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

Metal Biker said:
This thread just jumped 40 pages in the last 30 minutes...

c72e14c8-c62e-4cfb-ae4d-55ca1b4e5f53_text.gif
Click to expand...
Just mods housekeeping. The fuckers have had their pinnies on all afternoon, hoovering away
 
JTBlue1999 said:
Not just blocked from any old sponsorship deal either, likely a very big one. Sounds like City have finally had enough of the Premier League arbitrarily blocking our sponsorships with their crooked rules whilst letting Arsenal, Liverpool, and United push through as many deals as they want without question.

Our club has clearly been discriminated against by the Premier League due to having Middle Eastern owners (as cited in the case). And we likely have some grounds to stand on, otherwise this information wouldn't have been leaked to the public. Curious to know who in the PL is backing us - won't be any of the red cartel or newly promoted teams, could be Chelsea, Villa, or Newcastle.
Click to expand...
The rags voted with City against these new rules, it could be them.
 
The Blue said:
I'm actually a bit worried by this news. If it's a basic argument that related parties can dictate sponsorship fees, which aren't subject to market value, it does seems a bit underhand (surely we're past the stage of needing that now). No doubt that there is discrimination due to it coming into play when Newcastle got taken over by the Saudi's but will that hold up in court..I'm not sure.

Who does the market value assessment on the PLs behalf, is it truly independent - I don't know!?

Maybe it's a tactic to overwhelm the PL from the other charges.

Must admit I'm getting a bit sick of all the legalities. I truly hope we win this and the 115 charges case and be done with it all.

Let's put it to bed City.
Click to expand...

No it means they can’t dictate the market value.
 
The Blue said:
I'm actually a bit worried by this news. If it's a basic argument that related parties can dictate sponsorship fees, which aren't subject to market value, it does seems a bit underhand (surely we're past the stage of needing that now).
Click to expand...
I don't think that approach would help us, and I'd be surprised if we are arguing for that.
 
I’m glad we’ve took a stand against the PL and it’s piss poor rules.
The PL want us to abide by rules which only allow us to spend money which we’ve earned but they also want to decide where that money comes from and how much it’s worth.
American owned - American sponsors - perfectly acceptable.
English owned - English sponsors - perfectly acceptable.
Abu Dhabi owned - Abu Dhabi sponsors - related party.
I see what you’re doing cunts.
 
laserblue said:
About time City fought back against the cartel clubs' manipulation of the rules aimed solely to safeguard their own interests and destroy City. They brought it on themselves. Fuck 'em.
Click to expand...
My reading of discrimination actually means exactly what you’re hoping for. To prove discrimination you will have to reference who and how other parties are treated. This hopefully will expose the rags their Cayman Island offshoring. Their dividend payments to Glazers and other shareholders whilst servicing (whatever that fucking means) a £400m debt, then selling out to another tax evader who rather than regenerates an area issues redundancies to the local populous and expects the very country he refuses to pay tax to fund his project to then ensure he gets a return on his investment (which again no doubt will be tax free). Put that up against what we have done for east Manchester and Manchester in general and you have your Discrimination Case
 
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.