Liverpool pay City £1 million in "spy" settlement for hacking - biggest PL scandal

JASR

Well-Known Member
Joined
1 Sep 2015
Messages
2,434
You don’t pay £1mill if you are confident your employees are innocent. And you have enough information that the accusers are also guilty of something. Hi
My thoughts aren’t about whether Liverpool did it, (they clearly did), but why only 1m, why NDA... as ever there’s more than just the info which was originally reported, and now it leaks 6 years later.
It just feels that Liverpool got a good ‘deal’, and either there’s a lot more in it that’s not disclosed still, that’s positive for us (hopefully)... or there’s something unknown that made the agreement such a good ‘win’ for Liverpool (despite them being entirely in the wrong) on the single act of multiple times accessing City data).
 

Newman Noggs

Well-Known Member
Joined
27 Dec 2009
Messages
6,762
Location
Gone fishin'
My thoughts aren’t about whether Liverpool did it, (they clearly did), but why only 1m, why NDA... as ever there’s more than just the info which was originally reported, and now it leaks 6 years later.
It just feels that Liverpool got a good ‘deal’, and either there’s a lot more in it that’s not disclosed still, that’s positive for us (hopefully)... or there’s something unknown that made the agreement such a good ‘win’ for Liverpool (despite them being entirely in the wrong) on the single act of multiple times accessing City data).
It's "only" £1m because damages as a result of the hack are impossible to quantify. It's effectively punitive damages and, in that respect, is a very significant payment.
 

JASR

Well-Known Member
Joined
1 Sep 2015
Messages
2,434
It's "only" £1m because damages as a result of the hack are impossible to quantify. It's effectively punitive damages and, in that respect, is a very significant payment.
It’s an ‘only’ amount if it was hidden by an NDA.
It’s a significant amount, now that it’s leaked out.
But it raises more questions than just those 2 facts (the 1m and the NDA) -
It can’t just be those 2 facts in the overall agreement, can it?
That’s what I’m speculating on. It’s either things that are massively positive for City, or ... there’s something else, which gave Liverpool such an incredibly lenient get out.
 

FootballSense

Well-Known Member
Joined
29 Sep 2014
Messages
424
Are Liverpool the cause of one of the biggest scandals ?

It has been reported in The Times that Liverpool are at the centre of a major scandal. They recruited ex City employees to form part of Liverpool`s senior scouting network . Allegedly Liverpool`s new staff then accessed and used for the benefit of Liverpool FC the highly valuable scouting intelligence owned by City. The report noted that Liverpool`s recruitment has improved considerably. The report also suggests that the system used by City was compromised by Liverpool s employees and crucial information was obtained from a competitor by Liverpool`s staff without authority.

This article gives a further insight:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/staggering-affair-could-be-among-biggest-scandals-mchtsbnkf
 

@BluePhil8

Well-Known Member
Joined
4 Jan 2009
Messages
11,454
I suspect we settled at £1m because we didn't realise in 2013 that Liverpool are huge thunder ****s who are engineering a media smear campaign/lobbying UEFA against us etc. If this had happened last season I suspect we would be taking them to the highest court in the land by now.

Another example of how our softly softly approach in the early days of the take over was hugely naive.
 

Rolee

Well-Known Member
Joined
22 Jun 2012
Messages
8,735
I suspect we settled at £1m because we didn't realise in 2013 that Liverpool are huge thunder ****s who are engineering a media smear campaign/lobbying UEFA against us etc. If this had happened last season I suspect we would be taking them to the highest court in the land by now.

Another example of how our softly softly approach in the early days of the take over was hugely naive.
Incredible, your speculation on what may have happened is an example of the club's 'softly softly' approach?
 

Newman Noggs

Well-Known Member
Joined
27 Dec 2009
Messages
6,762
Location
Gone fishin'
It’s an ‘only’ amount if it was hidden by an NDA.
It’s a significant amount, now that it’s leaked out.
But it raises more questions than just those 2 facts (the 1m and the NDA) -
It can’t just be those 2 facts in the overall agreement, can it?
That’s what I’m speculating on. It’s either things that are massively positive for City, or ... there’s something else, which gave Liverpool such an incredibly lenient get out.
Not sure we know for certain there's an NDA but it would be exceptional if a settlement of this sort didn't have one. I don't agree that £1m is only significant because it has leaked out. It's an amazing amount where there is no way of quantifying damages.

That said, I think you are right, there must be a huge backstory here.
 

Don't have an account?

Register now!
Top