St Helens Blue (Exiled)
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 5 May 2011
- Messages
- 13,525
No mateWas City Rabin Stefan?
No mateWas City Rabin Stefan?
Samuel was clearly briefed in advance by City and he makes the same case as contained our letter about the PL statement. Not just an opinion piece - it's the 'Authorised Version' ;-)
On Merseyside. They love a bit of grief over thereWill there be weeping?
The city hate is so strong they want us gone. The 3 clubs behind this want it to go back to the way it was. City can fuck off with their Arab owner to div 2.I feel this is the reason Masters ducked out of his golf day with the PL's broadcasters.
Imagine the investment the broadcasters made being undermined & threatened by the very organisation who sold them the product? It's fucking business suicide!
Personally, if I was a TV Executive, by the 2nd hole I'd have told Masters to end the bullshit. City are the most watched team on the planet, in the most popular league, & the PL are risking killing the goose that laid the golden egg all to appease the Cartel, one of whom is down in 14th & rumoured to be looking for yet ANOTHER manager?
I've honestly never seen a business go to such lengths to kill themselves & their product. La Liga & the rest must be loving this!
I`m hoping it goes to BOOM !!BANG!
Where's that Tyson gif...I`m hoping it goes to BOOM !!
Apologies if already posted. Fair review. You prove unlawful once it’s unlawful.
To be honest I get confused at times as well.
I'm pretty certain it's a bit of both. The allegation is:
"In respect of each of Seasons 2009/10 to 2017/18 inclusive, the Premier League Rules applicable in those seasons that required provision by a member club to the Premier League, in the utmost good faith, of accurate financial information that gives a true and fair view of the club’s financial position, in particular with respect to its revenue (including sponsorship revenue), its related parties and its operating costs."
The der Spiegel stuff on this allegation is all about sponsorship being inflated because they allege SM was paying for it.
They also worked for City.That's why City have a problem with Nielson assessing them, they also work for those three clubs!
I'm not so sure that's right, City are being charged under rule E54, so City are having deals assessed for FMV and it is Neilson who are doing it.
I wish we see it once when one of the sponsors will end up suing the PL.