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

[slbsn]

Btw, it's interesting that Keegan was the first to break the story of the meeting and talk about what was in the 14 page document, followed by Ziegler. Normally Ziegler is the PL's go-to person and Keegan gave a very pro-City view when the decision was announced, do much do that we assumed he had been briefed by City. Maybe City leaked this this time?

The problem is that we are reading from reports written by people who don't understand the importance of what they themselves are reading. So there is probably more to all this yet to come out.

I seem to remember Keegan (was it?) said the PL had asked the tribunal for clarification but they hadn't received it yet? Yes, here it is: "And clarity has been sought from the tribunal panel on whether the amendments, rather than a complete overhaul, satisfy their requirements." Has been sought. Old news. So the document doesn't say it has been received.

Still some way to go on all this, I imagine.

Matt Lawton (Times) and Mike Keegan had the story and the document at precisely the same time

 

[slbsn]

thats what many rival fans cant understand about a potential £100m a year deal with etihad is that its not just for a shirt but the shirt, stadium and training campus??

Not really right. One is a kit deal and one is a sponsorship- not the same commercial terms, rights or inventory. £100m a year for a kit deal sounds about right over 14 years with growth in latter years built in (United get £90m from Adidas).

City’s Etihad deal proposed probably hit close to £200m pa by the final year of the 10 years.

 

[M23 Citizen]

The meeting is going to be fun.
Masters goes before the firing squad, singing:
“I did it my way.”

More like, ‘I did it their way’ while pointing at United, Liverpool and Arsenal’s reps.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Matt Lawton (Times) and Mike Keegan had the story and the document at precisely the same time

Maybe Lawton and Ziegler are slow writers. This is how I remembered it (below).

Doesn't really matter I suppose, but you think they got the document from the same source?

 

[Kazzydeyna]

Do we ever hear anything from those City fans who immediately took to Twitter to lambast the club for taking this action on the day the action was announced?
They appear to have gone strangely quiet once the largely successful outcome was announced.
Maybe they’ll appear next time they have a podcast to promote or a book (about their team, City) to sell?

 

[Stoned Rose]

These point seem unfair on clubs that don’t have shareholder loans

The rule amendment will not require fair market value interest charges to be backdated to the time the loan was first issued.
During the grace period, club owners and shareholders who have put in loans will have the option to convert them to equity if they wish

Liberties.

 

[Gone for a Burton]

Liberties.

The 'advantage/benefit' has been available since the inception of the loan.

The accrued interest, penalties and sanctions must go back to the start of the loan.....at the very least

Brightons interest free share holder loans are a £100 million more than HH Sheikh Mansour paid for the entirety of City.

Retrospective interest should be set at the rate applicable at the time.

Brighton for example should be paying circa £24 million pa X the length of the loan. Everton could be paying substantially more.

However adva

The PL will try and fudge this with no retrospective interest payments because their own rules were UNLAWFUL.

However,commercial and sporting advantage has been gained and two wrongs never made a right.

These bastards signed up to the letter and wanted to destroy us.....fuck them long and hard City !!

 

[nmc]

The real problem has been that the PL has only very recently seen the need for their rules to be checked for legality and fairness.

Let other Clubs worry about things that affect them and we will leave things alone that benefit us and react only if any changes adversely affect us.

Just my opinion.

A cause not helped by Richard Masters prioritising the objections of his masters over the legal advice of his lawyers….

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

The 'advantage/benefit' has been available since the inception of the loan.

The accrued interest, penalties and sanctions must go back to the start of the loan.....at the very least

Brightons interest free share holder loans are a £100 million more than HH Sheikh Mansour paid for the entirety of City.

Retrospective interest should be set at the rate applicable at the time.

Brighton for example should be paying circa £24 million pa X the length of the loan. Everton could be paying substantially more.

However adva

The PL will try and fudge this with no retrospective interest payments because their own rules were UNLAWFUL.

However,commercial and sporting advantage has been gained and two wrongs never made a right.

These bastards signed up to the letter and wanted to destroy us.....fuck them long and hard City !!

I wouldn't object if the PL said they wouldn't punish any club on this retrospective basis but I absolutely agree they should apply the interest retrospectively.

 

[slbsn]

Maybe Lawton and Ziegler are slow writers. This is how I remembered it (below).

Doesn't really matter I suppose, but you think they got the document from the same source?

View attachment 137686

View attachment 137687

That was a revised times piece.

Lawton with time stamp



I had the 2 side by side and tweeted them at 2.17.