FFP facing legal challenge (updated pg 12)

[Prestwich_Blue]

Sections 1 & 2 of Article 101 dealing with EU Competition law.

Article 101

(ex Article 81 TEC)

1. The following shall be prohibited as incompatible with the internal market: all agreements between undertakings, decisions by associations of undertakings and concerted practices which may affect trade between Member States and which have as their object or effect the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition within the internal market, and in particular those which:

(a) directly or indirectly fix purchase or selling prices or any other trading conditions;

(b) limit or control production, markets, technical development, or investment;

(c) share markets or sources of supply;

(d) apply dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions with other trading parties, thereby placing them at a competitive disadvantage;

(e) make the conclusion of contracts subject to acceptance by the other parties of supplementary obligations which, by their nature or according to commercial usage, have no connection with the subject of such contracts.

2. Any agreements or decisions prohibited pursuant to this Article shall be automatically void.

 

[fbloke]

Sections 1 & 2 of Article 101 dealing with EU Competition law.

Article 101

(ex Article 81 TEC)

1. The following shall be prohibited as incompatible with the internal market: all agreements between undertakings, decisions by associations of undertakings and concerted practices which may affect trade between Member States and which have as their object or effect the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition within the internal market, and in particular those which:

(a) directly or indirectly fix purchase or selling prices or any other trading conditions;

(b) limit or control production, markets, technical development, or investment;

(c) share markets or sources of supply;

(d) apply dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions with other trading parties, thereby placing them at a competitive disadvantage;

(e) make the conclusion of contracts subject to acceptance by the other parties of supplementary obligations which, by their nature or according to commercial usage, have no connection with the subject of such contracts.

2. Any agreements or decisions prohibited pursuant to this Article shall be automatically void.

I have been reminding lots of journalists and 'experts' on UEFA FFP about these things for a while now and most seem not to 'get it' or are deliberately keeping their powder dry for some inexplicable reason.

As you know Col' the freedom of movement of capital is very important to the EU and one of the founding principles of the EEC.

Mess with that and they will get a tad upset.

 

[The Flash]

Sections 1 & 2 of Article 101 dealing with EU Competition law.

Article 101

(ex Article 81 TEC)

1. The following shall be prohibited as incompatible with the internal market: all agreements between undertakings, decisions by associations of undertakings and concerted practices which may affect trade between Member States and which have as their object or effect the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition within the internal market, and in particular those which:

(a) directly or indirectly fix purchase or selling prices or any other trading conditions;

(b) limit or control production, markets, technical development, or investment;

(c) share markets or sources of supply;

(d) apply dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions with other trading parties, thereby placing them at a competitive disadvantage;

(e) make the conclusion of contracts subject to acceptance by the other parties of supplementary obligations which, by their nature or according to commercial usage, have no connection with the subject of such contracts.

2. Any agreements or decisions prohibited pursuant to this Article shall be automatically void.

Are we to assume from this PB, that FFP is dead in the water?

 

[paulchapo]

Sections 1 & 2 of Article 101 dealing with EU Competition law.

Article 101

(ex Article 81 TEC)

1. The following shall be prohibited as incompatible with the internal market: all agreements between undertakings, decisions by associations of undertakings and concerted practices which may affect trade between Member States and which have as their object or effect the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition within the internal market, and in particular those which:

(a) directly or indirectly fix purchase or selling prices or any other trading conditions;

(b) limit or control production, markets, technical development, or investment;

(c) share markets or sources of supply;

(d) apply dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions with other trading parties, thereby placing them at a competitive disadvantage;

(e) make the conclusion of contracts subject to acceptance by the other parties of supplementary obligations which, by their nature or according to commercial usage, have no connection with the subject of such contracts.

2. Any agreements or decisions prohibited pursuant to this Article shall be automatically void.

Are we to assume from this PB, that FFP is dead in the water?

