New PL Commercial rule passed (pg4) | City rumoured to be questioning the legality

[blueinsa]

as per a daily fail article 6 voted against:
Sheffield, Chelsea, Castle, City, Forest, Everton
two not voted either way: Palace, Burnley

this fucking Burnley is clueless they going down they know they going down but still have no balls to vote properly.

Sheffield aint much of an ally as they also go down and imo not likely to come back quick.

while the other 5 against it all clubs PL is about to punish + Newcastle who are probably the biggest victim of these PSR rules currently as it stops them to properly spend and make themselves a regular CL club.

can only hope Luton finds its way back to Champo.

Villa can suck dick too, I guess they are shit scared of Castle pushing them down on the table soon.

PL now probably wants to give Everton further points deduction to send them down haha.

at this points is really clear the 3 main red tops and Spurs are dictating Masters while lobbying other 7/8 clubs what to do.

American ownership all voting the exact same way with the exception of Chelsea?

 

[cheekybids]

Always tickles me that spurs are involved in all this, cracking are a big club with their one league cup in 15 years

Fucking Spursy………. Who the fuck do they think they are. I can’t wait til Levy gets implicated in the insider trading scandal.


Manchester City 2023 (9)

Dippers 2020 (19)

Chelsea 2017 (6) 6

Rags 2013 (20)

Arsenal 2004 (13)

Everton 1987 (9)

Villa 1981 (7)

Nottingham Forest 1978 (1)

Spurs 1961 (2)

Burnley 1960 (2)

Wolves 1959 (3)

Newcastle 1927 (4)

Sheff Utd 1898 (1)

Bournemouth

Brentford

Brighton

Crystal Palace

Fulham

Luton

West Ham Utd

 

[Gordyola]

Are Silverlake majority stake holders in our club? :)

Just over 18% Mansour has the vast majority

 

[whipper]

Just over 18% Mansour has the vast majority

Exactly, cheers fella :)

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

American ownership all voting the exact same way with the exception of Chelsea?

Chelsea are in ffp shit this summer unless they sell players, or possibly get a legit cash injection onto the books - I wonder if this is aimed at tightening down on their owners options?

 

[The Stockport Iniesta]

American ownership all voting the exact same way with the exception of Chelsea?

Chelsea are the next club that gets fucked over.

 

[Gordyola]

Chelsea are in ffp shit this summer unless they sell players, or possibly get a legit cash injection onto the books - I wonder if this is aimed at tightening down on their owners options?

Lots of questions about their shirt sponsorship it’s also only for this season Interestingly Silver Lake have an interest in the company

Premier League to rule on value of Chelsea’s Infinite Athlete shirt sponsorship, says report- SportsPro

Chelsea and Infinite Athlete's ‘UK£40m+ per year’ partnership is under scrutiny amid the firm’s links to the club’s owners.

www.sportspromedia.com

 

[Lavinda Past]

Fucking Spursy………. Who the fuck do they think they are. I can’t wait til Levy gets implicated in the insider trading scandal.


Manchester City 2023 (9)

Dippers 2020 (19)

Chelsea 2017 (6) 6

Rags 2013 (20)

Arsenal 2004 (13)

Everton 1987 (9)

Villa 1981 (7)

Nottingham Forest 1978 (1)

Spurs 1961 (2)

Burnley 1960 (2)

Wolves 1959 (3)

Newcastle 1927 (4)

Sheff Utd 1898 (1)

Bournemouth

Brentford

Brighton

Crystal Palace

Fulham

Luton

West Ham Utd

To be fair, that was a bloody good Spurs side at the start if the 60s. Their problem is that they've been living off the back of it for 63 years.
Fraud club.

 

[The Stockport Iniesta]

It's related party transactions that companies have to declare, and there has to be a well-defined connection. Etihad is not a related party to City under the relevant accounting standard but the PL are trying to make it one.

They've only sponsored the stadium for what 12 or 13 years., and they are attempting to go after this now, by making a rule change?

I really hope it is City who are threatening legal action over this. It beggars belief, the levels the enemies of the club will stoop to.

 

[CC1]

It's related party transactions that companies have to declare, and there has to be a well-defined connection. Etihad is not a related party to City under the relevant accounting standard but the PL are trying to make it one.

Are they trying to stop all”related” sponsorship or just trying to make the valuation stricter than it is currently? Also, will they be backdating it or in will it only affect future sponsors