PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

:-)

A consortium of international investors, which involves a member of the Saudi royal family, has made a £400m offer to buy Premier League club Everton.

I would love the consortium to be led by that Saudi Sheik Jism (or whatever he was called), and for them to become a bigger force than the Rags with there Steptoe fucker.
 
Also the twitter user is quoting the CAS panel saying "we're presuming these are fair value" and pretending that's proof of the contracts being fair value. It's not.

His post is as misleading as anything Panja might put out.
My man, Dumbalino...
 
I suspect the presumption was made in the findings by the CAS justices as UEFA made no submission to CAS that the sponsorships were in fact "inflated" and offered no evidence to support such a submission.

Didnt the same UEFA that allow a €100 Million a year PSG sponsorship to lie on its desk unmolested until it was time barred? But thats another UEFA story!
 

It is worth mentioning for the billionth time when people talk about City's Vs United's funding and how unlikely it is that our revenues could overtake United.

People mocked City for the first five years of the takeover while the club were quietly building one of the world's best academies, training facilities, a secondary stadium, women's team and everything else. They then gave sponsorship rights not just to the stadium but to all of those things, with the promise that City were going to be a top five club in Europe within the decade. The club have over delivered on its sponsorship commitments: the only team in England to qualify every year for the CL. One of the world's best young footballers through the academy. A secondary stadium that hosts women's international tournaments. The biggest club in the US, a Netflix deal etc etc etc

That system has been so successful United have poached the highest person up in the system they could poach. While their stadium has fallen down, they have stagnated on the pitch, they've not found any new markets to develop, they've saturated the brand, they've been left playing catch up on digital and in women's football and so on.
 
I suspect the presumption was made in the findings by the CAS justices as UEFA made no submission to CAS that the sponsorships were in fact "inflated" and offered no evidence to support such a submission.

Yes exactly, the CFCB never called into question the value of the sponsorships being unfair, “The CFCB has not put fair value at issue in these proceedings” which is why anyone quoting the CAS judgment in an attempt to say CAS deemed them fair value is about as on the ball as Simon Jordan.

It’s also completely irrelevant to Panja’s point whether you agree with him or not. The only answer you need to Tariq’s point is “but the new rules came in 3 months ago, they’ve not had any time to cause an effect. All the things you’re describing happened under the old rules which city accepted”.
 

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.