PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Moss Side's Finest]

Man Utd's £900m adidas kit deal could be terminated if club are relegated from Premier League - Paper Talk

Plus: Fulham fear Marseille will renew their interest in signing Andreas Pereira; Tottenham are considering delving into the transfer market to sign a new goalkeeper; Aston Villa have recalled Lewis Dobbin from his season-long loan at West Bromwich Albion

www.skysports.com

Any debate about the amount?

Fair value?

Another free pass for them pricks.

The rags have been doing dirty on kit and sponsorship deals for decades unchecked . Just read up the Chevrolet deal. A deal signed up with a company with links to their owners for a price that was so obscenely overpriced it resulted in the internal Chevrolet exec being sacked for misconduct

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Hopefully the podcast is because he feels the need to get on the personal PR front because of some potential risks to his personal PR in 2025

That’s a bit of an understatement!

 

[KS55]

Just some clarification on the RPT issue and forgive me if it’s a stupid question. Who gets to decide what transactions is a RPT? My understanding (entirely from BM) was that the conditions were very specific, laid out in IS24(?) and not negotiable. So if Etihad tick all the boxes for IS24 they are a RPT, if they don’t, they aren’t and whatever City, the Premier League or UEFA think and/or would like doesn’t make a scrap of difference hence the introduction of APT’s.

I think an accountant will tell you that IAS 24 is open to two differing interpretations, which was a bone of contention in 2014, but UEFA did not press it because they thought that our sponsorships were FMV anyway.

 

[cheekybids]

As Stefan says, yes it would. Unless the PL has evidence that we're not aware of, the related party question is potentially the only chink in our armour as far as the AD sponsorships are concerned. But it's a very, very small one.

And for the cynic in me, it's yet more corroboration that this isn't about the PL acting independently of its shareholders, nobly trying to ensure there is a level financial playing field in accordance with its rules and regulations. It's about our competitors trying to nail us in any small way they can.

Clear & organised.

 

[chesterbells]

I can't wait to see the ruin of this wanker.

Fully agreed, though he’s just the fall guy really isn’t he?

 

[citizen_maine]

I think an accountant will tell you that IAS 24 is open to two differing interpretations, which was a bone of contention in 2014, but UEFA did not press it because they thought that our sponsorships were FMV anyway.

Is the PL's contention then, that we've deliberately misinterpreted this?

 

[Bluewonder]

Fully agreed, though he’s just the fall guy really isn’t he?

Yes, but he is hardly devoid of agency.

 

[Matt Diablo]

Payback is coming guys sit tight watching wanker Masters on this podcast highlights this even further . . .

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

I think Boozy **** would be more apt ;)

Yes but a certain high-profile, red-shirt wearing (for the moment anyway) football player has already claimed that one.

 

[BamberBridgeBlue]

As Stefan says, yes it would. Unless the PL has evidence that we're not aware of, the related party question is potentially the only chink in our armour as far as the AD sponsorships are concerned. But it's a very, very small one.

And for the cynic in me, it's yet more corroboration that this isn't about the PL acting independently of its shareholders, nobly trying to ensure there is a level financial playing field in accordance with its rules and regulations. It's about our competitors trying to nail us in any small way they can.

All of the actions speak for themselves. Deeds not words. Speech is about 18% of communication. But if you do need words, Pep told everyone that the other clubs wanted to beat us off the pitch. He knows the situation.