TheBrownBottle Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 I'm not surprised that the 'FMV / Related Party' nonsense has ended up being challenged - it always struck me as a more egregious and obvious reach of commercial law compared to FFP (though I'll happily stand corrected - the likes of @FloydianMag know their way around that subject better than me). I'm one of those who doesn't want to see an end of financial regulation and governance in football - I wouldn't want to see us to a PSG etc (and I also have my doubts that that would happen without shackles) - but what is in place at the moment isn't to protect football, it is to protect a racket. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
macphisto Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 (edited) 4 hours ago, TomYam said: I hope the whole PL explodes and a new administrative body is formed which is more equitable and not in the pocket of or kowtowing to 3 or 4 'elite' clubs. Mind you, that's surely not what Man City or Chelsea wish to pursue... I don't think structurally you could get anything more equitable than the Premier League as a large majority is required for any changes. The Premier League is made up of the clubs where everyone of them is it out for themselves. Edited June 6 by macphisto Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iwantcurlyhair2 Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 I really want to get to the excitement of buying who we want and restore a level playing field again with the cartel and hope other clubs join in. Its easy to forget that Forest were the first club to pay a million and that wolves and non Arab City were the first to spend £1.5M on players. I'm sure Keegan was the highest paid player in the league when he signed for us in the old second division and he was financed by our sponsor S&N. We broke the world record when we signed Shearer. The richest league in the world with the richest owners should have carte blanche to sign who they want. Every Premier League club should have been after Mbappe, who at the reported £15M in wages and £25M in yearly signing on fees, would have been self financing. No-one could ever argue that Mbappe or Harland don't warrant an additional £40-60M in sponsorship. The club profile would have gone stratospheric considering he alone has 40 time as many followers on Instagram than Newcastle!!!!!! (118M to 2.8M) Social media following would have immediately grown to the Red Cartel levels and would open the door to signing anyone we wanted. I don't believe we need to sell Bruno or Isak for FFP but not being allowed to bring in sponsorship from Saudi is preventing buying additional Bruno's to speed up the process. I really hope City win this case and we grow quickly with 3-4 superstars every window with a speeded up evolution rather that a cataclysmic revolution. If we are allowed to spend £200M a window our sponsorship and prizemoney will grow to Man U, City & Liverpool levels within a couple of years, but with regulations it will never get there. Spending money generates money if spent correctly and I'm convinced our board will spend correctly. I really hope City blows the rules to bits!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 (edited) 4 hours ago, TheBrownBottle said: I'm not surprised that the 'FMV / Related Party' nonsense has ended up being challenged - it always struck me as a more egregious and obvious reach of commercial law compared to FFP (though I'll happily stand corrected - the likes of @FloydianMag know their way around that subject better than me). I'm one of those who doesn't want to see an end of financial regulation and governance in football - I wouldn't want to see us to a PSG etc (and I also have my doubts that that would happen without shackles) - but what is in place at the moment isn't to protect football, it is to protect a racket. I agree with you TBB, I can live with FFP as long as we’re allowed to grow our revenue streams through sponsorship, the APT rules are much more restrictive than RPT rules. APT casts a much wider net that allows the PL to look at any type of sponsorship especially from the Gulf region due to who our owners are and rule if it’s allowable. I doubt the US owned clubs are subject to the same level of scrutiny if their sponsorship originates from US. It’ll be an interesting few weeks to await the outcome of the hearing that commences this Monday. We won’t be given any information on how the hearing went due to the confidential nature of the hearing, barring leaks of course. I guess we’ll only know the outcome if the APT rules are suddenly removed. Edited June 6 by FloydianMag Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 I echo the sentiments of a few on here, I don’t want to see the financial rules blown up and removed entirely but what I do want to see is an acknowledgment of how those clubs who grew when it was the Wild West gained an advantage which is no longer possible and rectification of that fact. What mechanisms used to reach this goal are used I truly couldn’t care less about but under the current regime the baked in advantages of the so called big 6 are only reinforced. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 I'd sooner there be some sort of spending cap rather than basing it on losses. If a club's owner has the money and there's some sort of proof of funds that can be shown, then do it. Take the oil state clubs out of the equation, but why should clubs like Villa or even Bournemouth be held back just because they don't have the stadium or commercial revenue of the bigger clubs? Bournemouth shouldn't have to be thinking over the next year that they'll have to sell Solanke if they want to buy new players to push on. A club like Wycombe Wanderers who've just been taken over by some billionaire for example should at least be able to dream of going all the way to the top even if that's not what the intention of the new owner is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloGeordio Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 4 hours ago, TheBrownBottle said: I'm not surprised that the 'FMV / Related Party' nonsense has ended up being challenged - it always struck me as a more egregious and obvious reach of commercial law compared to FFP (though I'll happily stand corrected - the likes of @FloydianMag know their way around that subject better than me). I'm one of those who doesn't want to see an end of financial regulation and governance in football - I wouldn't want to see us to a PSG etc (and I also have my doubts that that would happen without shackles) - but what is in place at the moment isn't to protect football, it is to protect a racket. And stop us! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 Have Wrexham had any sanctions yet ? They are sponsored directly by the owner. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
healthyaddiction Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 4 minutes ago, Ben said: Have Wrexham had any sanctions yet ? They are sponsored directly by the owner. Not in the Premier League are they. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUPERTOON Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 Really interested to see who wins, media are reporting both sides are confident. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
