City launch legal action against the Premier League | Unconfirmed reports that City have secured "potentially significant victory" (p 808)

[SWP's back]

Gab Marcotti, who I normally have a high regard of, on his podcast this week was total out of depth when talking about the arbitration case between City and PL
In his view
It will have an affect on the 115 case
Mansour and KAM are not football fans
He sees this as an exit strategy from City

Tbf both myself and @Prestwich_Blue did challenge him on his ESPN article where he showed he doesn’t have a clue what he’s talking about (in a cordial manner) and he liked PB’s reply to my comment.

 

[hello]

rag ;-)


As much as their dislike of Qatar and Yemens Houthis may get them co-operating are we sure the UAE and Saudis are that friendly with each other to mutually benefit each team

Replace Qatar with the rags and Yemen's Houthis with the dippers and there's enough scope for cooperation ;)

 

[mayo31]

That’s the power of social media. It’s a modern day evil. Post something on X or whatever it’s called and it instantly becomes an irrefutable fact. Social media gives a voice to some people who shouldn’t have a voice. The other problem being we don’t have any PR strategy whatsoever. We just sit there and take the mountains of shit that gets thrown at us on a daily basis, without any form of rebuttal or without even attempting to defend ourselves. It does become very draining for us fans. That’s for sure.

I think our PR is elsewhere and not in the UK

They know us over here will attend the games, the ground is full no matter what anyone says

The PR is elsewhere, despite all of this lets use the USA as an example, we have the highest viewing attendances over there than any other club and we are growing like wildfire over there, same in other countries.

The narrative is set here in the UK, why fight it i guess, that is our job. I happy to do that actually on social media and in grounds etc

 

[bluemoon32]

How can the PL decide on fair value of sponsorships for ManCity. We are in unprecedented territory. the treble then the 4 peat. Also world champions. The flagship club of a global franchise.
A billion over 10 years for stadium rights isn’t out of the question. Pl will say it is. Competition between club and PL on sponsorship is a conflict of interest.
I honestly think City should be using the super league as a threat including a few Middle East teams.
The PL are on shaky ground when. City, Chelsea, villa and Newcastle team up.
I am unsure why Utd, Liverpool and Arsenal are not with us on this? They will find it hard to rebuild under current financial rules. They got fined already.

Why would we ever want to play in that ?

 

[halfcenturyup]

Ineos would be a related party anyway surely.

It’s difficult without seeing the full submission but personally I do think there needs to be some regulation around associated parties (well, there does now because they allowed the Newcastle sale through, the right answer would have been never allowing that to happen), it sounds like the PL have overreached with it though.

I used to have that view. That I was uneasy about the connections the people at board level have and how that would generate income. But, trust me, any unease I had has been blown away by their never ending attempts to stop the club. And let's not forget Liverpool benefitted from contacts with Littlewoods that nobody else could ever get and United got benefits from their listing that other clubs couldn't have at the time. Now it's our time.

 

[117 M34]

How can the PL decide on fair value of sponsorships for ManCity. We are in unprecedented territory. the treble then the 4 peat. Also world champions. The flagship club of a global franchise.
A billion over 10 years for stadium rights isn’t out of the question. Pl will say it is. Competition between club and PL on sponsorship is a conflict of interest.
I honestly think City should be using the super league as a threat including a few Middle East teams.
The PL are on shaky ground when. City, Chelsea, villa and Newcastle team up.
I am unsure why Utd, Liverpool and Arsenal are not with us on this? They will find it hard to rebuild under current financial rules. They got fined already.

I'd argue that the 'value' of the sponsorship would also be different depending on which company was doing the sponsoring.
If sponsoring city increases a companies revenue by £20m, then the sponsorship is easily worth £10m.
For another company with the exact same sponsorship, it might only increase their revenue by £1m then it's clearly not worth £10m.

 

[Damocles]

They need to have a word with them about who Emirates sponsor.

I don't believe that Emirates or Etihad operate like this, with this level of management from the Sheikhs in power.

But let's be mischievous for one moment and suggest that they're "open to requests". One of the things that @projectriver pointed out on his TalkSport segment the other day that I think has gone WAY under the radar from the discussion is that the Premier League commercial revenues are beginning to flatline. The league has to give away more games in bigger packages just to get the same TV deal. Title sponsorships such as front of shirt have been hugely affected recently - he pointed out Villa, Chelsea and a few others, because without betting companies then the competition for the price has dropped and ultimately some clubs are struggling to get the value they wish for those high revenue items to where Chelsea have played games without a sponsor.

Again, just being mischievous here but I'd argue that if we really WERE owned by "the UAE" which we're clearly not then them also holding the title sponsorship of one of our biggest competitive rivals is probably something that will exert more and more soft power in the future as those values start dropping.

 

[Paladin]

I think the problem is that the Premier League and most of the media (print and visual) are businesses. As businesses they need to make a profit, to make a profit you need to sell something at a profit (I watch Dragons Den!) It's obvious that the Red Top teams are what sells (for now) and the Premier League and media need their matches to matter so they can get more in sponsorship, selling rights and clicks. City have totally fucked up their business model and I've changed my mind, I think we will win this case.

They might have a more healthy profit margin if they didn't have a £20m legal fee to pay.

 

[domalino]

I can't understand why some would abstain on something so fundamental to the finance of the game. They don't deserve to have a vote IMHO.

City abstained on the previous vote, there’s loads of good reasons why a club would do it.

 

[meltonblue]

I used to have that view. That I was uneasy about the connections the people at board level have and how that would generate income. But, trust me, any unease I had has been blown away by their never ending attempts to stop the club. And let's not forget Liverpool benefitted from contacts with Littlewoods that nobody else could ever get and United got benefits from their listing that other clubs couldn't have at the time. Now it's our time.

And I had the exact same view right up to the time they allowed the Newcastle deal through.