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

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

That is indeed a whole new area, but I've asked the question before about the nature of financial regulation in football. What is it for? What's the objective?

Is it to ensure a genuinely level financial playing field? No one really wants a scenario like Germany or France, where the wealthiest club by far generally dominates the league. Obviously that probably applies to us at the moment but there are a number of clubs who stand apart from the rest financially, with united & Chelsea showing that spending does not necessarily equate to success.

If that's the objective then you have to look at revenue sharing and spending caps. The notion of 'anchoring' is not one that I'm comfortable with. Why allow the lowest earning clubs to restrict the spending of the successful ones? You're handicapping clubs like us and Liverpool by doing that.

Is it to ensure genuine financial sustainability? I've said many times that the current PSR/FFP regimes, with the focus on historic profits and losses, aren't fit for that purpose. The squad cost rules are better, but still don't answer the fundamental questions around debt, which has generally been the main factor in club failure. We could have easily gone into administration in summer 2008, not because of historic losses, but because of cashflow issues and our inability to meet the £15m liability for the previous summer's transfers. FFP/PSR, even with squad cost limits, still won't prevent that liability-based scenario.

To use your example, if Musk took over Ipswich, and proposed a £1bn sponsorship over 5 years, it should fail the PL's FMV test. If he lent them a billion, they could still only spend so much, based on their revenue, expenses and squad cost. But if he did lend them a substantial sum, regardless of whether they could spend it, then changed his mind a couple of years later and demanded it back, they'd be screwed, possibly terminally. It happened with Brooks Mileson at Gretna (although he fell seriously ill). Why are there no rules to mitigate impacts like this?

I'll finish with the question I started with, which is what is financial regulation trying to achieve? We've never had a satisfactory answer to this question.

The beauty of football though is that you can only put 11 players out at a time whilst having a squad size of 25. In your analogy, Ipswich could only buy a finite number of players (provided that Musk wasn’t allowed to buy 200 players and pay them all £1M a week to not play).
Don’t forget that Liverpool have had the best defence and best front three in 6 of the last 8 seasons whilst Arsenal currently have a team that only Harlaand could get into and yet City keep winning the league ;-)

 

[spacecadet]

I’ve got loads of different medications but not really keen on hammering them. Day 10 today since I had my ACL reconstruction, it’s not pain per se, but it’s swollen with fluid sat on it, so in the night I manage to sleep for about an hour to 90 mins max and then it wakes you up. You’ve then got to stretch it out and wait for the ache to fuck off but it’s enough that you are completely awake and need to put light on and go on iPad for a bit. Probably averaging about 4 hours a night sleep, lol. Just been to hospital now to have all the dressings taken off and stitches and staples removed, lovely.

What game did you get the injury in Blue?

 

[chedinho]

If it’s not dawned on these frauds now that just like the CAS case they’ve been made to look fools by the posters but more importantly City & their representatives then there is no fucking hope for them. They’d have been better saying City had got a result due to the expensive lawyers, something they always hint but the thick cunts went along with the story City were embarrassed.

The expensive lawyers is usually a last throw of the dice if you’re having a conversation with any of the red cartel know nowts.

And the PL use the same firm as City. There’s no argument we can’t shoot down.

 

[lancs blue]

That is indeed a whole new area, but I've asked the question before about the nature of financial regulation in football. What is it for? What's the objective?

Is it to ensure a genuinely level financial playing field? No one really wants a scenario like Germany or France, where the wealthiest club by far generally dominates the league. Obviously that probably applies to us at the moment but there are a number of clubs who stand apart from the rest financially, with united & Chelsea showing that spending does not necessarily equate to success.

If that's the objective then you have to look at revenue sharing and spending caps. The notion of 'anchoring' is not one that I'm comfortable with. Why allow the lowest earning clubs to restrict the spending of the successful ones? You're handicapping clubs like us and Liverpool by doing that.

Is it to ensure genuine financial sustainability? I've said many times that the current PSR/FFP regimes, with the focus on historic profits and losses, aren't fit for that purpose. The squad cost rules are better, but still don't answer the fundamental questions around debt, which has generally been the main factor in club failure. We could have easily gone into administration in summer 2008, not because of historic losses, but because of cashflow issues and our inability to meet the £15m liability for the previous summer's transfers. FFP/PSR, even with squad cost limits, still won't prevent that liability-based scenario.

To use your example, if Musk took over Ipswich, and proposed a £1bn sponsorship over 5 years, it should fail the PL's FMV test. If he lent them a billion, they could still only spend so much, based on their revenue, expenses and squad cost. But if he did lend them a substantial sum, regardless of whether they could spend it, then changed his mind a couple of years later and demanded it back, they'd be screwed, possibly terminally. It happened with Brooks Mileson at Gretna (although he fell seriously ill). Why are there no rules to mitigate impacts like this?

I'll finish with the question I started with, which is what is financial regulation trying to achieve? We've never had a satisfactory answer to this question.

Neither is financial regulation some magic wand, rugby union's Premiership has had a salary cap for years but 4 or 5 clubs have still gone bankrupt and some of the best players have gone to France where the pay is much higher.

 

[LeonardoDaVnci]

We could do our own version of the 99 questions posed by McManus & Magnier to the united board (although most of them were complete bullshit).

And send it on Arsenal headed notepaper.

Only problem, If we sent it on Arsenal headed notepaper it would just be treated as an internal memo, if you get my drift...

 

[Rammy Blue]

What game did you get the injury in Blue?

MNF on 29th Jan

 

[mcrpogue]

Are there any areas where the corruption is bordering on criminal behaviour?

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Neither is financial regulation some magic wand, rugby union's Premiership has had a salary cap for years but 4 or 5 clubs have still gone bankrupt and some of the best players have gone to France where the pay is much higher.

It certainly isn't. Even NFL, where regulation ensures revenue sharing and restricts spending, there's always a Reid/Mahomes or Belichik/Brady combination that will dominate for a few seasons.

And a salary cap still won't stop clubs going bankrupt, unless you monitor cashflow and debt as well.

 

[gocity]

Ok that’s a fair point. Fortunately I don’t read it do have missed it. What propaganda has he provided?

Headline "Inside the week that blew up the Premier League" Sub headline , How city's war has created a split down the division that could lead to more acrimonious court battles . then odd quotes "it's extordinary , without precedent " a source at one club tells Mail Sport, "they are telling clubs any questions just ring us . "The inference being " "Just so you understand, we run the game. We'll help you take the League on" Then talks about Gulf State superiority. More like that whole article covers nearly 2 pages , with a big photograph oc Our team with the 4th Championship trophy.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Headline "Inside the week that blew up the Premier League" Sub headline , How city's war has created a split down the division that could lead to more acrimonious court battles . then odd quotes "it's extordinary , without precedent " a source at one club tells Mail Sport, "they are telling clubs any questions just ring us . "The inference being " "Just so you understand, we run the game. We'll help you take the League on" Then talks about Gulf State superiority. More like that whole article covers nearly 2 pages , with a big photograph oc Our team with the 4th Championship trophy.

As if this is the week that has blown up the PL. Absolute hyperbole.

To be clear, the next two weeks will be the weeks that blow up the PL unless the PL start playing ball.

:)