et tu brute Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 1 minute ago, SUPERTOON said: Really interested to see who wins, media are reporting both sides are confident. If they apply actual uk competition law (and I don't see how they can't), then City should. If for some reason they don't, then it will go straight to the courts I would imagine as there is no appeal with the arbitration. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaztoon Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 Cap everything so everyone can spend the same. Telling clubs they can't spend the same as a rival is nonsense. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keegans Export Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 1 hour ago, FloydianMag said: It’ll be an interesting few weeks to await the outcome of the hearing that commences this Monday. We won’t be given any information on how the hearing went due to the confidential nature of the hearing, barring leaks of course. I guess we’ll only know the outcome if the APT rules are suddenly removed. I wouldn't be surprised if we had almost daily leaks throughout the two weeks! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUPERTOON Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 Just now, Keegans Export said: I wouldn't be surprised if we had almost daily leaks throughout the two weeks! Aye, our takeover was supposedly confidential and we had daily leaks at times with that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledGeordie Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 There was discussion on talksport yesterday morning as I was driving to the lakes about the new rules that were brought in - all 3 agreed in issuing the (Stefan someone) that they’ve been out in place as barrier to us. Interestingly I didn’t realise that any new sponsorahip deal not only has to be ratified be an independent body but the potential sponsor itself has to argue reasons for the sponsorship and why it’s fair market value. Like wtf?? Even the guy Stefan someone who was on the show to talk about the regulations said this was ridiculous. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lordshola Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 14 minutes ago, Gaztoon said: Cap everything so everyone can spend the same. Telling clubs they can't spend the same as a rival is nonsense. The issue with caps like that, is then you potentially have the best players not coming to the PL as other leagues can splash the cash on them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lordshola Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 1 minute ago, ExiledGeordie said: There was discussion on talksport yesterday morning as I was driving to the lakes about the new rules that were brought in - all 3 agreed in issuing the (Stefan someone) that they’ve been out in place as barrier to us. Interestingly I didn’t realise that any new sponsorahip deal not only has to be ratified be an independent body but the potential sponsor itself has to argue reasons for the sponsorship and why it’s fair market value. Like wtf?? Even the guy Stefan someone who was on the show to talk about the regulations said this was ridiculous. I believe that guy used to be a financial advisor to Man City years ago. He seems to know his stuff. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 2 minutes ago, ExiledGeordie said: There was discussion on talksport yesterday morning as I was driving to the lakes about the new rules that were brought in - all 3 agreed in issuing the (Stefan someone) that they’ve been out in place as barrier to us. Interestingly I didn’t realise that any new sponsorahip deal not only has to be ratified be an independent body but the potential sponsor itself has to argue reasons for the sponsorship and why it’s fair market value. Like wtf?? Even the guy Stefan someone who was on the show to talk about the regulations said this was ridiculous. If you look at the leagues regulations from a business point of view they are totally beyond in and quite astonishing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr.Spaceman Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 The only league that can outspend us will do so regardless of a cap. And if someone is going to Real Madrid or Barcelona then again I don't think it matters if there's a cap or not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaztoon Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 1 minute ago, Lordshola said: The issue with caps like that, is then you potentially have the best players not coming to the PL as other leagues can splash the cash on them. I'm sure any cap would at a level that would still allow the PL to be the big dog. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 33 minutes ago, SUPERTOON said: Really interested to see who wins, media are reporting both sides are confident. PL were confident at the CAT re our takeover……….. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pubteam Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 I think the most important thing is the knee jerk reactions to any perceived threat by the other clubs has to stop. You can't just rewrite the rules every time something happens you don't agree with. Teams before us have been allowed to grow to astronomical levels but we've been told sorry your too late to the party, your not allowed in. It anti competitive at every level and I'm surprised the premier league has been advised to fight it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloGeordio Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 2 minutes ago, pubteam said: I think the most important thing is the knee jerk reactions to any perceived threat by the other clubs has to stop. You can't just rewrite the rules every time something happens you don't agree with. Teams before us have been allowed to grow to astronomical levels but we've been told sorry your too late to the party, your not allowed in. It anti competitive at every level and I'm surprised the premier league has been advised to fight it. They get a share of the cake that way. We’re coming for the whole fucking cake and they know it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloGeordio Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 3 minutes ago, pubteam said: I think the most important thing is the knee jerk reactions to any perceived threat by the other clubs has to stop. You can't just rewrite the rules every time something happens you don't agree with. Teams before us have been allowed to grow to astronomical levels but we've been told sorry your too late to the party, your not allowed in. It anti competitive at every level and I'm surprised the premier league has been advised to fight it. What if it suits the premier league to appear to challenge it knowing they’ll loose, big 6 strangle hold problem no more! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr.Spaceman Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 4 minutes ago, pubteam said: I think the most important thing is the knee jerk reactions to any perceived threat by the other clubs has to stop. You can't just rewrite the rules every time something happens you don't agree with. Teams before us have been allowed to grow to astronomical levels but we've been told sorry your too late to the party, your not allowed in. It anti competitive at every level and I'm surprised the premier league has been advised to fight it. You can do whatever the fuck you want when you mark your own homework. Everyone signed up for this and fully bought in throughout the 90's 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