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

I am still rather confused. Part of the 115 charges brought against City appear to be that the club has tried to disguise owner investment as sponsorship . Now it appears that some owners of some clubs have made sizeable loans free of interest to their clubs. There seems to be no time limit on these loans and no deadline by which they must be repaid. The most notable beneficiaries of such loans were Chelsea which received £1.5 billion from their owner, never paid a penny in interest and were told in the end that their owner didn't want a penny back. I know no shares changed hands, but I'm perplexed as to whether this practice should be described as an APT at (much) less than FMV, disguised owner investment or as a classic example of that heinous practice, financial doping. Any suggestions, gooners, seeing as your club has real expertise in this area of football finance?
 
jrb said:
Sly Sports News told to get the unity message out to the Red Shirt Cartel fans.

Click to expand...


I'll bet you it's not as many as they're making out.

We know Liverpool and United essentially voted him in, so it's them 2, probably Arsenal because it suits them to be against us and then maybe a handful more. I reckon we're getting close to a big split in the league.

Regardless of how other clubs feel about City they can't honestly think Masters is doing a good job. I mean look at how Chelsea and Leicester got off of their potential charges, the rules drafted are a mess and they're clearly not fit to govern.
 
Paladin said:
Confidence in Nielsen is surely tarnished, as we asked them for a FMV and the PL asked them for a FMV a few years later. The PL valuation using the same methodology was much lower than the valuation we paid them to give us.

So as another poster said earlier, Nielsen will deliver whatever result their client pays for.
Click to expand...
Could we sue them for the loss of income if they made a lower valuation without good reason. The club could lose millions in sponsorship directly due to a spurious valuation.
 
MCFC1993 said:
I'll bet you it's not as many as they're making out.

We know Liverpool and United essentially voted him in, so it's them 2, probably Arsenal because it suits them to be against us and then maybe a handful more. I reckon we're getting close to a big split in the league.

Regardless of how other clubs feel about City they can't honestly think Masters is doing a good job. I mean look at how Chelsea and Leicester got off of their potential charges, the rules drafted are a mess and they're clearly not fit to govern.
Click to expand...
Spurs, Brighton, West Ham, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.