobering reading. Yet, even sober, the hangover is going to last a very long time."

https://archive.ph/yUG6B

Wow! That is so different from how it is being reported in by every other journalist.

Martin Samuel is the only journalist worth his salt.

 

[canyerdogputoutafire]

Eh? A pasty?

Don't be nasty, show us yer pasty, na,na,na,na,na,nanah, old away day ditty.

 

[Inter Me Nan]

Is this good news???

Fuck knows!
I tried reading it and nearly had a stroke!!!

 

[Pablo ZZZ Peroni]

All Etihad had to do is point to their exponential growth since 2009, which they credit mostly to their association with Manchester City.

This alone is game, set & match to MCFC. You can't argue with facts & figures... Unless you're the Premier League!

Etihad have NOT had exponential growth since 2009. The arse fell out of the business from about 2015.
Post-covid and post-restructuring they are recovering strongly.

 

[manimanc]

Me in this thread

 

[Ric]

Is this good news???

Not really. It seems to suggest that the club will still face an uphill battle getting the renegotiated Etihad deal approved, unless our assertion that the rules are now null and void is correct. I think.

 

[KS55]

Yes Eth?
Where shall we go on holiday, Ron?
Dunno, Eth.
Could we go to the Isle of Wight, Ron?
Dunno, Eth.
Do you think you'd like Shanklin, Ron?
Dunno, Eth. I've never shankled.

That's the only one I remember.

Ah, the halcyon days of the wireless. Very little tv, no internet of course, but the Light Programmme on BBC was a joy. Ray’s a Laugh, Archie Andrews, Meet the Huggets, Life with the Lyons, Two way Family Favourites, and so much more. Who would believe today that a ventriloquist was a radio star?

 

[Metal Biker]

Is this good news???

It's news, that's enough.