PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

There is another side to the fair price sponsorship debate and it’s a bit more unscrupulous. If the PL are able to look into a clubs commercially sensitive material, that gives those on the PL boards a commercial advantage, knowing how the sponsorship is structured. And who is on these boards, undoubtedly there’ll be somebody from the Red tops picking through the detail.

This was, and is still a huge concern to us and why we will not fully cooperate with what the likes of UEFA and PL ask. We are a business first and foremost and giving your competitor critical data is something to be avoided at all times.
 
Why does any of this matter too us ?
Our horse bolted a long time ago, we are the biggest attraction in the football world and as such we will attract the biggest sponsorship deals and as such all fair market values will be judged of what we are worth to companies.
So in essence smaller /underachieving clubs like United, Liverpool and Arsenal should receive smaller sponsorship deals until such times as they can match our achievements.
 
SilverFox2 said:
Without the benefit of any personal legal training I have to say I have learnt more about the legal process by reading various BM threads.

We certainly value your legal opinions as well as your other opinions on none football threads.
Keep posting Gorden (as if you needed any encouragement).
Click to expand...

It really helped me with a legal case….

First I made sure I didn’t say legal team
Second I just left everything to my legal team solicitor
Third I realised it’s about points of law not innuendo perceived thoughts of right & wrong
Fourth It’s a process let it play out
Fifth No one wants to go to court
 
halfcenturyup said:
He can be as powerful as he wants to be. The clubs aren't in charge of what gets discussed at the meetings. He is. They aren't responsible for presenting documentation to the meetings, he is. If there is something asked for by the clubs which goes against the spirit of competition or that he thinks will be challenged on the grounds of illegality, he should be strong enough to say no and the clubs can vote him out if they don't like it.

He is a patsy. Platini was a patsy as well and that is how all this shit started. Ceferin, at least, has some balls. Masters needs to grow some before the PL is in big trouble in the courts. One way or another, he won't be around much longer, he must know that. He should stand up, show some backbone and do what is right for once in his miserable existence.
Click to expand...
Masters and his fellow Directors will be directing the legal process against City. He will not be consulting all the other PL clubs along the way but will certainly be being pressurised by LFC, Arsenal, MUFC, and Spurs behind the scenes.
Information is still leaking to the media, especially The Times. Not just from the City case but also from the Everton case. There was one targeting Newcastle on related sponsors last weekend.
These leaks are designed to damage City and Newcastle. They can only come from the PL board itself or from a club Director in the loop.
The PL leadership is not acting in good faith and senior Government and Opposition politicians on the Select Committee know exactly what is going on. That’s why they are so openly hostile to Masters.
 
It really is ridiculous. This bunch of amateurs took 4 years to bring a case against City, their teams/departments
( I actually don't believe there are any), couldn't list their own rules correctly. They only have a couple of low paid lawyers. They take 18 months to decide whether players are betting on games, and they take months to decide if they are going to back their own rules.

To believe that the shit show that is the PL have the staff or the expertise (joke) to vet every sponsorship deal and transfer is quite frankly insulting and for them, impossible. I'm not surprised the club are rumoured to be challenging this in the courts. The rule book would read like a Blackadder script with Masters in the Baldrick role.
 
The Future’s Blue! said:
There is another side to the fair price sponsorship debate and it’s a bit more unscrupulous. If the PL are able to look into a clubs commercially sensitive material, that gives those on the PL boards a commercial advantage, knowing how the sponsorship is structured. And who is on these boards, undoubtedly there’ll be somebody from the Red tops picking through the detail.

This was, and is still a huge concern to us and why we will not fully cooperate with what the likes of UEFA and PL ask. We are a business first and foremost and giving your competitor critical data is something to be avoided at all times.
Click to expand...
Spot on. How can clubs like City trust the PL with sensitive commercial data about our deals when it is leaked to our commercial rivals who then leak it to their pals in the media. Where are all these stories about City, Everton and Newcastle coming from. They are coming from senior level people at the Cartel clubs who are getting them from senior people at the PL and possibly the EFL who are also in constant discussion with the PL. Nothing has changed since the UEFA legal battle.
 
halfcenturyup said:
Well, what a load of bollocks. No organisation, connected to an owner or not, is going to lay bare its commercial sponsorship strategy to an organisation that leaks like a sieve, like the PL. The most they will get is a letter saying the deal is at a fair value to the sponsor and if the PL disapproves it, straight to court to get the whole thing thrown out.

The burden is on the club to show the sponsorship is at fair value? On what planet? The responsibility of any director at any club is to maximise revenues for the benefit of its shareholders. The PL has a problem? They can prove it.

This is just like the way they referee matches. Employ stupid interpretations, then when they are found to be stupid, change them into something more detailed and more stupid. It really is mind-boggling how badly is run the whole organisation.
Click to expand...
I think what is interesting that the PL rules stipulate that they require a statement from a director (or equivalent) of the sponsoring company to say that the deal is at fair market value. In PL terms they want a statement from one plotter that there is no plot!. It may be fair to point out that City and Etihad produced documentary evidence that City performed everything they had been contracted to perform and that Etihad paid what they had agreed to pay. So City don't seem to have a problem. The PL might, though, if it persists with its categorisation of associated parties and deals. The independent regulator may also wish to know why the PL is determined to stop money coming into the game when it is needed quite desperately. But then it might also wish to know why the sustainability of a growing number of clubs is put at risk by points deductions in the name of profitability and sustainability .....
 
Asa's left peg said:
It really is ridiculous. This bunch of amateurs took 4 years to bring a case against City, their teams/departments
( I actually don't believe there are any), couldn't list their own rules correctly. They only have a couple of low paid lawyers. They take 18 months to decide whether players are betting on games, and they take months to decide if they are going to back their own rules.

To believe that the shit show that is the PL have the staff or the expertise (joke) to vet every sponsorship deal and transfer is quite frankly insulting and for them, impossible. I'm not surprised the club are rumoured to be challenging this in the courts. The rule book would read like a Blackadder script with Masters in the Baldrick role.
Click to expand...
What if Masters has a cunning plan?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.