The Prophet Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 Very interested to see what they end up doing with the related party transaction stuff. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 1 minute ago, The Prophet said: Very interested to see what they end up doing with the related party transaction stuff. That rule won’t be changing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prophet Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 1 minute ago, The Prophet said: Absolutely no shame from Masters and who he represents. It would be interesting to see which clubs would welcome an outside governing body??? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 19 minutes ago, NG32 said: Absolutely no shame from Masters and who he represents. It would be interesting to see which clubs would welcome an outside governing body??? I mean a regulator makes no sense if your the PL or its members, why have someone else influence your business? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazzy Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 35 minutes ago, r0cafella said: I mean a regulator makes no sense if your the PL or its members, why have someone else influence your business? Well that's exactly why the general football public want this regulator in place ASAP. Whatever Masters and the other untrustworthy members of the PL want, it's probably best to do the opposite . The sooner the regulator is in place the better it will be for fans and the worse it will be for Masters, and I'm happy to see that happen. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazzy Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 For what it's worth, the exact same thing that happens to energy companies and water companies, they all have a regulator (even though they do a shit job of it). So there's no reason football should be any different seeing as the PL can't seem to manage it by itself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUPERTOON Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 43 minutes ago, r0cafella said: I mean a regulator makes no sense if your the PL or its members, why have someone else influence your business? They already have outsiders influencing it tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 7 hours ago, FloydianMag said: PFA could also challenge any wage cap, football agents have already won a legal challenge at capping their fees. It's a soft cap. UEFA have implemented a soft cap as have La Liga. The UEFA cap is still the most restrictive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terrymac1966 Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 Apparently we are leading the charge on this afternoons vote with City United Liverpool and Arsenal dead against it. We dont even need to guess why. 14 clubs are needed for the changes to go through....its going to be an interesting outcome for all involved. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ikon Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 So fucking annoying those clubs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Icarus Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 I can't see it working, but I think it's definitely an interesting move to make and sort of forces those clubs to show their hand. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 So these rules with the removal of the related party transactions would be good for us ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUPERTOON Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 4 minutes ago, Ben said: So these rules with the removal of the related party transactions would be good for us ? Removing restrictions on the related party sponsors would be huge for us. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
timeEd32 Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 I think City are just opposed to any financial ruling at this point. Their opposition is different than the other three. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 1 minute ago, SUPERTOON said: Removing restrictions on the related party sponsors would be huge for us. Which is why it won’t happen lol Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abacus Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 I don't think the anchoring would make any real difference in isolation. If a club can still spend 5 times as much as another, what's the point? It doesn't fix competitive balance at all. And I actually agree with the points made by the objectors - it hobbles the PL in Europe. From our point of view, get rid of some of the other rules and then we're cooking, but I don't think this change would do any of that. Unless there's some sort of pact to protect the 'smallest' clubs with this change first so the other rules go too, since we or anyone else then couldn't just run away with it, as has happened before. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Icarus Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 6 minutes ago, Ben said: So these rules with the removal of the related party transactions would be good for us ? If it doesn't happen we're fucked I think, it would mean that we'd have a lower turnover to wages ratio without being able to generate a higher amount of related-party revenue. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 FFP for you but not for me, the sky 6 classic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 The removal of the related party transactions seems to have come from nowhere, does this mean Man City would be let off their 115 charges Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoot Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 (edited) 23 minutes ago, Ben said: So these rules with the removal of the related party transactions would be good for us ? But they aren't removing RPT's are they? The vote has nothing to do with that. Unless I'm mistaking. Edited April 29 by Scoot Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prophet Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keegans Export Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 Wow, that's a big shock. Unless they're bringing it in in addition to the 70/85% rule? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 1 minute ago, Keegans Export said: Wow, that's a big shock. Unless they're bringing it in in addition to the 70/85% rule? They are Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeordieT Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 Just now, Keegans Export said: Wow, that's a big shock. Unless they're bringing it in in addition to the 70/85% rule? There has to be concurrency with UEFA as I’ve understood it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now