I just cant see what the basis of the argument would be for an arbitrary body to set the price of anything, its unworkable and ridiculous not to mention entirely open to corruption and collusion (not things the pl are concerned about i know) but its just economics 101 that the market sets the price thats just how the world works despite the gnashing and wailing of people the market will set the price, you may not like the price of something but if it sells out then the price was the right price as it met the desired aim and its the same with sponsorships, you may not like the price but if the price meets the companies desired aims no matter what they are then it was the right price and then you are into a whole other argument where the pl think it should be allowed to tell global powerhouse companies how they should spend their marketing budget and what they should get out of it, the power the PL thinks it has is insane.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
City launch legal action against the Premier League | City win APT case (pg901)
- Thread starter denislawsbackheel
- Start date
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 11,969
Not for me for two reasons, firstly it makes a mockery of the completion and secondly, it opens the door for every club to claim compensation. They'll most likely change them when they all meet up again
Do you think they will be applying illegal rules in the meantime?
On your first point: I think it is applying illegal rules that makes a mockery of the competition, and continuing to apply them after you know they are illegal or, at least, not notifying clubs that the rules are no longer applied.
On your second: every club impacted will claim compensation if illegal rules were applied to them in the meantime, or if rules were found to be illegal but clubs were still expected to comply with them in the meantime.
Sir peace frog
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 9 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 18,518
- Location
- stalking the canals and rivers
- Team supported
- Manchester City Football Club
if we had lost they would of come out and said the rules are staying, they are not illegal, however we haven't heard anything , so in my thinking they are changing the rules but this takes time and they need to make them watertight(this time) before giving them the green light and discussing a legal settlement with us for monies lost.
imo we've won the case
imo we've won the case
Cobwebcat
Well-Known Member
I’m assuming will still received sponsorship money but just couldn’t count it towards PSR. I am however not confident in my assumption!if we had lost they would of come out and said the rules are staying, they are not illegal, however we haven't heard anything , so in my thinking they are changing the rules but this takes time and they need to make them watertight(this time) before giving them the green light and discussing a legal settlement with us for monies lost.
imo we've won the case
BerkshireBlue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 19 Jan 2015
- Messages
- 4,003
Do you think they will be applying illegal rules in the meantime?
On your first point: I think it is applying illegal rules that makes a mockery of the competition, and continuing to apply them after you know they are illegal or, at least, not notifying clubs that the rules are no longer applied.
On your second: every club impacted will claim compensation if illegal rules were applied to them in the meantime, or if rules were found to be illegal but clubs were still expected to comply with them in the meantime.
If it were me I'd call an emergency board meeting, get a plan and time table together to remove them as soon as possible but we're talking about the imbeciles running the PL here.
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 11,969
I’m assuming will still received sponsorship money but just couldn’t count it towards PSR. I am however not confident in my assumption!
The rules expect a club to amend the contract to the values determined by the PL. I really don't see how they can expect to apply that.
citizen_maine
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 May 2011
- Messages
- 14,049
I too could be wrong, but I think the new rules state if the deal isn't FMV, you have to either give the extra money back or renegotiate the contract to the amount they say is fairI’m assuming will still received sponsorship money but just couldn’t count it towards PSR. I am however not confident in my assumption!
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 11,969
If it were me I'd call an emergency board meeting, get a plan and time table together to remove them as soon as possible but we're talking about the imbeciles running the PL here.
Can't argue with that :)
richards30
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 20 May 2009
- Messages
- 27,914
The rules expect a club to amend the contract to the values determined by the PL. I really don't see how they can expect to apply that.
Agreed, if the law was indeed wrong then if we get our claim to be proven correct then the correct figure and profit etc should be allowed as well.
But firstly I would like a time line on that Stanley Park fiasco such as when it was set up and is it still viable.Pay per view?