I agree . They are looking at it upside down. It's the value of the sponsorship to the sponsor and each one will have their own circumstances no one can judge that better than the Company. The PL are more interested in how much tbe club will benefit.been saying since day one and i will say it till im blue in the face, no independent body can set a market value, the market sets the value, that is the basic tenet of a market economy, its baffling to me how they just dont seem to understand this.
Its basic economic knowledge that something is worth what someone is prepared to pay for it, its just that simple, is a piece of canvas with some paint on it worh 100s of millions in relative terms no but if someone is prepared to pay it then it absolutely is.I agree . They are looking at it upside down. It's the value of the sponsorship to the sponsor and each one will have their own circumstances no one can judge that better than the Company. The PL are more interested in how much tbe club will benefit.
Would make them laughing stock of ther other leagues and kill any remaining credibity.
The clubs have done nothing wrong. Just another attempt by the PL to make up for stupid rules. Can’t they see that?Masters and the PL on another mission.
The Premier League will monitor every transfer this summer to ensure clubs are not circumventing rules after a spate of unusual transactions.
Several ‘swap deals’ have occurred between top-flight clubs in the last weeks, including academy products being traded in separate transactions which are designed to aid both parties’ balance sheets.
As an example, midfielder Tim Iroegbunam signed for Everton from Aston Villa on Saturday for around £9million, while winger Lewis Dobbin has completed a move the other way in a separate deal believed to be worth £10m.
CASPerhaps like City they are uncertain what a PL selected Panel will act in an unbiased way?
What possible reason would any sector of industry insist that only their approved list of Panel members could be used.
Barca’s big thing was sale of future tv revenue.Controls it only to an extent. Didn’t they allow Barcelona to forward sell most of their gate receipts for the next few years to aid their current financials?
I will ask again, someone posted the section from the CAS findings re the time barred and the fact that it did not matter as the "charges" that were time barred were not valid, can someone post it again? I want to use it to shoot a know all Utd fan down (he never ever thinks he is wrong). Thanks all
I just remember about a week ago someone posted something and highlighted the part that was pertinent, I should have saved it then.Don't remember seeing that in the CAS findings, tbh. Iirc, once it was time limited, they didn't waste any more time on it. Was it from the club's submission maybe?
The interesting thing there is the whole fair market value thing which is why deciding sponsorships based on fair market value does not work, if barca have sold those tv rights based on their current position then they are worth a certain amount if barca fall off a cliff then those rights have been overvalued if barca get a cracking team together then they have been undervalued and this is where the system doesnt work as fair market value doesnt and cant take into account future events.Barca’s big thing was sale of future tv revenue.
Don't remember seeing that in the CAS findings, tbh. Iirc, once it was time limited, they didn't waste any more time on it. Was it from the club's submission maybe?