I am no legal expert but i always felt it was constructed upon a sugar pedestal base and when the rains came down,as in a legal challenge,it would melt away.However,before they implimented it they must have taken legal advise,but sometimes people hear what they want to hear and railroad and bluff others with the knowledge,when the truth is very different.

 

[james1910]

talking about it on talkshite now!!!!

 

[BoyBlue_1985]

Sections 1 & 2 of Article 101 dealing with EU Competition law.

Article 101

(ex Article 81 TEC)

1. The following shall be prohibited as incompatible with the internal market: all agreements between undertakings, decisions by associations of undertakings and concerted practices which may affect trade between Member States and which have as their object or effect the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition within the internal market, and in particular those which:

(a) directly or indirectly fix purchase or selling prices or any other trading conditions;

(b) limit or control production, markets, technical development, or investment;

(c) share markets or sources of supply;

(d) apply dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions with other trading parties, thereby placing them at a competitive disadvantage;

(e) make the conclusion of contracts subject to acceptance by the other parties of supplementary obligations which, by their nature or according to commercial usage, have no connection with the subject of such contracts.

2. Any agreements or decisions prohibited pursuant to this Article shall be automatically void.

Are we to assume from this PB, that FFP is dead in the water?

I always believed they circumnavigated this as Europe is an invitational competition and therefore they can have whatever rules they chose

 

[paulchapo]

Sections 1 & 2 of Article 101 dealing with EU Competition law.

Are we to assume from this PB, that FFP is dead in the water?

I always believed they circumnavigated this as Europe is an invitational competition and therefore they can have whatever rules they chose

I heard this but when it impacts on players wages and security it may negate that argument.

 

[The Stockport Iniesta]

Assuming the legal challenge does go to court, what sort of timetable would we be looking at for the initial hearing?

 

[BluessinceHydeRoad]

Are we to assume from this PB, that FFP is dead in the water?

I always believed they circumnavigated this as Europe is an invitational competition and therefore they can have whatever rules they chose

I heard this but when it impacts on players wages and security it may negate that argument.

UEFA makes a fortune from the TV rights to the CL and from companies (we know who they are!) which sponsor the competition to the point where they can guarantee to pay £50 million to the winners. Clubs eliminated in the group stage will receive somewhere in the region of £25 million. These monies count in calculations to "break even" under the regulations. This idea that it is an "invitational tournament" not governed by norma; rules is rubbish. It is a market, UEFA is a competing party and commercial law governs it as much as any other market.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Sections 1 & 2 of Article 101 dealing with EU Competition law.

Article 101

(ex Article 81 TEC)

1. The following shall be prohibited as incompatible with the internal market: all agreements between undertakings, decisions by associations of undertakings and concerted practices which may affect trade between Member States and which have as their object or effect the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition within the internal market, and in particular those which:

(a) directly or indirectly fix purchase or selling prices or any other trading conditions;

(b) limit or control production, markets, technical development, or investment;

(c) share markets or sources of supply;

(d) apply dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions with other trading parties, thereby placing them at a competitive disadvantage;

(e) make the conclusion of contracts subject to acceptance by the other parties of supplementary obligations which, by their nature or according to commercial usage, have no connection with the subject of such contracts.

2. Any agreements or decisions prohibited pursuant to this Article shall be automatically void.

Are we to assume from this PB, that FFP is dead in the water?

That will be for the courts to decide. I'm not a lawyer but I'm guessing that the plaintiff's argument will centre around FFP limiting investment and effectively restricting competition through barriers to access to the financial stimulus that the CL can bring.

The interesting thing for me is that the CL itself is a major source of distortion across the various domestic leagues. A Moldovan team may not be able to compete with Bayern Munich on a pan-European level but simply by getting into the group stage of the CL could earn enough money to out-spend other Moldovan teams. If I were ADUG or someone like them, I would argue that I should be able to spend enough to make my club competitive, if I could afford to do that, without needing to be a member of what is effectively a cartel.